Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: The Problem with English cricket

  1. #1
    State Vice-Captain Gotchya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lahore, Pakistan
    Posts
    1,399

    The Problem with English cricket

    There is much to admire about English cricket. I believe it is still the most professionally organised structure in the world. County cricket is a great breeding
    ground for anyone who desires to improve his game. I only wish the many good things about Englisg cricket could be grafted onto the Pakistan version.

    Despite its many and varied assets, the english system fosters mediocrity which, in the long run, is cruel for the country's international aspirations. Test matches aren't won by bowlers who bowl accurate medium pace or flat off spin and compile laborious innings off the front foot.

    England's team is always difficult to beat, but invariably mediocre, with few attacking players in the side who can win a game by flair. This is partly due to overkill:
    There is too much first class cricket in England,
    The English game seems short of genuine enthusiasts on the field. With so much cricket being played in the season, the English player knows he can always make ammends the next day. He's just not hungry enough for success, he needs to be more aggressive. The relaxed attitude of the players seeps through to the public, who like an edge to the cricket and can sense a lack of excitement.

    Also a lack of 'Personalities' in English cricket seems part of an unconscious desire to have every cricketer playing the same, over coached way and behaving in the same fasihon. Characters cant flourish too readily in English cricket and I admire Ian Botham for getting to the top, while still remaining true to his individualistic instincts.

    Generally the English first class cricket is not sold enough to the public, compared with tennis, soccer or golf, and it just doesn't appeal to the right age groups. As a result, the present system in England isn't conducive to creating the best International side in the world....
    Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go back in the same box

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Leicestershire, England
    Posts
    25
    It is hard to find a solution to a problem which is historical in nature.

    If it is ideal to have, say, eight first-class teams, then how do you go about bringing that to fruition?

    It may be that the idea of setting up promotion and relegation, two divisions and the like will eventually cause the resettlement of the 'best' players to the 'best' teams, but with three up and three down, it is hard to see this ever taking place.

    If a natural gravitation (will the cream rise to the top?) is not the way, then someone has to make a decision as to which county lives and which county dies.

    From next season, there will be seven counties with test-standard grounds. Would those be the ones to keep? To those seven, do you add another two (say Somerset and Worcestershire because they have 'pretty' grounds)?

    No current first-class county is going to volunteer to go belly-up for the benefit (real or imaginary) of the national side.

  3. #3
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,839
    Comme Tenchi a dit

    No counties will ever stop being top-level.

    Maybe regionalisng the county structure into leagues of six ( la SuperCup) and then (like in Australia) having 'state'/region teams?
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

  4. #4
    State Vice-Captain Gotchya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lahore, Pakistan
    Posts
    1,399
    If a natural gravitation (will the cream rise to the top?) is not the way, then someone has to make a decision as to which county lives and which county dies.
    Counties dont have to die, the tiresome system of pointless (made so) cricket has to. That is what is hurting english cicket most.


  5. #5
    Hall of Fame Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,752
    Counties dont have to die, the tiresome system of pointless (made so) cricket has to. That is what is hurting english cicket most.
    So which counties cease to be first-class in their own right? There are currently 2 divisions of 9, with promotion and relegation (3 going each way) on a season-by-season basis.

    Pointless cricket to one county is the lifeblood of the game to another (not really, the revenue which test matches and ODI's generate is the life-blood of all of them).

    3 regions could be a way forward.

    6 teams per region, that's 10 games each at county level. Then the regional 'select' teams could play each other in a triangular tournament (possibly at the start of the following season as a precursor to the test matches - this would serve to get the 'top' players warmed up for the real business to follow).

    How's about these for divisions?

    North
    Durham
    Yorkshire
    Lancashire
    Derbyshire
    Nottinghamshire
    Warwickshire

    South
    Kent
    Sussex
    Hampshire
    Essex
    Middlesex
    Surrey

    Central
    Northamptonshire
    Worcestershire
    Glamorgan
    Somerset
    Gloucestershire
    Leicestershire
    Nigel Clough's Black and White Army, beating Forest away with 10 men

  6. #6
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,839
    I wouldn't want to see Derby, Leicester and Notts separated... How about these ones:

    North
    Derbyshire
    Durham
    Lancashire
    Leicestershire - Further North than Birmingham anyway!
    Nottinghamshire
    Yorkshire

    South
    Essex
    Hampshire
    Kent
    Middlesex
    Surrey
    Sussex

    Central
    Glamorgan
    Gloucestershire
    Northamptonshire
    Somerset
    Warwickshire
    Worcestershire.

    One change and they work nicely. They're also the B&H Groups...

  7. #7
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,595
    I'd like that - the Bears would be winning a fair few games!
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  8. #8
    Hall of Fame Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,752
    I chose Leicestershire in the central group to give Northants a 'local Derby' - it was quite deliberate, but your way certainly works better geographically for the most part.

  9. #9
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,839
    I chose Leicestershire in the central group to give Northants a 'local Derby' - it was quite deliberate, but your way certainly works better geographically for the most part.
    Northants v Warwicks?

    Leicester have to stay with Derby and Notts!

  10. #10
    Hall of Fame Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,752
    All right, 2 local Derbies.


  11. #11
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,839
    As long as Notts play at least one game a season at Cleethorpes!

  12. #12
    State Vice-Captain Gotchya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lahore, Pakistan
    Posts
    1,399
    Just to clear up things about what's really wrong with cricket in England.

    Bottom line : It may not be the quality of cricket but the quantity of cricket thats damaging. Because of so much cricket the quality suffers. Please read my post above.

  13. #13
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    The problem with English cricket is that we play the Aussies every 2 years and if they beat us then suddenly we are hopeless again and players who have helped England to win, who don't perform well against the Aussies, get dropped and then we are back at stage one again...I think its good that England are sticking with the same players who have been successful as, lets face it, most teams struggle to keep up with Australia. But the balance should be addressed soon when most of Australia's top players retire in the next 5-6 years, then it will be interisting to see which country takes over their mantle. What I'm saying is there is no problem with English cricket, except our impatience, just wait a few more years and win a few more series then suddenly when we crack it the newspapers who have spent most of their time bashing England will claim "I said it would happen all along" and we can just laugh at them. Paitience people patience! And remember England's academy beat the ACB academy last year! England's future is in good hands.
    "Age is just a stupid number"

    20...that's a rather big number :(:(:(

  14. #14
    International Debutant V Reddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Hyderabad,India
    Posts
    2,550
    I saw Healy saying that ENG are the second best. That should have to be something to be proud off. You can't compare it with the best team to have ever played. The system is good. Even when AUS were not that good a team they had the same teams and now also they have the same structure. Its just that now it is AUS' s time like windies before. Still windies are having the same teams but they are struggling now.

  15. #15
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    Originally posted by vishnureddy
    I saw Healy saying that ENG are the second best. That should have to be something to be proud off. You can't compare it with the best team to have ever played. The system is good. Even when AUS were not that good a team they had the same teams and now also they have the same structure. Its just that now it is AUS' s time like windies before. Still windies are having the same teams but they are struggling now.
    England were in trouble in the mid 90's when all-round idiot Ray Illingworth decided to take over running every part of the England Team including telling what the captain what to do...it has been said what he did put English cricket back by 10 years...since its only about 5-6 years since he left and already the problems he created are being fixed...it looks like England are on track, maybe ahead of schedual. No one should take any notice of the newspaper headlines, either English or Aussie, because England are on the right track. Anyway there is one Aussie who keeps saying England have a bright future and guess who he is? Rod Marsh, head of the ECB academy. Of course as soon as his efforts start to bear fruit all the Aussies will say "well you couldn't have done it without one of ours", I think I can cope with that, and I didn't know that the guy who basically runs the England Team, Duncan Fletcher, was Australian

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •