New signings for the 2021 season

[pavarotti1980]

Really . Teams dropping out left right and centre leagues crumbling.
Teams not even able to turn out 2 teams. Crowds down but you crack on.
One of the best leagues in the country ruined by the county and their delusions.

Nothing to do with the fact DSL doesn't exist any more. Try
COVID
kids not interested in spending entire days playing cricket
Football being 12 months of the year ( normal times)
People working weekends bla bla bla.

Do you think supposed demise is simply because of the NEPL and the pyramid system?

 

[Voice of fair play]

Nothing to do with the fact DSL doesn't exist any more. Try
COVID
kids not interested in spending entire days playing cricket
Football being 12 months of the year ( normal times)
People working weekends bla bla bla.

Do you think supposed demise is simply because of the NEPL and the pyramid syste

Personally imo what you said in your previous post is way off the mark, local club cricket is no where near better now, as it was years ago when the DSL was going, especially in terms of participation and depth of players and clubs, it's not even close!

It was thriving back then and is in decline now!

So tbh on your first post thought it was totally incorrect for you to say it's better now.

However in your second post and the above post you are spot on, the decline has everything to do with other activities and other interests and nothing to do with the DSL or the NEPL and simply to do with changing times unfortunately.

 

[Johnap]

The decline of club cricket is all over the country - don't think Durham is special. Here in Yorkshire we have gone steadily down - no matter what is tried. Too many choices for the young people these days.

 

[Stattos child]

Personally imo what you said in your previous post is way off the mark, local club cricket is no where near better now, as it was years ago when the DSL was going, especially in terms of participation and depth of players and clubs, it's not even close!

It was thriving back then and is in decline now!

So tbh on your first post thought it was totally incorrect for you to say it's better now.

However in your second post and the above post you are spot on, the decline has everything to do with other activities and other interests and nothing to do with the DSL or the NEPL and simply to do with changing times unfortunately.

I agree. Lots of reasons why cricket in decline. Competition in the leagues has proven good for many teams. 2 negatives for me:
Very average players being paid in some of the lower leagues, then jumping ship I.e team gets relegated and 4 or 5 players jump ship meanwhile they have prevented juniors from playing previously and these have lost interest or moved elsewhere
Some Teams reluctant to give juniors a chance, in the days of no relegation clubs could give their juniors a couple of years to develop in senior cricket without the risk of relegation etc.
like I say many positives as well.
I also wonder whether in some of the lower leagues second team cricket could be on a Sunday. It would help with umpires and leagues could allow some of the first team to play on the Sunday as well, e.g someone who batted 8 and did not bowl on the Saturday or a batter who is out of form and wants a knock. Admittedly some teams would abuse this but it could also help many clubs and stop sides turning out 8 or 9 which is no good to anyone

 

[NorthCountryBoy]

I agree. Lots of reasons why cricket in decline. Competition in the leagues has proven good for many teams. 2 negatives for me:
Very average players being paid in some of the lower leagues, then jumping ship I.e team gets relegated and 4 or 5 players jump ship meanwhile they have prevented juniors from playing previously and these have lost interest or moved elsewhere
Some Teams reluctant to give juniors a chance, in the days of no relegation clubs could give their juniors a couple of years to develop in senior cricket without the risk of relegation etc.
like I say many positives as well.
I also wonder whether in some of the lower leagues second team cricket could be on a Sunday. It would help with umpires and leagues could allow some of the first team to play on the Sunday as well, e.g someone who batted 8 and did not bowl on the Saturday or a batter who is out of form and wants a knock. Admittedly some teams would abuse this but it could also help many clubs and stop sides turning out 8 or 9 which is no good to anyone

Sunday cricket is actually a growth area though mate (NEPL, plus Hetton Lyons league at record membership of 32 teams this year).

That proposal would do more damage than good imo.

 

[Voice of fair play]

I agree. Lots of reasons why cricket in decline. Competition in the leagues has proven good for many teams. 2 negatives for me:
Very average players being paid in some of the lower leagues, then jumping ship I.e team gets relegated and 4 or 5 players jump ship meanwhile they have prevented juniors from playing previously and these have lost interest or moved elsewhere
Some Teams reluctant to give juniors a chance, in the days of no relegation clubs could give their juniors a couple of years to develop in senior cricket without the risk of relegation etc.
like I say many positives as well.
I also wonder whether in some of the lower leagues second team cricket could be on a Sunday. It would help with umpires and leagues could allow some of the first team to play on the Sunday as well, e.g someone who batted 8 and did not bowl on the Saturday or a batter who is out of form and wants a knock. Admittedly some teams would abuse this but it could also help many clubs and stop sides turning out 8 or 9 which is no good to anyone

I think you always have to have some kind of promotion as teams have to be allowed to progress.

If you have hard working club people who have put in hours of hours of unpaid work into their club only to be told you can't progress even if your team is clearly good enough is very wrong imo.

That's where the DSL was very wrong imo, not allowing clubs to progress.

Not disrespect intended to those clubs but for years and years the same clubs seemed to be at the bottom of the DSL in the 90s for example, yet teams and clubs who were clearly better than them could not get into the DSL because of no relegation, me personally thought that was wrong.

 

[Stattos child]

Sunday cricket is actually a growth area though mate (NEPL, plus Hetton Lyons league at record membership of 32 teams this year).

That proposal would do more damage than good imo.

I appreciate that, guess it’s all about priorities is it better that big clubs (and not knocking all the effort they put as know a lot of hard work goes on), have 3 senior sides and 80 plus juniors whilst many other clubs have no junior sides and can only turn out 1 senior team (for me this is not sustainable long term and clubs will fold)

I think you always have to have some kind of promotion as teams have to be allowed to progress.

If you have hard working club people who have put in hours of hours of unpaid work into their club only to be told you can't progress even if your team is clearly good enough is very wrong imo.

That's where the DSL was very wrong imo, not allowing clubs to progress.

Not disrespect intended to those clubs but for years and years the same clubs seemed to be at the bottom of the DSL in the 90s for example, yet teams and clubs who were clearly better than them could not get into the DSL because of no relegation, me personally thought that was wrong.

Can’t disagree like I say lots of positives, nothing perfect though.

 

[brandon]

Personally feel like the current structure is the best it’s been in my lifetime*, I’m very optimistic about the NEDCL (or whatever the letters ) and think the organisation of the divisions has been very good - even though I keep pestering @ac arundez - and in 3/4 years I think every team will have found their level. That for me is the single most important factor in keeping people interested in playing. Competitive cricket.

I’ve been involved in teams that have won everything and also teams that have lost everything - one is better than the other of course, but neither are ideal in the long run. All sports are seeing a drop in quality and participation numbers (in some people’s eyes atleast), especially local football. I don’t think there’s any one significant thing that the governing bodies are doing wrong, just as @Voice of fair play says; it’s a sign of the times really.

*I wasn’t alive or was at best very young when the DSL was in its pomp.

 

[SAFC2403]

I think you always have to have some kind of promotion as teams have to be allowed to progress.

If you have hard working club people who have put in hours of hours of unpaid work into their club only to be told you can't progress even if your team is clearly good enough is very wrong imo.

That's where the DSL was very wrong imo, not allowing clubs to progress.

Not disrespect intended to those clubs but for years and years the same clubs seemed to be at the bottom of the DSL in the 90s for example, yet teams and clubs who were clearly better than them could not get into the DSL because of no relegation, me personally thought that was wrong.

The DSLs attitude towards other clubs was outrageous in my view. They protected clubs finishing bottom and effectively formed a barrier to other up and coming teams who were keen to progress. Their refusal to allow promotion and relegation was their downfall in my view.

 

[Sea to Shining Sea]

The DSLs attitude towards other clubs was outrageous in my view. They protected clubs finishing bottom and effectively formed a barrier to other up and coming teams who were keen to progress. Their refusal to allow promotion and relegation was their downfall in my view.

In fairness, the DSL did accept teams into the league who wanted to progress and had the teams and infrastructure. For example, South Hetton dominated the Coast League, applied to get into the Senior League and were accepted.

 

[Super K]

In fairness, the DSL did accept teams into the league who wanted to progress and had the teams and infrastructure. For example, South Hetton dominated the Coast League, applied to get into the Senior League and were accepted.

You totally contradict yourself with this statement by the way.

 

[Sea to Shining Sea]

You totally contradict yourself with this statement by the way.

How so? (Unless referencing the unwanted autocorrect in my initial post which said ‘didn’t’ but was edited )

 

[eddyfinn]

@wicketkeeper are you a Horden player/committee member or former?

 

[Super K]

South Hetton were a good example, but was that not because there was a vacancy? I cannot recall the circumstances? If the DSL had a full contingent would South H be accepted?

If I had a choice of going back to the 80s/90s cricket, or today, I’d be back in my time machine. There may be promotion now but numbers playing and standards have definitely dropped. Not to mention interest. Local cricket is about local rivalries and playing the team in the next town or village. ...not travelling 45mins to a game. Who cares or is interested in Easington playing Mainsforth......or Eppleton v Stockton. Playing against those who you went to school with, or seeing them in a local pub after the game keeps interest and was great. As a Coast League stalwart nothing gave me more satisfaction than turning over a Senior League team. I would still turn out to play a mid week game against Seaham Harbour, but not bothered about travelling to Evenwood on a night.

 

[Sea to Shining Sea]

South Hetton were a good example, but was that not because there was a vacancy? I cannot recall the circumstances? If the DSL had a full contingent would South H be accepted?

If I had a choice of going back to the 80s/90s cricket, or today, I’d be back in my time machine. There may be promotion now but numbers playing and standards have definitely dropped. Not to mention interest. Local cricket is about local rivalries and playing the team in the next town or village. ...not travelling 45mins to a game. Who cares or is interested in Easington playing Mainsforth......or Eppleton v Stockton. Playing against those who you went to school with, or seeing them in a local pub after the game keeps interest and was great. As a Coast League stalwart nothing gave me more satisfaction than turning over a Senior League team. I would still turn out to play a mid week game against Seaham Harbour, but not bothered about travelling to Evenwood on a night.

My memory is a little hazy too to be honest. I’m fairly sure South Hetton’s infrastructure at the time was superb with an excellent first team and good junior set up.

I don’t think the Senior League was quite the closed shop it has been made out to be as other clubs entered who weren’t longstanding members too. There may have been some protection of longer established and traditional clubs but I think there are merits to that approach as well as obvious downsides.

 

[Super K]

i think that’s where our opinions differ. South H. got in the league because it suited the DSL, not because of their infrastructure. If you go back 30 years prior to that I can only think of maybe the Lyons being accepted into the league, not really a good advert to say the ‘DSL did accept teams’. They were a closed shop.

Also South Hetton got into the League based on their 1st team success, not their infrastructure.

 

[pavarotti1980]

Personally imo what you said in your previous post is way off the mark, local club cricket is no where near better now, as it was years ago when the DSL was going, especially in terms of participation and depth of players and clubs, it's not even close!

It was thriving back then and is in decline now!

So tbh on your first post thought it was totally incorrect for you to say it's better now.

However in your second post and the above post you are spot on, the decline has everything to do with other activities and other interests and nothing to do with the DSL or the NEPL and simply to do with changing times unfortunately.

My point on it being better now is mainly due to the pyramid system as it currently stands allowing clubs to find a position which suits their circumstances, which in the past would not have happened. A club may have a strong 1st XI but struggle with 2nd XI sides. They can continue with that 1st XI without the pressure of having to find a 2nd XI simply to make up the numbers to avoid being kicked out of a league. Teams can be promoted and relegated all the way through which encourages more competitiveness in those at the top and bottom without a ceiling restricting progression as they would have to apply to another league to improve further.

I do agree the standard may not be as high and the amount of money floating around for bang average players is daft but I'm sure clubs paid beforehand anyway, it was just not official.

 

[NorthCountryBoy]

I appreciate that, guess it’s all about priorities is it better that big clubs (and not knocking all the effort they put as know a lot of hard work goes on), have 3 senior sides and 80 plus juniors whilst many other clubs have no junior sides and can only turn out 1 senior team (for me this is not sustainable long term and clubs will fold)

Can’t disagree like I say lots of positives, nothing perfect though.

Fair points mate. I think one thing that can help is flexibility on loans.

 

[Stattos child]

Fair points mate. I think one thing that can help is flexibility on loans.

Totally agree I have said in past that the loaning of juniors would be good step forward for second xi cricket. Years ago back in 90’s Philadelphia we’re doing this with east rainton

 

[Voice of fair play]

My point on it being better now is mainly due to the pyramid system as it currently stands allowing clubs to find a position which suits their circumstances, which in the past would not have happened. A club may have a strong 1st XI but struggle with 2nd XI sides. They can continue with that 1st XI without the pressure of having to find a 2nd XI simply to make up the numbers to avoid being kicked out of a league. Teams can be promoted and relegated all the way through which encourages more competitiveness in those at the top and bottom without a ceiling restricting progression as they would have to apply to another league to improve further.

I do agree the standard may not be as high and the amount of money floating around for bang average players is daft but I'm sure clubs paid beforehand anyway, it was just not official.

Yeah agree with most of that apart from your last sentence, think clubs paid some players years ago, but there was definitely more loyalty to certain clubs and money knocking about was paid to quality players, not only players who just went from club to club year after year

The DSLs attitude towards other clubs was outrageous in my view. They protected clubs finishing bottom and effectively formed a barrier to other up and coming teams who were keen to progress. Their refusal to allow promotion and relegation was their downfall in my view.

Yeah it is difficult to argue with that, like I say if I was a committee member or volunteer of a club wanting to get promoted who were clearly good enough but were blocked would have been very annoyed.

Not really sure how blocking teams progressing could ever by seen as ok?

In fairness, the DSL did accept teams into the league who wanted to progress and had the teams and infrastructure. For example, South Hetton dominated the Coast League, applied to get into the Senior League and were accepted.

Don’t think they did tbh mate, could be wrong but think South Hetton and other teams were only accepted when other teams folded and hence a space to have a even number of teams.

And not because they wanted South Hetton to progress, in other words when it suited them they accepted teams when it didn’t they didn’t