Forum

A small issue I picked up on by Ed…

Currently… T20 rearrangements on a Sunday.

Surely it makes more sense if you have a Sunday free to use it… or you just run the risk of bad light & weather determining the outcome during a weeknight fixture.

By playing on a Sunday with an 11am start as a T20 you then have all day to be on & off with covers etc and it still gives you a far better chance of a team getting a result.

By playing mid week over a free Sunday you are running the risk of no points for either side… I’d rather have 7-8 hours to get a result than a no result deciding it on a bad weeknight. That could be your league gone or even relegation with a no result!

That said even as a family man of 14 months!

If our Summers were lets say like a Summer then yeah go for midweek, that makes perfect sense but this place does know how to rain…

Into the future… 2 attempts only per match!

*** Please note times will be explained in summary below paragraph ***

Hutchy makes a good point, if we turn up on a last chance (2nd attempt) fixture and the big blue is out & forecast good then lets play/start as a 50 over match starting at 11am (Sunday’s only). If the weather doesn’t look so flash then lets say if you haven’t started the match by 12:24pm on the last chance (2nd attempt) fixture then it atomically becomes a T20 as soon as you can get started after 12:24pm. In the case where you have started at 11am or anytime before 1pm but less than 10 overs of the match has been completed by 1pm then it is scraped & a T20 will apply from 1pm onwards.

Summary: (last chance only/2nd attempt)

Option 1: 11am or anytime before 1pm start with 10 overs or more completed by 1pm = 50 over/reduce DL game.

Option 2: 11am or anytime before 1pm start with less than 10 overs completed by 1pm = T20 match starting anytime from a 1pm.

Option 3: If no play before 12:24pm due to weather/ground = T20 match starting anytime after 12:24pm – this is due to taking 4 minutes per over off from 1pm (9 overs total, 1 over short of being able to play a 50 over/reduced DL match)

Note: If the original fixture that was washed out was say in June then you should have until the end of July (but 1st available date for both clubs within the timeframe) to complete the fixture, this would hopefully allow you to have a Sunday free to use even if in a Cup run. In the case where there is no Sunday free over/during this period then it would have to be forced as a mid week T20.

Just my point of view…

Personally I love playing cricket (well apart from this season when I could quantify the matches ive enjoyed into overs) but this season ive found it especially hard to get players out on the pitch and so weve forfeited 3 games already this season are any other clubs finding it hard to get players on the pitch???

I had 3 promising 17-18 yr olds the past 4 years in the side but one has “found work” another “found women” and the third “retired” so maybe im like the posters on this site and enjoy getting a game of cricket during the summer but unfortunately at my club anyway everyone seems to be the opposite

From the posts on the forum that I have read it appears that there is a general consensus that the Premier league should be eight teams, eight teams in Premier 2 is too small, and more thought needs to be given to section 2. It's good to see that there have been comments from guys like Marty, Mark, Andy and Stuart who are all playing in their respective leagues. Hopefully, the clubs will take these views forward to the meetings.

In relation to rearrangements I, like Mark, thinks that each team should have at least two opportunities to play a 50 over match as the league is intended to be a 50 over league. After that I have no real difficulties with the match going down to 20 overs if necessary to try and get played. I don’t want the old system where matches get towards the end of September and there is no appetite at all to play. One point I would make in relation to the editor's comments regarding 20 over midweek rearrangements. I agree that the theory is correct to try and keep some Sundays free and play these matches midweek but my personal experience of midweek 20 over cricket is that there is a massive reduction in the quality of cricket as there are almost more difficulties with the availability of players for midweek matches with work commitments and also many players only arrive as the game is about to begin. In 20 over cricket you need to be on your game from start and with people rushing from work and then going out to bowl or bat within five minutes of getting out of the car the matches never really have the same intensity or quality.

How do you make a proposal for the NCU AGM, and when does it have to be made?

Also, when and where are the roadshows taking place?

James disagreement is GOOD. We need many differing views not Yes men. Also some great points made by every poster re the league structures. I just hope we have healthy open discussions at the roadshows next week. Cricket isn't and should never ONLY be about the Premier League. Re Section one or Premier Two as
is suggested I think it's great that such respected figures as Mark and Neil have come out with well thought out ideas.
Weather forecast not great for Saturday and Sunday so maybe more 20 over rearrangements.

Ed's response

Marty, I would love to think you're right but over the last few years the clubs have voted to restrict the number of attempts at rearrangements and shortened these to 20 overs, I don't think that really shows that people want to play more cricket...

Ed,

I agree with you and Marty. At first, I was amazed that the 20 over rearrangement rule was voted in, but on further reflection, we had a few terrible summers, weather wise, and the top teams, who had cup runs, were really struggling to get fixtures played. I think, at that stage, a lot of people were fed up; I know I was.

Thinking about Premier 2, it doesn't sit well with me that players could wake up on a beautiful June Sunday and have no option, but to play 20 overs. Could match 2 start as 50 overs and, in the event of poor weather, be reduced to 20 overs?

I also believe that given the lack of cup runs for Premier 2 teams, they should have 2 opportunities to rearrange matches so that players can get full value out of their subscriptions.

Neil, Hutchy and Marty here here.
8 team leagues belew premier league is absolute madness. More cricket you play the better you get not the less you play. Might try and tell the skipper im not praticing as much because it'll make me a better player!!
I for one don't want to be sitting on my arse on a sunny saturday mid july saying wish we had a game today.
I would also change league games to 40 overs starting at noon.

Ed,

Fair point made regarding voting for less re-arrangements, but perhaps this was in the aftermath of a particularly bad summer or if there were teams refusing to play Sundays?
Clubs will have to think long and hard about these proposals and actually know what they are voting for or against at the AGM. As we know, this isn't always the case.
The real issue is of how to get people to keep playing, take the game up or come back playing. Numbers are dwindling and would back up the theory that cricket in this country is a dying sport. There will obviously be success stories, but overall there are less people playing the game.
I for one don't think that by offering less, you get more.

Ivan - look at the experience of All Ireland rugby where it was purported to be "best-v-best". Now main emphasis is on the Ulster/Leinster/Munster teams and club rugby is nowhere. The large crowds that used to attend league matches are now at Ravenhill on a Friday instead of club matches on a Saturday - and the number of teams is continually being reduced. The mighty Malone who used to boast 12 - 14 teams is down to 4 or 5 is one example. there are so many similarities in the way our game is going. As for some clubs not providing teas - this is disgraceful as it is an integral part of the match although there is at least one club where this may not be a negative thing as their teas are awful. No names but I'm sure players will know who I mean!!

I think Neil and Hutchy cover everything well.

My own view is that if clubs below the Premier League vote for a reduction in teams, it's a bit like turkeys voting for Christmas. Playing less games is not going to improve levels of competition or indeed the overall standard.
Premier League clubs have left everyone else behind. There are a number of contrubutory factors to this and it would take a long time to go through it, but that does not mean that everyone else in the NCU should be simply swept up in this.
I'm very much of the old school and believe that by playing more games, you actually get better. Best vs best is an ideology that may never happen and ultimately what would it produce? Irish players are primed from under-age teams or encouraged through the residency door. Club cricket produces very little by way of international cricketers anymore and is unlikely to in the future as Cricket Ireland continues to grow and employ more coaches etc throughout the island.
The main role of the union should be to provide what it's members want and I ultimately believe that all members of the NCU would favour playing more rather than less.

re:- neil cahill's post

i hope the new task force take neil's comments on board. very sensible views on how we need to move forward.

I have to agree with a few of the views proposed on this forum.

The league structure proposed by Neill Cahill seems like a good idea. We have to be careful not to offer too little cricket. We play cricket because we enjoy it.

I agree with the views of Mark Hutchinson as well. The whole focus seems to be on reducing the number of overs we play. Why reduce the number of full games? If a game is called off at the end of April why reduce it down to a 20 over game, when we have the rest of the summer to squeeze in a game (if the 21 day rule didn't exist)? Yes, flexibility in re-arrangements is needed, but this should not mean that teams have to play shortened.

As J Keenan says, we need to be careful that there is not too much of a gulf in class in Section 3. Keep games competitive.

The new rules introduced into Junior cricket have not worked entirely, as highlighted by Gordon. Dundrum have fallen victim of this. If one game is rained off, it automatically goes to a 20 over re-arrangement, depriving cricketers of full games. Even worse... if the game is called off a second time, the match is VOID. Neither team get any points, nobody gets to play any cricket!! Ludicrous.

We have until the end of Spetember to play, why not use it if necessary. If it means re-arranging the game numerous times, if the two clubs are happy, why not? With the current regulations, offering only one re-arrangement (a T20 at that), clubs will be punished, not for how they play, but for when they chose to arrange fixtures.

if there are less mataches will subs for each team at all the clubs be different?

Re: Senior League Structure

Excellent suggestions from Neil Cahill and Mark Hutchinson regarding the proposed changes to the league structure. I hope such suggestions are not overlooked at the roadshows and the current proposals not set in stone.

From a Section 3 point of view, teams currently play only 12 league matches of 50 overs. If the proposals are approved this will be reduced to 10 matches and will no longer play teams home and away. The suggestion has been to create a new competition for Section 3 teams to create more matches – presumably this will be T20? I don’t feel discussion on this can be put off until the fixture meetings as appears to be the case from reading the proposals. There does not appear to be much enthusiasm either from Section 3 players for more and more T20 matches at the expense of full matches.

I like Neil Cahill’s suggestion of keeping Section 1 at 10 teams but would go even further and keep Section 2 at 10 teams leaving 9 in Section 3. This would allow 16 league matches in Section 3 with home and away matches against teams. Inevitably there will be a few T20s if the weather intervenes. I feel that 11 teams would be too many in Section 3 with too wide a range in standards between the top and bottom of the league. Two up and two down could also be kept to avoid more meaningless matches towards the end of the season. The Twenty20 Shield could always be expanded into a knockout competition for the new Section 2 and 3.

I would be interested to hear other views from clubs in Section 2 and 3 regarding the changes but would feel that a larger Section 3 has less chance of being approved as teams will not vote to be relegated.

RE Ivan

We should be trying to promote clubs and not individuals

There will always be those who come and go for whatever reason, clearly you had yours - however that attitude aint for me or many or my teamates.

Cricket in this country is of a very very low standard, you could throw your cap over those who could actually "make it" - therefore the sooner we accept that and re-establish the clubs then maybe we can entice people to stay or come into the game.

I have to say Ivan, I fundamentally disagree with just about everything you said in that last posting.

Cricket like you describe would have me pushing a trolley round Tesco's on a Saturday...!