Forum

James, who ever you are I really don't understand your thinking or worse what is it your thinking ?
I would not promote a cradle to a grave attitude. I promote a "play at the highest level you can " attitude. If your original club's ambition doesn't match your own why should you stay ?
Muckamore is my club and always will be. However in the early 80's I got a chance to play in the top league with Saintfield and I went because I wanted to see if I could get wickets or score runs at that level. Simple. Otherwise why leave your friends and go 45 miles for a home match AND practice twice a week. Twenty odd years on and I still have friends from those days. A few years later I went to Ballymena again to play in the top flight and I still have many friends from those days. I had the pleasure of looking after the Colts team during that spell that included Neil Fullerton, Robert Kennedy , Michael Glass and John Glass who captained the side.Those guys were outstanding cricketers at that age.
I would never try and hold someone back in cricket or in a job if they have higher ambitions. We only live once and unfortunately that time in cricket playing years is relatively short. So it would be hypocritical for me to advocate a cradle to the grave scenario.
Now James if you are an official at a club concerned about losing players then I suggest maybe you need to get together with other officials and decide what you need to do to make sure your club matches the ambitions of these players and if you can't then wish them well and welcome them back at any time. We have a saying which is very true "there are no gates at Moylena". Remember it's no use crying over spilt milk.
We are scraping hard to survive in the Premier League this season and if we fail we will fight even harder to get straight back.

people are going to stop playing at all levels young and old if the task force(what players)get it wrong playing less cricket is not the way forward some leagues next year are going to be of a poor standard and when it dosent work what happens then?

Dundrum club is thriving because i went againest my princibles that pros be allowed play below PREMIER and still would agree that they SHOULD NOT but i will still raise the cash over the next ten years to coach our juniors over 50 under 11/13/15 and 4 primary schools even if they do ban them as i dont want a pro that dominates as its not what Dundrum require . Dundrum need to survive or compete as a TEAM not rely on a match winner.Academy are another example there coach dont bat before six and they have great structure in place as they go schools and have triving junior section, in my opinion its about getting the balance right over pro an team but il settle for getting it right at Dundrum before i try change the world . totally agree with neil cahil post only thing id add is 40 over CRICKET BELOW PREMIER .GOrdy is correct in saying the present rules for second team games are flawed bigtime as the pay same fees an want more games not less and that needs redressed . but the work pary have done their bit now its up to the clubs too vote the way they want . ive played 40 years but if i was starting now id guess id last 15 years maximum as we must move with the times relationships and work committments put more pressure on players than any FAST BOWLER or THE NCU.

RE Ivan

Please, the cradle to the grave scenario is exactly What you should be promoting FGS...!

The mobile society (what are you talking about)if it actually exists, it is a nonsense that those that no better should be castigating..

step back pal and smell the coffee...

A great post from Neil Cahill; I too am not convinced that the recommendations will benefit all clubs, particularly those in the new Premier league 2.
I can, however, only imagine the countless hours that have gone into the senior cricket working group and I think that it has things spot on for the top 8 clubs.
In my opinion, there must be further consideration given to the other leagues. Looking at the new Premier league 2, Neil is quite right when saying that the teams will play too little cricket. They are usually out of their cup competition fairly early in the season, perhaps after only one game and therefore, in my opinion, should have eighteen 50 over league matches; not 20 overs in a match 2 scenario. For these clubs, the league matches should be the Holy Grail and a win should be hard to come by.
I can only speak for myself, but for example, ending up with eight 50 over matches and six 20 over matches (given a few cancellations) would be wholly unappealing. I don’t think I’d continue making the sacrifices to play cricket in a structure like this.
Perhaps some people will feel differently, but I, like Neil, feel that discussion is necessary regarding the potential changes ahead.

and well said Ivan McCombe - tho i feel a few just want to be continual moaners and live in the dark ages - in my day........whoops it's now 2011

James. Read Gordon's posting again. He makes no reference to how the club is going, he is making points about the new match regulations. Dundrum 1sts are going well and they are doing a lot of work in local primary schools and fielding under age teams. By the way James who ?
Good posting by Neil Cahill and exactly the sort of debate that the roadshows next week are designed to hear. All those with thoughts on the best way forward should make sure they and their club are represented at a roadshow.
I think the cradle to the grave loyalty that used to exist in many walks of life has also disappeared from cricket. In today's mobile society I think we need to accept that we may lose players AND we may gain players from time to time. I don't think with the opportunity at International level a club can not expect talented players from wanting to prove themselves at the highest level of club cricket.

Re Gordon Dundrum

That's blown that theory out of the water Ivan....!

i am secretary of dundrum 2nds and this year has probably been one of the worst as unfortunately dunmurray had to pull their 2nd team out of the league due to shortage of players and with the new rule enforcing after match 2 situation with match unable to be played due to weather that the game is void it has meant we have lost 4 matches to date this season already.with the 1st match being scrubbed after the 1st weekend in june.also ivan not all teams now provide tea's in 35 over matches which is hard on the school kids who have a match in the morning and then don't get anything to eat until maybe 8pm which has also happened to us this year.i hear a lot of talk about having earlier starting times
but people still work on sat morning's etc or night shift's and with the matches now 35 overs in our league the average match is over by 6pm at the latest including tea's,
and no school's cricket after 3rd year?? one member from our club told me that if that is the case he won't play any league cricket until school's season is over.surely we need to keep these young players on board as they are the future.when you look through the section's you see a lot of matches scrubbed and point's awarded to other teams which would make you wonder why??

There has been a bit of debate on the forum in relation to the recommendations put forward regarding senior cricket. Having looked at a recommendation I am not convinced that they will benefit all clubs. I consider that the recommendations are heavily weighted in favour of the top Premier league clubs. I know that the ideal is to get to a best v best situation but I do not think it should be at the expense of other clubs. Renaming leagues won’t increase quality and players will just migrate to top premier one teams to guarantee cricket every week thus weakening cricket as a whole. I agree that the top clubs play too much cricket and agree that the Premier league should be eight teams but I consider that there needs to be further discussion in relation to the other leagues. In particular, the suggestions in relation to the new Premier league two and Senior League two appear to be flawed as they will play too little cricket as teams are usually out of their cup competition fairly early in the season, perhaps after only one game. The suggestions in relation to rearrangement rules will further decrease the amount of cricket played. If the current proposals went through my club, Cliftonville, would potentially play only nine 50 over matches (assuming we have no more cancellations) in Premier League 2 (if we stay there) in a league season if the weather was similar next year. For what it's worth this is my suggestions in relation to the league restructuring perhpas with also looking at the rearrangement rule:

Premier league- 8 teams
Section 1- 10 teams
Section 2- 9 teams
Section 3- 10 teams

The reason there are less teams in the Premier league and section 2 is that they are likely to go further in the Challenge Cup, Irish Cup and the Junior Cup respectively. Furthermore, a Saturday would potentially be freed in the Premier league to allow a revamped T20 competition. On my estimation this would mean that the vast majority of clubs would play between 18 to 20 matches per season. I would make promotion and relegation one up one down from the Premier league to section 1 and two up two down in all other leagues. The reason I say this is that it appears since two up two down has come in the team that finished second in Section 1 when in the Premier league has always returned straight to section 1 the following year. Keeping two up two down in other leagues would keep the interest in promotion and relegation particularly in nine and ten team leagues. It would also means all teams play home and away and no need to think up a new competition for the bottom section.

These are just my views but hopefully it will spark some debate prior to the meetings which understand that take place in the next couple of weeks.

Ed

Is there a link to the 2011 NCU stats posted anywhere?
I cant find them on any site

Cheers

Paul

DK - thank you for your advice but you seem to miss the point. I accept what you say about the "top" sides but I suggest that YOU take a trip to the NCU site and have a look at the facts for a spoonful of reality.

Simon I don't think we can lay all the problems at "paying " players. I don't think there are that many carpetbaggers about these days. I personally have never had an issue of playing with or against someone receiving money for playing. In fact I found any player receiving money behaved in a professional manner and understood the expectations placed on them. In fact I just regret never being good enough so that someone would want to pay me.
I just would love to see a real best v best scenario and then let's all fight like crazy to get our own clubs into that set up.That in theory should lift the overall standard. That won't be done by buying players alone. It will involve proper cricket Academies , proper fitness work and a serious amount of practicing the basics over and over again. It will also require work on grounds and equipment.The top clubs in both Unions aren't the big payers. They inevitably have the best grounds, the best pitches, the best 2nd XI's , the best teas etc. They understand what's important and other clubs are now realising that buying players alone isn't enough.
I think the best advert for professionals must be two clubs who for many year resisted having them. Namely Ballymena and Dundrum. They must now be in their most healthy state right through their clubs than they probably have ever been.
It certainly should be easier to attract supporters if we have a superior product that ends around tea time. I must admit I would have struggled to put a " spin " on some of the recent games ( not all involving Muckamore) as a "good day out"
I think the demise of the social club has more to do with a more sensible attitude towards the drink driving laws than anything else.
But as Andy Kennedy points out the issues regarding unfilled fixtures at junior level is worrying. This was the main concern of last season's Junior Task Force of which I was delighted to be part of. Without the stats my "gut feeling" would be that the changes haven't as yet reversed the trend of games being scrubbed.
I respect people who offer opinions on these forums but why they don't tell us who they are baffles me. Maybe then we could have proper face to face conversations when we meet at games or dinners or what ever. After all I don't think anyone coming on here wants to see club cricket suffer.

Andy,

Sorry to hear of your condition & decline - I recommend some prozac or as an alternative medicine, a trip to either The Lawn Waringstown, The Green Comber or The Holm Donemana - that ought to cure you...............i'll waive the consultancy fee this time.

RE- Andy and Ivan

Too much money has knocked the heart out of it.

Money removes the Heart and the Soul. It kills the Commaradarie and the Friendships, it destroys the Loyalty and the Integrity, it is the "virus in the game"
It turns once great social "Clubs" into places of little desire

I like many of my friends have spent far too many summers playing with these guys - You stand at the bar, buy them a drink,(seldom reciprocated)you even think they're your mate...!
Only to find they buggar off next year for a better offer.

I and many of my mates can now seldom be bothered with them...
When asked to attend a fundraiser for them, I'm afraid we now make our polite excuses...
It's easy now to find something else to do on a Saturday...!

I do find myself exhaling in despair when people try and defend all these overseas (and local) "carpetbaggers" milking the local game like an over laden "dairy cash cow

Ivan, after all the hard work trying to attract spectators, it sounds to me like you have admitted defeat, or maybe you have just hit the nail on the head...?