Forum

David - thanks for that marvellous advice. It would have taken me to have been out of the traps as fast as anything you might see at Drumbo to have asked for a recount before we were on to the other business, but that's life. The top table wanted a result, they got a result, so fair play to them. We could debate this all day, but time I think to move on and hear what else is making news in the local cricket world.

PS - Rodders is my wife's uncle, not my cousin, I know for someone as precise as yourself, you would like that corrected for you. I know Rodney probably would!!!

Peter..

Your right one size doesn't fit all (and from talking to some senior clubs who occupy lower leagues I can understand their plight / frustrations). I speak somewhat selfishly as a player wanting the quality to improve week in week out
(in my league). I understand the varied views on this forum and do indeed feel that a more flexible approach should have been taken. Debate is healthy.

i have to say for once i agree with charlie, i just think there is very little for the teams in the lower leagues to play for apart from finishing in the top 6 of the league. Maybe an idea could have been for the bottom two from the premier league to be relegated and then the top two from section 1 to play off with the next two at the bottom of the prtemier league to see who makes up the last two positions in the 8 in the new top league.
The same would apply in the lower leagues and would give all the clubs a lot more to play for.
Obviously this is irrelevant now as the motion was passed so we all just have to embrace it.

Re Peter Whitten - I never regarded myself as being "over sensitive" but I am sure that there are plenty of forumites who would regard me as a shrinking violet! It comes from spending my formatative years at Miss Lavender's private school! I was simply making the point that for many years progress was stymied by the requirement for a large %age vote. I have in the past sat through NCU AGMs where the role of the "professional" was debated and everyone wrung their hands in debate - and then voted in a partisan manner. I, for one, am enjoying the healthy debate that has been opened but then again Flossie says I should get out more.

Paul Stafford seems to have summarised the ncu situation very well by asking where the fairness is in the new system.
I'm not saying I disagree with the eight team league scenario but it means that life in the ncu next year is all about relegation.
In a reverse of Pauls facts (and I am sure they are correct), if I were to say ok we'll have the 8 teams in the top league in 2012 but we will make them up by relegating the bottom 4 in the top division and promoting 2 out of the next section, people would say that is crazy. Maybe so but is the situation not a bit harsh on the lower league teams.

M Parks, I had assumed based on the location of the poster and their general agreement with your sentiments (hence the caveat in my previous posting) that P Carpenter was a member of your club. If this assumption offends you then I can only apologise but in truth there is little difference between your opinions; it's a question of degree.
Mr (I presume but correct me if I'm wrong) Carpenter you are wrong to regard me as taking a condescending attitude and indeed that I am an elected official of the NCU. Do feel free to explain to me in which way I am being condescending; emotive possibly but not condescending. If you were at the meeting then you will be aware that the NCU is not a body independent of the clubs but rather is one that is elected by and is therefore fully representative of its clubs. You will also be aware that Murray Power stated that there were positions available on various of the Directorates so I shall make the same proposal to you that I have on another Irish cricket forum and ask you to volunteer your time. You're closer to the meetings than I am and I'd like to have more time to persue other interests. It's a bit harder than you think and perhaps I should point out that the only person to take up the offer resigned before the start of the next season.
In answer to Mr Carpenter's concerns that below the Premier league that their fixtures would be dramatically reduced if they had a poor cup run there is little that anyone can do about that and 3rd teams have been living with that for many years. It is the nature of a knockout competition that some will play more games than others and those not knocked out may well find themselves playing too many games. If you look at the number of unfulfilled fixtures which have happened even by 1stXI's then I would suggest that there is a problem with too many fixtures that needs to be addressed. As in all democratic decisions there are winners and losers so perhaps you could put forward a more reasonable proposal for consideration.
Fozzy, perhaps you are a little less observant than I and your cousin because we suspected that the motion had been lost and was pleasantly surprised to find otherwise. If there was any shred of doubt in your mind then you should have requested a recount straight away. A recount may well have been called for had the result gone the other way but this is only because somebody had realised it was close and would have requested it. It is not an unknown request at NCU AGM's and is facilitated. Go with your gut instinct next time and don't let the hare sit!

Seems like most of the debate on the AGM is taking place now. I'm told the vote to change junior and minor cricket was unanimous so who are all these dissenters representing? Themselves I suspect.The NCU is dominated by junior cricket interests and voting strength as someone has already pointed out. As for the eight team league and less games maybe we should look back at the scores in the last few weeks of the season and see whether CI, Lisburn and Instonians delivered premier league performances.

Ryan, Andy,

I don't think that my posting (or the Victoria CC ones) are "excessive and overly intensive". It shows that people care and also that the impact on many senior clubs hasn't yet been adequately addressed, at least for many of us. You make a rather sweeping statement that "the 8 team structure is for the good of cricket", that "90% of cricketers should appreciate this" and you imply that we are all against any change ("not in my backyard syndrome"). It seems that you've completely missed my points.

First, I'm totally behind helping Irish cricket. I'm also totally behind the decision to reduce the PL to 8 teams. Moreover, I've no problem with the PL being the main focus on NCU cricket. I can see why you guys who play in the PL are very satisfied with the outcome. But some respect should be shown to the majority of senior clubs who while aspiring to play in the PL are unlikely to ever do so. Sometimes, one size doesn't necessarily fit all.

And I'm certainly not against change. Quite the opposite in fact but there needs to be a good reason for turning your world upside down as it could well do for many S2 and S3 clubs. I'm prepared to listen to any arguments put forward in favour of reducing S1 and S2 to 8 teams and S3 to 13 teams but none of you have addressed any of the points that I or others have raised?

Some may be content enough with 18 wkts. at an average of 10.1 with an economy rate of 3.6, but not me !
I still desire and will improve on this for next season !

So whatever league my team are playing in, or whoever the opposition are, one thing is for sure, I'll be trying my dame-dest, to win every game for my club next season, cause I just hate losing and being a some-what late starter as a cricket player, at only 46 yrs. old by next year I feel I'll be at the peak of my game !

So watchout whoever you are next year, if you're on the end of my sights, I'll not be aiming for 'flesh-wounds', no doubt about that !

I usually take October off for a bit of a break, but I'll be commencing outdoor training again in November, so maybe the 'part-time' cricketer and P.Carpenter will join me in Moira Demense or Lurgan Pk. take your pick ?

My own team mates never do, cause I can't get them away from Mourneview Pk.
(Fat lot of use that will do them, I see my prediction that Glenavon F.C. would be in free-fall soon, is well under way! They never listen do they?)

David Edwards indicates that in his view I have "besmirched" Dr Power by "intimating" that the next motion was on the meeting with some degree of haste. For the record, I dont suggest that this was done in an "underhand" way by Murray. He has consistently spoken in favour of 8 team leagues and I am sure that he was mightily relieved that the vote carried by the slimmest majority possible. He is fully entitled to that view, and I respect him for wanting to pursue it with vigour. I dont think anyone at the meeting, whether for or against the motion, would have had the time to work out the percentages before the next motion was called and I, for one, didnt have the opportunity to call for a recount before we were onto the next motion of business.

I simply wonder, and I do so without any attempt to besmirch Murray, you or any of the other delegates present who voted in favour, whether a recount would have been called for if the vote had shown there to be 59.8% in favour. This is not an attempt to cling on to the past as you put it, but if the future means less cricket, a senior cup final still unsponsored, more slap and tickle cricket to fill the void, then I would have felt a little more comfortable if I could have been sure that it was teams really wanted (as opposed to what the NCU really wanted). I assume all of the NCU officials entitled to vote, did so in the affirmative, and I wonder how that leaves the vote on a club basis.

That said, I accept the result and of course myself and my club will try to ensure that the suggested aims and objectives of the reduction are met. I hope that you, as a decision-maker with the NCU, are right. I will be the first to congratulate the NCU if we can look back in 5-10 years time at a greatly improved situation, with lots of good competitive cricket, and clubs thriving.

So I do genuinely hope that the NCU view is right. Speaking personally I for one wouldnt want to see less people playing less cricket at senior level on the basis of "increased competitiveness". It may be an exaggeration but the ways things are heading I fear that the season will be mid May to mid July, culminating in the unsponsored senior cup final being a 10 over bash in 26 degrees heat on a sunny Wednesday afternoon to make sure it doesnt clash with the Linfield v Glentoran pre-season friendly on the Saturday.

As they say, the proof of the pudding etc.....

Why didn't the NCU go the whole hog and rename all leagues below Section 1 as the "junior section". No-one at the top table really cares about sections 2 and 3.I attended the NCU dinner last saturday and noted Mr.Power's comment that he had visited 50% of grounds during the year.How many of those grounds were in section 2 or 3? I would have a guess not very many.I see a comment that section 3.1 should be positioned above section 2.3.Talk about fast tracking! Why don't the NCU just sit around a table and decide which team goes in which league.

Re. David Edwards.

I am not associated in anyway with Victoria CC but it is typical of the condescending attitude of the Northern Cricket Union and its elected officials that they would naturally assume and disregard any dissent in such a way.

Eight team leagues might well be the answer for Premier clubs who aspire to compete in the Challenge Cup, Clubturf and BKISC, but for anyone below Premier whose cup campaign doesn't go beyond May it doesn't appear to matter that their fixtures will be dramatically reduced, let alone having little incentive to play for in the 2011 season but for survival itself. I can't think of any sport that is improved by less exposure.

Re: David Edwards

P Carpenter is not a member of Victoria C.C., so if you take offence at his comments you cannot attach them to the comments of the "Victoria representatives" as you put it!

The changes were carried by democratic vote. Every clubs representatives vote in their own clubs best interests. On this occasion I don't think that the changes are a positive step for the so-called smaller clubs within the union. This does not make my comments, or any of the "Victoria representatives" comments as scare-mongering, merely stating that the changes were not in the interest of our club.

The bottom section of the senior league will basically be "the scrap" of the other sections!

Guys some excessive and overly intensive postings on the forum in recent days.
The 8 team structure is for the good of cricket. 90% of cricketers and clubmen surely appreciate this. There will always be a vocal minority.

the current debate shows the dichotomy that occurs on every proposed change. On one level everyone agrees that "somebody" must do "something" for the good of cricket but when "something" is done then the "not in my backyard" syndrome kicks in.