ECB to ponder radical domestic changes

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/england/content/current/story/352518.html




'Among the ideas being mooted are, according to today's Guardian, a 21-team Twenty20 league and a revamped Pro40 competition of two 20-over innings per side, as well as a return to the three-day Championship. Perhaps most notable is the plan to divide the Championship into three conferences, with southern, midland and northern divisions.'





I will be spewing if this happens. Surely they can see that this will be a huge step backwards?

Batman wrote:So what next? Tests in T20 format? Each team getting 2 innings of 20 overs each to prove their 'skills'?

Huzzah for one day tests.....

I knew I spoke a bit too soon in the other thread.....

So why do they still play a 40 over competition? (aside from tradition)

Money.

Basically everyone knows it'll be the first competition to go.

Agree with Mudge, a return to 3 day cricket would be a disaster

Perhaps most notable is the plan to divide the Championship into three conferences, with southern, midland and northern divisions.'

Interesting way of getting less games but not convinced the turkeys will vote for Xmas.

JKLever wrote:

Perhaps most notable is the plan to divide the Championship into three conferences, with southern, midland and northern divisions.'

Interesting way of getting less games but not convinced the turkeys will vote for Xmas.

TMS just said the Eurovision contest would be more meaningful.

Agree that a a three-way India-Pak-England contest in England would be exciting, for us Paksters!

JKLever wrote:

Perhaps most notable is the plan to divide the Championship into three conferences, with southern, midland and northern divisions.'

Interesting way of getting less games but not convinced the turkeys will vote for Xmas.

There must be very little money in the Championship anyway, most matches are attended by one man and his dog aren't they? Not sure the number of games would make that much difference.

I can't see regional conferences being a good idea, that will prevent the better teams playing each other as we have with the current two division setup. Three merit-based divisions of six with one promotion and relegation between them each year would be better, at least it would concentrate the talent at the top.

We have to keep four-day cricket though, or even go up to five-day, to prepare players for Test cricket. Three-day cricket (particularly with the English weather) produces nothing but contrived results with farcical declarations and joke bowling.

beamer wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Perhaps most notable is the plan to divide the Championship into three conferences, with southern, midland and northern divisions.'

Interesting way of getting less games but not convinced the turkeys will vote for Xmas.

There must be very little money in the Championship anyway, most matches are attended by one man and his dog aren't they? Not sure the number of games would make that much difference.

I can't see regional conferences being a good idea, that will prevent the better teams playing each other as we have with the current two division setup. Three merit-based divisions of six with one promotion and relegation between them each year would be better, at least it would concentrate the talent at the top.

We have to keep four-day cricket though, or even go up to five-day, to prepare players for Test cricket. Three-day cricket (particularly with the English weather) produces nothing but contrived results with farcical declarations and joke bowling.

Sayonara to spinners and middle-order batsmen ...

lardbucket wrote:

beamer wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Perhaps most notable is the plan to divide the Championship into three conferences, with southern, midland and northern divisions.'

Interesting way of getting less games but not convinced the turkeys will vote for Xmas.

There must be very little money in the Championship anyway, most matches are attended by one man and his dog aren't they? Not sure the number of games would make that much difference.

I can't see regional conferences being a good idea, that will prevent the better teams playing each other as we have with the current two division setup. Three merit-based divisions of six with one promotion and relegation between them each year would be better, at least it would concentrate the talent at the top.

We have to keep four-day cricket though, or even go up to five-day, to prepare players for Test cricket. Three-day cricket (particularly with the English weather) produces nothing but contrived results with farcical declarations and joke bowling.

Sayonara to spinners and middle-order batsmen ...

So no change then?

The three conference idea is as daft as Jack Simmons' plan to bring back the three day game and should be smothered at birth. Three divisions of six with promotion and relegation is the way to go. Maybe with a play-off to decide the champions.

The Pro40 is a piece of nonsense - no-one else plays it. At the very least it should become a straight knockout, to shoehorn the matches into a four week period. The better solution would be to do away with it altogether.

I thought the title read "ECB to ponder racial domestic charges".

Won't they just scrap Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, and Glamorgan and transfer their players into less risible playing outfits?

lardbucket wrote:Won't they just scrap Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, and Glamorgan and transfer their players into less risible playing outfits?

Because their chairmen will come up with all sorts of legal reasons as to why it can't happen. And also because any proposal of change in English cricket is voted on by the counties themselves. In other words, the tail wags the dog.

lardbucket wrote:Won't they just scrap Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, and Glamorgan and transfer their players into less risible playing outfits?

Retention of the eighteen counties is enshrined in the ECB's constitution. Care to guess as to who can vote to change it?

Been saying it for years...remove FC status for Division two...relegation and promotion will suddenly mean something.

If Australia can produce enough players to fill a Test XI with 6 FC teams, surely England can with 8.

Invader Zim wrote:Been saying it for years...remove FC status for Division two...relegation and promotion will suddenly mean something.

If Australia can produce enough players to fill a Test XI with 6 FC teams, surely England can with 8.

Phurt...there'd be 70 Kolpaks and 18 Ozzies with Pommy passports in the 8 teams

Actually we manage with 5 FC teams and South Australia.

Invader Zim wrote:Been saying it for years...remove FC status for Division two...relegation and promotion will suddenly mean something.

If Australia can produce enough players to fill a Test XI with 6 FC teams, surely England can with 8.

I don't think the number of teams is the point - it's the amount and type of cricket played that counts. The championship is far more competitive now than it was thanks to promotion and relegation. Waugh snr and Warne thought so.

This so-called radical change is only being contemplated to accommodate an expanded 20/20 competition. Personally, I'd leave the championship as it is and scrap the Pro40. But if we have to reduce the amount of championship cricket - then let's have three divisions of six resulting in 10 games.

Invader Zim wrote:If Australia can produce enough players to fill a Test XI with 6 FC teams, surely England can with 8.

Going by what they sent to Australia for the last Ashes series, they struggle to fill a Test touring squad from 18 FC teams.

I think you're rather missing the point, Zatty boy. As is Zim with his "we survive with only six teams" talk. The idea of less first class teams is that it will actually produce more test quality players. Less is more.

Henry wrote:I think you're rather missing the point, Zatty boy. As is Zim with his "we survive with only six teams" talk. The idea of less first class teams is that it will actually produce more test quality players. Less is more.

So the ultimate is one team?

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:I think you're rather missing the point, Zatty boy. As is Zim with his "we survive with only six teams" talk. The idea of less first class teams is that it will actually produce more test quality players. Less is more.

So the ultimate is one team?

The ultimate would be two teams. 22 of England's most highly skilled players battling it our for an England spot. It's the main reason why regional cricket is mooted, as the 3-4 regional teams would be the elite of the elite, so to speak.

Henry wrote:

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:I think you're rather missing the point, Zatty boy. As is Zim with his "we survive with only six teams" talk. The idea of less first class teams is that it will actually produce more test quality players. Less is more.

So the ultimate is one team?

The ultimate would be two teams. 22 of England's most highly skilled players battling it our for an England spot. It's the main reason why regional cricket is mooted, as the 3-4 regional teams would be the elite of the elite, so to speak.

But how many English qualified players would get into the 22?

The system would need 2-3 years before the cream starts to rise to the top.

Henry wrote:

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:I think you're rather missing the point, Zatty boy. As is Zim with his "we survive with only six teams" talk. The idea of less first class teams is that it will actually produce more test quality players. Less is more.

So the ultimate is one team?

The ultimate would be two teams. 22 of England's most highly skilled players battling it our for an England spot. It's the main reason why regional cricket is mooted, as the 3-4 regional teams would be the elite of the elite, so to speak.

How much CC do the Pommy Test players play in a season ...or how much do they miss?