Constant tampering ruining the one-day league in England?

[Langeveldt]

As I say - there's a good reason why that's not been done - in England, 40-over cricket is considered more crowd-friendly.

So why don't we reduce every game to one over a side? And then this "crowd" we've suddenly had to cater for can get home in time for watching football or big brother..

[Autobahn]

So why don't we reduce every game to one over a side? And then this "crowd" we've suddenly had to cater for can get home in time for watching football or big brother..

Ah always the cheerful type.

[Langeveldt]

Ah always the cheerful type.

Nah I'm alright actually, just fed up that something I love appears to have sold itself out somewhat!

[GIMH]

The National League is hugely devalued IMO, not necessarily by having 5 less overs, but by the fact that it's only 8 games, and you only play each team once, which brings in a random element - the purpose of a league is surely to show which side can prevail in all conditions? Just off the top of my head a side could get very lucky by being a batsman friendly side and playing teams whose strength lies in their attacks, on flat tracks. It's a farce, if I was a Durham fan i'd be peeved as well

And a straight knockout for the Cup is obviously the best idea. You have the National League for your league, and the Twenty20 has a group stage anyway, and as Neil said, Devon don't get to play, neither do Shropshire, Cheshire, etc. Stupid, I can't help but think this season the league and cup winners would both have justifiable claims to being the best one-day side in the country, yet it should always be the league winners who get to make that claim.

Alas, bigger crowds means more money for the counties, which means better development, and it's better for the national side in the long run. I just feel that they could bring in the crowds differently.

[DanielFullard]

The National League is hugely devalued IMO, not necessarily by having 5 less overs, but by the fact that it's only 8 games, and you only play each team once, which brings in a random element - the purpose of a league is surely to show which side can prevail in all conditions?

Indeed. The 5 overs reduction would have been much more tolerable without the laughable 8-game season

Alas, bigger crowds means more money for the counties, which means better development, and it's better for the national side in the long run. I just feel that they could bring in the crowds differently.

But I dont see the logic behind this. Fair enough CGT reform means more games but taking 8 games away from the NL league sort of balances it out. And whilst every game in the NL means something, because it should be the OD domestic game, the CGT will be over for any side that looses 3-4 of the first 4 matches.

ECB once again showing that logic doesn't come into their decision making

[open365]

The National League is hugely devalued IMO, not necessarily by having 5 less overs, but by the fact that it's only 8 games, and you only play each team once, which brings in a random element - the purpose of a league is surely to show which side can prevail in all conditions? Just off the top of my head a side could get very lucky by being a batsman friendly side and playing teams whose strength lies in their attacks, on flat tracks. It's a farce, if I was a Durham fan i'd be peeved as well

And a straight knockout for the Cup is obviously the best idea. You have the National League for your league, and the Twenty20 has a group stage anyway, and as Neil said, Devon don't get to play, neither do Shropshire, Cheshire, etc. Stupid, I can't help but think this season the league and cup winners would both have justifiable claims to being the best one-day side in the country, yet it should always be the league winners who get to make that claim.

Alas, bigger crowds means more money for the counties, which means better development, and it's better for the national side in the long run. I just feel that they could bring in the crowds differently.

More money does not equal a better national side, or a better county system, players playing in an effectively challenging and meaningfull domestic format does.

[DanielFullard]

20/20 is where the money is.....leave the rest of the domestic game to keep going as it always has done. Its survived this long so why tamper

[marc71178]

Indeed. The 5 overs reduction would have been much more tolerable without the laughable 8-game season

How many games a season do the Aussies have? And bear in mind that this is just 1 of 3 OD Tournaments...

But I dont see the logic behind this. Fair enough CGT reform means more games but taking 8 games away from the NL league sort of balances it out. And whilst every game in the NL means something, because it should be the OD domestic game, the CGT will be over for any side that looses 3-4 of the first 4 matches.

ECB once again showing that logic doesn't come into their decision making

But surely logic dictates that in the league it'll also be over for any side that starts as badly?

If it were 16 and they lot the first 4 that's the season gone.

[luckyeddie]

When I read the thread title I thought that Javed Miandad was having a go at David Constant again.

[DanielFullard]

If it were 16 and they lot the first 4 that's the season gone

Not True. a) there is the fight for relegation in NL1 and b) Warwickshire lost 6 last year and got promoted.

Plus the monetary incentives for higher placings are greater in the NL than in the CGT

[Scaly piscine]

I think that most of the problems stem from the cup that thinks it's a league. I can't believe they lost the FA Cup giant-killing element and the non-professional sides (tho it's pretty rare in cricket to have a giant-killing) so they could come with this stupid league system with a cup element tacked on at the end. Twenty20 can get away with the groups because it's massively popular, it doesn't drain players much and it's 3 groups anyway (tho they changed that to a weird 8 games v 5 teams - dunno if that's been changed again this season as I can't be bothered to check).

[DanielFullard]

this stupid league system with a cup element tacked on at the end

Whats more absolutely stupid is the fact that only one team qualifies from it. If they had four teams from each and then made it into QF, SF the Final it would have made it a little more understandable. But its still daft. Just daft

[Autobahn]

Well if you're worried about the lack of competitive games, lets say that the first four games of the C&G Trophy will have teams trying their hardest, then add on the 8 national league games which will all be competitive because of the number of games and because a few wins or losses, coupled with other results could see you in pole position or in a relegation spot.

So you have 12 competitve OD games in which teams will be unlikely to rest their top players unless they have to, and compare that with India where a domestic side can play as little as 4 games and 8 games max if they make it all the way to final, and Aus where the State teams play 10 OD games each.

[DanielFullard]

I know the comparisons people are making with other nations domestic games are useful points, but bare in mind thats not the debate here. We may play more than other nations but at the end of the day the point being made is that changing the format of the CGt and NL is a laughably bad move by the ECB because it takes away the biggest attraction of the CGT, the knockout format, and diminishes the NL to a lowe status

[Richard]

But that is foolish logic by the ECB. 40 over cricket is not anymore attractive than 50 over cricket. Going to a match or watching it on Tv still consumes most of your day. 40 over Cricket isn’t going to attract a bigger crowd. That is what 20/20 is for.

A 50 over, 18 game league with a 40-45 over cup competitions is the best solution all round

The National League is a joke and it makes all that promotion celebraiton seem worthless. The CGT format is horribly ill-conceived. If they want to pull people through the gates what is the point in devising a competition that will result countless matches of irrelevance. Face it, a team plays 9 games, they loose the first 3-4 and the last 5-6 will be rendered irrelevant. Heck, the league could be won early and we could be left with a situation of 2 weeks of nothing fixtures. Having only one qualify for the final is a horrible near idiotc idea

It's not the idea of anyone on the ECB Board - it's a general consensus from pretty much all the counties, based presumably on reliable information (ie gate-figures).
I can't really see why anyone would find 80 overs different to 90 or 100, either - but apparently they do.