June 17, 2010

Lessons from the county scene

George Dobell
County chief executives on the lessons learned from the season to date
  shares 15

The schedule doesn't work

This season started earlier than ever. The reason? Largely so it could finish earlier to allow the counties to participate in the Champions League and earn more money from extra T20 games. Well, the early signs are that it isn't creating more revenue. And no English counties will participate in this year's champions league. Apart from that, it's worked a treat.

Meanwhile, to allow space in mid-summer for T20, much of the 40-over competition was squeezed into the early weeks of the season. "And we learned quite quickly," says Dave Brooks, chief executive of Sussex, "that spectators won't come in April and early May. Forty-over cricket may be more attractive than 50 over cricket but, if we play so early, it'll make no difference to attendances."

David Smith, chief executive of Leicestershire, agrees. "Lots of our spectators won't come until after the end of the rugby and football seasons," he says. "I'd like to see limited-overs cricket start in late May, when the weather has warmed up."

"I don't think it's working at the moment," says David Harker, CEO of Durham, "but really, we need to get to the end of the season and review everything before making a decision.

"At the moment, the players are being asked to make some ridiculous journeys that can't be healthy or helpful. Maybe one of the things we could look at is playing limited-overs games on the back end of Championship matches against the same opposition. I'm not saying that is the answer, but let's discuss it."

"The different formats are all on top of each other," says Hampshire's Rod Bransgrove. "And we probably do play too much cricket. But the real problem is the amount of international cricket as it calls into question the integrity of the championship.

When counties don't see anything of their centrally contracted players, when international tours and A tours spring up from nowhere, when counties are penalised for playing experienced cricketers and when the likes of Stuart Broad and Steven Finn are taken out of the game for strength development, it does make you wonder whether county cricket even works as a nursery."

You can't buy success

It's often said that the most successful teams create a unit that is worth more than the sum of their parts. Think of the Sussex side of recent years, the Warwickshire side of the mid-90s or the Gloucestershire limited-overs side a little later.

Surrey have gone the other way. They've created a team worth far less than the sum of its parts. Despite investing heavily in players and coaches, they remain relentlessly unsuccessful. At the time of writing, they are bottom of the division two in the County Championship and bottom of the southern division of the Friends Provident t20.

Nor are they alone. Hampshire, another of the larger spending counties, are also struggling while Warwickshire, despite good limited-overs form, is fighting to avoid a second championship relegation in three years. For a club of their size, history and, sometimes, hubris, that's a poor record.

"It doesn't surprise me," Harker says. "I remember the Malcolm Allison school of football management which was about buying the best but never winning anything. You can't just assemble a team overnight.

"Look, realistically, the team with the best players will usually, eventually, emerge as the best team. But you can't over-estimate the importance of team spirit in cricket. The team have to spend so much time together - travelling, in hotels and in the dressing room - so if they don't get on, you have a real problem."

Clearly money is an advantage. Three of the top four teams in the Championship are still Test-hosting grounds. But if the example of Surrey shows us anything, it is that building team spirit takes shared experience, shared values and shared goals. Those are things a cheque book can't buy.

The Test match grounds are not as powerful as they thought

At the start of the season, it appeared the Test match grounds (TMGs) were trying to steal a march on the non-Test match grounds. There was talk of an IPL-style T20 competition based around franchises and a concern that the non-TMGs would be frozen out. Such a scenario now appears unlikely.

Indeed, it now seems that the non-TMGs have the more viable business model. The TMGs have borrowed enormous sums and there is a fear that there will not be enough games to go around to enable them to service their debts. As Harker puts it: "Under the current model, I would agree that we [the TMGs] can't all prosper. We don't all have the advantage of a long-term staging agreement like Surrey's [which guarantees major matches long into the future] and, at the minute, things don't look sustainable."

As a result of that insecurity, the TMGs have gone in search of other revenue-raising measures. Hence the interest in city cricket and franchises.

The non-TMGs are unimpressed. "The issue I have," explains Brooks, "is that some of the TMGs behave as if the game owes them something. They made commercial decisions to redevelop their grounds. They didn't have to make that investment. No-one made them. Now they have to make it work. They can't just come back and say 'please help us' if part of their business plan doesn't work. In the normal commercial world, businesses live or die by their decisions."

Smith agrees. "The advantage the non-TMGs have is that we are not in competition with one another. The TMGs thought they were heavyweights, but were reminded that, under the rules of the ECB constitution, they need 75% of the counties to support them if they are to make changes. They need to take our views on board."

In an effort to reach compromise, Essex's David East now sits on the working party investigating the viability of TMGs in order to ensure that the views of the non-TMGs are fully reflected.

Failure will not be tolerated

Has there ever been a season where four county captains have 'resigned' by the middle of June? Will Smith (Durham), Nicky Boje (Northants), Shaun Udal (Middlesex) and Mark Pettini (Essex, for the T20 at least) have all relinquished their positions after a run of disappointing results, while Ian Westwood (Warwickshire), Chris Read (Notts) and Nic Pothas (Hampshire) have stepped down for the duration of T20. Expect coaches and directors of cricket to come under similar scrutiny in the coming weeks.

"Cricket has changed," Mark Newton agrees. "Supporters are more demanding and less patient."

"It reflects modern life," David Smith says. "People seem to want instant success and captains and coaches are under more pressure. Cricket is becoming much more like football."

Impatience may be a virtue, however. "It's professional sport," says Harker. "So it's only right that people are judged by their results on the pitch. Maybe, if that wasn't the case in the past, it should have been."

"I wouldn't say cricket clubs are becoming like football clubs. Yes, we made the decision to change captain, but it wasn't taken hastily. There had been concerns for a while that we weren't getting the best out of the captaincy and the sense was that we got away with it a bit last season. He [Smith] just needed to score some more runs and have a spell out of the limelight. I'd describe it as a hiccup, not a crisis."

There's too much T20

Doom mongers forecast the demise of T20 every season. It's as much a part of the cycle as autumn and spring.

Yet, this year, there is some evidence to support their claims. It's not that T20's popularity has waned exactly, just that it's not so popular that it can support 16 group games per county. For a start, the current format will create a glut of dead matches. Lose the first five and the remaining 11 are pretty much meaningless.Will anyone come and watch them?

And then there's the issue of a saturated market. "All we've done is increase costs," Smith explains. "We'll have the same income from 16 games as we had from 10. But each county will have had to pay to stage three more."

There are mitigating factors. The football World Cup is vying for spectators' attention, while the economic climate remains challenging. It's worth remembering, however, that there is a major football event every couple of years. This is not a unique situation.

"Anecdotally, there's no doubt that crowd figures are down," Newton agrees. "I believe the economic situation is having a much greater impact than most people think. The corporate market, in particular, is extraordinarily difficult.

"We've learned that people will pick and choose more now. They'll consider how attractive the opposition are; they'll consider how we'll we're playing and they'll consider which night of the week it is. If we're in good form and playing an attractive side on a Friday night, we'll do very well."

Bransgrove also feels that the ECB are not as supportive of the T20 competition as they should be. "I'm not happy with [with ticket sales] at all," says Bransgrove. "We've just not got it right.

"It may be that we play too many games, but the ECB have also shown no commitment to the competition. Our international player [Kevin Pietersen] was only available for one game. We really need to grasp the opportunity of T20, but it's almost gone now."

Many overseas players are more trouble - and expense - than they're worth

The aim was that each team would boast a couple of world-class overseas players in T20. But it's not really happened.

The number of withdrawals and early departures has decimated the plans of some counties, leaving them both out of pocket and disillusioned. As Bransgrove, who has seen Shahid Afridi, Ajantha Mendis and now Abdul Razzaq pull out, puts it: "We may well not bother in future. We've had a nightmare this year."

Even if they do show up, there's no guarantee that they'll provide value for money. Andrew Symonds, for example, has barely hit the ball off the square as yet. And, when they succeed - as Ross Taylor has for Durham - there's little evidence that they are attracting more spectators. Is anyone in Manchester rushing to the ground to catch a first glimpse of Nathan McCullum?

Warwickshire declined the opportunity to sign further players. "We decided we didn't want someone who came purely because of the size of the cheque we were writing," explains the club's chief executive, Colin Povey. "There are excellent overseas players out there but, unless you can be certain that you're going to get a good one, you're just disrupting the dressing room and robbing a local player of opportunity."

"We're all looking at the overseas player issue," Smith confirmed. "We do feel a bit cheated, though it's not the players' fault."

Some at the ECB are hopelessly out of touch

The dominant reaction to the ECB's five proposals to reduce the Championship programme was incredulity.

As David Stewart, the Surrey chairman, asked in an open letter to ECB chief executive, David Collier: "We find it difficult to understand how the ECB could go into consultation with a set of proposals that have not included the views of the ECB cricket and commercial committees as well as those of the players collected through the PCA. If all those people have been excluded so far, who was left to come up [with] the proposals in the document?"

It's a very good question. And it's a question Collier needs to answer. As one chief executive put it: "there's no doubt this issue has undermined his credibility."

There was also something disingenuous about the ECB's document. While it states that the reduction in the Championship programme "would be consistent with the Schofield report," the author of that report disagrees. Ken Schofield himself has stated: "The reference to our report is quite inappropriate. Whereas all on the panel felt a reduction in BOTH international and domestic fixtures to allow for recuperation was important, it was one-day cricket that was in our firing line."

Fortunately it seems that sense will prevail. To their immense credit, Surrey sent out a questionnaire to ascertain their members' views. 96% of respondents voted to maintain the Championship as it is. Several other counties have also rejected all five proposals and the TMGs have asked for time to digest a report from Deloitte that is investigating the viability of the whole game. It should be published in August and is is highly likely to recommend a radical change in the way that major matches are allocated.

That's a crucial development. If Deloitte can find a solution to the allocation issue, it will reduce the pressure on the fixture list. The interest in city or franchise cricket all stems from the concern the TMGs have about servicing their debts and finding alternative income streams in case they lose their chance of hosting Tests. If the ECB are able to provide a greater degree of long-term certainty over fixtures, the clubs will no longer need to look to India for inspiration.

"The options on offer were even less sensible than the current situation," Povey says. "The odds on there being no change to the current structure have shortened a great deal."

But the ECB Cricket Committee deserves credit

Credit where it's due. The decision to ban the use of the heavy roller after the start of Championship matches has contributed to far more entertaining cricket. An alteration to the points system has also encouraged positive cricket, with the value of drawn games now diminished. Their actions have directly improved the entertainment on offer to spectators.

"I think everyone has been surprised by the impact of those decisions," says Povey. "It's helped create a much more exciting county championship."

The Championship is not quite so unloved as some would have you think

At the start of the summer it seemed inevitable that the Championship season would be cut in order to make space for the new, longer T20 season. Not any more. In fact, it's quite possible that we'll see the T20 programme reduced to allow the championship season the space it deserves.

"Whenever an institution is under threat, those that love it will rally around," says Brooks. "And that's probably happened in the last few weeks.

"And, we have to remember we are guardians of the game and its long history. We must hand it on in great shape to those who follow."

Why? Smith puts it best. "It remains the pinnacle of our domestic cricket," he says. "It's played to an excellent standard - look how Andrew Strauss couldn't make runs in division two - and it means a lot to a lot of people. I think we've all been reminded of the passion that people have for it."

"I'd like to think that county supporters made a difference," Harker says. "It's certainly true that the Championship has a broad following. No, they may not always be able to go to watch games. But they follow what is happening on-line and they read about it in the papers."

If only some at the ECB took such pride in the competition.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on June 23, 2010, 21:57 GMT

    How refreshing to read so much commonsense about the structure of County Cricket, both the article itself and nearly all the comments. If only the ECB would take note! The ECB badly needs a clear-out (as does the ICC, WICB and most other governing bodies). They all seem to have lost touch with reality as witness the empty stands in the recent West Indies v South Africa Test in St.Kitts. Play matches when people want to see them. Cricket should be more than a schedule filler for satellite television channels.

  • ibounds1927 on June 20, 2010, 11:55 GMT

    As a Glamorgan member of 20 years the current structure is ridiculous. We played a T20 match at 6.30 yesterday and one at 11am last Sunday!!! The T20 is as badly scheduled as the last World Cup. The IPL gets dealt with in 5 weeks. The T20 is 2 months. Why cant we have the T20 dealt with in a month (July). Why cant we have a 50 over competition started in late May. Why not a two week block to start around Whitsun and a 2 week block to end around August Bank Holiday. Lets start Championship games on Fridays or Saturdays, but we must keep 16 games of cricket.

  • Ludlowbowlingwizard on June 19, 2010, 20:26 GMT

    What a great article. Although many storys have been written about the county scene, and the gorging relationship between th ECB and t20, every time one is written the pressure on those running the game is increased. I'm 15, supposedly the target audience for t20, but I love the feeling of checking the cricket score over four days, and Worcestershire's cricinfo scores page is a favourite on my dads iphone. Surely that idea is enough of an argument. And i would rather support Worcestershire, than Worcester.

  • py0alb on June 19, 2010, 10:27 GMT

    A good point, Stuart. The ECB need to decide whether they want the T20 to be short and snappy, compressed into a month, with 10 group games each, because if they want 16 group games, it needs to be intermingled with the other formats, otherwise the gap is far too large.

    How about keeping T20s to Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday evenings in late May and June, and starting at 5:30. The everyone knows where they are. County Championship games can be played at the weekends. Then make a big event of the quarter finals (either best of 3, or home and away aggregate scores) and finals day. Then play the 40 over tournament in July and August once the T20 is decided.

  • on June 18, 2010, 18:02 GMT

    For me the problem with the T20 is not so much the number of matches but their scheduling. I'm a Surrey member and have yet to make it to a match (possibly a good thing). Because it's so compressed the home games seem to be bunched up so if you're busy one week you could miss two or three games. Then they stick a match on starting at 4. The greatest advantage of T20 is not the excitement of big hitting (the best game I've seen in the tournament so far was Hants-Somerset) but the fact that you don't have to dedicate a day to it. Once you have several games a week you'll either have to miss some or sacrifice most of your free time to it. The World Cup is probably part of the problem, but there's a major football tournament every two years so it's hardly a special case. Finally, do people know when the matches are? I don't know what the level of advertising is for each match but surely following the approach of football where most games are on at the same time and day would be better?

  • jameslawler on June 18, 2010, 12:50 GMT

    Good articule. ECB is trying to change the season before the impact of this season had been fully felt but I think the secudle of this season needs looking at. lots of county championship games in the space of a few weeks then none for ages. We play too many 20/20 which is why i think the crowds have fallen but at Lordswe do get a good crowd in. Remember less is more. As for the future of the coutn championship is to reduce the number of counties to 12. Those counties we don't nned can revert top minor countie stuts. we need 2 leagues of 6 with promotion and regulation. Less games will alow players to train and rest more which is want the ECB wants

  • puneet_cricinfo on June 17, 2010, 20:46 GMT

    The present scenario of English counties has something to teach to the IPL authorities as well who are more interested in trading the game through creating more teams, sponsorship rights ... IPL has added 2 new teams for the next season which will lead to 34 more matches & at least 2 more weeks. This would put further strain on the international calendar & very soon most teams will not give time to IPL & there will be very few international players participating in IPL (except the retired players). Also by increasing no. of matches, the viewer-ship will be greatly diminished. The quality of the competition will also be diluted because of more no. of teams. All these & some other factors will eventually lead to the extinction of IPL. This might be a blessing in disguise for Lalit Modi who can then proudly claim that IPL cannot exist without him. With proper efforts & strategy all this can be avoided; with strategy I mean strategy for the game of cricket & not for profits.

  • Paul_JT on June 17, 2010, 17:25 GMT

    A fair article pointing out what has gone right this season as well as wrong. The football means the t20 is difficult to judge. However, a little less 40-over and t20 with a clearer schedule would be an improvement. Revert to more familiar structures in 2011. 40-over: 2 divisions of 9 (8 games), 3 promotion/relegation places, played mainly on Sundays Aug-Sept. t20: 3 regional groups, include Ireland, Netherlands and Scotland (12 games), make Quarters best of 3 games, fixed dates in the calendar (like Wimbledon tennis) for; blocks to coincide with school holidays (late spring and summer), a Finals Day closer to Quarters and an international free window. Finally, leave the County Championship alone!

  • jackiethepen on June 17, 2010, 11:23 GMT

    The last time I was at the final day of a Championship match - admittedly a nice sunny day in April - there were more spectators than at the t20 match Durham v Leicestershire. We saw Ross Taylor hit nine sixes but the game wasn't that exciting compared to the Championship match. Durham fought all day for a draw in a tigerish stubborn way that was nail biting at the finish. Blackwell was all flourishing panache and 18-year-old Stokes, after not scoring for an hour, suddenly came to life and hit a six. Now that six was something! He went on to make a decent debut. That is why fans and club members love the four day game. We know t20 can have tight finishes, but there is no narrative.

  • BackwardOfSquare on June 17, 2010, 10:42 GMT

    The ECB also deserves credit for providing the highlights packages, which are a godsend for those of us following county cricket via laptops from far-flung parts of the world. Plus which, Cricinfo's and in particular George Dobell's beefed-up coverage this season is very welcome. (And no, I'm not employed by either the ECB or Crinfo)

  • on June 23, 2010, 21:57 GMT

    How refreshing to read so much commonsense about the structure of County Cricket, both the article itself and nearly all the comments. If only the ECB would take note! The ECB badly needs a clear-out (as does the ICC, WICB and most other governing bodies). They all seem to have lost touch with reality as witness the empty stands in the recent West Indies v South Africa Test in St.Kitts. Play matches when people want to see them. Cricket should be more than a schedule filler for satellite television channels.

  • ibounds1927 on June 20, 2010, 11:55 GMT

    As a Glamorgan member of 20 years the current structure is ridiculous. We played a T20 match at 6.30 yesterday and one at 11am last Sunday!!! The T20 is as badly scheduled as the last World Cup. The IPL gets dealt with in 5 weeks. The T20 is 2 months. Why cant we have the T20 dealt with in a month (July). Why cant we have a 50 over competition started in late May. Why not a two week block to start around Whitsun and a 2 week block to end around August Bank Holiday. Lets start Championship games on Fridays or Saturdays, but we must keep 16 games of cricket.

  • Ludlowbowlingwizard on June 19, 2010, 20:26 GMT

    What a great article. Although many storys have been written about the county scene, and the gorging relationship between th ECB and t20, every time one is written the pressure on those running the game is increased. I'm 15, supposedly the target audience for t20, but I love the feeling of checking the cricket score over four days, and Worcestershire's cricinfo scores page is a favourite on my dads iphone. Surely that idea is enough of an argument. And i would rather support Worcestershire, than Worcester.

  • py0alb on June 19, 2010, 10:27 GMT

    A good point, Stuart. The ECB need to decide whether they want the T20 to be short and snappy, compressed into a month, with 10 group games each, because if they want 16 group games, it needs to be intermingled with the other formats, otherwise the gap is far too large.

    How about keeping T20s to Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday evenings in late May and June, and starting at 5:30. The everyone knows where they are. County Championship games can be played at the weekends. Then make a big event of the quarter finals (either best of 3, or home and away aggregate scores) and finals day. Then play the 40 over tournament in July and August once the T20 is decided.

  • on June 18, 2010, 18:02 GMT

    For me the problem with the T20 is not so much the number of matches but their scheduling. I'm a Surrey member and have yet to make it to a match (possibly a good thing). Because it's so compressed the home games seem to be bunched up so if you're busy one week you could miss two or three games. Then they stick a match on starting at 4. The greatest advantage of T20 is not the excitement of big hitting (the best game I've seen in the tournament so far was Hants-Somerset) but the fact that you don't have to dedicate a day to it. Once you have several games a week you'll either have to miss some or sacrifice most of your free time to it. The World Cup is probably part of the problem, but there's a major football tournament every two years so it's hardly a special case. Finally, do people know when the matches are? I don't know what the level of advertising is for each match but surely following the approach of football where most games are on at the same time and day would be better?

  • jameslawler on June 18, 2010, 12:50 GMT

    Good articule. ECB is trying to change the season before the impact of this season had been fully felt but I think the secudle of this season needs looking at. lots of county championship games in the space of a few weeks then none for ages. We play too many 20/20 which is why i think the crowds have fallen but at Lordswe do get a good crowd in. Remember less is more. As for the future of the coutn championship is to reduce the number of counties to 12. Those counties we don't nned can revert top minor countie stuts. we need 2 leagues of 6 with promotion and regulation. Less games will alow players to train and rest more which is want the ECB wants

  • puneet_cricinfo on June 17, 2010, 20:46 GMT

    The present scenario of English counties has something to teach to the IPL authorities as well who are more interested in trading the game through creating more teams, sponsorship rights ... IPL has added 2 new teams for the next season which will lead to 34 more matches & at least 2 more weeks. This would put further strain on the international calendar & very soon most teams will not give time to IPL & there will be very few international players participating in IPL (except the retired players). Also by increasing no. of matches, the viewer-ship will be greatly diminished. The quality of the competition will also be diluted because of more no. of teams. All these & some other factors will eventually lead to the extinction of IPL. This might be a blessing in disguise for Lalit Modi who can then proudly claim that IPL cannot exist without him. With proper efforts & strategy all this can be avoided; with strategy I mean strategy for the game of cricket & not for profits.

  • Paul_JT on June 17, 2010, 17:25 GMT

    A fair article pointing out what has gone right this season as well as wrong. The football means the t20 is difficult to judge. However, a little less 40-over and t20 with a clearer schedule would be an improvement. Revert to more familiar structures in 2011. 40-over: 2 divisions of 9 (8 games), 3 promotion/relegation places, played mainly on Sundays Aug-Sept. t20: 3 regional groups, include Ireland, Netherlands and Scotland (12 games), make Quarters best of 3 games, fixed dates in the calendar (like Wimbledon tennis) for; blocks to coincide with school holidays (late spring and summer), a Finals Day closer to Quarters and an international free window. Finally, leave the County Championship alone!

  • jackiethepen on June 17, 2010, 11:23 GMT

    The last time I was at the final day of a Championship match - admittedly a nice sunny day in April - there were more spectators than at the t20 match Durham v Leicestershire. We saw Ross Taylor hit nine sixes but the game wasn't that exciting compared to the Championship match. Durham fought all day for a draw in a tigerish stubborn way that was nail biting at the finish. Blackwell was all flourishing panache and 18-year-old Stokes, after not scoring for an hour, suddenly came to life and hit a six. Now that six was something! He went on to make a decent debut. That is why fans and club members love the four day game. We know t20 can have tight finishes, but there is no narrative.

  • BackwardOfSquare on June 17, 2010, 10:42 GMT

    The ECB also deserves credit for providing the highlights packages, which are a godsend for those of us following county cricket via laptops from far-flung parts of the world. Plus which, Cricinfo's and in particular George Dobell's beefed-up coverage this season is very welcome. (And no, I'm not employed by either the ECB or Crinfo)

  • py0alb on June 17, 2010, 10:31 GMT

    The lack of interest in the twenty twenty is extremely puzzling. If there were a huge global football tournament going on at the moment, then that might explain it, but for the life of me I can't think of one!

    It's much more satisfying to jump to conclusions about "spectator apathy" and "twenty-twenty overload" that support a barely hidden traditionalist agenda.

  • george204 on June 17, 2010, 10:13 GMT

    "Maybe one of the things we could look at is playing limited-overs games on the back end of Championship matches against the same opposition." Back to the future - they used to have the Sunday League game in between day 3 & 4 of the championship match. Having the one-day game after day 4 runs the risk that if the 1st class game is over inside 3 days that there will be no cricket on Saturday (i.e. lost opportunity for some gate revenue). Also, away sides still have to pay hotel costs etc for a "blank" day.

    Why not do it the other way? Have the one day game on Saturday, then the championship game start on Sunday. Then if necessary, stick a Friday evening T20 game on the front of it?

  • on June 17, 2010, 9:33 GMT

    Really insightful and thoughtful article. T20 this season is clearly too big. No doubt the "World Cup" excuses will be trotted out, but hopefully the ECB will realise that they're in danger of killing the golden goose. The Championship works well as a two-division competition - the idea of "conferences" favoured by some is too horrible to contemplate.

  • george204 on June 17, 2010, 9:28 GMT

    Excellent article, George. "Stuart Broad and Steven Finn are taken out of the game for strength development, it does make you wonder whether county cricket even works as a nursery" Of course it doesn't work as a nursery if the players never play in it! IMO the one big downside to central contracts has been that international players simply don't play enough first class cricket. What are they doing between test matches? Nets, training & rest. But time in the middle, playing for runs & wickets which count, is just as important. As for the amount of time spent on fitness, there is a point of diminishing returns, especially for bowlers. Glenn Turner, among others, has hit the nail on the head - players are training for a sprint but cricket is a marathon.

  • Biggsey on June 17, 2010, 9:26 GMT

    Fantastic article, agree fully with all that is said. I also think that teh ECB need to look at teh scheduling of Championship matches over a weekend. Surrey only had two matches this season at the Brit Oval played over a weekend, all others were mid-week, ridiculous! I have a membership @ £155 but it's unlikely I will renew next year unless I am able to attend more Championship matches. I work full time so the mid-week games are impossible for me.

    www.petition.co.uk/save-the-weekend-fixtures

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Biggsey on June 17, 2010, 9:26 GMT

    Fantastic article, agree fully with all that is said. I also think that teh ECB need to look at teh scheduling of Championship matches over a weekend. Surrey only had two matches this season at the Brit Oval played over a weekend, all others were mid-week, ridiculous! I have a membership @ £155 but it's unlikely I will renew next year unless I am able to attend more Championship matches. I work full time so the mid-week games are impossible for me.

    www.petition.co.uk/save-the-weekend-fixtures

  • george204 on June 17, 2010, 9:28 GMT

    Excellent article, George. "Stuart Broad and Steven Finn are taken out of the game for strength development, it does make you wonder whether county cricket even works as a nursery" Of course it doesn't work as a nursery if the players never play in it! IMO the one big downside to central contracts has been that international players simply don't play enough first class cricket. What are they doing between test matches? Nets, training & rest. But time in the middle, playing for runs & wickets which count, is just as important. As for the amount of time spent on fitness, there is a point of diminishing returns, especially for bowlers. Glenn Turner, among others, has hit the nail on the head - players are training for a sprint but cricket is a marathon.

  • on June 17, 2010, 9:33 GMT

    Really insightful and thoughtful article. T20 this season is clearly too big. No doubt the "World Cup" excuses will be trotted out, but hopefully the ECB will realise that they're in danger of killing the golden goose. The Championship works well as a two-division competition - the idea of "conferences" favoured by some is too horrible to contemplate.

  • george204 on June 17, 2010, 10:13 GMT

    "Maybe one of the things we could look at is playing limited-overs games on the back end of Championship matches against the same opposition." Back to the future - they used to have the Sunday League game in between day 3 & 4 of the championship match. Having the one-day game after day 4 runs the risk that if the 1st class game is over inside 3 days that there will be no cricket on Saturday (i.e. lost opportunity for some gate revenue). Also, away sides still have to pay hotel costs etc for a "blank" day.

    Why not do it the other way? Have the one day game on Saturday, then the championship game start on Sunday. Then if necessary, stick a Friday evening T20 game on the front of it?

  • py0alb on June 17, 2010, 10:31 GMT

    The lack of interest in the twenty twenty is extremely puzzling. If there were a huge global football tournament going on at the moment, then that might explain it, but for the life of me I can't think of one!

    It's much more satisfying to jump to conclusions about "spectator apathy" and "twenty-twenty overload" that support a barely hidden traditionalist agenda.

  • BackwardOfSquare on June 17, 2010, 10:42 GMT

    The ECB also deserves credit for providing the highlights packages, which are a godsend for those of us following county cricket via laptops from far-flung parts of the world. Plus which, Cricinfo's and in particular George Dobell's beefed-up coverage this season is very welcome. (And no, I'm not employed by either the ECB or Crinfo)

  • jackiethepen on June 17, 2010, 11:23 GMT

    The last time I was at the final day of a Championship match - admittedly a nice sunny day in April - there were more spectators than at the t20 match Durham v Leicestershire. We saw Ross Taylor hit nine sixes but the game wasn't that exciting compared to the Championship match. Durham fought all day for a draw in a tigerish stubborn way that was nail biting at the finish. Blackwell was all flourishing panache and 18-year-old Stokes, after not scoring for an hour, suddenly came to life and hit a six. Now that six was something! He went on to make a decent debut. That is why fans and club members love the four day game. We know t20 can have tight finishes, but there is no narrative.

  • Paul_JT on June 17, 2010, 17:25 GMT

    A fair article pointing out what has gone right this season as well as wrong. The football means the t20 is difficult to judge. However, a little less 40-over and t20 with a clearer schedule would be an improvement. Revert to more familiar structures in 2011. 40-over: 2 divisions of 9 (8 games), 3 promotion/relegation places, played mainly on Sundays Aug-Sept. t20: 3 regional groups, include Ireland, Netherlands and Scotland (12 games), make Quarters best of 3 games, fixed dates in the calendar (like Wimbledon tennis) for; blocks to coincide with school holidays (late spring and summer), a Finals Day closer to Quarters and an international free window. Finally, leave the County Championship alone!

  • puneet_cricinfo on June 17, 2010, 20:46 GMT

    The present scenario of English counties has something to teach to the IPL authorities as well who are more interested in trading the game through creating more teams, sponsorship rights ... IPL has added 2 new teams for the next season which will lead to 34 more matches & at least 2 more weeks. This would put further strain on the international calendar & very soon most teams will not give time to IPL & there will be very few international players participating in IPL (except the retired players). Also by increasing no. of matches, the viewer-ship will be greatly diminished. The quality of the competition will also be diluted because of more no. of teams. All these & some other factors will eventually lead to the extinction of IPL. This might be a blessing in disguise for Lalit Modi who can then proudly claim that IPL cannot exist without him. With proper efforts & strategy all this can be avoided; with strategy I mean strategy for the game of cricket & not for profits.

  • jameslawler on June 18, 2010, 12:50 GMT

    Good articule. ECB is trying to change the season before the impact of this season had been fully felt but I think the secudle of this season needs looking at. lots of county championship games in the space of a few weeks then none for ages. We play too many 20/20 which is why i think the crowds have fallen but at Lordswe do get a good crowd in. Remember less is more. As for the future of the coutn championship is to reduce the number of counties to 12. Those counties we don't nned can revert top minor countie stuts. we need 2 leagues of 6 with promotion and regulation. Less games will alow players to train and rest more which is want the ECB wants