Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
Cambridgeshire, Dorset, Shropshire, North Wales, Cheshire, Northumberland...luckyeddie said:
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Hussain: We need a Wilko
- Thread starter Magrat Garlick
- Start date
Langeveldt
Soutie
Ahhh so they are trying to bring 12 of the counties down to that level... Sounds very productive, well done lads!Neil Pickup said:Welcome to the world of Devon, Cornwall, Cumbria, Lincolnshire, Herefordshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire...
So what happens in Wiltshire, Dorset and Northumberland???
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Wiltshire and Dorset produce fabulous cheeses.Langeveldt said:Ahhh so they are trying to bring 12 of the counties down to that level... Sounds very productive, well done lads!
So what happens in Wiltshire, Dorset and Northumberland???
Northumberland's best cheesy contribution is Steve Harmison
Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
... Channel Islands, Oxfordshire, Isle of Wight, Berkshire, Anglesey, Carmarthenshire, Ceredigion, Conwy, Denbighshire, Flintshire, Gwynedd. Monmouthshire, Pembrokeshire, Powys, Wrexham, Rutland, Tyneside.
Think that's it.
Think that's it.
Langeveldt
Soutie
Neil Pickup said:
So most of Wales does sod all....
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
No, they're not doing that at all.Langeveldt said:Ahhh so they are trying to bring 12 of the counties down to that level... Sounds very productive, well done lads!
They're trying to establish links with the minor counties, which can only be a good thing.
I wonder, if Somerset had been named as one of the 6, would you be complaining so much?
I would personally prefer either Lord McLaurin's Conference idea, or 3 divisions of 6 personally.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
No, they're not doing that at all.Langeveldt said:Ahhh so they are trying to bring 12 of the counties down to that level... Sounds very productive, well done lads!
They're trying to establish links with the minor counties, which can only be a good thing.
I wonder, if Somerset had been named as one of the 6, would you be complaining so much?
I would personally prefer either Lord McLaurin's Conference idea, or 3 divisions of 6 personally.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
No, they're not doing that at all.Langeveldt said:Ahhh so they are trying to bring 12 of the counties down to that level... Sounds very productive, well done lads!
They're trying to establish links with the minor counties, which can only be a good thing.
I wonder, if Somerset had been named as one of the 6, would you be complaining so much?
I would personally prefer either Lord McLaurin's Conference idea, or 3 divisions of 6 personally.
Langeveldt said:
I don't agree with this at all i'm afraid. For the first 18 years of my life I lived in Lincolnshire which existed without a first class team and still does. I must admit we do have a minor counties side, a fairly decent one even but I couldnt give a stuff as to whether they win or lose frankly. I'm pretty sure most people feel like this and yet there exists a fairly vibrant cricket scene within the county.
The point is that the amount of people inspired to take up and play cricket has little to do with local county cricket. True some people may be inspired by seeing a game or two, but lets be honest it would have be pretty good stuff for Somerset v Worcestershire in front 150 people in the county championship to convert you to a long term fan. The way in which people get interested in cricket is by England winning or just watching cricket at international standard. As far as the bigger picture of the game in this country goes the national team is the relevant factor. So lets put in place a management structure which accepts that the counties are mere feeding organs for the national team and stop allowing them to operate to their own selfish agendas.
I agree with Swanny that the major purpose & responsibility of domestic competition should be to improve the quality & achievements of the international team. What you have now appears very much like the recent debates of Club V Country in English football.
To further continue the analogy IMO the problems with both competitions are much in the same. My major complaint regarding both is that there are too many games in domestic competition, which in turn weakens the national team thru injury & fatigue / burnout.
To further illustrate this the Aussie domestic cricket comp has at most half the FC matches of the English Counties during the season, and their internationals would play about the same number of international matches. Yet the Aussie national side are calling for a reduction in the amount of International cricket - esp ODIs, so as to try to reduce the length of the season to allow more time for recuperation etc.
IMO unless this issue is addressed in English cricket (and football), then all the development & support programs will amount for nought as the players will be too fatigued / injured to gain from them, or to put something back either by improved results or by imparting their experience & knowledge to their team mates at domestic level.
Similarly I disagree with the proposal to reduce the County squad size while the number of games remains the same. It may be idealistic, and this is a very simplistic outline, but I'd prefer a tiered domestic comp whereby the top level sees a reduction in domestic comp, with the balance made up by International, development & 'A' type matches.
IMO when you have such a large domestic comp so far as players & teams are concerned, the top level should primarily feature your current elite (current & former Internationals & 'A' team etc). The lower levels then become feeders into the top level, unlike current systems whereby the team / club winning promotion gains entry into the higher levels.
Again it may be overly simplistic and will certainly upset a lot of people at domestic levels, but perhaps an easier option would be to create a new elite level above the County level. The counties could be regionalised to reduce the number of 'teams' in the upper level and they would then feed players into these squads.
This could also eliviate the so called county bias at national levels & would also allow the County comp to continue it's local rivalries much in it's presant form without fear of this being diluted / broken up by an alternative reduction in County teams.
The ECB would then control the highest level of domestic cricket as opposed to any County egos, and the elite level would in effect have the potential of becoming a series of rep sides of relatively equal strength if the 'regionailisation' was based upon player base as opposed to strict geographical locations.
To further continue the analogy IMO the problems with both competitions are much in the same. My major complaint regarding both is that there are too many games in domestic competition, which in turn weakens the national team thru injury & fatigue / burnout.
To further illustrate this the Aussie domestic cricket comp has at most half the FC matches of the English Counties during the season, and their internationals would play about the same number of international matches. Yet the Aussie national side are calling for a reduction in the amount of International cricket - esp ODIs, so as to try to reduce the length of the season to allow more time for recuperation etc.
IMO unless this issue is addressed in English cricket (and football), then all the development & support programs will amount for nought as the players will be too fatigued / injured to gain from them, or to put something back either by improved results or by imparting their experience & knowledge to their team mates at domestic level.
Similarly I disagree with the proposal to reduce the County squad size while the number of games remains the same. It may be idealistic, and this is a very simplistic outline, but I'd prefer a tiered domestic comp whereby the top level sees a reduction in domestic comp, with the balance made up by International, development & 'A' type matches.
IMO when you have such a large domestic comp so far as players & teams are concerned, the top level should primarily feature your current elite (current & former Internationals & 'A' team etc). The lower levels then become feeders into the top level, unlike current systems whereby the team / club winning promotion gains entry into the higher levels.
Again it may be overly simplistic and will certainly upset a lot of people at domestic levels, but perhaps an easier option would be to create a new elite level above the County level. The counties could be regionalised to reduce the number of 'teams' in the upper level and they would then feed players into these squads.
This could also eliviate the so called county bias at national levels & would also allow the County comp to continue it's local rivalries much in it's presant form without fear of this being diluted / broken up by an alternative reduction in County teams.
The ECB would then control the highest level of domestic cricket as opposed to any County egos, and the elite level would in effect have the potential of becoming a series of rep sides of relatively equal strength if the 'regionailisation' was based upon player base as opposed to strict geographical locations.
Last edited:
badgerhair said:
No offence taken re the Aussie identification.
Agreed that the mid '80s Ashes series probably signals a turning point as such, & was possibly the nail in the coffin regarding the reliance upon 'talent cycles'. Aussie cricket was in a telent trough at the time, but during the course of these cycles was competitive with everyone bar WI. Loosing do "The Olde Dart" very well may have initiated the changes, but this should not be confused with being responsible for the directions taken as opposed to being a catalyst.
From what I have read the primary catalyst for change was the WI success, the wanting to emulate ut, and above all the determination to make it enduring rather than based upon 'talent cycles'. It is this 2nd part to their program that IMO is most significant & sets it apart from being just another talent development program.
The observed change of attitude by Coach, Captain & players on the field could have been part of the mental / philosophical process that has continued from AB thru Tubby, Tugga & soon to rest with Punter. Again as you have pointed out results do come come overnight but take time & have to start somewhere.
IMO it is a further indication of the Aussie resolve to make things happen that the changes in approach to their cricket can be so readily identifed so soon after the decision was formulated etc, even though they would have known that their immediate success would have been limited with their squad of the time.
For me AB must take a lot of credit for his strength of character & Captaincy to 'see it thru' this period, and I'm pleased for his Captaincy that he was able to taste a little of the success he helped to shape. This could also have been one of the reasons why his career lasted as long as it did, as they would have been able to see the results falling into place sooner rather than later.
The fact that they were able to achieve such a turn around within the playing career of his Captaincy is a remarkable feat IMO - similar to that achieved thus far by Fleming's Captaincy with NZ, although the latter has not been of the same magnitutde and can only truely be judged in hindsight after his career ends.
Just as an aside, IMO the mid '80s was the last time English cricket produced world class players. For me it is a sign of the problems within their game that their 'talent cycles' since then have failed to produce players the likes of Gower, Botham, Willis et all, as no 'trough' lasts for the best part of 20 years.
Again my basic arguement is that the development programs will help to better identify the talent, but the real test is to be able to sustain the impact at both International & domestic levels.
I agree with PY that the current crop of England players seem to have a bit more of the dog in them, but without the proper system this will only remain true while the results are there, and they do not get blinded by 'false dawns' a la the 5th Ashes Test, or in the way the Indian Team repeatedly does.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Same village as Harmison - Ashington.Craig said:
I would hardly classify them as cheesy, though (although Jack Charlton's old tv programme about fly fishing comes close. The man's certainly no Rex Hunt).
Favourite memories of the Charlton brothers (apart from the heroics of the 1966 World Cup)
Jack Charlton - the Popside at Derby just Chanting 'Rubberneck' at him and Kevin Hector nutmegging the guy
Bobby Charlton - legend. Everything he ever did on a football field was sheer class.
