Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => Your Cricket => Topic started by: thecord on December 10, 2015, 08:42:34 PM
-
Our league is discussing bringing in 30 over per side Saturday cricket for the lower divisions (currently 40 overs).
What are people's thoughts on this??
-
Could be a sink or swim attempt to resolve an issue.
Everyone wants to finish sooner, and this will achieve that.
Would an earlier start time not work better?
-
I say this every time this comes up.
Why do the lower leagues always get fobbed off with less cricket??
Does less of a standard mean they need less cricket?
Why not try to cater for both but offering two leagues, a shorter format on Saturdays and the higher format, and see what players want to go where.
-
If you were a lower middle order batsman who bowls a bit of spin would you want to play? I imagine match fees would be the same too.
-
Personally, I would retire and never play again. 40 over cricket isn't enough time for everyone to get a good game (especially if you aren't wanting to just slog), so 30 overs is even worse.
Just my opinion though. I don't think you would have 11 getting a good game either. Bowlers have few overs and only 3-4 batsmen will get a good bat (good in as much as 15 ish overs and even less if you aren't a slogger)
Only good if you want to slog or are the main man in a team and will get to bat top 3 and bowl full overs and then you won't care about the others doing little to nothing.
People say people want 2020 type wham bang stuff, and yet.. there is less and less 2020 teams playing. The county cup in Gloucestershire can only attract 8-10 clubs, the rest don't want to know.. the evening league has gone from 5 leagues 5 years ago to 3 and even they are now only playing like 6-7 games a year (usually losing a few to rain etc). I get the argument about 'time' but if you lose current players (who, like me may help run clubs etc etc) then you won't have the people doing the donkey work as the modern youth have generally no interest in the club side of things.. just turn up, play and go home.
-
Why do the lower leagues always get fobbed off with less cricket??
Does less of a standard mean they need less cricket?
this this this
WHy are the lower standards fobbed off with less cricket, less overs etc etc. Are they less deserving of playing a full game?? People say 'well they struggle for numbers'... is it those lower teams that struggle or the higher ones who have to take lesser players to make up numbers that cause that???
-
Our league is discussing bringing in 30 over per side Saturday cricket for the lower divisions (currently 40 overs).
What are people's thoughts on this??
(No Swearing Please), they reduced it this season from 45 to 40. I don't know anyone I've played cricket with say it takes too long. Most are glad to be out of the house for the day. I know I am.
-
Bloody hell, they are obsessed with tinkering with the lower leagues lately. Which divisons @thecord?
-
May as well play T20. Except by and large T20 weekend cricket has been a failure.
I want to play as many overs as possible, why do they regard this supposed view from their surveys that games finish too late to mean they should scheduled less overs? It's simple in my mind, start earlier!
-
I'm pretty sure its the new div 9 downwards
I just wish they'd have push the start time forward to midday
-
I'm pretty sure its the new div 9 downwards
I just wish they'd have push the start time forward to midday
This! They bring the start time forward in August to negate the shorter daylight hours. Why not bring it forward for the whole season.
I play a fairly good standard, so there's a couple of long trips each season. Nothing quite like an 8.45 finish knowing you've got a 90 minute dive back home...
-
What area is this btw? It'd be interesting if the local clubs in that area kept a record of how many have played (and number of games etc) and then if they introduce it, keep track of the numbers falling and keep reporting it back to the stupid league committee's
-
This! They bring the start time forward in August to negate the shorter daylight hours. Why not bring it forward for the whole season.
I play a fairly good standard, so there's a couple of long trips each season. Nothing quite like an 8.45 finish knowing you've got a 90 minute dive back home...
a local club here won their divison last year and then had to travel gloucestershire and whiltshire.. unsurprisingly, many of their players simply played home games or completely sacked off the season. When asked they just said they weren't prepared to travel and as above, have the really early and late finishes due to travelling. That's probably more the issue than the length of the game.
as people have said, just start earlier so people actually have a full evening available to them
-
Bristol & District
-
I'm pretty sure its the new div 9 downwards
I just wish they'd have push the start time forward to midday
9 downwards? Yeesh, that's hardly the 'lower leagues', it's half the entire league structure!
-
Our earlier starts has meant that those who work Saturday mornings can't play, those who do overtime on Saturday mornings lose out financilly. There is no perfect solution.
-
a local club here won their divison last year and then had to travel gloucestershire and whiltshire.. unsurprisingly, many of their players simply played home games or completely sacked off the season. When asked they just said they weren't prepared to travel and as above, have the really early and late finishes due to travelling. That's probably more the issue than the length of the game.
as people have said, just start earlier so people actually have a full evening available to them
I can fully understand this. Being on the Soufff coast we're in the "Hampshire" league. Over the last couple of seasons I managed to play away games on the Isle of Wight (not miles away, just a long day due to trains & ferrys not running in sync with each other), Wiltshire, Dorset, Berkshire & Surrey.
Along with the out of the county fixtures there's a few fairly long away trips where we're lucky end ugh to stay in Hampshire.
It's not the amount of overs that puts people off, it's the 1/2pm starts to play 50/45 over games and the hundreds of miles you have to travel to play. I dunno if the league are aware of this, but fuel isn't exactly cheap...
-
I can fully understand this. Being on the Soufff coast we're in the "Hampshire" league. Over the last couple of seasons I managed to play away games on the Isle of Wight (not miles away, just a long day due to trains & ferrys not running in sync with each other), Wiltshire, Dorset, Berkshire & Surrey.
Along with the out of the county fixtures there's a few fairly long away trips where we're lucky end ugh to stay in Hampshire.
It's not the amount of overs that puts people off, it's the 1/2pm starts to play 50/45 over games and the hundreds of miles you have to travel to play. I dunno if the league are aware of this, but fuel isn't exactly cheap...
exactly. The cost of playing is expensive now, add to that kit, fuel and if you are due to start at 1300 and the travel is 2 hours away.. teams to act all professional want to get there at least 60 mins early.. meaning leaving at 9-10am !!! utterly stupid for amateur cricket. then if you don't finish until 2000.. 60 mins in the bar.. 11pm finish.. ridiculous at the amateur level.
-
May as well play T20. Except by and large T20 weekend cricket has been a failure.
I want to play as many overs as possible, why do they regard this supposed view from their surveys that games finish too late to mean they should scheduled less overs? It's simple in my mind, start earlier!
As well as reducing the overs from 45 to 40, the games started 30 mins earlier at 13:30. At one stage they also wanted to stop the teas as well.
-
9 downwards? Yeesh, that's hardly the 'lower leagues', it's half the entire league structure!
Yea the idea would be the newly formed Section C which is Div 9 down so about half the league
-
As well as reducing the overs from 45 to 40, the games started 30 mins earlier at 13:30. At one stage they also wanted to stop the teas as well.
Don't for one minute think scrapping teas is off the agenda Rob
-
Don't for one minute think scrapping teas is off the agenda Rob
Madness. As anything been discussed about which divisions you can play for other teams Phil?
-
Our 4th team have asked for overs to be reduced to 40 overs as have many sides in the Essex league outside of the big teams who put out 7 or 8 sides. The argument is 52 overs is to long and that's from the senior players. I actually think there is an argument for it, bringing start times forward isn't the answer as many players work Saturday mornings , but no rule fits all.
-
Madness. As anything been discussed about which divisions you can play for other teams Phil?
choice between losing overs or scrapping tea then there is no contest.. Tea is gone
-
40 isn't so bad compared to 45 overs higher up the leagues, but 30 is a very strange idea. Might as well play t20.
I'm also hearing that there's a suggested rule in the last month or so of the season, players can't be dropped to lower teams if they've played more than a certain no. of games in the top few divisons? Bizarre.
-
Our 4th team have asked for overs to be reduced to 40 overs as have many sides in the Essex league outside of the big teams who put out 7 or 8 sides. The argument is 52 overs is to long and that's from the senior players. I actually think there is an argument for it, bringing start times forward isn't the answer as many players work Saturday mornings , but no rule fits all.
40 overs means less people get a game, more people get crap games (no point saying clusb will manage it because winning is all that matters) and so people leave the game. Add to that, less overs means you will only breed one type of player because there isn't the time for your different types of batsmen (or bowlers for that matter) to come into the game. how snr is snr, if you are talking about 45+ yr olds then they are probably losing fitness to manage long games rather than actually wanting the game to be shorter. just that they are getting tired and so finding it hard. a lot of them I suspect are plodder batsmen so moving to 40 overs will mean either they get discarded from sides or rarely get a decent bat (or, they'll nick the batting slots from the rest of the younger guys and so causing them to leave the game etc etc)
vicious circle
People not being allowed to play lower down the leagues once played a certain number of games is there to stop strengthening BUT it's also madness because some people might choose to step down during a season, maybe have work, maybe just want to play with mates who are lesser players... who knows. Banning them simply puts people off playing which is kind of stupid.. although, if you turn up and the oppos have a ringer in it ruins the game quicker than anything so again.. vicious circle
-
choice between losing overs or scrapping tea then there is no contest.. Tea is gone
I'd retire if they ever scrap teas!!
-
I'd retire if they ever scrap teas!!
Lol, exactly. Whichever they do under the pretence of raising participation will probably have an adverse effect. Given this time issue, you'd expect 2020 to be a growing area, which as jake has pointed out isn't true. So simply shortening the game won't help one bit.
As I say, 2020 in glos is dying on its backside which is amusing for me as I hate 2020 personally but as a game it's sad to see.
-
I'm also hearing that there's a suggested rule in the last month or so of the season, players can't be dropped to lower teams if they've played more than a certain no. of games in the top few divisons? Bizarre.
This has been a rule in the Essex league for the last 10 years(9 games from memory). It stops clubs putting 1s players in the 2s etc to stop them being relegated.
@ProCricketer1982 That's not my opinion but the opionion of players in our 4th team. TBH we struggle to get players dropping below 2nd team, so 4s is generally older players and young youth. Locally this seems to be the norm.
-
People not being allowed to play lower down the leagues once played a certain number of games is there to stop strengthening BUT it's also madness because some people might choose to step down during a season, maybe have work, maybe just want to play with mates who are lesser players... who knows. Banning them simply puts people off playing which is kind of stupid.. although, if you turn up and the oppos have a ringer in it ruins the game quicker than anything so again.. vicious circle
Rules against strengthening makes sense, I understand that, but used to play in a league that just had a rule that if you dropped teams you couldn't bat top six or bowl before 30 overs for a couple of games. Worked fine, just putting a rule against people moving down teams is insane. Feel sorry for anyone in their club 2s who bangs vast amounts of runs and can't be promoted up because the league says noone can be dropped.
-
Rules against strengthening makes sense, I understand that, but used to play in a league that just had a rule that if you dropped teams you couldn't bat top six or bowl before 30 overs for a couple of games. Worked fine, just putting a rule against people moving down teams is insane. Feel sorry for anyone in their club 2s who bangs vast amounts of runs and can't be promoted up because the league says noone can be dropped.
It is a weird rule. I fell out of interest in 1xi cricket this year so said I only playing 2xi for a few weeks (after 9'games and I was avging 30+ opening in the 1xi). Played against @OwzatOllie as it happens and just had fun, didn't take the mick by slogging or biffing them but played sensible shots with a couple of mates and my dad umpiring. Enjoyed it more than any 1xi game.. Yet, technically I shouldn't have played which is silly because I wasn't enjoying 1ximceicket so was likely to just stop playing which surely for the game is a bad thing ....
As it happens the 1xi top order collapsed and that was the only 2xi game I played but it was the most enjoyable Saturday I had this year without doubt.
-
Don't think 30 overs would be very satisfying as some wouldn't get a bat or bowl they would just be paying subs to field and would soon get fed up and stop playing
-
With regard to teas they will eventually be dropped due to clubs struggling for people to do them many clubs already serve teas which are of poor quality due to the small amount of tea money they receive.
-
With regard to teas they will eventually be dropped due to clubs struggling for people to do them many clubs already serve teas which are of poor quality due to the small amount of tea money they receive.
Regrettably I agree.
-
With regard to teas they will eventually be dropped due to clubs struggling for people to do them many clubs already serve teas which are of poor quality due to the small amount of tea money they receive.
I think that's very sad personally, with nobody drink driving any more like in the old days fewer and fewer clubs stay behind for a drink post game so the tea break is the main time you get to have a bit of banter.
We found with earlier starts and therefore earlier finishes less people stayed to socialise at our club because they had more time to crack on elsewhere ???
-
Final thought for now, we shorten the format to encourage the youngsters and less hardcore players to play the game...in doing so the old guard, who invariably do the majority of work off field keeping the clubs running become disgruntled at shorter format cricket and step away from the game...do we expect the younger, casual cricketer to take up the slack and fill the committee roles? Or do we expect even more clubs to disappear?
I know where my money lies sadly
-
Personally I think 45 overs is ideal. The main issue is travelling, which thankfully, next year should be reduced, as we won't be playing the 2 sides in Bristol. Sitting on the motorway for 45 mins in bumper-to-bumper traffic worrying if we will get to the ground on time is not fun!
I work saturday mornings and when you have to be ready at 11am to be picked up it is not enjoyable!
If it was 30 overs, I would not score more than 30 as I have a slower strike rate, I'd get tonked as I bowl spin, and pay the same amount of subs to field less time...subs are too high as it is, but paying £8-10 to field for approx 2 hours and be unlikely to have a good game with bat or ball...no thanks!
-
Turn up and field only players are already rife in 40-50 over cricket, 30 overs would make it worse. As has been repeatedly stated, no one wants to pay subs only to stand around fielding. I started senior cricket in my old club's midweek T20 team and I was lucky if I faced more than one ball in a game, it wasn't worth me turning up and paying subs just to stand around at fine leg all night.
As much as I despise fielding in 45 over games (mostly because I don't get a bowl and happen to be a magnet for the ball), i'd sooner play 45 overs than 30 any day. At least with longer games there's a chance of a decent bat and different batting styles can be utilised, rather than just having 11 sloggers. I personally don't think i'm suited to short games anyway, as I tend to dig in and score slowly.
-
30 overs is no good to anyone ! In our league 2nd team cricket is now 40 overs and its just been announced that this current season 2nd team cricket is win or loose no draws which I think will hopefully keep the younger players interested in keep playing after they finish junior cricket.
-
Rather than reduce travel our league increased it we used to have North and South divisions with promotion and relegation but in there wisdom the league dropped the North and South divide In favour of promotion and relegation players now have to travel miles to certain away matches the knock on effect for some clubs is they cannot get players to play on Sunday after having to travel on Saturday.
-
With regard to the travel issue Knowing the locations of the away teams grounds for season 2016 and the travelling I would have to undertake to get to these grounds at the end of November I reluctantly informed my club that I shall not be available in 2016.
-
I can see both good and bad in this,
the good...
The majority of lower division games (only speaking from experience of leagues in South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire) seem to last around 30 -35 overs, by bringing in a shorter format your attracting younger players (15-19) to want to spend a Saturday playing. Many younger players are turned off playing by the potential for games not finishing until 8-9 pm whilst the even younger up and coming players (13-15) see the 50 over format as too long and tiring being stood in the field all day. The hope of getting younger players to turn out on a Saturday in the shorter form means as they grow and develop through to higher levels they move onto 50 overs. We are loosing too many juniors and need to find some way of keeping them involved...they are the future of the game and indeed our clubs!
The bad...
The older, more experienced players have become accustomed to 50 overs and the time it allows at the crease, the shorter form does not suit everyone.
In my opinion I feel that the lower leagues are for teams of mixed ages, the older players passing on the experience and wisdom to your youth. However too many players are clinging onto playing and stopping the younger players coming through. I retired playing at 40, I could have gone on but having played previously at a high level would I really have been happy playing 4th team cricket? That would have stopped the progression of the number of promising juniors coming through the club.
I keep involved with the game both in a coaching and umpiring capacity, the later has seen me take part at a level which on a playing front I'm too old and knackered to take part in. I find these almost as rewarding as playing.
I know the game is for everyone but I think as the older end we have to look to the future and how we can preserve the future of not only our game but also our clubs.
With regards to travel, it never worried me as a player where I was traveling too as long as I was playing and even now having been accepted onto the new Yorkshire League umpiring panel I will be traveling longer distances than ever before.
-
(http://i752.photobucket.com/albums/xx165/d7bow/Mobile%20Uploads/A4781E70-A2DB-43AD-A425-5FCA7B780BB1_zpsjmjde0wt.png) (http://s752.photobucket.com/user/d7bow/media/Mobile%20Uploads/A4781E70-A2DB-43AD-A425-5FCA7B780BB1_zpsjmjde0wt.png.html)
Ecb survey
-
Yea I saw that @d7bow
The article @uknsaunders has just posted gives some u retesting insights though. Seems to suggest they aren't really worried about existing players
-
What is the deal with the 33% who aren't happy with a 30 min journey? You're gonna play the same people a lot if you'll only play teams within a half hour drive of you.
-
They love a road trip and want longer journeys ;)
-
What is the deal with the 33% who aren't happy with a 30 min journey? You're gonna play the same people a lot if you'll only play teams within a half hour drive of you.
You do this anyway.
I get butterz point but older people mainly have no interest in coaching or umpiring and so you'll lose loads of people (who are vital to keep clubs going ) if you lump all your eggs into the youth comes first basket. Youth and progression are important but so is that 40 yr old who still has 10-15 years 45 over cricket In them. Ok, some will be all 'I'm not playing lower level' but they will be the minority and probably leave the game anyway regardless
-
Is cricket dieing because it's full off negative Nigel's?
I won't play less cricket
I won't finish Late
I won't travel to away games
I won't play in first
I won't play win/lose cricket
I won't wear a helmet
I won't wear any gear that's not traditional
I won't wear anything that's lairy
I won't play with him
I won't play at that ground
I won't play without side screens
I won't play indoor
I won't play t20
I won't play with sloggers
I don't like change.
Cricket is the most traditional game ever, maybe this is the reason it's dieing out, not because people are trying to change it.
-
Kent regional league has just cut down from 46 to 40 which is not the best still only have to use four bowlers as well unlike Sunday you have to use five