The Notts stuff is interesting. As well as the vote on reducing the county championship there were votes of no confidence in all of the member elected board members, none of which were carried (i.e. the board survived unscathed). I think it shows member's are very reluctant to get behind anything that seems confrontational. And as the Notts vote showed you can call an EGM and win on the resolution but that doesn't necessarily mean anything under the club rules. I'm still hoping to get our rules changed to give the member's a vote on fixture list matters. I have the necessary support of 250 members but if there's anybody else who would like to sign up, please message me, the more the merrier. I'm also planning to attend the Stuart Cain update which I think is on the Tuesday of the Essex game.

Very disappointing result yesterday, failure to chase 280 and not getting the 218 to beat Middlesex cost us dear. Chasing, particularly chasing tricky mid range targets, does seem to be a problem. The positive from the tournament would be the performances of Kai Smith, Michael Booth and Taz Ali - all of whom seem to be making the step up from good young player to just good player - Booth in particular is this season's pleasant surprise. I think Taz benefitted from Barnard's captaincy, where he was used as an attacking bowler, I think Davies is always a bit worried he'll get whacked around. But captaincy, like everything else, is easier in the Metrobank 50. Obviously none of the three has made it and T20 cricket, whilst giving players lots of opportunity, does make building a career harder, but the signs are good. The more experienced players weren't great but it seemed to me as if Alex Davies threw himself into the competition which was impressive as being blanked from The Hundred must have been a blow to the ego and bank balance. Our season now all seems to hinge on the Somerset quarter - final.

A comment on the County Cricket Matters on Facebook page that there are currently 7 counties against any change to the fixture list, 11 in favour, 1 less than the 2/3rds majority necessary to change the structure of county cricket. The squeeze is being put on the no change counties to try and get one to flip. No idea if that's true but it sounds plausible.
On matters Warwickshire, I'm trying to change the club rules to ensure the club has to get the approval of the members before voting on any changes to the fixture list. If the rule change goes through it won't impact on the current discussions which is unfortunate but it will be there for next time and I'm pretty confident there will be a next time. I currently have 253 signatures plus another 20 remote signers so that's stage 1 complete, I should be able to get this to the AGM.

You may have seen this elsewhere, but Warwickshire County Cricket Club is now the 51% controlling shareholder in Birmingham Phoenix Limited. The articles of association of the Phoenix are on the Companies House website and are incredibly complex. I think we are the only Hundred host county to have completed. If you are a member you have an indirect holding of 1/3000 * 51% of the franchise.

kevandmac wrote:

Hi, I was at the ground yesterday but can't make today or tomorrow- presumably you already have my signature from an earlier response in this thread?
Thank you for making the effort to do this.
Hi, yes I have the details and I'm counting them towards the 250. If it's a tight squeeze to make 250 & the club is tough on applying the letter of the rules I may have to ask those who expressed support on this forum to also send a signature to the club, which is the actual requirement in the rules - but we can cross that bridge if and when we get to it.

Hi Andy
Tomorrow i'm hoping to get down for the lunch to tea session but that will probably be it, I'll be there on day 4 if there is a day 4. I'll be weraing a shirt with sun flowers on it to aid identification. Currently 128 have signed at the ground plus 11 via this site so I'll hope to add a few in the next two days and the suggestion above about a trip to Rugby might be worth taking up.
RB.

Hi all a quick update on where I've got to on collecting member's votes. What I'm trying to do is to change the rules of the club so the board can only vote on ECB proposals to change the fixture list if they tell members how they intend to vote, hold a members vote and get the approval of 50% of the Warwickshire members who vote. I need the support of 250 members for that proposal to go forward to the membership as a whole. I did a walk round today and got 77 signatures with about 80 - 90% of the members I spoke to signing. Enough to make it worthwhile walking round again tomorrow. If you'd like to sign but weren't at the ground please message me on this site. If you are there tomorrow keep an eye out for me.
Reabank

Hi I'll update next week.

mad wrote:

You say balanced my heart sank several times reading that propaganda puff piece

I did have a look at the report and it's much more balanced than the quotes in the Guardian, but perhaps a little bland as a result. The report is described as "a first ever Financial Performance Index for the 18 first class counties" although I've been doing something pretty similar since 2018. They have Warwickshire joint 2nd on 2023 financial performance, whereas I had us 10th for the equivalent period. Trying to understand the difference, I think the report gives a lot of weighting to revenue. My approach doesn't include revenue as a criteria at all. I think Warwickshire is a good example of why it's best not to include revenue, we've built a lot of stands and expanded our ancillary businesses but profitability is about the same as it ever was. Next up, a new hotel.

Certainly never got much love on this forum nor, in recent years, from Warwickshire management. His record for us wasn't bad 105 wickets at 32.4. Taking 47 wickets at 21 in our county championship winning season. Could hold a bat, was a good and enthusiastic fielder and although his record in recent seasons was no great shakes he had to bowl on some very bland wickets - particularly at Edgbaston. I'll be sad to see him go but clearly the coaches don't have confidence in him and a new contract at Gloucestershire extends his career and hopefully will go well.

Devon_Bear wrote:

GerryShedd wrote:

Surrey are supporting the retention of a 14 match County Championship but will be voting for a reduction in T20 Blast games.
They say of the County Championship: "We have seen crowds double in just five years here at the Kia Oval and huge numbers of younger fans come through the gates and learn to love the format." That's not something that Warwickshire could say.
https://www.kiaoval.com/statement-on-the-domestic-schedule/

What are our attendance stats for the cc games at home this season, do you happen to know? Are they down on the 2021 season or are they more or less the same?
I did see something on the "Grumbler" substack showing Warwickshire attendances for the county championship as 17,000 in 2019 and 17,000 in 2024. So very low, 600 a day if you assume 28 days play, a bit higher allowing for rained off days etc, but, seemingly, not getting any lower.

Hello All

Just a quick update, currently I only have 12 members down supporting a SGM, 238 short of the 250 required. But I haven't given up, I'm hopeful there are other people getting names. If anybody else would like to sign, please message me (click on the message link to the left of this post) and if anybody knows other members and feels OK mentioning this to them, that would be great. Have a good weekend.

Hello all

I'd echo Gerry's sentiment that the only way to prevent a 12 game county season with no four day cricket in July and August is to call a SGM. For that we need 250 members to sign up. I'm happy to collect names from this forum. As to what the SGM would be about I'd say, a proposal to change the club rules to prohibit the board from voting for any ECB plan to either reduce the number of days of first class cricket in a season or reduce the number of days played in June, July. If you would like to sign then I think you can message me directly from this forum by clicking on the blue "message" underneath "Reabank." I think I need names and membership number only.

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?

Does look like another nailed on draw. Like the Sussex and Surrey games. I can see you might want to encourage point of difference bowlers but not sure our flat pitches plus the kookaburra helps anybody very much.

Disappointed Taz Ali missed out. He's obviously got some talent and did OK in the three games he played for us in the championship. Seems we started the season with a eye to developing players for the future and then after a few games lost our nerve.

Thanks BB - that's an interesting summary. I think we need to start getting votes for a SGM - no need to hear what Stuart Cain has to say, we know all of the proposals are bad and the entirely unrepresentative members committee with a little prompting, I suspect, has gone for the worst of the bad options. One thing that caught my eye about the T20 proposals, "A continuous tournament from mid-May to July - finishing before The Hundred starts." To me that means county cricket is not only cut down in games but it's even more than now pushed to the edges of the season as the Blast is projected to start in mid - May and runs uninterrupted until the Hundred which takes up August. Annoying and disappointing.

Hi Gerry
As reasoned as ever and I certainly agree with the last statement, does anybody know whether signatures are being collected?

I'm pretty sceptical about the Sport England explanation for the rule changes. The situation we've ended up with is that the county is controlled by the board and the board is elected by the board. Other than the SGM route, which is clunky and involves coordinating 250 members out of a total membership of 3,000 there is no way for members to influence the running of Warwickshire. At Surrey by contrast every year there are elections for the board and there are always more candidates going forward than seats available. But despite this Sport England still provides funding to the ECB.
I'm basically in favour of avoiding boards consisting entirely of white middle aged men but I think this could be done in a number of ways, Warwickshire took the one that most restricted member involvement.

Of course the special general meeting route only works if 250 members sign up to request one. It's my impression that without that the club will consult members, but won't feel bound to listen to what we say.