• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Seaham Harbour CC

Status
Not open for further replies.

wicketkeeper said:
If you had bothered to talk to the men who prepare the wickets, chase up teams, and make the teas you would know that they do it because they loved
their clubs and they don't give a tinkers cuss whether some kid from another club made the county side. It is these people who were the life blood of clubs who are in decline. You say I am in the minority - the attendances and clubs folding suggests the contrary.
Click to expand...

I know plenty of people like that, in cricket and football, I talk to them regularly - what's your point?

The reason clubs are folding isn't exclusively the league system you tool. How can you explain the decline in participation in counties without a First Class side? Or moreover, what of the counties who've had First Class sides for hundreds of years - such as Lancashire and Yorkshire? Their club cricket was amongst the best in the world but they're facing the same decline in numbers as our region.

You can't be reasoned with unfortunately, because your bitterness has you so blinkered that it won't allow you to see a different view.

Answer me this, if it's the League system that is to blame, how come Senior League crowds were massively greater in the 60's and 70's than the 90's? Because the NEPL didnt exist then.

Voice of fair play said:
The point been for me is that it should not be semi pro because local cricket clubs can not afford it to be that way.

Where they supposed to get the money from it’s not like people are going to cricket clubs and putting money behind the bar like they did in the past.

What has happened is that a handful of clubs in the north east are of a very good standard and the rest are not.

So is the standard of north east club cricket good overall,I would say no!!

Trying to make it semi pro when some clubs are struggling to even turn teams out just makes it a closed shop for the top few teams and does not improve the quality overall.

Professionalism does not make sense when you don’t have the players or the money to make it that way!
Click to expand...

I'd argue that most of the sides in NEPL are already operating with such professionalism. The money is there, for some, through means other than bar takings - which is another sign of a different era. There are other revenue streams for clubs now than the old whip-round for the pro.

The standard overall of local cricket is up for debate. I probably haven't been around long enough to judge, but to be honest I don't care - all I care about is supporting England and Durham and playing cricket to whatever standard I am capable of playing it at. That standard is available to me within the new regime, just as it was in the old.

Which really is all I see Club cricket as being about. The same as football. Play it and go as high as your ability will take you but most importantly - enjoy it. If that means dropping down through the pyramid or playing Second Team rather than First, do it.

So in that regard, I don't understand what your issue with it all is. If clubs are ambitious, they can make the grade and become as good as they want to be. If they just want to exist as a competitive social side, there's leagues and competitions for that also.

Nobody is forcing any club to apply for the NEPL or to run as semi-pro.

wicketkeeper said:
Spot on and this is also the reason why many local football clubs have folded or are struggling.
Click to expand...

Can you explain why many local football clubs have folded or are struggling based around what VOFP said?

Because I'd argue NE non-league football is in the best nick it has been in for about 20 years.

Voice of fair play said:
Yep rightly or wrongly participation in sport at a local club level is dwindling so now is the time to support local clubs not tell them what they must have.
Click to expand...

Except that isn't happening. Only clubs who wish to be ambitious are being told what they must have.
 
Last edited:
When Durham CCC set up the Academy and they wanted to play local cricket on a Saturday to the highest standard available which league did they join?

The Durham Senior League.

The league welcomed them with open arms as it meant they were recognised as the highest League in the area. The Senior League were trying to help the County develop the best players to the highest standard possible. Something in my opinion the Senior League should be congratulated for.

Obviously @wicketkeeper has so short a memory he forgot all about this.
 
Last edited:
Lots of clubs do put paying players before the facilities. I do not agree with it. The problem is ordinary league cricketers changing clubs every year for an extra £10. That is what is spoiling the development of players throughout Yorkshire. You also had to play for the right clubs and I am no talking about League cricket here. Although their influence has waned over the recent years the nomadic clubs, and the right public schools, were always considered they way forward - thankfully that is not the case. Although we still cannot play any lad who is at public school until the end of term as they play on a Saturday afternoon. Anyone had that one?
 
Former Player said:
When Durham CCC set up the Academy and they wanted to play local cricket on a Saturday to the highest standard available which league did they join?

The Durham Senior League.

The league welcomed them with open arms as it meant they were recognised as the highest League in the area. The Senior League were trying to help the County develop the best players to the highest standard possible. Something in my opinion the Senior League should be congratulated for.

Obviously @wicketkeeper has so short a memory he forgot all about this.
Click to expand...

I haven't forgot. I played against the Academy myself. And how were the Senior League repaid for their welcome.
They were first weakened by the NEPL
Who took some of their more affluent clubs and best players then deliberately undermined them so they had no choice other than to fold.
The moment the Academy joined the league they began to dictate things.
I know for a fact how much many of the club stalwarts who attended meetings were suspicious of Geoff Cooke and his agenda.

brandon said:
I know plenty of people like that, in cricket and football, I talk to them regularly - what's your point?

The reason clubs are folding isn't exclusively the league system you tool. How can you explain the decline in participation in counties without a First Class side? Or moreover, what of the counties who've had First Class sides for hundreds of years - such as Lancashire and Yorkshire? Their club cricket was amongst the best in the world but they're facing the same decline in numbers as our region.

You can't be reasoned with unfortunately, because your bitterness has you so blinkered that it won't allow you to see a different view.

Answer me this, if it's the League system that is to blame, how come Senior League crowds were massively greater in the 60's and 70's than the 90's? Because the NEPL didnt exist then.



I'd argue that most of the sides in NEPL are already operating with such professionalism. The money is there, for some, through means other than bar takings - which is another sign of a different era. There are other revenue streams for clubs now than the old whip-round for the pro.

The standard overall of local cricket is up for debate. I probably haven't been around long enough to judge, but to be honest I don't care - all I care about is supporting England and Durham and playing cricket to whatever standard I am capable of playing it at. That standard is available to me within the new regime, just as it was in the old.

Which really is all I see Club cricket as being about. The same as football. Play it and go as high as your ability will take you but most importantly - enjoy it. If that means dropping down through the pyramid or playing Second Team rather than First, do it.

So in that regard, I don't understand what your issue with it all is. If clubs are ambitious, they can make the grade and become as good as they want to be. If they just want to exist as a competitive social side, there's leagues and competitions for that also.

Nobody is forcing any club to apply for the NEPL or to run as semi-pro.



Can you explain why many local football clubs have folded or are struggling based around what VOFP said?

Because I'd argue NE non-league football is in the best nick it has been in for about 20 years.



Except that isn't happening. Only clubs who wish to be ambitious are being told what they must have.
Click to expand...

My point which I thought o explained very clearly is that men like that lived for their clubs they didn't give a shit about the County.All they wanted was for their club to succeed.
It is these volunteers - not paid team managers , coaching directors and all those others with pretentious titles-
who are now in short supply.
 
Last edited:
So finally you admit it. The League who helped set up the Durham Academy to produce players for Durham County Cricket Club was in fact your beloved Durham Senior League. In my humble opinion this is something we should all be proud of.

I was part of the Durham Senior League Management Committee and since my club joined the NEPL I have been part of its League Management Committee.

For the record my whole ethos is to maintain and develop Recreational Cricket in our area. It really is sad when clubs are struggling such as Seaham Harbour who are a genuine hard working club run by very good and committed people.
 
Last edited:
wicketkeeper said:
I haven't forgot. I played against the Academy myself. And how were the Senior League repaid for their welcome.
They were first weakened by the NEPL
Who took some of their more affluent clubs and best players then deliberately undermined them so they had no choice other than to fold.
The moment the Academy joined the league they began to dictate things.
I know for a fact how much many of the club stalwarts who attended meetings were suspicious of Geoff Cooke and his agenda.



My point which I thought o explained very clearly is that men like that lived for their clubs they didn't give a shit about the County.All they wanted was for their club to succeed.
It is these volunteers - not paid team managers , coaching directors and all those others with pretentious titles-
who are now in short supply.
Click to expand...

Don't they still exist? Why would they give a toss about the league structure? If they love their club so much - what difference would it make to them whether they're in the Senior League, the NEPL or the DCL?

I'd suggest they do still exist. They'll exist at every single club in country, unfortunately your bitterness won't allow you to see that.

I understood what you were getting at, it just makes absolutely fuckall sense. You say clubmen would want their clubs to be successful - so why would they not want to be a part of the top end of the cricket pyramid?
 
Last edited:
brandon said:
Don't they still exist? Why would they give a toss about the league structure? If they love their club so much - what difference would it make to them whether they're in the Senior League, the NEPL or the DCL?

I'd suggest they do still exist. They'll exist at every single club in country, unfortunately your bitterness won't allow you to see that.

I understood what you were getting at, it just makes absolutely fuckall sense. You say clubmen would want their clubs to be successful - so why would they not want to be a part of the top end of the cricket pyramid?
Click to expand...


It makes lots of sense. It is these people the Senior league were thinking of when they refused to relegate their clubs.
The men and sometimes women who work tirelessly behind the scenes. I have spoken to several people who were involved or supported that decision and they all said that they weren't prepared to relegate teams and put clubs at risk when they understand the work that individuals at clubs undertake and the difficulties they face. Like I said they supported their clubs.

As an aside you had the cheek to call the senior league 'snobby'. As someone who played regularly in the league and won the title on several occasions I can't recall there being prententious titles like ' director of coaching' or imposing unrealistic expectations on teams .
The senior league was able to maintain impressive standards of cricket without resorting to pretentiousness.
 
Last edited:
wicketkeeper said:
It makes lots of sense. It is these people the Senior league were thinking of when they refused to relegate their clubs.
The men and sometimes women who work tirelessly behind the scenes. I have spoken to several people who were involved or supported that decision and they all said that they weren't prepared to relegate teams and put clubs at risk when they understand the work that individuals at clubs undertake and the difficulties they face. Like I said they supported their clubs.

As an aside you had the cheek to call the senior league 'snobby'. As someone who played regularly in the league and won the title on several occasions I can't recall there being prententious titles like ' director of coaching' or imposing unrealistic expectations on teams .
The senior league was able to maintain impressive standards of cricket without resorting to pretentiousness.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, yeah, they also blocked promotion of other clubs for years and years. So tell me, would you define that as snobby? I certainly would.

Sport needs competition and verily the best way to achieve that is a league format and a structure which promotes success. You might not want teams being relegated, but if teams know they won't be relegated they can become too comfortable and get complacent. People don't want to play for a team that's getting hammered every week and so it is necessary for clubs to find their level. If that means relegation, so be it.

Cricket needs to be competitive, because if it isn't, we're going down the path towards the lunacy that is uncontested sports days in schools so people's feelings don't get hurt.....

As for Director of Coaching et al, I agree, it's absolute bollocks, but that is up to the individual clubs isn't it. No league is making clubs employ such people.

I get it though, you want the Senior League back. But who would you have in it? What happens to the clubs who aren't allowed in it? Is it just tough that they don't belong there?

You might not agree with the current structure and you might be upset that clubs aren't what they used to be, but the old system was outdated and it was dying because of what it was.
 
Last edited:
SAFC2403 said:
Only clubs with a good enough history are allowed. Snobbery i beleive this is called. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Didn't set ridiculous requirements or have pretentious titles . That's snobbery.

brandon said:
Hmmm, yeah, they also blocked promotion of other clubs for years and years. So tell me, would you define that as snobby? I certainly would.

Sport needs competition and verily the best way to achieve that is a league format and a structure which promotes success. You might not want teams being relegated, but if teams know they won't be relegated they can become too comfortable and get complacent. People don't want to play for a team that's getting hammered every week and so it is necessary for clubs to find their level. If that means relegation, so be it.

Cricket needs to be competitive, because if it isn't, we're going down the path towards the lunacy that is uncontested sports days in schools so people's feelings don't get hurt.....

As for Director of Coaching et al, I agree, it's absolute bollocks, but that is up to the individual clubs isn't it. No league is making clubs employ such people.

I get it though, you want the Senior League back. But who would you have in it? What happens to the clubs who aren't allowed in it? Is it just tough that they don't belong there?

You might not agree with the current structure and you might be upset that clubs aren't what they used to be, but the old system was outdated and it was dying because of what it was.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously trying to say the Senior League wasn't competitive?
Chester le street one of the leading lights of the NEPL hadn't won the Senior league for the last 20 years they were in it.

I know teams like Horden who won the Senior league regularly in the 80s 90s and,00s were regularly in the bottom 2 in the 70s. If they had been relegated they may never have had the chance to build a successful team.
 
Last edited:
wicketkeeper said:
Didn't set ridiculous requirements or have pretentious titles . That's snobbery.



Are you seriously trying to say the Senior League wasn't competitive?
Chester le street one of the leading lights of the NEPL hadn't won the Senior league for the last 20 years they were in it.

I know teams like Horden who won the Senior league regularly in the 80s 90s and,00s were regularly in the bottom 2 in the 70s. If they had been relegated they may never have had the chance to build a successful team.
Click to expand...

No, that wasn't what I was saying at all. Have another read.
 
wicketkeeper said:
It makes lots of sense. It is these people the Senior league were thinking of when they refused to relegate their clubs.
The men and sometimes women who work tirelessly behind the scenes. I have spoken to several people who were involved or supported that decision and they all said that they weren't prepared to relegate teams and put clubs at risk when they understand the work that individuals at clubs undertake and the difficulties they face. Like I said they supported their clubs.

As an aside you had the cheek to call the senior league 'snobby'. As someone who played regularly in the league and won the title on several occasions I can't recall there being prententious titles like ' director of coaching' or imposing unrealistic expectations on teams .
The senior league was able to maintain impressive standards of cricket without resorting to pretentiousness.
Click to expand...

Equally though outside the senior league at the time were plenty of men and women putting in hard work and yet no matter how much hard work they put in,their team were blocked from progressing,that simply can’t be right.

Every team should be able to progress
 
wicketkeeper said:
And yet club cricket was thriving.
Click to expand...

Just going round in circles, but the clubs below the senior league were not able to thrive any further because they were blocked from doing soo, volunteers ,hard working club men and women were not exclusive to just that league.

I don't understand if you value hard working people involved with their local cricket club, that you would agree to denying them the chance to take their club as far as possible.

In one breath you are rightly saying these volunteers are the heart beat of local cricket (rightly soo), yet in another you are saying it was right not matter how hard they worked that their could not see their club progress.
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Just going round in circles, but the clubs below the senior league were not able to thrive any further because they were blocked from doing soo, volunteers ,hard working club men and women were not exclusive to just that league.

I don't understand if you value hard working people involved with their local cricket club, that you would agree to denying them the chance to take their club as far as possible.

In one breath you are rightly saying these volunteers are the heart beat of local cricket (rightly soo), yet in another you are saying it was right not matter how hard they worked that their could not see their club progress.
Click to expand...

Not saying it was right : Just saying I can understand why they didn't want to relegate clubs,whose representatives they would know and respect and importantly empathise with. Was speaking to a relative of ours today about it and he said why should we have relegated clubs which had been around for years in favour of some
Fly by night clubs.
 
Last edited:
wicketkeeper said:
Not saying it was right : Just saying I can understand why they didn't want to relegate clubs,whose representatives they would know and respect and importantly empathise with. Was speaking to a relative of ours today about it and he said why should we have relegated clubs which had been around for years in favour of some
Fly by night clubs.
Click to expand...

Out of fairness, to give the opportunity to clubs trying to progress and in the interests of maintaining competition rather than snobbery, insularity and conservatism?
 
DSL clubs were quite happy to keep teams like Wearmouth, Seaham Harbour and North Durham in their league as they provided easy points and posed no threat to the better teams.

If they’d allowed the likes of Hetton Lyons and, to a lesser extent, Ryhope into the DSL it would have been a better competition but less chance of the self serving ‘big guns’ winning.

From personal experience the league committee where a bunch of gin slinging old dodderers - for want of a better term
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top