mad
Member
Not nice to speculate but a personal issue will generally involve the relations. Let's hope he'll find he's happy at Warwicks as he sure won't let anyone down.
Maybe I'm reading too much into the signing but one thing it does suggest to me is Warwickshire are confident the championship will not be reduced any time soon. We wouldn't be making such a signing for a measly ten game championship really now would we?
On BBC north east Rushworth spoke recently quite firmly against the Strauss review. Think I posted the link here a fortnight ago.
From Worcester. A similar statement from Warwickshire showing firm commitment to retention of a 14 match county championship would be appreciated. I especially like the section 👇 in bold I hope this is mentioned to Warwickshire at the forum on Wednesday should they still be insisting on supporting the brainless idea of reduced championship matches
Following widescale discussion during multiple Members’ Forums and following the Board’s consideration – Worcestershire County Cricket Club can confirm the following:
The Sir Andrew Strauss-led High-Performance Review (HPR) has many aspects that we support looking through the important lens of improving international performance.
However, at the county level, reducing County Championship fixtures is not supported. Our preference and desire is to maintain 14 games rather than reduce to 10 games, as proposed in the HPR.
We totally support the best v best overriding principle in the HPR and believe this can be achieved with two divisions rather than three leagues of six counties. We favour a true meritocracy with two up and two down from each division.
Worcestershire does not support reducing the number of Vitality Blast games from the current level of 14 games. That would be particularly harmful to counties like ours that do not have alternative games to host.
A reduction in County Championship and Vitality Blast fixtures would harm the holistic health of cricket in our county and beyond.
Our preference would be to truncate The Hundred (if possible) to reduce strain on the overall schedule. There is very limited appetite amongst our members to play first-class Festival cricket during this period.
Reducing the level of competition for select players (seamers, internationals) is a serious consideration properly highlighted in the HPR. This can potentially be achieved for these players by other means, such as limiting their number of fixtures, as in other sports, rather than wholesale reductions for all.
It should be noted that many of our players choose to play cricket for other teams when not appearing for us, indicating that for many, they desire more cricket. More analysis and consultation with players is required on this important issue.
The concentration of the schedule, and in particular the switch from one type of cricket to another, is an important factor that needs improving with better scheduling of competitions rather than a per-se reduction in overall games.
The schedule will not change materially in 2023, therefore, we have time to work through and properly consider any putative change for 2024.
We look forward to working with other counties, the PCA and the ECB to arrive at an appropriate solution in the best interests of cricket
Durhams disgraceful treatment by the ECB is the reason he's been out of the top division for a few seasons. He's a true county loyal pro. Some personal issues so he wants away from the north east and Warwickshire definitely in need of strengthening their seam attack so it's an ideal fit in many ways. His experience will rub off on the youngsters around him similar to the way Bresnan did.
Warwickshire will be a decent shout for dark horses again next season just like the acquisition of Danny Briggs made us potential dark horses in 2021
Yes it has to be 14. And in order to go half way with Strauss we revert to a top division of eight which is closer to his stupid idea of six. It's not that hard is it??? 1 up 3 down next season gets us there and then we can all relax again until the next change and the one after that...
14 CC games ideally with a couple at the back end of August after a shortened three weeks long 100 comp. The RLODC can then remain at the beginning of the school hols just slightly shortened to three weeks for the group stage and Quarter finals. Semi finals midweek at the end of August & the final in mid-September
Scheduling oughtn't be as tricky as the ECB have often painted it out to be - cynically some might suggest that's exactly why they've made it a dogs dinner - to make it appear more of a mess than it needs to be - to provide an excuse so that Strauss comes in and mops it up
Ethan and Jordan hoping to get going tonight in the Victorian Premier League, lots of rain still around however. Rob Yates is in the XI for Bayswater-Morley in Perth and some nice words from Brisbane during the week on FB;
🚨 DEBUTANT 🚨
Congratulations to George Garrett who made his debut over the weekend against local rivals Wynnum Manly District Cricket Club. George is one of our overseas players this year hailing from county side Warwickshire County Cricket Club. We look forward to seeing George showcase his fast bowling skills out on Peter Burge Oval this season! George was presented cap number 690 by fast bowling stalwart Jon Stimpson.
BIG INTERVIEW: Chairman Warren says Northants will consult supporters over Strauss review
"At the right time we will consult our supporters, we will do a forum and explain everything… I need to protect the club, that is my priority”
Gavin Warren says Northants shareholders and season-ticket holders will be consulted before the club votes on the recommendations made in Andrew Strauss's controversial High Performance Review of English cricket.
And the County chairman has made it clear that his and the club's board's focus will always be what is best for Northamptonshire, insisting: "I need to protect the club, that is my priority."
Strauss's HPR was revealed last month, and in it the headline calls were that he felt the number of matches should be cut from both the County Championship and Vitality Blast, from 14 in both competitions to 10.
The proposed schedule changes require the support of at least 12 of the 18 first-class counties, with a vote to be held after a further period of consultation.
That vote is due to be held at the end of November, but is likely to be delayed until the new year.
Some clubs have already made it clear they are against Strauss's recommendations.
Warren says he and the County board are considering everything that has been proposed and he will be consulting with the club's fanbase when the time is right.
"What we need to do is understand it first, before we go out there and say 'this is what we think', because there is so much around it,” admitted Warren. "Things are not going to change for 2023, that is for sure.
And Warren admits he is still to be convinced too much county cricket is currently being played, both red and white ball, as Strauss suggests.
"The paper was very much about Team England, but what we are very much interested in is the development of English cricket, and there is a key difference there," said Warren.
"Of course we want our national team to be the best, but also you have to get the foundation right, you have to get the pathways right and we are certainly excited about a few of our youngsters at the club.
"People say 'we play too much cricket', but that is a bit of a throwaway answer, and I am still not convinced by that, I need more evidence."
Referring to the workload of the Northants players in particular, Warren will take on board the expert opinion of head coach John Sadler, and he suggests one solution could be counties employing more players rather than simply reducing the fixture list.
"Do the players play too much? They probably do," accepted Warren.
"Do we need to rest them? The feedback from John Sadler is yes we do, so the answer to that might be 'okay, let's get a bigger squad'.
"Is there an argument for clubs to carry those bigger squads so we can rest players more? To make them fresher. These are all things we need to discuss."
It had long been mooted that the review would call for a reduction in Championship cricket, but the call for the Blast to also be reduced from 14 games to 10 - with all counties losing two money-spinning home fixtures - was a big surprise.
And not one that Northants, or Warren, are particularly keen to see come to fruition.
"Do I want to reduce the number of Blast games? Of course I don't, because crowds are up and it is our role to put on top-class cricket in the county," said Warren.
"Crowd-wise, we had great attendances (in 2022) and we had to lock the doors for a couple of games.
"Nationally, the T20 attendance was down, but we were up at about 85 per cent occupancy or whatever it was, which is really good.
"The problem we have in the modern era is all the franchise cricket that is going on, with the IPL, the South Africa tournament, the UAE, Florida, where players are now getting sucked out and playing in these tournaments.
"That is the threat we have, that we lose the best players."
For many supporters of English county cricket, and plenty of Northants followers, the elephant in the room is of course The Hundred.
Thanks to the huge investment from the ECB and broadcasting companies the controversial competition is seemingly untouchable, and effectively takes out the whole of August in the calendar.
There has been no red ball cricket played in August in either of the past two seasons - with the only county cricket played being the One Day Cup - which Warren accepts is a ridiculous scenario.
And although the Northants chairman knows the ECB aren't going to offload their own product, he does feel there could be room for a little tinkering.
"The Hundred is not going anywhere, because it is such a big asset to Sky," said Warren. "It is locked in with the TV schedule, so that is going nowhere.
"I think the only thing we could do with The Hundred is look at the schedule of it, and potentially reduce the length of it by a week, or a few days, so that it only lasts for three weeks.
"If we are genuine about red ball cricket, then we need to be playing it in August.
"But they also then say they want it (the Championship) to be best versus best, but often the best players are not available anyway because they are playing for England.
"It is such a conundrum. Have we got opinions? Yes, we have a lot at the minute.
"But there is no point talking to and addressing our members, and we still call them members, they are our fans, because we are still going through the impacts of the High Performance Review, and what it means for us as a county."
One thing Warren is promising Northants faithful is that no stone will be left unturned to make sure the best decision is made for the good of the club as a whole when it comes to the vote.
"The vote is set for November, we are working towards November," he said. "Do I think we will vote in November? I think it is 50/50. I am certainly not ready to vote, but here we are in mid-October, six weeks away.
"So things might change in the space of six weeks.
"It is an absolute thorough process and we will do our proper due diligence on it, because I need to protect the club, that is my priority.
"At the right time we will consult our supporters, we will do a forum and explain everything to them, and you have to do that. They are the club's fans and you have to respect those fans.
"I have had a load of messages from people asking when I am going to speak, when I am going to talk to them, and I haven't got back to them yet because I am not ready to.
"When I am ready, Ray (Payne, CEO) is ready and John (Sadler) is ready then we will do, because it will be a cricketing decision as well.
"I have spoken to John quite a lot about it over the summer, and he has to have a massive input into it as well, because it is cricket versus finances and they have to balance each other out.
"It is all about the club being stronger for it, not weaker, that is the key thing."
"That is the threat we have, that we lose the best players."
For many supporters of English county cricket, and plenty of Northants followers, the elephant in the room is of course The Hundred.
Thanks to the huge investment from the ECB and broadcasting companies the controversial competition is seemingly untouchable, and effectively takes out the whole of August in the calendar.
There has been no red ball cricket played in August in either of the past two seasons - with the only county cricket played being the One Day Cup - which Warren accepts is a ridiculous scenario.
And although the Northants chairman knows the ECB aren't going to offload their own product, he does feel there could be room for a little tinkering.
"The Hundred is not going anywhere, because it is such a big asset to Sky," said Warren. "It is locked in with the TV schedule, so that is going nowhere.
"I think the only thing we could do with The Hundred is look at the schedule of it, and potentially reduce the length of it by a week, or a few days, so that it only lasts for three weeks.
"If we are genuine about red ball cricket, then we need to be playing it in August.
"At the right time we will consult our supporters, we will do a forum and explain everything… I need to protect the club, that is my priority”
Huge!
ECB under pressure to cut Hundred window as counties fight back
Hundred may be handed over to PGB that would see tournament link up with other competitions and potentially facilitate shortening the window
By Nick Hoult
The England & Wales Cricket Board is under pressure to shorten the window for the Hundred as counties fight back against changes to the domestic schedule.
Lancashire, Surrey and Glamorgan are three clubs who have told members over the past week that they would like to see the Hundred window cut from four weeks to help ease scheduling crisis.
All three counties host Hundred teams and their views are broadly replicated across the domestic game.
Telegraph Sport also understands there is a strong possibility the Hundred will come under the auspices of the Professional Game Board, an arm of the ECB that runs domestic competitions and is led by a selected group of county chief executives.
The Hundred was set up with a separate board and as a completely different entity to the county competitions. By giving the PGB control it will link up the Hundred with other competitions, decentralise the tournament and potentially facilitate shortening the window if the counties get their way.
Rob Key, the England director of cricket, urged the counties to get behind the Hundred in an interview with Telegraph Sport during which he also became the first senior ECB figure to publicly concede the proposals put forward by Sir Andrew Strauss’s High Performance Review had failed to gain support.
It is understood those proposals – which included cutting the championship to 10 matches with a top division of six and reducing the Blast from 14 to 10 games – are dead in the water and discussions on a compromise are unlikely to be resolved this year.
The Hundred has been sold to broadcasters until 2028 and will be held during a four-week window in August.
To cut the length of their new tournament would see the ECB buck trends for national governing bodies, who across the world are putting their muscle behind Twenty20 leagues. The Big Bash and IPL have both expanded in recent years and 2023 will see the launch of T20 leagues in South Africa, the UAE and the United States.
The ECB’s ultimate ambition is to attract private financial investment in the Hundred, something Richard Thompson, the board’s new chairman, has admitted publicly as the logical next step.
Shortening the window would send the wrong message to potential investors because it would suggest the board is not fully convinced its own competition is working, however it would be an olive branch for the counties to put before members incensed by moves to cut the championship.
Walking into this is the new chief executive of the ECB with an appointment imminent. Final interviews with Richard Gould and Tim Bostock took place on Wednesday and repairing relationships and rebuilding trust with the counties will be the first task of the successful candidate.
But they will also have to solve the domestic schedule, restructure the ECB and its finances and decide what to do with the Hundred going forward – does it remain in the form it is now, monetised differently or sold off to private investment.
There is also the ECB's place at the top table of international cricket and how it combats the rise of rival leagues around the world to deal with too.
Reducing the window to 21 days for the Hundred could be achieved by playing more double headers, which would then give a little bit more time for the championship but it will prove a difficult negotiation with Sky and the BBC, who have paid for Hundred rights and want a tournament with mainly one match per day because they believe it helps build a narrative.
One compromise put forward is to cut the championship to 12 matches and played across three divisions with a top flight of six teams.
Not sure about that last bitm if they gain an extra week by reducing the time the 100 takes up AND they have fixed rest weeks instead of staggered rest weeks then SURELY there's no need to reduce the number of championship matches. Which is what we all want. 14 WAS, IS and SHOULD REMAIN the compromise
Correct those alterations to the points system have evolved organically over time and with the spectator in mind. This current proposal seems far too top down in approach. Seeking to make things look to the casual observer neater and tidier but actually may have the effect of making county championship matches less attractive to watch.
Of course the top down approach is why they're even having this panicky HPR after an Ashes thrashing down under. I hope one of the compromises remains rejecting the HPR proposals that seek to reduce CC matches or make the games less appealing to watch or certain counties even less viable.
If Warwicks board don't have that as an option for the members next week it'll be a complete waste of time even having the forum. It'll demonstrate yet again that they haven't been listening to members concerns whatsoever
Quick overview of Glamorgan Members HPR meeting tonight. (Tuesday night)
Members not in favour of CC reduction in games. Preference for Two divisions 8-10, 2 up, 2 down. Need more info re: possible changes to points scoring system.
RL and T20 - remain as now.
Hundred - compress playing period to permit some CC cricket in August.
Chair has also garnered opinions of players, coaches and the board. Will pull together an official response. Counties likely to vote in November. Middlesex Chair appears to be collating responses at present.
Glamorgan has fed back to Surrey's chairman while Lancs have fed back their members views with Warwicks. These sub groups will then formulate a response to the ECB and possible compromise position re: shortened 100 etc...
The points changes mooted have so far been overlooked. I'm glad it was raised by the Glamorgan members as I and others on here have reservations about proposed changes
Another wonderful piece from Paul Edwards this morning;
PAUL EDWARDS addresses the key figures at the top of county cricket, thanking them for their service, appealing for unity amid the high-performance reviews and asking for the concerns of players to be accounted for
Please excuse me but can you give me a little of your time? Maybe not, you're all busy people and you're coming towards the end of discussions that could hardly be more important for the future of the game we all love. But if you can spare me 10 minutes, I'll try not to waste them. That being understood, let's not hang about.
The first thing I'll say is 'thank you'. All of you render cricket a service and there must be days on which your only reward is to be pulled in six directions at once while receiving criticism, if not abuse, from the people you're trying to serve. I'm not blowing smoke up your arses here, this isn't empty flattery. The vast majority of you care just as much about cricket as your members and some of you could earn more money elsewhere. Yet you give your time to your counties and to English and Welsh cricket. I'm grateful.
My own season ended just over a fortnight ago at Worcester. Over the preceding six months I'd watched so much fine cricket in both divisions that any sadness had to be balanced against deep appreciation of the players who had enriched my summer: players like Anuj Dal and Ben Geddes; Ali Orr and Jack Brooks; George Lavelle and John Simpson; Ben Compton and Liam Patterson-White; Gareth Roderick and Fin Bean. Yes, I get about a bit; yes, I'm very lucky.
I haven't missed a round of the LV= Insurance County Championship for five years. That was why I volunteered to serve on the high-performance review back in April. I didn't for a moment think my offer would be accepted but I reckoned one ought to show willing.
Cynical friends suggested that actually watching so much county cricket disqualified me but I thought that was a cheap shot and we've had far too many of those. Indeed, while there was so much to enjoy this summer, my pleasure was sometimes tainted by the acrimony of a debate that frequently became little more than a slanging match. At some point in the recent past, we've lost the precious art of listening to each other, but that isn't confined to sport.
So let's put the bitterness aside. Let me be plain that I do not wish to abolish The Hundred and I fully appreciate its extraordinary impact on women's cricket. Some of the new teams have attracted many new and often young supporters to cricket and it would be wrong of me to deny them their fun. They are part of the game's future.
But to discuss the structure of the domestic game without allowing The Hundred to be part of the debate devalues the exercise and might tempt you towards unnecessary conclusions.
That's especially so when one considers that by playing two matches on one day more frequently, time could be freed up for Championship cricket in August. That could require the broadcasters to be understanding but I assume they care about the game, too. And it would at least increase the chances of there being some live cricket on the box when the weather is unsettled.
I am not a traditionalist, though. Although the past informs, enriches and to some extent determines the present, it cannot of itself justify policy. My strong commitment to a meaningful County Championship comprising 14 games – there, I've said it – stems more from the belief that such a competition provides a proper test of professional county cricketers and that such a programme is not only feasible but also desirable, given the eccentricities of the English climate.
More to the point, I reckon the majority of the players want the 14-match Championship to be retained. Their objections to the current situation centre far more on the concentration of matches in a brief period – six or seven in as many weeks this April and May – as on the volume of cricket they are asked to undertake in six months.
That, of course, seems to be at variance with the view of the Professional Cricketers Association that "the players want to play less cricket", words often used by Sir Andrew Strauss when launching the review.
I'd like to put some courteous factual questions to the PCA: Precisely when were the players polled? What were they asked? What percentage of current professionals replied? What percentage of those who replied wanted to play less? Who were the independent auditors for the whole process?
My point is if the players were asked during the most gruelling part of the season, the results might be particularly misleading, not that I would ever accuse the PCA of doing so deliberately. But I get to talk to a lot of professional cricketers and I believe their views are far more nuanced than we have been led to believe.
And I'm sure you'll have considered the British climate. The subject mocks easy generalisation, of course, but the evidence from recent seasons suggests that April and particularly September are becoming far more suitable for professional cricket than perhaps they used to be.
The pitches are a little slower in April and 10.30am starts in September test batters in different ways but isn't that a counter-balance to the flatter wickets on which we play in June, July and, I hope, August? Surely being tested in a variety of conditions is a central component of any young cricketer's development. And I certainly agree with many county pros that we could play on into the first few days of October and maybe that would allow another round of Championship matches to be fitted in.
The impact of climate change is rarely so beneficial, though, and I hope the whole process is reversed as soon as possible. When torrential midsummer rain arrives, it frequently wipes out two or three days of a first-class game and this season's exceptional weather merely shows how erratic our climate has become. As a general rule, I reckon that each county can expect to have a couple of four-day games badly affected by the weather. It's worth considering when you are thinking about the amount of cricket we play.
That's almost all I wanted to say. I know this column hasn't mentioned the Blast, which I enjoy, or the Royal London, which I like even more, but you have given me enough of your time.
The easy assumptions about the County Championship are that it's gentle, soft and undemanding; one of summer's many pastorals; appealing to the spectator but of limited value to the selector; July's picture in a calendar entitled The English Scene.
Well, it is often beautiful, of course, but anyone who doubts its intensity has probably not watched much of it. It remains the prize that matters most to the players – and you are its principal guardians. Moreover, you are also, in part, the guardians of all the very young cricketers – you've not yet heard of them – who rock up at their first county trials with dreams of playing Ashes Tests still fresh in their minds.
I hope your deliberations go well this week. Don't be scared of taking time to reach the best conclusions. We waited until last January for the first-class fixture this year and everyone coped. It's vital to get things right because while you all know that your clubs’ core responsibilities include the development of England players, they also extend far beyond that role.
The counties are the engines by which inclusion and diversity can be implemented. Isn't it sad that one or two middle-ranking people at the ECB would like to get rid of them? So to adapt Benjamin Franklin's saying, it's important that you hang together or assuredly, you will hang separately.
But that's a gloomy thought on which to end. Much better, as long as you're not from Yorkshire or Hampshire, to remember Liam Norwell pounding in on the last day of the season with no greater prize on offer than his team's survival in Division One of the County Championship. Such things still matter to the players and I know they matter to you, too.
Thanks for reading and winter well,
Agreed Gerry. Some hope exists and some breaking news from the Surrey forum which took place this morning...
Steve Elworthy was asked...
How much dialogue is taking place with other counties? Can counties can agree to reschedule the 100?
SE in response suggested there was "huge dialogue going on. 4 to 5 meeting this afternoon. Conversations about reducing Hundred to 21 days is happening."
This squares with information from the Lancs forum and correspondence I've had since. What this shrinkage would do is make it easy to retain 14 CC matches AND crucially for the smaller counties 14 Blast group matches
Think that's a bit harsh personally. He was messed about as much as anyone last season. They tried him as a three to bring in Davies to open with Sibley I'm guessing with the intention of increasing our run rate early in the innings. Davies and Sibley kept getting out and Yates did struggle in the three slot. Hain coming in at four is 4-5 years ahead of Yates in experience.
Yates caught the eye of England selection in 2021 so there's no way Bears were gonna let him go after one lousy season. I'm actually glad they don't chop players on this basis. Yates has potential to improve and go on to plough big runs in first class cricket and still has time on his side for higher recognition potentially.
For all the gnashing of teeth over Matt Lamb let's be fair he's just had a decent first half to two thirds of one season after not exactly pulling up any trees prior to or during Covid and I'd have kept him too but his potential isn't the same.
I think it's quite likely Lamb's situation is a victim of the schedule in recent seasons being such a dogs dinner. Had we an appointment to view schedule going forwards (with ideally IMHO Friday T20 and 16 championship games starting on Sunday's) as a squad player he'd be invaluable. The chunking up of the season into blocks and the recruitment of all these T20 specialists means for Lamb, given his relatively limited potential compared to some of the other youngsters and him not being a slip catcher of any note nor much of a bowler makes his retention a bit of a 50/50 punt.
I'd still have kept him but can sort of understand the need to trim the squad means sometimes half-decent middle order batters (with few other strings to their bow) or basically squad players have to reluctantly be let go. Good luck to the lad at Derby and to Adam Hose (who might consider himself equally unfortunate) at Worcestershire
Certainly don't buy the Lancs line that the SGM costs them any more than a binding vote would.
The board there do have issues with trust
And what will a binding vote entail exactly?
Vote X 10 CC matches and 14 Blast matches
Vote Y 12 CC matches and 12 Blast matches
Vote Z 14 CC matches and 10 Blast matches
Something along those lines when what members could well insist on is retention of 14 CC and 14 Blast matches to show solidarity with the Worcestershire's and Sussex's
What I think Lancs members fear is there will only be option X or Y.
Or perhaps option X - yay or nay?
No change to the volume has to remain on the table with an insistence on the schedule being sorted so there are games for all the counties throughout June July and August as opposed to the huge gaps we've had to put up with - some counties worse affected than others in 2021+2022
Vote A 14 CC matches and 14 Blast matches (but get the blinking schedule sorted out)
Annie Chave posted this on the Somerset Facebook page yesterday
"Hello All
Just to say on the back of the forum last night - I'm afraid I wasn't able to be there but I did meet with Gordon Hollins during the day along with Mike Unwin, Chris Winkleigh (apologies Chris I know I've got your surname a bit wrong) and Alan Higham to discuss the High Performance Review and we had a three hour meeting where we looked at the proposals as a whole. There are many aspects of the review that need to be looked at and Gordon was very definite that the Somerset CCC Board would not be agreeing with ANY proposals until the ECB had looked at the Somerset response and agreed to their points.
We will be meeting again in November to talk again about Members & fans concerns and so do get in touch with me if you have anything specific or if you're just worried or want to let off steam.
It is an incredibly frustrating time to be a County Cricket Fan at the moment and the delay in any decision making is very hard for the counties to get on and sell membership or make informed decisions but it's important we feel that we are aiming for the same score and I'm really really trying to ensure that we are keeping Winviz 50/50% and our projected score is heading for that tie...."
They may not have won the vote but that will have been mainly down to Lancs CCC throwing the kitchen sink at defeating it. What they have done however is help open up a few eyes to what they're after and their members (rather condescendingly described by the club as "small but significant") were right to call the SGM in the circumstances as information was far from forthcoming in August. They've also helped awaken members at other counties and wangled us an extra year - if nothing else - so well done Alan and the volunteers.
If I'm reading it right in an ideal world what the board of Lancashire County Cricket Club would prefer is one division of 12 or 13 (or perhaps 14?) counties playing each other once per season with no relegation or promotion. This would necessitate demoting 3 or 4 counties to minor county status forevermore.
They don't like small divisions of six
They don't like playing some teams more than once but other teams only once
They don't think smaller counties should have any say in the matter
They don't think they should ever be relegated
Yet they somehow agree with the warped view of the ECB report that there's somehow too much cricket presumably so they can fit more concerts in at Old Trafford and more slogball too
It might be what many of the supposed bigger counties are after at the end of the day.
Getting far too big for their boots at Old Trafford especially considering they've won precisely 1 county championship title in close on 90 years
It's not just Lancs however. This'll likely reflect how other so called big counties think
14 games CAN fit into the 5 months outside the 100 window they just won't admit it and they keep inventing stumbling blocks. It is is pure deflection tactics
The 100 can be played with CC alongside it. I'd actually prefer this and in the light of this there ought to be efforts made to increase the CC back up to 16 games if this is the case not reduce it to a shrunken disheveled status
Where there's a will there's a way. They just want to shrink the game and it needs opposing still
A shame for those in Melbourne that for a second week running heavy rain put paid to the entire schedule. There was a photo I saw of Essendon CCs ground completely flooded
George Garrett's had an impressive debut overnight. Came on first change and removed both openers - caught third slip with one that extracted a bit of extra bounce and caught second slip in that corridor of uncertainty area. Figures of 2-5 off 4 overs at one stage. Fair play to the lad
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LTCPIvmbljE
And Jacob Bethell has been playing for Sydney CC overnight in their away match at Bankstown
Duplicate post
Lancashire had their SGM during the week and Somerset had a forum
Lancs appear to be committed to preserving 14 FC games in the season and will push for some CC cricket in August to facilitate this. They are deeply opposed to the idea of a tiny top tier of just six teams. At one point they mentioned a 12 team division as being their preference but I can't see how that would work. Like Warwickshire they are not too fussed if a couple of T20 Blast games were cut from the schedule.
Somerset's forum suggested they are angling for a 100 franchise to be hosted at Taunton so at least they get to cash in on some of that while it exists. I personally cannot see the other counties agreeing to expand it as it generally flopped ratings wise last year. They are looking at ideas to have some CC cricket on during the Hundred - THIS IS POSITIVE NEWS as it would be less pressing to cut fixtures.
I saw some some interesting comments about only having six teams in the top division;
One thing I have grave reservations about is how a six-team top division is going to help England's cause.
It was mentioned on the Northants - Essex commentary yesterday that when there was an 8-team top division it was intensely competitive. Yet this has actually since gone up to 10, presumably to reduce the risk of "big" counties going down to Division 2.
It's obvious that with only room for 6 clubs in the top division, that risk of not being in it will increase substantially. The basic maths is that 12 teams won't be in that league.
One might say that the likes of Lancashire, Surrey and Yorkshire are the core resource when it comes to producing England players. But what if, rather than the assumption that it will be the likes of Leicestershire "marooned" in the feeder divisions, it is those big clubs? Let's face it, all 3 have spent time in Division 2 before, so it's far from a given that they will stay in a top division of 6. And once out, it could take years to get back in, especially if all 3 ended up down there.
On top of this, you then also have the other side of the coin, that the big clubs are by no means the sole providers of England players - far from it. As things stand, there is sufficient incentive for all the county clubs to try and get into Division 1, which means they build stronger sides. But with the proposed set-up, it may be that more clubs "do a Leicestershire" and privately admit that they will give-up on trying to build red-ball team capable of challenging for the top flight.
These combined effects could actually end up seeing the supplies to the England Test team worsening, not getting better.
Food for thought I reckon.
Totally agree. Gave the club the benefit of the doubt over recruitment of the overseas Nathan McAndrew this season but this makes far more sense all formats too but especially championship cricket he'll chip in in several ways.
May enable Will Rhodes to go back to opening if they're that way inclined as would ease his need for bowling