"That includes the players going on a dip with Cricket Australia if revenue falls for whatever reason. That's what partnership is all about. We all want cricket to be the best it can be and that means that if things don't go well for a period of time, we all should share the hit. On the other side, if it does grow, it's a partnership that rewards everyone, including grassroots and all the other levels of cricket in the country."

Discussions between the ACA and CA reopened this week after the players last month rejected a new payment model under which Sheffield Shield players would be excluded from the set-percentage model for the first time since it was introduced in 1997. International male and female players will only share in the model provided there are surplus funds.

At stake is more than $400 million over the next five years. Players also suggest CA's offer "short changes" them by $128 million compared to what was claimed in the player-payment pool.

"Every player should be treated equally, from the internationals down to the domestic players because, ultimately, we get all our international players from the domestic ranks," Handscomb said.

"If they get treated fairly, they're going to be training hard and doing the right things. Also, it's a great advertisement for the game if the domestic players are getting what they deserve. I think part of the effect is that people who might choose football over cricket, or rugby over cricket, for instance, might be more likely to stick with cricket and make the player pool stronger.