The shape of things to come!

Newby

Well-known member

I'm not saying I like it but I can see the sense in most of it. The exceptions are:

A 50 over knockout competition in April might leave those knocked out early, and their supporters, with very little to do for a couple of weeks.

The August regional competition sounds a bit vague, my guess is it would be centred on County grounds that don't host the hundred, and would therefore not be great for us.
 
A curmudgeon speaks.

No amount of hand-wringing is going to restore the game back to the formats/composition I fell in love with in the early seventies. I accept that.

The slicing and dicing of various formats throughout this summer I find unpalatable, but I guess they're here in one guise or another for the foreseeable.

If the proposed knockout competition began with an initial group format followed by a knockout (a la B&H Cup) then it would even out the number of games played to an extent. Maybe we'll end up with a first round losers shield. It feels like no idea is too ludicrous to ignore.

Ah well, it at least diverts attention from events at The Oval.
 

DaveMorton

Well-known member
There's a very strongly worded statement from Kent CCC on the lines of 'we will not allow ourselves to be made irrelevant'. Let's hope this attitude prevails, and Yorkshire should be leading the protests. The Strauss proposals must not succeed.
 

Karma

Well-known member
I may have got the 'wrong end of the drift' in relation to The Shape of Things to Come by Dobell 20/09/22. However, under a photograph (I think of the late great Shane Warne), there is the following:

"A County Championship restructure will be voted on by the 18 first class counties in the coming days"

Unless this is a miss-print, this implies there is to be vote very shortly ie not months, not weeks but days. What happened to consulting with members or the survey YCCC was talking about issuing to members? We know the EGM was cancelled (for in my opinion, 'spurious' reasons) but how is the club meant to consult? How does the club know what we are saying if they have tin ears? I think they read forums.

Perhaps I'm being too suspicious, distrusting of YCCC management. I know the actual implementation for changes to red ball cricket has been put back until 2024 and my fear is that people will hear a lot of promotion by Strauss and colleagues in the coming weeks and months and in many cases come to the conclusion it's a done deal. It's one way of stifling or deflecting debate.

Also, although red ball cricket proposals have been put back until 2024, they haven't for white ball cricket and changes apply from 2023. So, when does the debate start. Also, the proposals themselves are a bit half-baked with 'might' 'maybe' used too frequently, I'd personally prefer to keep as much CC as possible to be able to play teams home and away.

Also, for the T20, why aim to have the most games all on a Friday night? I thought part of the Hundred strategy was to stagger games so that Sky and in turn the ECB could maximise broadcasts and revenue. Why isn't the same principle being applied to the blast? Unless it's about beer sales to 'the suits' on Fridays.

Older people don't always react well to change and I'm no different in this regard

A Knock-knock out one day competition in April? Presumably as no CC at the same time, out-grounds would not be used and consequently less income for York or Scarborough. April can be pretty dour though weatherwise. That apart if you get knocked out then more holes in the cricket diary. If the RLODC was in April, then stronger teams (no Hundred demands)

And the suggestion of non-hundred players having some kind of competition at the same time as the Hundred. isn't that called the RLODC?

Regarding Mr Strauss and his High-level Review reminds me of a song by Stevie Wonder, purely coincidental. goes something like:

"He's a man
With a plan
Got a counterfeit dollar in his hand,
He's Mr. know-it-all'

Playing hard, talking fast
Making sure he won't be last
He's Mr. know-it-all

Makes a deal with a smile,
Knowing all the time that he lies a mile
He's Mr. know-it-all"

Other songs are available.
 

Donnylad

Well-known member
I may have got the 'wrong end of the drift' in relation to The Shape of Things to Come by Dobell 20/09/22. However, under a photograph (I think of the late great Shane Warne), there is the following:

"A County Championship restructure will be voted on by the 18 first class counties in the coming days"

Unless this is a miss-print, this implies there is to be vote very shortly ie not months, not weeks but days. What happened to consulting with members or the survey YCCC was talking about issuing to members? We know the EGM was cancelled (for in my opinion, 'spurious' reasons) but how is the club meant to consult? How does the club know what we are saying if they have tin ears? I think they read forums.

Perhaps I'm being too suspicious, distrusting of YCCC management. I know the actual implementation for changes to red ball cricket has been put back until 2024 and my fear is that people will hear a lot of promotion by Strauss and colleagues in the coming weeks and months and in many cases come to the conclusion it's a done deal. It's one way of stifling or deflecting debate.

Also, although red ball cricket proposals have been put back until 2024, they haven't for white ball cricket and changes apply from 2023. So, when does the debate start. Also, the proposals themselves are a bit half-baked with 'might' 'maybe' used too frequently, I'd personally prefer to keep as much CC as possible to be able to play teams home and away.

Also, for the T20, why aim to have the most games all on a Friday night? I thought part of the Hundred strategy was to stagger games so that Sky and in turn the ECB could maximise broadcasts and revenue. Why isn't the same principle being applied to the blast? Unless it's about beer sales to 'the suits' on Fridays.

Older people don't always react well to change and I'm no different in this regard

A Knock-knock out one day competition in April? Presumably as no CC at the same time, out-grounds would not be used and consequently less income for York or Scarborough. April can be pretty dour though weatherwise. That apart if you get knocked out then more holes in the cricket diary. If the RLODC was in April, then stronger teams (no Hundred demands)

And the suggestion of non-hundred players having some kind of competition at the same time as the Hundred. isn't that called the RLODC?

Regarding Mr Strauss and his High-level Review reminds me of a song by Stevie Wonder, purely coincidental. goes something like:

"He's a man
With a plan
Got a counterfeit dollar in his hand,
He's Mr. know-it-all'

Playing hard, talking fast
Making sure he won't be last
He's Mr. know-it-all

Makes a deal with a smile,
Knowing all the time that he lies a mile
He's Mr. know-it-all"

Other songs are available.
Yes - I hear Alec Stewart saying what a wonderful chap Strauss was ......... he reminds me of the worst type of 'management speak' consultant who made fortunes when schools started Local Financial Management (a scheme to pay companies what LEAs did already).

Large schools prospered, small schools didn't and became prey to avaracious adademy companys .. all political, all backed by people who stood to make enormous anounts og money.

In this cricket equivalent - the money stays with the E*C*B*s and their trips to Dubai. Come the revolution .. a la lanterne with them.
 

Newby

Well-known member
The more I look at it the less sense it makes.

It talks of playing the different types of cricket in blocks, but they will have to play the T20 blast at the same time as the CC or you can't fit the games in.

If you are in Division 2 next season there can't be any chance of promotion as the top 6 in Division 1 will take all the places for 2024.

The smaller clubs won't wear the reduction in home T20 matches, their main source of revenue. More ECB funds to buy them off I suppose.

If you get knocked out of the 50 over competition in April they suggest clubs can arrange a late pre-season friendly. The Counties are incapable of arranging anything with less than 4 months notice.

If Strauss and co know what they want a season to look like for a typical County, why didn't they use the time to come up with a sample season on a calendar to show us. Probably because they know it would look even worse on paper, perhaps.
 

DaveMorton

Well-known member
Surely they can't vote in this rubbish, can they?

One of the very few benefits from The Hundred was the playing of the RL50 at the same time, and a chance to see so many terrific young players from the various County Academies. Strauss wants to beat Australia, he says. Surely the best way to do that is to produce loads of players, of whom some will be good enough. As always.

Strauss himself was a late developer, several years with Middlesex, England debut aged 27. I remember going to Old Trafford to watch Middlesex 2s. Their opening batsmen were Strauss and Konig. "Who are we playing?" asked a bloke near me. "Bloody Germany?"
 

Tykemania

Active member
If he wants to beat Australia in Test cricket, he's not going to manage it by priorising the bloody Hundred, now is he? I mean, aside from the fact that it eats up five weeks of peak season where the conditions might, you know, bear some resemblance of those down under, the fact that they will not be playing Tests during that window guarantees that Test players will play almost no red ball cricket. Oh, and the whole thing actively disincentivises counties from seeking to develop England players - i mean, would you rather be like Yorkshire and have a star studded squad, none of whom actually play for you, or Surrey, who buy in players from elsewhere to succeed (eg Worrall - good as he is, does a 32 year old Aussie on an English passport really need to play ahead of promising home grown talent like Atkinson and Taylor?)
 

byased

Active member
If he wants to beat Australia in Test cricket, he's not going to manage it by priorising the bloody Hundred, now is he? I mean, aside from the fact that it eats up five weeks of peak season where the conditions might, you know, bear some resemblance of those down under, the fact that they will not be playing Tests during that window guarantees that Test players will play almost no red ball cricket. Oh, and the whole thing actively disincentivises counties from seeking to develop England players - i mean, would you rather be like Yorkshire and have a star studded squad, none of whom actually play for you, or Surrey, who buy in players from elsewhere to succeed (eg Worrall - good as he is, does a 32 year old Aussie on an English passport really need to play ahead of promising home grown talent like Atkinson and Taylor?)
None of it makes sense. And even if we did happen to be number one in the world, it would not last long, things like that never do. All the other countries are not going to sit back and applaud England as world leaders.
I am old enough to be a traditionalist, but I am not one. I welcome change, it is the only way for all aspects of life. Some change is good, some not, but standing still is worst of all. Cricket needs change but tinkering with numbers in a division or numbers of matches does not solve the problem of getting enough people into a county game to make it sustainable and entertaining. Strauss is not going to solve that issue with his proposals.
I came across something in an old book from 1967 recently. It was proposed that games should be three days, plus a one-day game with points allocated in an appropriate way to be agreed, thus combining both sets of skills. Guess what? every county voted against it. Even now, it makes more sense than all the tinkering that has happened and is being proposed.
 

Karma

Well-known member
I recall speaking to some senior executives at a major British company. They were full of bu**sh** most of the time
eg 'there are no problems, only opportunities'

One thing I did take on board however was not to think and talk about change

Instead, to think and talk about improvements

A lot of the High-Level Review seems to be tinkering and just changing rather than improving. To get my vote for what is proposed has to be better than what went before. I'm sure most companies' senior managements are still full of gobbledegook.

I've been retired for some years, and like byased, I'm not opposed to change, far from it, provided it is better than what went before
 

DaveMorton

Well-known member
An improvement would be to get rid of Strauss.

Another improvement would be the recognition that if we've got 18 County Clubs all looking after player development in their own areas, a strong England team is inevitable. A further improvement would be if those areas not covered - Cheshire, N Wales & Staffordshire; Devon & Cornwall; Norfolk, Suffolk & Lincolnshire; Northumberland & Cumbria; and even South Yorkshire! - could be brought into the system, we might have three leagues of eight for each competition.

Now a Premier Division of 8, with two feeding 'conferences' of 8, does have a sensible feel to it.

And the top 8 could be The Hundred for shortest form purposes and for TV, with the other two leagues playing at the same time, for spectators to attend. All neat and tidy, no need for franchises at all.
 

Donnylad

Well-known member
An improvement would be to get rid of Strauss.

Another improvement would be the recognition that if we've got 18 County Clubs all looking after player development in their own areas, a strong England team is inevitable. A further improvement would be if those areas not covered - Cheshire, N Wales & Staffordshire; Devon & Cornwall; Norfolk, Suffolk & Lincolnshire; Northumberland & Cumbria; and even South Yorkshire! - could be brought into the system, we might have three leagues of eight for each competition.

Now a Premier Division of 8, with two feeding 'conferences' of 8, does have a sensible feel to it.

And the top 8 could be The Hundred for shortest form purposes and for TV, with the other two leagues playing at the same time, for spectators to attend. All neat and tidy, no need for franchises at all.
Far too bl**dy sensible DM. It seems hard to consider English cricket when a good half of the country is ignored.
The snag (from the E*C*B*s p-o-v is that your scheme reduces the amount of G & T, shopping for the missus in Dubai and freebies trips around the world.
 

Newby

Well-known member
An improvement would be to get rid of Strauss.

Another improvement would be the recognition that if we've got 18 County Clubs all looking after player development in their own areas, a strong England team is inevitable. A further improvement would be if those areas not covered - Cheshire, N Wales & Staffordshire; Devon & Cornwall; Norfolk, Suffolk & Lincolnshire; Northumberland & Cumbria; and even South Yorkshire! - could be brought into the system, we might have three leagues of eight for each competition.

Now a Premier Division of 8, with two feeding 'conferences' of 8, does have a sensible feel to it.

And the top 8 could be The Hundred for shortest form purposes and for TV, with the other two leagues playing at the same time, for spectators to attend. All neat and tidy, no need for franchises at all.
You've definitely got a blind spot for Somerset Dave. I'm sure they consider Devon & Cornwall as part of their bailiwick.
 

Hawke

Administrator
Staff member
My own opinion is that I am tired of the counties having to justify themselves regards England. I am fed up and bored to death of England and international cricket. The Hundred well I just ignore. Except to say it is simply damaging our game. Add the Rafiq effect to this and, well I just find these times barely tolerable.

I will retire to my cricket history books. Karma will know the lyrics to Jethro Tull’s ‘Living In The Past’!!!!
 
Last edited:

Karma

Well-known member
My own opinion is that I am tired of the counties having to justify themselves regards England. I am fed up and bored to death of England and international cricket. The Hundred well I just ignore. Except to say it is simply damaging our game. Add the Rafiq effect to this and, well I just find these times barely tolerable.

I will retire to my cricket history books. Karma will know the lyrics to Jethro Tull’s ‘Living In The Past’!!!!
Good points, well made
 

Hawke

Administrator
Staff member
There's a very strongly worded statement from Kent CCC on the lines of 'we will not allow ourselves to be made irrelevant'. Let's hope this attitude prevails, and Yorkshire should be leading the protests. The Strauss proposals must not succeed.
Hard to imagine the current ECB imposed Yorkshire hierarchy standing up to the Strauss proposals. We will be irrelevant, yes boys and girls.
 

tbsteve

Active member
I don't see the point in conferences. They are bound to have some utter dross and a couple of decent teams in each one, so the standard won't improve beyond the elite top division. Why not a straight forward three division structure. One automatic promotion and a play-off for 5th place v 2nd place in the division below. That's stop good teams getting relegated, but give most teams a reason to push hard as promotion/relegation would be alive for most of the season. The only possible reason I can think of for 2 conferences over this is that it might be more palatable for some of the weaker FC counties - but politics shouldn't be part of the review.

I'm probably in a minority of one here, but I'm broadly in favour. If there could be some group games added to the one day cup, a change to divisions instead of conferences, and shorten the hundred to three weeks instead of five, that's be ideal! I like the idea of some FC cricket during the Hundred, but outside the main league so the integrity of the championship won't be impinged.
 

DaveMorton

Well-known member
If you have a Premier League, and two equal leagues feeding into it, you avoid the pitfalls of a 3rd division, where all the ambitious players leave because it will take years to get to the top with their clubs. This is actually what Strauss wants.

His proposal is a play-off, of the two conference winners, for only one promotion spot. So obviously any decent player will leave, especially as the next step will be to announce England teams will be selected only from the Premier League. Initially, all the players will leave the relegated club, most joining the promoted one, until they ring-fence it, which they will do when they get six Test grounds in it. There are 8 such grounds, and guess which ones will miss out.

Imagine a top league of six. Fear of relegation will be the overriding fact, it will colour every game, because once you're down, you could be down for years. That's why the 10/8 current split is better than the 8/10 one was. (Obviously 9/9, but we're dealing with idiots.) I've said this before. England play without fear of relegation. So we lose the Ashes? We nearly always have. It doesn't mean next year we'll be playing Zim and Bangladesh and Ireland. We'll be playing India and Australia again.

It's easy to play Bazball when there are no consequences. Cracking game, shake hands, see you next season. Not so easy when defeat is a potential death sentence, as in our game at Old Trafford. Note Somerset's caution last week, same thing, except they won anyway.
 
Top