What is the right balance for domestic cricket?

[chaminda_00]

Sri Lanka is starting to implement a new provincial series to go with their club competition. But unlike South Africa they want the players to play every match, both provincial and club. The provincials were orginal designed to allow the decent FC players to play matches with the NT players. But they can't find any windows or windows get closed with lately arranged series like Pakistan.

To cut to chase the players are complaining about playing too much cricket. With guys playing 17 FC games (12 3-Dayers, 5 four dayers), 17 OD Matches and 9 Twenty20 Cricket. Add in Under 23 tournment and potential SL A call up at the end of the season. Young cricketers like Sachith Pathirana might play 12 months straight cricket.

There been calls for improving the standard of domestic cricket so they implemented a Tier structure. Which has worked to get all the top players in one league. Now they want a standard just below the national team, as even with the Tier there still quite a few holes in all the sides, especially as you get lower down the ladder.

But have the gone overboard now, with these fixtures. Personally I think they should run the comps side by side and have the club comp as feeder comp for provincials. Basically Colombo Grade cricket. It wont happen, as there too much behind the scences stuff at club level.

Basically what is the right balance for domestic cricket quality or quanity?

 

[Prince EWS]

I don't think there's a universal "right balance" TBH; it's different for each country. What works for one might not necessarily work for others depending on how players are identified to come through, the amount of good-quality players available, the geographical spread of cricket, financial constraints etc etc.

 

[Furball]

Quality. England suffer from playing far too much domestic cricket of a poor quality.

A county player good enough to play all games in all formats but not quite of the quality to step up internationally will spend over half his cricket season playing - which is ridiculous. More time is needed for players to hone technique and work on their game, which players in England don't get.

They also suffer from substandard competition. There are simply far too many counties in the English game.

 

[chaminda_00]

Sri Lanka has 21 clubs and five provincial sides ftr. We have more sides then England, even just at club level.

 

[Furball]

Sri Lanka has 21 clubs and five provincial sides ftr. We have more sides then England, even just at club level.

Doesn't seem that bad if the system is operated properly.

Play for your club, represent your province if you're good enough, move onto the national team.

 

[Woodster]

Quality. England suffer from playing far too much domestic cricket of a poor quality.

A county player good enough to play all games in all formats but not quite of the quality to step up internationally will spend over half his cricket season playing - which is ridiculous. More time is needed for players to hone technique and work on their game, which players in England don't get.

They also suffer from substandard competition. There are simply far too many counties in the English game.

Not sure about the poor quality of English county cricket, but certainly too much of it. Justin Langer said last season the County Championship now is as tough as any State cricket he had played in back in Oz.

There is a definite case for more time to hone technique though, I fully agree.

 

[Nishan]

For SL the province format produces the best cricket, the lesser the teams the better obviously and also in the provincial they get to play on international standrad pitches. Australia have similar population to SL and have 6 teams so i think SL should implement similar system. NZ also have 6 teams could be 2 teams too many.

 

[straw man]

For SL the province format produces the best cricket, the lesser the teams the better obviously and also in the provincial they get to play on international standrad pitches. Australia have similar population to SL and have 6 teams so i think SL should implement similar system. NZ also have 6 teams could be 2 teams too many.

That's quite a popular view (that NZ has too many domestic teams), but I don't agree. For a round robin competition four is too few teams, and IMO five is the bare minimum. Make it too small and all that happens is everyone plays each other far too many times and becomes far too familiar with playing against each other, and you also end up with a smaller pool of potential players to pick for the national team.

Am quite happy with the 6 domestic teams NZ has.