I see Jos Buttler has had a say on the reduction of CC matches and seems to think it will be beneficial - Very strange for someone like him to have an opinion when he has hardly played a single CC game in 3 years and hasn't learnt how to bat at first-class level at all a bit like Jason Roy. He should keep it shut as none of this will ever affect him unless he has suddenly learnt how to bat for more than a day.
I'd be willing to cut Buttler a bit of slack here. He was asked for his opinion so gave it, although why one should give any weight to what is said by somebody who hardly ever turns out at County level is another matter.
What grates with me is that he is trotting out the line that players need more rest and recovery time. Do the poor ickle darlings really need a good long break after bowling 4 overs (or, indeed, 3.2 overs)? I suspect that whirring sound in the background is Jack Bannister spinning in his grave.
Next Wednesday, Lancashire will hold their first special general meeting since that point in the mid-1960s, although the nature of the debate will be focused around the future of English cricket as much as the specifics relating to the county, who have just completed a strong season. Indeed, all around the shires a small revolt has been growing among county membership in the face of the potential reforms pushed by Sir Andrew Strauss and his high-performance review.
As well as at Lancashire, extraordinary general meetings (EGMs) have been called at Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire. Enough signatures from members for EGMs have been gathered at Somerset, Glamorgan, Warwickshire, Gloucestershire and Surrey — although they have yet to be served on their respective clubs. Each of these clubs may have their own particular issues, although it is the possible future direction of the game that has given members a cause around which to coalesce.
I have a couple of questions. Does anybody know if it's true that there enough signatures to call a Warwickshire General Meeting?
Secondly, the club's website announcing the next member's forum described the Members committee as "the elected vehicle for gathering the views of Members". Is this true? I have no recollection of being asked to vote for who goes on the committee.
Afternoon reabank yes a number of us are in possession of more than 250 signatures. The figure was reached primarily during the Somerset championship game. These are in addition to those that have been posted/handed into the club already or completed online.
I do not know the answer to your second question but it's clear attempts have belatedly been made over the last three weeks or so to help make the committee more visible just a shame it's now October.
Reading around I found a nice summary appraisal of the Strauss Review today I thought worth sharing;
... so empty and lacking in explanation and detailed reasoning as to lend credence to any who might suggest that the Review committee not only concluded with its conclusions but commenced with them also. There is nowhere an attempt to recognise or balance the competing interests within the game. There is nowhere any explicit consideration of the threat to domestic scheduling and domestic player contracts from overseas leagues. There are no proposals for managing player demands to participate in overseas leagues where it would not serve the interests of English cricket for them to do so. There is no consideration of the viability of certain counties as centres of first class cricket. There is no consideration of splitting the domestic game between red ball and white ball squads, as England does, with no requirement for counties to participate in both or either forms. The 'rationale' presented for each recommendation is a 'why we are right' justification rather than an explanation of why alternatives were rejected. Fundamentally, there is a lazy and contestable assumption that player talent simply needs to be better managed within the current domestic pipeline, rather than that it needs to be more aggressively pursued in schools against other sports. Worst of all, the entire assumption behind it takes no account of the very diversity it seeks to promote: for example, that different types of leadership might be excellent, that there might be more than one set of qualities that have 'what it takes to win', that the talent to be 'identified' and 'developed' might (as is true of young people generally) be idiosyncratic and asynchronous; that players may need to play, train and rest in different proportions at different times, that 'the right' players might not always be selected were selection to rely on 'clear selection criteria', or that there might be different versions of 'strong performance culture' that would benefit individual players differently.
Finally, there is no consideration of the county structure as reservoirs of expertise in any of the things the Review thinks it needs: leadership, knowing what it takes to win, player/talent development, quality time on task, selection and performance culture. If the aim of this Review is to win potentially dissenting voices round to its point of view, it does not seem to have addressed any of the issues from their perspective or sought to make a case for why its view should prevail.
This is a thoroughly inadequate piece of work that does its authors no more credit than it does domestic cricket.
It's a worry so many county CEO's and chairs were falling over themselves to fawn over the review. I know some see it for it's true worth and are simply being polite with their response
As far as the Members Committee is concerned, the Club invites Members to apply to join the Committee from time to time. You have to fill in a form and may then be interviewed. See link from last year:
https://edgbaston.com/news/could-you-represent-the-diverse-voice-of-members-at-warwickshire-county-cricket-club/
I'm not sure what happens after you have gone through the selection process - it could be that those who have been successful have to be voted through at the next AGM; but even if so, it's stretching it a bit to say that the Members have elected them. You might think that it's not all that different from how the current Prime Minister was appointed; but I couldn't possibly comment.
Thanks Gerry, thanks mad.
On the members committee I checked the rules and there is no election. All new representatives have to be proposed by the member's committee and if the committee propose one member for a vacancy there is no election. The members committee does not represent the interests of the members.
I wonder if, in the circumstances, mad, it might be worth serving the notice for a general meeting? There's a long lead in time between the chief executive receiving the notice and having to call a meeting, you'd hope Stuart Cain wouldn't take advantage of that but.... Also now we have the hood up I think there's a good case for revising the rules to make it clear it is the members who control the club, not the board.
Surely for a Members' Committee to truly represent the views of the membership (and not just their own views) every member should be given the detaiils of every committee member and how to contact them. It should not be just down to "you will see them in the members' lounge in the lunch interval".
Certainly take the point Reabank I think it's reasonable to wait and see what the club is actually being asked to vote on exactly. Also any efforts the club is willing to make to ensure fairness, openness (other counties will lay it all on the table anyway) and full member engagement potentially by way of a vote? Our SGM is a review of their decisions after they're made and we know that unless this gets kicked into the long grass certain dates are key;
End of October (so by around the date of the second Warks forum) the counties will have decided on the exact schedule for 2023 - possibly some minor alterations. We will be informed of this I would hope at the forum if not beforehand. If 2023 can work then I would appeal to counties to try to make it work in 2024 aswell. Why the need for drastic change if 2023 can work? Strauss review is flawed that's for sure.
End of November the counties will have a fixture list for 2023 (probably won't be made public until nearer Xmas mind) so they'll want to know what 2024 will look like.
Clearly the mood music over the next couple of weeks will help determine any decisions with regard to serving the SGM
The Club is inviting applications for membership of the Members Committee:
https://edgbaston.com/news/members-committee-vacancy-play-your-part-in-the-clubs-future/?utm_campaign=13537181_Warwickshire%20Members%20Newsletter%20%2814.10%29&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=DotDigital&dm_i=1AFS,825CT,R425FP,WZBS8,1