Print

[ProCricketer1982]

I believe the issue goes deeper than county cricket, it goes down to club cricket. The grand vision of the ECB at club cricket level just isn't producing the top class cricketers it was designed to.
I'm talking specifically about the region of the country I play in, but I'm sure it's the same across the UK. A few years ago if you were a good side with talented players you could progress as a club to the highest level of club cricket, and all that mattered were the results you delivered on a Saturday. What has happened more recently in my area of the country is that the Southern Premier League has imposed a range of accreditation requirements before you can get promoted from the Hampshire League (the league I play in), so not only do you need to be a good side, you need to have a raft of requirements in place including a set number of colts sides, boundary sizes, pitch/ground marks to a set standard and specific facilities in place.
Now I'm all for having basic facilities in place, but a number of very good teams over the past few years have been refused promotion due to real technicalities, allowing bigger clubs 2nd teams getting promoted in their place despite finishing lower in the league.
I believe in our region the ECB are trying to create a super league of big clubs in the belief that will deliver the best young cricketers. The impact is that in the smaller clubs, young players who want to play at a high level often have to make the decision to leave their club to join a bigger club in order to do that. I know of a number of talented young players who have chosen to either play a different sport, or stay at their local club and be part of the club they know and like rather than move elsewhere. Either way a potential talent may have been lost to the game at a higher level.
I apologize for the rant, but I have a real issue with what the ECB are doing at club cricket level, and clearly over the past 10 or so years it isn't delivering the required amount of talent to the top level.

Something that always makes me laugh about these Southern League accreditation requirements is that in order to play in the very top league you need to have 2 sight screens at each end. We have players from Australia over who play at a high level back home and have never played a game of cricket with any sight screens, let alone 2 at each end.

Whilst I agree the system of 'club mark' and 'focus clubs' doesn't work and only makes clubs put out youth teams as cash cows, I do think that having certain criteria for leagues in terms of ground requirements is a good thing. I mean, I'd hate to find myself playing Saturday league cricket at some ground where the outfield is rutted and the wicket is some doggy pudding. Sight screens, scoreboxes, electronic scoreboards are all fancy things that just 'finish' off grounds by the wicket and outfield should be good to progress.

As for the junior sections.. I believe most clubs just view them as cash cows rather than truly out the time, effort and money into developing them. Probably because they don't have enough volunteers but also because they know most will stop playing, move away or go uni and never come back.

[Steveo1000]

Play for Portchester. And I know about Sarisbury's issues.
Despite the fact your 1st team have finished in the promotion spots for the past 2 years in what is affectively div 2 of the premier league they can't go up because the boundary is about 2 meters to short. A good example of the accreditation requirements stopping good players playing at the highest level for their own club.

[Gingerbusiness]

Keep it to six
North East
North west
East Midlands
West Midlands
South west
South East

That would be quite interesting.

South East would be incredibly strong (Middlesex, Surrey, Sussex, Hampshire, Kent plus Berkshire, Bucks and Oxon).

[Steveo1000]

Whilst I agree the system of 'club mark' and 'focus clubs' doesn't work and only makes clubs put out youth teams as cash cows, I do think that having certain criteria for leagues in terms of ground requirements is a good thing. I mean, I'd hate to find myself playing Saturday league cricket at some ground where the outfield is rutted and the wicket is some doggy pudding. Sight screens, scoreboxes, electronic scoreboards are all fancy things that just 'finish' off grounds by the wicket and outfield should be good to progress.

As for the junior sections.. I believe most clubs just view them as cash cows rather than truly out the time, effort and money into developing them. Probably because they don't have enough volunteers but also because they know most will stop playing, move away or go uni and never come back.

Focus clubs! That was the expression I was trying to remember when writing earlier.
Totally agree about pitches and outfields, but they don't need to be like lords, just to an acceptable standard. And more often than not it's the other fancy elements that are preventing clubs from promotion. That can't be right in my opinion.

[ProCricketer1982]

Focus clubs! That was the expression I was trying to remember when writing earlier.
Totally agree about pitches and outfields, but they don't need to be like lords, just to an acceptable standard. And more often than not it's the other fancy elements that are preventing clubs from promotion. That can't be right in my opinion.

As you say, boundary ropes, scoreboards etc aren't important. As Lon as the wicket is good, outfield is good and te boundaries anent too short then tbh who cares. Can't say I really bother with sight screens, maybe the odd ground if,the back ground happens to be bad

[ProCricketer1982]

That would be quite interesting.

South East would be incredibly strong (Middlesex, Surrey, Sussex, Hampshire, Kent plus Berkshire, Bucks and Oxon).

I'm sure the yorkies and lancs thnk theirs would also be strong

[WalkingWicket37]

Focus clubs! That was the expression I was trying to remember when writing earlier.
Totally agree about pitches and outfields, but they don't need to be like lords, just to an acceptable standard. And more often than not it's the other fancy elements that are preventing clubs from promotion. That can't be right in my opinion.

I won't name any names but playing in County Division 3 last year (so a fairly good standard, although admittedly not top if the tree) we played on a ground where it was bouncing to head high off a good length. That could only be described as dangerous.
Add to that grass clippings still in the outfield and the outfield itself being about as level as Stuart Broad's temper! We had one guy go down for a long barrier to a firmly struck ball that hit something and went ever his head! Not an enjoyable days cricket that...
Like you say they don't need to be Lord's, but ideally they shouldn't be putting the players in danger either!

[ProCricketer1982]

I won't name any names but playing in County Division 3 last year (so a fairly good standard, although admittedly not top if the tree) we played on a ground where it was bouncing to head high off a good length. That could only be described as dangerous.
Add to that grass clippings still in the outfield and the outfield itself being about as level as Stuart Broad's temper! We had one guy go down for a long barrier to a firmly struck ball that hit something and went ever his head! Not an enjoyable days cricket that...
Like you say they don't need to be Lord's, but ideally they shouldn't be putting the players in danger either!

These sorts of wickets and outfields need stamping out. It just ruins the fun. What's the point of batting whenyou know the wicket will gEt you no matter how you play and as for the fielding... It again is bloody annoying and stops fielders from making good stops as you can't trust the ground.  Defo lose interest in playing in those games even in leagues which is sad.  I think some mates play at two grounds in their league, shurdington and frampton on Severn.. Both by all accounts terrible wickets and outfields.. Just don't get why they are allowed in county div 1 tbh. Send them down to the depths where their wickets belong

[Nickauger]

This just about sums it up for me... fantastic article. No idea who David Hopps is btw and what his credentials are, but I agree with everything that he says!

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/709591.html

[Manormanic]

Hopps is a Yorkshire cricket writer, so naturally the best thing since sliced white!

[ProCricketer1982]

Good article that. If they did what he sets out then I suspect 18 counties would work. They won't of course and they'll continue to pump money into a few 'clubmark' 'focus' clubs that fail to produce the good as they are only interested in premier league status and cash.

state schools and strengthening grass roots will show the biggest improvement in the pro game. More people interested in playing, means more crowds, more people playing, meaning more sponsorships, meaning more money, meaning better facilities, meaning better standards, meaning better cricekt from top to bottom.