What I find interesting is that all of the counties seem to think it ends here. The global partners that are buying up the 100 franchises will soon want to see an expansion of the competition to maximise ROI. I doubt many of them will be satisfied with 5 home games per season. I suspect this process will be repeated again within a few years to accommodate an earlier July start and an increased set of franchises.

SC_Bear wrote:

What I find interesting is that all of the counties seem to think it ends here. I suspect that the global partners that are buying up the 100 franchises will soon want to see an expansion of the competition to maximise ROI. I doubt many of them will be satisfied with 5 home games per season. I suspect this process will be repeated again within a few years to accommodate an earlier July start and an expanded set of franchises.

Players who aren't involved in the Hundred regularly need to be very careful, they should be looking to maintain the existing structure rather than a reduction which will strengthen franchise cricket and weaken County cricket

ajones1328 wrote:

Exiled Bear wrote:

Could someone paste the email here?

Reimagining the domestic schedule: Is change essential for red and white ball cricket to thrive?

Hi Anthony,

As promised in last week’s newsletter, I want to update you on the ongoing discussions around the future shape of the domestic cricket season. Over the weekend, the game-wide Steering Group shared a set of proposals, which we reviewed during an in-depth Members' Committee meeting on Monday evening.

The session lasted nearly four hours and highlighted the importance - and complexity - of the issues at hand. Ahead of the wider Member consultation during the Members Forum planned for the lunch interval on Monday, I’ve tried to summarise the options and discussions. In the pursuit of brevity, I’ve had to leave out some detail but I will fill in the gaps when we meet. However, this hopefully gives you a feel for the options and how the Members' Committee viewed them.

The Case For Change
The structure of the domestic cricket season has been a long-standing topic of debate. However, the sense now is that it’s time for decisive action - to create sustainable formats and a workable schedule that can serve the game well into the future. Key challenges include:

• Player Welfare:
  The current calendar - running from early April to late September with frequent format changes and back-to-back fixtures - is impacting performance, player development and wellbeing. Fewer matches are likely to reduce injury rates.

• Member and Fan Engagement:
  Audiences are declining. Rothesay County Championship struggles to attract new supporters, with concerns about a lack of jeopardy and elite-level quality. Vitality Blast attendances have also dropped sharply over the past two years, with scheduling and format cited as key issues.

• Logistical Pressures:
  International fixtures, the growth of the women’s game, and the fixed window for The Hundred mean that it’s impossible to schedule the current volume of games in a way that addresses issues. This means that the wickets are being exhausted and Ground Staff are under unsustainable pressure to maintain pitch quality.

Members' Committee unanimously agreed that the status quo is not sustainable.

Guiding Principles
Members' Committee heard that the game-wide Steering Group evaluated proposals against three criteria:

• Player welfare and performance:
  Promoting 'best v best' to elevate quality and support England player development.

• Audience growth (attendances and broadcast):
  Through more competitive, engaging fixtures with stronger narratives and 'best v best' cricket.

• Stakeholder alignment:
  Ensuring Members’ interests and your passion for the Rothesay County Championship is central to any changes.

Once agreed, changes to the Rothesay County Championship and Vitality Blast will remain in place until at least 2031 to provide long-term clarity. Due to a number of counties wanting to review what cricket is played under The Hundred, and also the long-term future of 50-over cricket, the Metro Bank One Day Cup will stay unchanged for three years and be reviewed thereafter.

Vitality Blast: Rebuilding Momentum
The proposed reforms aim to restore the competition’s relevance and appeal:

• A continuous tournament from mid-May to July - finishing before The Hundred starts.
• Three groups of six, preserving local derbies (e.g. Bears v Pears).
• 12 matches per team: 10 within the group, 2 against teams from other groups with rotation of groups up for discussion.
• Even distribution of fixtures, focused on weekends for better attendance.
• Greater attention to travel and player recovery - aiming for 24 hour gaps between games.
• Quarter Finals and Finals Day held in July, ensuring maximum player availability.

Members' Committee broadly supported these proposals but stressed the need for serious marketing investment to reverse declining interest.

Rothesay County Championship: Five Structural Options
The Steering Group proposals reflected a majority (but not unanimous) view from the game that player welfare is an issue that needs to be addressed by a slight reduction in games, but there were different ways of doing this – and a 14 game option was included for comparison:

• Option A: 8/10 Divisions (14 Games)
  Division 1 teams play each other (home and away) but it was felt that this is really 'status quo' and doesn’t address fixture congestion, player welfare or audience engagement.

• Option B: 10/8 Divisions (12 Games)
  The reduction improves player welfare, but two games felt a bridge too far and did little to enhance competitiveness or narrative. Again, tinkering and more of the same really.

• Option C: Two-Tier Conference + Finals Series (13 Games)
  Top 12 teams split into two 'top tier' groups of 6, while bottom 6 in a 'lower tier'. Each team plays 10 group games and then the groups split: top 3 in each of the top tiers merge and play 3 games in a September 'finals series' to decide on the County Championship winner. Bottom 3 and those in lower tier involved in relegation/promotion play-offs. Creates 'high jeopardy' games throughout, especially in September. This was positively received - a strong balance of competition, welfare, and tradition. However, scheduling challenges around the final rounds in September would need to be resolved.

• Option D: Two-Tier Conference + One-Off Final (12 Games plus '13th game' Final)
  Similar to Option C, but replaces the finals series with a one-match final. Each team plays ten games in their group and two from the other conference. The top teams in the top two groups then play each other in a 'winner takes all' Final. This emulates models from other sports and global red-ball leagues. However, the weather/impact of the toss and the jeopardy of a 'winner takes all' game after a long season were concerns. It also means that the majority of counties will only play 12 games.

• Option E: 3 Groups of 6 + Playoffs (12 Games)
  All teams can win the Championship but lacks promotion/relegation and could lead to more 'dead rubbers.' There was a concern that quality players would be spread too thinly, weakening overall standards. It also removed the jeopardy of promotion/relegation and teams' desire to strive for higher standards.

Members' Committee felt that there’s no perfect solution, but consensus leaned toward Option C. It strikes a balance between innovation and tradition, encourages competitive cricket, and reduces player load modestly. If logistics prove unworkable, Option D was the preferred fallback.

Crucially, the Committee felt that this is a pivotal moment. Bold but considered changes now could secure a healthier future for the domestic game, delivering better cricket for Members and safeguarding the development of elite players.

Next Steps
I’ll walk through these proposals in greater detail at the Members Forum during the Somerset game on Monday 23 June, and have some graphics to help explain each format. It’s difficult to get everything across easily in the confines of a newsletter. I will then ask those present for their views and thoughts.

Following that, we’ll take the feedback from the forum and Members' Committee session to the Club Board. This will form the basis of our response to the ECB ahead of their July decision

Thanks! That’s interesting. I’m not sure that any of the options seem very appealing to me.

On a different note, I just realised that I never get emails from Warwickshire any more. Obviously I wouldn’t expect to get an email like this one now I’m no longer a member, but I used to get about one email a week with news updates etc. I think this is something we could definitely do better at, I get at least a couple of emails a week from Somerset for example.

Andy wrote:

That email from Stuart Cain we've had today, sounds as though our lot have accepted the reduction in the amount of games no matter what.

Apparently our Chair wants to become ECB Chair so I guess he’s pushing this as hard as he can!

Andy wrote:

That email from Stuart Cain we've had today, sounds as though our lot have accepted the reduction in the amount of games no matter what.

True but that can be overturned/reversed at a Special General Meeting.

I ran out of optimism regarding the County Championship some time ago. Framing the debate in terms of the structure of the CC is a red herring as the real problem is that there is too much hit-and-giggle. The cuckoo in the nest that is The Hundred is continuing its work of eviscerating competition. The proposals for the CC pay little or no attention to any competitive integrity, they are just a way to open up space for more donkey slog.
It's too late now - Money is in control and I pity anyone who thinks they can stand in the way of Money. Might as well be grateful for the few crumbs we are still being fed whilst they are available.

The ECB want a successful test side yet places restrictions on playing that format of the game.
In a short season of really 5 months (April to August) we have 4 different formats of the game - c/c, 50 over, 20 over and 16.4 over.
Football with its 8 month season has one format and just 3 competitions - league, FA cup and League cup (whatwever it's called these days).
Therein lies crickets problem.
Cricket would get a much better following if it had county cricket played throughout the season alongside T20 - in the same way cc played alongside the 40 over game back in the 90s. There would be room for a knockout competition similar to the old B&H or Gillette cup. The public needs to know when games are on so needs to be set days = eg Friday night T20 followed by county cricket starting on Sundays.

I see where you are with this LE, but I do think we need to have a full weekends cricket at least every other week at home. If they played 40-over cricket in between CC games before, no reason why it shouldn't still work seeing as they did it at a time when we had the start of 4-day cc games for every fixture. The powers that be have been talking about players being burned out for the last 15 years and as they were advocating more rest, a few days later we had Warwickshire playing 9 out of 10 days at one point and I am sure less than 20 years ago, we had played 13 out of 15 days. I am not sure there is a solution but I do not want to go back to 2014 when we had no fixtures at home on a Saturday at all. That season I only watched us twice on a Saturday, T20 finals day and the C&G(?) cup final at Lord's.

I agree Paul. I only mentioned the Friday T20 - Sunday 1st day of CC because players have avoided starting at 11am after an evening game the night before! Pluse players complaining of too much cricket. Yet they have the energy to chase the dollar around the world. But yes cricket should be played on Saturday and Sunday on alternate weeks.
Funny how players were never burned out when there was no limited overs cricket and they played 6 days a week bowling 120 overs a day! At a time when the fitness levels were much lower and dietry needs were met in pint glasses!

I agree Paul. I only mentioned the Friday T20 - Sunday 1st day of CC because players have avoided starting at 11am after an evening game the night before! Pluse players complaining of too much cricket. Yet they have the energy to chase the dollar around the world. But yes cricket should be played on Saturday and Sunday on alternate weeks.
Funny how players were never burned out when there was no limited overs cricket and they played 6 days a week bowling 120 overs a day! At a time when the fitness levels were much lower and dietry needs were met in pint glasses!

LE, yes, my thoughts as well and often you hear of poorly paid players walking 5+ miles to and from games because they wanted to save money. Anyone who plays in The hundred cannot complain about 'Burnout', here is a competition which earns them good money and has no real knock-on effect in terms of other similar franchises but obviously does get a few players international recognition as we have seen here with Mousely and Bethell. If a Sunday start to a T20 is 2.30 or 3pm, I think this is adequate for a team to then have a CC game the next day as they have started late and over at more or less the same as most CC or 50 Over games. There is no easy answer but it does sound as though the ECB do not care (Have they ever) about scheduling as long as the money is made for them and then they can trot out "Gras routes" in a sentence but not realising youngsters are not being able to watch games on TV anyway to get engaged in the first place.

Out of interest was anybody at the members’ forum on Monday? I couldn’t make it.

Yes, I've been meaning to do a summary of what was said but haven't had the time. will try to do it later.

It's a terribly bleak outlook he portrays. No wonder the crowds are so low although that's been a longer term issue than his tenure. 20 years now since we had above average county crowds on a regular basis down Edgbaston - one off games excepted. The ground never was full for CC games nor did it ever need to be but 13,000 for Lara's debut 4-day game which only lasted 3, Twose notching a double ton seems a lifetime ago - and is to be fair but this lot running the show since just before COVID have exacerbated the issue. Website's rubbish. Nobody outside a few nerdy types know when the fixtures are or what they are being played for anymore. A generation since the loss of free to air has grown up not having to know about county cricket the way they would have 30 years ago. Surrey buck this trend. Even Somerset crowds are beginning to fall after several years of increases it's a crying shame but county cricket has been deliberately set up to fail since almost getting it spot on circa 2009-2015

But this hierarchy have brought this on itself, destroyed county crickets foundations so that Edgbaston Old Trafford and a couple other of the bigger grounds can look a bit more full a bit more often for what they call 'major events' but which largely amount to exhibition slop

The members' forum - what Stuart Cain said:
Any changes to the CC and Blast will last to 2031.
The Blast - proposal is three pools of six, keeping local derbies so 12 games then top two in each group go to quarter finals. Played May to July, with Finals Day in July. Two CC games also in June. Minimum 24 hours between games.
County Championship - preferred option is Top 12 teams split into two 'top tier' groups of 6, while bottom 6 in a 'lower tier'. Each team plays 10 group games and then the groups split: top 3 in each of the top tiers merge and play 3 games in a September 'finals series' to decide on the County Championship winner. Bottom 3 and those in lower tier involved in relegation/promotion play-offs.
One Day Cup - leave pretty well unchanged but look again in three years to see what has happened to 50 over cricket at international level.
The Members' Committee added a request that the ECB needs to invest in the Blast - effectively to re-launch it.
Mr Cain mentioned the decline in attendances as a factor in the need to make changes to add interest and create "jeopardy" so that matches mattered.
It was stressed that two-thirds of counties will need to vote for any proposals so Warwickshire's preferred options may not be agreed.
There was then a Q&A session - I will do another post to summarise what was said.

Hi Terry, nice coverage. The CC one I find quite interesting, and this "all-in" play-off model I think is a good one to create increasing jeopardy while also ensuring all teams are playing. I make that 13 games for the season - with the potential, I guess, for a 14th game final or relegation / promotion decider which I think might well be the best compromise given the alternative was 12 or even fewer CC games.

OD have explicitly said now is in a holding pattern, I hope this is some step into going further and mandating the involvement of academy players or paradoxically full internationals of county capped players, etc.

Thanks Terry

So in summary, drop 2 T20 matches (no strong views on this). Plus drop the 2 four day games that currently take place in July. (which seems wrong to me). As members we should get to vote on all this. Anything about how much Warwickshire intend to cut the cost of membership to reflect the reduced number of games?

Regarding the Q&A session, there were no punch-ups or shouting matches, all very civilised!
What I have written below is an attempt to summarise the main points but is not comprehensive. Also, just before the end I gave up and went for my lunch!
Question - why is this up for debate now when the Strauss High Performance Review that made similar proposals was rejected just a couple of years ago?
Answer - that was being imposed by the ECB whereas this is coming from the counties and the players. The counties are seeing lower attendances and the players say the schedule imposes unsustainable pressures.
Question - with few players playing all formats, is the schedule really unsustainable? Players seem to find the energy to go off and play franchise cricket.
Answer - only about 20% of players go off to play franchise cricket. As well as the volume of cricket, it's the switching between formats that is a problem.
Question - couldn't there be a clearer move to specialist squads - red ball and white ball - to ease the pressures?
Answer - there would be a danger that four or five counties would choose not to have a red ball squad so the 18 county model would disappear.
Question (or more a statement) - the preferred 4 day option is horrendous. We should stick to the current system with maybe a loss of a game or two if necessary. The Hundred can and should subsidise this.
Answer - the money received from the Hundred sale won't last forever. Once you have sold the family silver, you can't sell it again(!)
Question - how many attended the Bears v Pears Blast match? Wasn't this a worrying drop?
Answer - yes, about 10,000. This is partly due to the scheduling - too many matches in too short a time; plus the Blast has been under-promoted.
Question - in the favoured option, how will promotion and relegation be organised?
Answer - not yet decided.

In the Blast a pool of 6 teams would result 10 games not 12.

To make the County Championship meaningful with a better chance of resulting in improved Test side the matches should be played in every month of the season.

I wonder if the Derby would be outside of pool play?? Something similar in Major League Baseball...

LeicesterExile wrote:

In the Blast a pool of 6 teams would result 10 games not 12.

To make the County Championship meaningful with a better chance of resulting in improved Test side the matches should be played in every month of the season.