Rank the world's first class competitions in order

[wfdu_ben91]

The idea that there are too many competing teams in English domestic cricket is wrong-headed and based mostly on instinct, with very little actual consideration of relevant factors.

No it's not. If county cricket only had 6-7 teams then the best would always be playing the best and players would be better prepared for International cricket. It would also make getting into county cricket allot more difficult to get into to, which makes things allot more competitive. It's the main reason why a smaller population like Australia has been so dominant for so long because it's allot more difficult to get into state cricket and there is less margin for error.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Australian grade cricket is better competition then New Zealand district cricket.

 

[Craig]

I would it hard to believe that it is of a higher standard then FC level.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Sheffield Shield is probably still best. Duleep Trophy does suffer from individualism and is less of a team game, but its still pretty good. England A took part once, and they didnt win. If I remember correctly, neither did a Sri Lankan side.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

I would it hard to believe that it is of a higher standard then FC level.

I'm not talking about the local park club cricket standard that the average joe plays. I'm talking about the First-Grade cricket that all of the State-Contracted players (When their not playing for their respective state) & Aus u19s players play in.

 

[Craig]

I'm not talking about the local park club cricket standard that the average joe plays. I'm talking about the First-Grade cricket that all of the State-Contracted players (When their not playing for their respective state) & Aus u19s players play in.

Oh right, your post wasn't that clear. I can't think of too many places that rivals the Sydney grade scene in terms of standards. I know the Lancashire Leagues are of a very high standard, but whether or not it is higher then Sydney, then I have no idea.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

Its interesting that people have Minor county cricket listed. I left the UK 10 years ago but I doubt much has changed. Its a lower standard than top club cricket and shouldnt be included on lists like this.

I don't think it can be described as a lower standard than top club cricket - my local side, Cheshire, have been just about the most consistently successful side of the last few years and their side is essentially a composite of the best players in the local Premier League.

Not that that makes it a particularly high standard, though. But certainly above club cricket and would give some county seconds a game.

 

[morgieb]

Sheffield Shield is probably still best. Duleep Trophy does suffer from individualism and is less of a team game, but its still pretty good. England A took part once, and they didnt win. If I remember correctly, neither did a Sri Lankan side.

Not to bash the Duleep Trophy, as I think it's quite competitive, but wasn't that more like an Academy side? IIRC it had people who had only played a few FC games in it.

 

[Himannv]

I'd like to hear from some Sri Lankans as well. I've heard conflicting reports about their first class league, ranging from people extolling it's efficiency and professionalism and the high concentration of talent it has in its relatively few teams, to people decrying how rag-tag it is.

There's a lot more focus on school cricket than club cricket in Sri Lanka I reckon. The club scene isn't bad, but as far as interest and money and even scouting, school cricket appears to actually have more resources. I think club rugby is far more large scale and professional over here than cricket.

You do get the odd gems cropping up from club cricket but its hard to measure how they would shape up at international level and in most cases the selectors themselves seem hesitant to throw these players into the deep end too quickly. Its only recently that a large host of youth appear to have promising potential in the international scene. They had been tried through necessity, as we had quite a few injuries cropping up during that period.

In anycase, the quality of resources and more importantly funds, is somewhat lacking for club cricket in Sri Lanka although I think you'll find that there definitely is talent available which simply needs to be harnessed a bit better.

 

[Aritro]

Eh? Not sure where you're coming from?

What's school cricket got to do with first class cricket?

 

[Howsie]

Australian grade cricket is better competition then New Zealand district cricket.

Yeah, I would imagine it would be. District cricket in New Zealand is the level below provincial/FC cricket and might have two or three FC cricketers plus a few under 19 players at best. Cameron Merchant did quite well in Sydney grade cricket irrc and he struggled immensely when he came over here, he wasn't even scoring runs at the district level.

The cricket company did an interview with Ravi Bopara a couple of weeks ago and asked what he thought about New Zealand domestic cricket. He said that it wasn't as strong as division one County cricket but it was up there and with only having six teams it made the competition a lot tougher.

 

[Richard]

Zonal/provincial.

Wellington plays as it province, but sides like CD, despite the Districts tag, are built up of provinces. It's a composite side.

A district in NZ is part of a province. Eg. New Plymouth, Waitara, Stratford and others are all districts that make up the Taranaki province, which is part of the CD zone.

Wellington and Auckland play as their provinces because they have the population to support it.

I see.

 

[Richard]

No it's not. If county cricket only had 6-7 teams then the best would always be playing the best and players would be better prepared for International cricket.

You can make that argument to whatever degree you want, to reductio ad absurdum, and argue that domestic cricket in every country would be strongest with 2 teams.

Fact is there is an optimum level for the number of domestic sides; that optimum differs from Test team to Test team; and the main factor which dictates what that optimum is is the active cricket-playing population of the Test team's catchment area (for most sides it's a country, for West Indies and to some extent England it's a geographical region).

Too many people make the mistake of looking at county cricket and simply saying "there are fewer teams in Australia, Australia have largely been a better Test team than England for 90 years, England must have too many domestic sides". It isn't true, and those who think so are basing their thoughts on simplistic notions.

 

[Richard]

Not to bash the Duleep Trophy, as I think it's quite competitive, but wasn't that more like an Academy side? IIRC it had people who had only played a few FC games in it.

The Academy don't really have a "side" - that Academy is an institution which is used by players from all over the country. The side which played in the Duleep Trophy in (I forget which season) was a side which, though it was far from representative of "the second best side England can offer", was most certainly not a side drawn from "Academy" in the classical sense - ie, a load of novices.

 

[Goughy]

I don't think it can be described as a lower standard than top club cricket - my local side, Cheshire, have been just about the most consistently successful side of the last few years and their side is essentially a composite of the best players in the local Premier League.

Not that that makes it a particularly high standard, though. But certainly above club cricket and would give some county seconds a game.

What is your local Premier League?

I have played in some good leagues in England and few guys played Minor Counties (though some did. One or two were good, most nothing special, some were very ordinary.)

Top club cricketers get paid something to play at the weekend and work during the week. They have neither the time or the inclination to play minor counties cricket during the week. Traditionally Minor Counties cricket has been made up of people that can afford to take time off or can get time off eg Bankers, school teachers etc.

Availability and interest is as important as ability. If you put top Yorkshire League and Bradford League teams against Minor Counties then Id back the club side.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I'll be honest and state at the outset that I don't know enough about other countries' domestic FC comps for my opinion to carry any weight, but I will say that despite all the knocking the dear old CC gets, in the days when the qualification rules allowed pretty much every West Indian test player to play a full county season they ruled international cricket with a rod of iron.

Nowadays, not so much.

Gross over-simplification obv, but I think it's a factor in the Windies' decline, however small.

 

[Nishan]

Eh? Not sure where you're coming from?

What's school cricket got to do with first class cricket?

In the old days guys like arjuna just came from school cricket to international, the school system produces far more competitve cricket, the outstation cricketers get picked up by top schools. However the currernt interprovincial tournument is of high standrad i reckon.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

What is your local Premier League?

I have played in some good leagues in England and few guys played Minor Counties (though some did. One or two were good, most nothing special, some were very ordinary.)

Top club cricketers get paid something to play at the weekend and work during the week. They have neither the time or the inclination to play minor counties cricket during the week. Traditionally Minor Counties cricket has been made up of people that can afford to take time off or can get time off eg Bankers, school teachers etc.

Availability and interest is as important as ability. If you put top Yorkshire League and Bradford League teams against Minor Counties then Id back the club side.

Local Premier League is Cheshire, fairly solid standard I think, but I've got little to compare it to.

In most places, from what I've seen, the Minor County side is virtually a composite XI of the best club players, minus those who are working during the week and can't get time off. Maybe it's different in Yorkshire. But I've seen Minor Counties sides play and then seen Premier League games, and there's a noticeable gap.

 

[silentstriker]

I'll be honest and state at the outset that I don't know enough about other countries' domestic FC comps for my opinion to carry any weight, but I will say that despite all the knocking the dear old CC gets, in the days when the qualification rules allowed pretty much every West Indian test player to play a full county season they ruled international cricket with a rod of iron.

Nowadays, not so much.

Gross over-simplification obv, but I think it's a factor in the Windies' decline, however small.

Yea, I think part of the reason might be that the best athletes in the UK are going into soccer rather than cricket that might explain why arguably the best domestic structure in the world doesn't necessarily always mean the best Test team? Obviously sports are different, but most times, you'll find the best athletes are remarkably good at many sports.

I'm just guessing here, I'm not sure. What do people from the UK think?

 

[Richard]

Football's been more popular than cricket in the UK for ages - nonetheless, not all good athletes are good footballers and not all good cricketers are neccessarily athletes.

Cricket's inferiority in terms of popularity to football and, of times, other sports is nonetheless a massive handicap to the game in the UK and always will be. Fortunately the population is easily large enough that even though cricket is played and watched only by a very small minority, that small minority is still very considerable compared to other countries.