mad
Member
Committee having strong links with the membership is debatable
Farby obviously too candid with his views last time
Proposals Threaten Our Survival' - CEO Statement
22 September 2022
Leicestershire CCC CEO Sean Jarvis has questioned the proposals outlined in the ECB’s High Performance Review following its publication yesterday morning (Thursday, 22 September).
Subsequently, the Club can announce a revised date for our Members’ Forum, which will now take place on Friday, 7 October at 6pm in the Charles Palmer Suite at Uptonsteel County Ground.
In response to the publication, Jarvis said: “We see the proposals in two parts. The recommendations around elevating the performances of players makes for 'interesting reading', and is a concept that requires more discussion and understanding.
“A focus on creating the right environment for players and coaches is something we very much support, and a plan that we believe could actually go further.
“However, when scrutinising the proposals for the domestic schedule, that is where issues arise from our perspective. Simply put, the suggestions do not work for Leicestershire.
“We have to ensure we protect the interests of both the Club and our Members. When you actually calculate it, the proposed schedule results in a 28% reduction in days of cricket at Grace Road for Members. That is not acceptable.
“At a time when we are seeing membership rise (34% growth compared to 2019), and more of our community having access to cricket, such a reduction is not fair and does not help to grow the game.
“A near 30% reduction in matchdays would ultimately mean a potential revenue loss of £250,000 for the Club and threaten our survival.
“Clubs are continually asked by the ECB to reduce their financial dependency on the central body, but the proposed schedule creates a conflict of messaging.
“Moving forwards, it is essential we talk to our Members to hear their opinions and give them the opportunity to help us to form a consensus from a Leicestershire perspective.”
The Club welcomes and encourages Members to join us for the rescheduled Members’ Forum on Friday, 7 October to air their views and concerns pertaining to the Review.
Leicestershire CEO, Sean Jarvis, Director of Cricket, Claude Henderson, and Chairman, Jonathan Duckworth will all be in attendance, with doors opening at 5pm ahead of a 6pm start.
Think that's 4 no's now 3 to go although we've to be careful of the bribes which will surely come along again
We must hammer Hants with maximum points and hope that Kent or Yorkshire get hammered.
It's not happening
Pivotal session was on day three last week when Somerset dug in for their second innings and didn't allow Siraj or OHD to blow them away for a second time.
Warwick Somerset Notts all flaky sides that could go either way. If Somerset have a bit more of Craig Overton around next season they might be up the other end of Div 1 especially if they add a top overseas bowler.
Of course it might suit the ECB to relegate Yorkshire with a points deduction which could yet save Warwickshire. Yorkshire you'd think would have a far better chance of an instant return or at most within two seasons would return to the top tier.
Gareth Batty has suggested the county game ought not be reduced to just providing talent for celebrity cricket formats
He should have a word with his old Worcestershire pal Darryl Mitchell then who seems to shill more and more for a certain broadcasting company rather than his members
Keaton Jennings suggested this. It makes sense to give every county the same rest week after first three CC games than all having different rest weeks
The rest week could be late April or early May. Then another rest week early September before the final 2 games.
I'd prefer 16 CC games too but baby steps
To win Div 2 we'd have to outperform Gloucestershire (not easy) one of Middlesex or Glamorgan (improving sides especially Glam) and Durham. Remember we also couldn't bowl Derbyshire out at home last season and Worcestershire will fancy their chances too
I doubt they'll relegate 5 next season. Warks have already said they'd not support ten games in 2024 so likely a 7 team top division but even to get into that will not be easy
All they need to do is reject the Strauss review. Then shorten the RLODC by a fortnight so they can move one April round and one September round into late August. This'll give players more week long breaks that some have asked for.
No major changes required none of this upheaval
Keep 10+8 as counties prefer that structure and must keep 2 up 2 down. Easier to sell memberships plus more chance of promotions if you happen to be in Div 2 fewer teams will get trapped there for years and years.
Return to 9+9 as soon as it's feasible
These are about our level. They enjoyed a good season in 2019 being promoted and beat us in the COVID 2020 season. Did okay in 2021 too.
I think getting promoted will be challenging especially if Warwickshire are barmy enough to vote through 1 up 1 down from 2024 onwards. There'll likely be no promotion at all in 2023. Bouncing straight back might not be possible
Some good grounds to visit next season including plenty of outgrounds hopefully
Essex chief executive and interim chair John Stephenson told BBC Essex that as it currently stands, the club would not vote in favour of any reduction in the Championship.
3 down 4 to go
Middlesex (Strauss's own county): "We strenuously underline our position on being opposed to any reduction in volume of 1st-class cricket played across season & most importantly the Championship... we firmly stand behind our belief this should remain at 14 games over the season"
Warwickshire could end up looking like that one complete arsehole at the end of the night
Commenting after the publication of ECB’s High Performance Review led by Sir Andrew Strauss, Kent Cricket’s Chair, Simon Philip, said: “The Strauss Review is a wide-ranging and comprehensive document. However, it should be remembered that it has been prepared through the prism of High Performance only.
“The two key areas for our Club – domestic structure and scheduling – remain within the discretion of the 18 First Class Counties. Within this group, we will now consider issues such as the needs of all our Members, supporters, players and stakeholders, the financial impact, the unintended consequences and the possibly irrevocable change to the essential nature of County Cricket.
“Kent Cricket is a fundamental part of our community, committed to supporting the growth of the Men’s and Women’s game at all levels.
“We continue to deliver success on the field, produce players for England and support one of the largest recreational and schools cricket populations in the country.
“We will not allow our Club to be rendered irrelevant.”
If Warwickshire touch this with a barge pole we will call the SGM
Not sure on this one. Yates bats in the top three it's proven very tricky for top three batters over the last 5-6 years and he's caught the eye of national selection. Not saying he's undroppable. However there's a difference between players available to bat up the top of the order for which Warwicks have few options at present (and there'll be even fewer next season once Sibley's gone) compared to batting in a more comfortable slot against the older ball at 5, 6 or 7 where there will almost certainly be more options available to the coaches and there will be a need to select players with multiple facets to his/her game - slip catching, turning his arm over for a few overs with the old ball without going for too many runs. There's obviously an issue with Lamb and I hope his move slightly south east goes through in the winter and he gets a good run at a first division county shows what he can do
Benjamin has a bit more time to crack on with Bears next two seasons and I hope he does he showed he can knuckle down with that innings up at Old Trafford last season not just whack it up in the air or get bowled playing heave-ho shots like he so often does
Yes lots to play out over the next couple of days. Does sound as though like Edgbaston this Bristol pitch will flatten and flatten as the game wears on perhaps a consequence of ecb finally getting to grips with some issues at non test ground pitches over the years. I think it might well be Henry Brookes time to really shine and collect a clutch of wickets also Briggs ought to take some confidence into his bowling.
We are where most pundits expected us to be though in the bottom 4 of this ten team league (I was more hopeful I guess of at least safe mid-table) - it is a worrying state of affairs with the club set to perhaps vote itself into semi-permanent feeder league status (you wouldn't put it past our CEO and board would you????!!!) as envisioned for any county not occupying one of the six top spots at the conclusion of season 2023. Likely go then spend at least 2/3rds of our future existence not being able to even compete for the county championship let alone win it.
Talking of winning we've apparently not won at Bristol since Allan Donald (match figures of 8-91) and fifties for Ostler, Reeve and Penney emerged from a thriller against Bill Athey and Courtney Walsh in June 1992 our sole victory there in 60-odd years (admittedly for the last 23 years we've often been in a different division or beat them at Cheltenham, Gloucester or Moreton in the Marsh). I think we could well find ourselves playing Gloucestershire quite a bit over the next few seasons in one of these 'feeder divisions'. You see we don't have the clout of Surrey or Hants and don't currently produce enough of our own top talent like a Lancashire or Yorkshire or Somerset. Best of luck selling three-year memberships off the back of that clever piece of future proofing.
Highveld wrote:
Ian Bell never had a season averaging 12!
Very true and I'm not suggesting Yates is on the same page as a generational talent like Bell. However he might have struggled had Warwicks not been placed in Div 2 where they spent a couple of seasons after the split occured at the end of 1998.
Yates needs a full season in one spot not being messed about and with a bit less pressure He'd probably get that in Div 2 next season aswell.
Ian Bell plundered Div 2 in one of his early seasons either 1999 or 2000 it was probably the making of him
Agreed. Its important to stress no matter what tricks the club uses to try to summarise the forum - Nobody on the floor within the forum made any suggestion as to the effect that they'd be at all comfortable with a reduction to 12 championship matches - so this should in no way be a major takeaway from this first forum.
If the club are intending to pursue 12 games as a viable compromise option they will be going completely at odds with the wishes and views of members following the initial consultation.
Also the way Warwickshire's written summary deals with the input Farbrace made is frankly disingenuous. In response to a number of points made about the relative success of the England test team between 2004 and 2019 in an era of stability and 16 CC matches (World number 1, 2 or 3 for the vast majority of that period) Farbrace did not say he supported a reduction to ten matches, he merely said from a purely hypothetical perspective it would give coaches more time etc... Well no shit Sherlock!!! If you listen to his response he actually advocated more red ball cricket.
Also let's do a comparison between county championship and premier league football since 1992. It might sound spurious but it's no more so than the dodgy dossier Strauss report.
Since 1992 there have been only 7 different teams win the premier league out of some 50 or so clubs that have competed in it. Meanwhile since 1992 lets count how many counties out of the 18 have won the title. Warwickshire, Essex, Leicestershire, Glamorgan, Surrey, Middlesex, Nottinghamshire, Yorkshire, Sussex, Durham and Lancashire have all won the county championship since 1992 and we may well get to add Hampshire to that list in 2 weeks.
The county championship is brilliant - it was ace as one big 18 team division and also as 2 divisions of 9.
It would be foolish to wreck this and limit any top tier to a paltry 6 teams.
If anything a 6 team premier league would be far more suitable for football not county cricket
I need to flesh this out more but I think there is a compromise solution for 2024 that avoids much of the upheaval that would ensue if major changes occurred.
Firstly we have to retain a good number of counties being able to win the championship each season so that has to be 8, 9, or 10 - let's stick with 10 for now
I'd suggest in order to maintain 14 Blast games for the counties that really need that many there is an obvious way to reduce playing days in the other two formats without cutting the number of championship fixtures.
14 Championship games could be played as a mixture of 4-day and 3-day matches
April & May 5 rounds of 4-day matches
June & July 5 rounds of 3-day matches (longer days and helps fit the blast games in between more easily)
August & September 4 rounds of 4-day matches
Total 14 rounds of county championship matches (playing 9 4-day matches and 5 3-day matches)
RLODC three groups of six playing 5 matches - hundred host counties would only play two home matches and the other counties would host three matches. This was an issue mentioned at the forum. Instead of the RLODC taking up all of August I'd start the RLODC on the same weekend as Blast finals day so that counties that didn't qualify for Blast finals day have a game on the Sunday. The RLODC could all be wrapped up by mid-August (apart from the September final) enabling the championship to resume towards the end of August
Resuming the championship towards the end of August would be feasible as there'd only be the semis and the final of the hundred to finish off meaning that many hundred players will have already returned to their counties. This would also help bring an end to the county championship much earlier in mid September instead of ploughing on right to the last week of September.
I know 3-day matches would also be controversial but it'd be far better IMHO than losing those fixtures altogether. Also it would help counties take the odd game to out grounds at more reasonable cost. Did I hear Warwickshire are considering using Stratford-upon-Avon again?
Also these changes can be effected without major ripping up of the 2-division championship structure that has worked brilliantly for twenty three years and has served the England test team rather well
There were several really intelligent lines of questioning from the floor in the forum well worth listening to.
Farby himself seemed less than enamoured by the 100 and actually hinted at the players needing to play more red ball county cricket not less. I'm frankly disappointed by this continual attitude from county CEO's and chairs that the CC somehow isn't able to fund itself when the fact is without the CC there'd be no short form players to fill the blast or 16.4 sides nor England test cricketers from who's performances the game derives between 66% & 75% of its revenue.
Overall what I sense is a strong desire from both members and Paul Farbrace not merely to retain 14 championship matches but to return to 16 Championship matches which took England to world no 1 during the 2000's. This is a clear and logical outcome from this first forum which the committee ought to take forward and record in their recommendations to Stuart Cain when he writes his report to the board. I thought the ideas around perhaps having some 3-day matches in the middle of the season to help facilitate 16 matches were quite interesting too.
Crucially not one member on the floor suggested being happy with 12. However that's a figure that's been ascribed to members committee as representative of a suggested 'compromise' without any thought to the cost of such a major drop in the schedule. If the club try to pursue this line then I'm afraid they will be pushing a line that shows a clear split between the members committee and the wider membership at least as represented by the views in this first forum.
Well said Keaton Jennings. Exactly what I've been saying. Schedule properly so there's no need for any cuts.
"In my opinion you can keep the 14 County Championship games and that's only what Ben Stokes said on social media a few weeks ago," said Jennings. "But you can factor in breaks, so that you can play three four-day games and then have a break from the Championship. I think my view is representative and it certainly echoes what the England captain said.
"I think 14 games is a good amount and the cricket we play is of good quality, but the problem comes when you have a week off at the start of April and then another at the start of September. Including the Royal London Final, we play 13 days in September whereas in April we were playing 12 in 17."