Since the season has come to an end, I thought maybe a good time to mull over the potential changes.
Whatever happens, this will always be tagged the Strauss Review, maybe unfairly, he just the man who has been lumbered with sorting out the mess that our game is in at t moment. Not all bad, but could be so much better.
The review came about after another away drubbing in the Ashes, resulting in 17 wide ranging changes, 15 of which will be implemented. The final 2, & most controversial are changes to the domestic structure, & therefore require the backing of a minimum of 12 out of 18 counties. The competitions in question are the Championship, & T20 Blast, the Hundred is of course untouchable. Don't believe that the 50 over comp is included in any proposed changes.
The sticking point as far as I see it, is that each individual County, it's members & players have there own agenda. I believe that 15 of the 18 Counties are members clubs, not sure of the 3 that aren't. So in most cases, members will, at least be consulted, with some being balloted.
The proposed reduction of 14 to 10 championship matches will not go down well with most members, with a strong bias towards 4 day cricket. reducing the blast to 10 games wont get much support from the smaller, non Test Match Stadium clubs, that can often fill their grounds, & gain substantial revenue, remember these are the Counties that don't directly profit from the Hundred.
In recent weeks/days, Buttler & Malan have added their support to the reduction in the domestic programme, easy coming from 2 players with England contracts who don't play much County Cricket, but are more than happy to play in some of the many big buck T20 comps around the world. Do they care about the County Cricketers who mainly play 4 day cricket, & have to wait for their season to re-start while the Hundred is taking place. For them not enough cricket.
Proper scheduling, & not reduction is what's required. The madness of 6 Championship matches in 7 weeks with bowlers exhausted, or worse still, injured. Making space in a packed schedule should be helped by having an even number of teams in each Division, but stupidly extra Rounds/days are required, as not all sides play every round, this sounds like it's building in breaks for teams, but some missed playing in the opening Round, & therefore had to play 6 on the bounce.
(01-10-2022 19:48 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote: [ -> ]In recent weeks/days, Buttler & Malan have added their support to the reduction in the domestic programme, easy coming from 2 players with England contracts who don't play much County Cricket, but are more than happy to play in some of the many big buck T20 comps around the world. Do they care about the County Cricketers who mainly play 4 day cricket, & have to wait for their season to re-start while the Hundred is taking place. For them not enough cricket.
Proper scheduling, & not reduction is what's required. The madness of 6 Championship matches in 7 weeks with bowlers exhausted, or worse still, injured. Making space in a packed schedule should be helped by having an even number of teams in each Division, but stupidly extra Rounds/days are required, as not all sides play every round, this sounds like it's building in breaks for teams, but some missed playing in the opening Round, & therefore had to play 6 on the bounce
Final two paragraphs contain the uncomfortable truths about what is going on here, and hit the nail firmly on the head. It is indeed easy for the 'hired hand' mercenary brigade to reach a conclusion - the outworking of which will not affect them as they will rarely be playing anyway. There is one other uncomfortable truth, and it is this! As usual, the ashes is the litmus test for the success or failure of the England team (simply not interested - like the ashes fanbase - in the world test championship) and therefore, their downturn in fortunes that stretched back - some 13 tests or so I think - against multiple opposition before this last summer's uptick in performances (including W Indies loss) could have been the same, but with an ashes victory, and I am willing to bet - no review, and no proposals to upend the entire domestic season again. England's position near the foot of the Championship table (prior to this summer - not sure where they sit now) was not a concern raised either!
As far as the reduction in county championship matches in a ridiculously small div 1 structure as proposed is concerned, it strips away any authenticity the competition that the CC is supposed to represent will have! I believe that this is just as much a concern for the clubs/members/paying supporters, as naked self - interest - that seems to be the preserve of the Malans etc of this world, and their manufactured concern - maybe that should have been the basis of the arguments against this Strauss plan put forward by the Chairmen, when they finally put their adopted position(s) into the public domain. You are correct Booms that proper scheduling is the answer (those that parachuted the 100 into the calendar should be asked to come up with one that works, but since they care not for the CC or Royal London Cup, they do not see it as their problem to solve - that now - unarguably - includes SKY and the BBC - who should not have been allowed to make a unilateral decision in this case, and on this matter)
Recommendations
1/ Create accountability for men's high performance.
2/ Improve our shared understanding of "What It Takes To Win"
3/ Foster a high-performance community.
4/ Develop diverse skills in performance leadership roles.
5/Reward performance impact.
6/ Challenge our bowlers to develop their global skills.
7/Give players access to experiences overseas.
8/ Provide earlier international benchmarking.
9/ Refocus the Lions.
10/ Produce a coherent schedule
11/ Upgrade the standard & intensity of our competitions.
12/ Incentivize higher quality pitches.
13/ Provide opportunities or talent & reward counties for development.
14/ Sustain an exciting shop widow or the game.
15/ Enable players to better manage workload.
16/ Improve physical & psychological resilience.
17/ Schedule international matches to allow players to play their best cricket more often.
(09-10-2022 11:50 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote: [ -> ]1/ Create accountability for men's high performance.
2/ Improve our shared understanding of "What It Takes To Win"
3/ Foster a high-performance community.
4/ Develop diverse skills in performance leadership roles.
5/Reward performance impact.
6/ Challenge our bowlers to develop their global skills.
7/Give players access to experiences overseas.
8/ Provide earlier international benchmarking.
9/ Refocus the Lions.
10/ Produce a coherent schedule
11/ Upgrade the standard & intensity of our competitions.
12/ Incentivize higher quality pitches.
13/ Provide opportunities or talent & reward counties for development.
14/ Sustain an exciting shop widow or the game.
15/ Enable players to better manage workload.
16/ Improve physical & psychological resilience.
17/ Schedule international matches to allow players to play their best cricket more often.
#17 I agree with but not just to provide match intensity practice. Equally, to ensure that the domestic competition - in the Championship in particular - is sustained in minds and hearts, with integrity of the competition the top priority, with the county clubs getting a little return on their initial investment in the players they developed to international standard!
Isn't the rest of that list Booms, supposedly what the Strauss review was all about?? (or so we were told)
^^ Yeh, sorry, they are the proposals.
Proposed Domestic Structure
County Championship
May - June, & a conclusion in September
10 games
Top tier of 6
One team relegated each year, sitting above 2 conferences of 6
One-Day Cup
Whole tournament in April.
T20 Blast
Late May - late July
Primarily on Thursday & Friday evenings, & Sunday afternoons.
10 games
The Hundred
3 week block booked out in FTP in August & September from 2024
Just as I thought, they are the proposals!! Ironic isn't it, that the royal london cup (the very format of the world cup - England current champions) should be played in April (done and dusted) at a time when the ball is doing all sorts, and on pitches that I am willing to bet, will not mirror those that will host the wc tournament in many parts of the world....good move!! Somewhat Ironic too, given the flat batting tracks in England in recent history!
The County Championship may be very marginally better - given the discussions - than anticipated, but still flawed in my view! The mooted play - off matches will need to be played on result pitches, otherwise draws come into the equation (they may do either way) How do we then determine a winner?? Sounds to me like it may be league position - better then surely, to have two extra matches per team to determine a champion on division position alone - first meaning first
yeah I know..right??? As for the uneven number of matches, twice against some opposition and once against others..Hmmmmm!!?
As for the rest, the entire structure is designed to pander to the T20 and Hundred........enough said! No more lectures on the primacy of formats, clearly that is not a concern anymore.
Feel free Booms to correct anything I may have got wrong!!
Counties have rejected the 6 team top flight Championship as expected. No major changes for 2023, & more than likely 2024.
A few tweaks to the points system, means that it is back to 5 pts for a draw after the change to 8 which was made to encourage better pitches at the start of the pandemic.
Bonus points will now be accrued in increments of 50 commencing at 250 runs through to 450, previously the first batting point was gained at 200 runs. This change is to encourage the aggressive batting approach adopted by England's Test side. To achieve the maximum 5 points will require a run rate above 4 runs per over.
Counties will now be able to register 4 overseas players at the same time, up from 3. Only 2 can play in any given game, but it allows for 2 red-ball & white-ball players available in the event of the Blast & CCC clashing.