Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
County Championship 2015
#81
Possibly LE but it would probably just mean some one-sided games.

I think Warley you will get few people agreeing with you about the amalgamation of counties. and theres always going to be the die hards that don't regard the t20 competition as proper cricket. I found your analysis interesting.

I do think that the word slog in reference to that format is wrong. T20 has added many new shots to the game and the longer format is better because of it. Its helped bowlers less than batsman though but fielding has improved imeasurebly.
Reply
#82
Of coursde there would be some one-sided games. But carrying on my copying football theme that happens there as well. But like in the FA Cup the 18 first class counties would only come in when a handful on "non-leagues" are left.
LE - aka John
Reply
#83
Think the biggest mistake they made 10-15 years ago was getting rid of the Minor Counties from the 50/60 over knockout cup

Here you had a quintessential English style knockout contest (with non-league teams to boot) playing a quintessential English game - cricket - for a full day's play on Wednesday (which was fine because you would only take the day off work if your team was still in it) to very good crowds from the Quarter Finals onwards in midweek - and they jettison the concept

Similar to half a dozen or more half brained changes they have wrought.

The Sunday League becoming obsolete due to poor scheduling.

The loss of Saturday as a 2nd or 3rd day of a Championship game.

The loss of Warwicks home one weekend, Worcs at home the next weekend.

No wonder crowds have fallen away!

One criteria for all cricket schedules next season must be to ENSURE there is some cricket within easy reach of EVERY major city in this country every SATURDAY and SUNDAY. There should ALWAYS be a game in London, always one within 30 miles of Brum and always one at either Leeds or Manchester.

Forgot to add

IN CRICKET SEASON

I.E. MAY JUNE JULY & AUGUST!
Reply
#84
Hally bloody lujauh... I could kiss you!!!!! Spot on.

I am reminded there's more days of Championship cricket per side scheduled now than 35 years ago, when clubs played 20 three day matches and ..... there are more counties. We just need to tweak to improve that position rather than drift the other way.
Reply
#85
It is bordering on criminal what they have done to the Lord's showpiece final.

People ought to be brought to book over that alone
Reply
#86
Also agree. I used to go to the 60 and 50 over finals and they were rammed full. We used to buy tickets from Lords months in advance... you could even buy a ticket to sit on the grass. I remember Somerset wining one year with Richards in his pomp scoreing 140 odd. The crowds started to decline in the 1990s when some early starts made the games uncompetative and peoples dislike of Gloucs being in every final seemed to have an impact. At least T20 finals day is very good.

The County Championship needs protecting.. it is vunerable... but it needs tweaking rather than a revolution. I fear the latter because of a lack of positive inertia that will lead to franchiseing systems that even our own Ian Bell is calling for.
Reply
#87
Back in the day when the ECB looked after the interests of the wider game there were 2 showpiece Lord's finals and a proper 40 over league where each county would play 17 matches throughout the summer on a fixed day - conveniently Sunday.

They also had the Championship and the season didn't start in March or finish near enough in October!

What crazy fools dreamed up the current hypothermia inducing schedule? Messy, ill defined, unattractive to sponsors, never featured in a tabloid newspaper, completely off the radar of most of the general public. And that's just the Lord's final!

And all for what? Just so England could beat the Aussies once or twice per decade?

Sky subscriptions...
Reply
#88
But Leicestershire winning their first away game in nearly five years did make a few column inches... and even radio 5!

Hypothermia. ... do they sponsor the county championship ;-)
Reply
#89
(08-06-2015, 09:36 PM)Mad Brummie Wrote: Back in the day when the ECB looked after the interests of the wider game there were 2 showpiece Lord's finals and a proper 40 over league where each county would play 17 matches throughout the summer on a fixed day - conveniently Sunday.

They also had the Championship and the season didn't start in March or finish near enough in October!

What crazy fools dreamed up the current hypothermia inducing schedule? Messy, ill defined, unattractive to sponsors, never featured in a tabloid newspaper, completely off the radar of most of the general public. And that's just the Lord's final!

And all for what? Just so England could beat the Aussies once or twice per decade?

Sky subscriptions...


We had a pure knockout competition which meant only 3 or 4 games to get to the final and that was exiting.  Theres a lot of changes the ecb have made which has made the game less appealing. In some ways I would like to go back to 3 day championship cricket with one division because although 4 day two division cricket is more competitive its less attractive. Scoring rates may of gone up in test cricket but not in championship cricket and you often had a run chase on the final day. OK the downside was declaration bowling but nobody wants to watch draws unless your a diehard cricket fan. 

So in order to attract people back to county championship cricket we need to create more incentive for teams to play for the win instead of being afraid to loose pts to the opposition.
Reply
#90
The players have to take some of the blame for the changes made in the scheduling. The 4 day game was on Thurs, Fri, Sat and Monday with the 40 over game inserted on the Sunday. I remember the players protesting about having to switch half way through a 4 day game to play the 40 over game usually against the same team.

Back then the public knew when cricket would be played and turned up with Sunday being a family day out. With CC starting on a Sunday the family have their day out together going somewhere else.
LE - aka John
Reply
#91
(07-06-2015, 08:14 AM)GrizzlyBear Wrote: I'm liking this discussion and the more I think about a three division system the more it starts to appeal. Those old enough to remember the old football league system will know that it was pretty much a closed shop. The club that finished bottom of Division 4 (that's League 2 to you) had to apply for re-election. Usually a formality as none of the other clubs wanted it to happen to them, only once in a blue moon did you get, say, Wigan elected to the league. Now, with a full pyramid of leagues, you get competitive, meaningful football all the way down and the likes of AFC Wimbledon can come from literally nowhere to a league slot.

I wouldn't pretend that non-league football is high quality nor is there much money in it (an issue for the ECB no doubt). But it sure can be entertaining and the ever present prospect of promotion or relegation keeps the interest up. Starting a pyramid of divisions for red ball cricket could be very helpful in keeping it alive.

Did you have to use Wigan as an example? It was Wigan that replaced us in the final ever re-election :(
Proud to be a Bear
Reply
#92
Yorkshire and Lancs would never sanction 3 divisions. That could potentially put them 2 divisions apart and thus 2 seasons without a Roses fixture.

Much as promotion relegation has stirred interest and made 'some' late season matches more exciting than they may have been otherwise, think about how sides are cautious early season. The extra competitiveness people bang on about has resulted from many factors - pitches, 4 days, fitness, players paid in winter - not just 2 division structure.

If they do go to 3 groups of six i think it will be more likely to be regional and lead to semi finals and a Five day final. Or the top 6 will proceed to play each other once round robin after the T20 window.

15 matches altogether with the Grand Final in early October in Dubai
Reply
#93
Not sure that's a good idea - having to go to Dubai to see Warks in the final. Far better to go to Barbados!!!!!

The promotion/relegation has removed virtually all dead games. Very rarely are there games where both teams are playing for the draw. Under the pre-2000 era most games were played out with teams not bothered whether they won,drew or lost.
LE - aka John
Reply
#94
I certainly wouldn't want to move back to one division....
Reply
#95
Why then you would at least have a trip to the wonderful Grace Road every season.
Reply
#96
(09-06-2015, 11:55 AM)Leicester Exile Wrote: Not sure that's a good idea - having to go to Dubai to see Warks in the final. Far better to go to Barbados!!!!!

The promotion/relegation has removed virtually all dead games. Very rarely are there games where both teams are playing for the draw. Under the pre-2000 era most games were played out with teams not bothered whether they won,drew or lost.

I agree that I wouldn't go back to one division - but I don't believe the bit in bold.
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
#97
Ok what about 16 three day matches instead of 4. Reduce the work load of the players. Max of 100 overs per side first innings. and 100 overs to be bowled all three days. Otherwise its inevitable we'll end up with 12 championship games.

it will encourage a more positive brand of cricket. Batting sides cant meander along at 2.5 runs an over. We have seen with the test against New Zealand how exciting faster scoring rates make the games.
Reply
#98
I seem to remember a period when 100 over limit applied to first innings. The drawback was that a side that got to, say, 350 for one didn't have the chance to really press their advantage. Compare this to Safety Cars in Formula 1 where the leader ends up brought back to the pack for no fault of his own. All very artificial. Personally, I like the opportunity 4 day cricket brings for batsmen to build a really big innings. There are plenty of other opportunities to see how good they are at slogging.

The main problem I recall with 3 day games was the weather. Too many were truncated by rain and bad light. That seems to be rare with 4 day games.
Reply
#99
Perhaps, Terry, I used the wrong words - what I was aiming at is the fact that by June most teams had no chance of winning the championship and the incentive to win games had reduced as a result.
LE - aka John
Reply
I sort of got LEs feeling..... after a few weeks, I saw many games where there was an element of "get the overs in". IMHO .... promotion and relegation are needed. If we go back to one division, we will certainly end up with a dozen or less sides. We wouldn't then be talking about new sides or amalgamations..... it would become the Sky super league and be based on the test match venues for all forms of the game plus one or two sides like Somerset.

Change is coming.... I suppose I crave fresh ideas that will work to keep the longer format going. If "keep as is" is the big idea.... then fingers crossed.... perhaps everything will be fine?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)