• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

NEPL 2021 Season

Helmerroids said:
The league secretaries were informed well in advance that the table would switch to percentages rather than average points, don’t see that Castle Eden have a leg to stand on tbh, every club knew what they needed to do on the final day to secure promotion.

It’s unfortunate that Play Cricket can’t reflect the table with percentage points, bound to lead to frustration when it’s showing incorrect information.
Click to expand...
I agree that all knew what was needed so little chance of winning any appeal.

Strange league asking them to play in a play-off mind. Almost admitting that there may be grounds of an appeal. Surely they stick to the decision that was made on the Friday around average points
Congratulations to Seaham Park as well. Straight swap with Boldon and a good addition to the league
 

Helmerroids said:
The league secretaries were informed well in advance that the table would switch to percentages rather than average points, don’t see that Castle Eden have a leg to stand on tbh, every club knew what they needed to do on the final day to secure promotion.

It’s unfortunate that Play Cricket can’t reflect the table with percentage points, bound to lead to frustration when it’s showing incorrect information.
Click to expand...
Changing it before the last game is a shambles though, should have been changed to percentage long before that.
 
YES WE GYAN said:
Changing it before the last game is a shambles though, should have been changed to percentage long before that.
Click to expand...
It was because the last Covid cancellation was actually the first one from the win/lose portion of the league, all others were from the win/draw/lose games. Because the points on offer are different for the two formats the only equitable solution was to calculate by percentages.

If both clubs took maximum points from the games that went ahead, Castle Eden would have had 550 points, Newcastle could only have reached 520. Percentages was definitely the only fair way determine final positions.

I just hope that next season is a lot more straightforward!
 
Helmerroids said:
It was because the last Covid cancellation was actually the first one from the win/lose portion of the league, all others were from the win/draw/lose games. Because the points on offer are different for the two formats the only equitable solution was to calculate by percentages.

If both clubs took maximum points from the games that went ahead, Castle Eden would have had 550 points, Newcastle could only have reached 520. Percentages was definitely the only fair way determine final positions.

I just hope that next season is a lot more straightforward!
Click to expand...
Percentage is the fairest method, but the change should have been done a lot earlier, not just before the final game. Teams have made decisions in the games leading up with the understanding it would be average.
 
So what’s happened here then? They’ve changed the rules on how points are scored prior to the final game of the season having played inline with different rules all season?!?
Whats the rationale for that as on the face of it, it seems a ludicrous decision.
 
safccfas said:
So what’s happened here then? They’ve changed the rules on how points are scored prior to the final game of the season having played inline with different rules all season?!?
Whats the rationale for that as on the face of it, it seems a ludicrous decision.
Click to expand...

My understanding:

A query was raised in May/June time that average points is not fair, as win/lose games have different maximum winning points in comparison to win/lose/draw games. The League met in June and announced to all clubs that if no win/lose games were off due to COVID then they would stick with average points (at this point only win/lose/draw games had been off due to COVID). If there were both win/lose and win/lose/draw games off due to COVID, the league would change to percentage points for fairness in terms of points available in the two formats.

Prior to the final week of fixtures, there had been no win/lose games called off due to COVID. However, in the days leading up to the final round of fixtures, Willington called their final game off due to COVID. This meant NEPL1 would change from average points to percentage points. This change meant that Newcastle finished ahead of Castle Eden (rumoured to be by 1 point) and were therefore promoted to NEPL.

Castle Eden then lodged an appeal. I believe the appeal was that the league should not have accepted Willington calling their game off due to COVID (There have been rumours that a lot of their first team were at a music festival). The league however didn't really question other games being called off for COVID earlier in the season, so I don't see how they could start questioning these things.

I was told yesterday that Castle Eden have now got solicitors involved. This has all got a bit messy and in my view, everyone was aware of the rules regarding points in the event a game is off due to COVID.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EGG
safccfas said:
So what’s happened here then? They’ve changed the rules on how points are scored prior to the final game of the season having played inline with different rules all season?!?
Whats the rationale for that as on the face of it, it seems a ludicrous decision.
Click to expand...
Read my post above mate, it’s to do with different amount of points available in the different game formats (the league compromised a round of W/L matches, then a round of W/D/L then another round of W/L). Maximum of 18 points for a W/D/L win, whereas it’s 20 for a W/L win. Average points didn’t work as everyone ended up with a different set of maximum available points.

In hindsight, with Covid in our midst I think one game format would’ve made life a lot simpler, we all know what a wonderful that is though..
 
BatEleven said:
My understanding:

A query was raised in May/June time that average points is not fair, as win/lose games have different maximum winning points in comparison to win/lose/draw games. The League met in June and announced to all clubs that if no win/lose games were off due to COVID then they would stick with average points (at this point only win/lose/draw games had been off due to COVID). If there were both win/lose and win/lose/draw games off due to COVID, the league would change to percentage points for fairness in terms of points available in the two formats.

Prior to the final week of fixtures, there had been no win/lose games called off due to COVID. However, in the days leading up to the final round of fixtures, Willington called their final game off due to COVID. This meant NEPL1 would change from average points to percentage points. This change meant that Newcastle finished ahead of Castle Eden (rumoured to be by 1 point) and were therefore promoted to NEPL.

Castle Eden then lodged an appeal. I believe the appeal was that the league should not have accepted Willington calling their game off due to COVID (There have been rumours that a lot of their first team were at a music festival). The league however didn't really question other games being called off for COVID earlier in the season, so I don't see how they could start questioning these things.

I was told yesterday that Castle Eden have now got solicitors involved. This has all got a bit messy and in my view, everyone was aware of the rules regarding points in the event a game is off due to COVID.
Click to expand...

sorry if this is a silly question but why didn’t the league just make them play either that day and select players who hadn’t tested positive (as isolation rules had changed, I think, at this point) or make them play the game on another date - like yesterday?!? Seems daft to have caused this issue over one match being called off.
 
BatEleven said:
My understanding:

A query was raised in May/June time that average points is not fair, as win/lose games have different maximum winning points in comparison to win/lose/draw games. The League met in June and announced to all clubs that if no win/lose games were off due to COVID then they would stick with average points (at this point only win/lose/draw games had been off due to COVID). If there were both win/lose and win/lose/draw games off due to COVID, the league would change to percentage points for fairness in terms of points available in the two formats.

Prior to the final week of fixtures, there had been no win/lose games called off due to COVID. However, in the days leading up to the final round of fixtures, Willington called their final game off due to COVID. This meant NEPL1 would change from average points to percentage points. This change meant that Newcastle finished ahead of Castle Eden (rumoured to be by 1 point) and were therefore promoted to NEPL.

Castle Eden then lodged an appeal. I believe the appeal was that the league should not have accepted Willington calling their game off due to COVID (There have been rumours that a lot of their first team were at a music festival). The league however didn't really question other games being called off for COVID earlier in the season, so I don't see how they could start questioning these things.

I was told yesterday that Castle Eden have now got solicitors involved. This has all got a bit messy and in my view, everyone was aware of the rules regarding points in the event a game is off due to COVID.
Click to expand...
So the appeal can only be against Willington inappropriately calling the game of for Covid which is not likely to be proven. Appeal can't be for the rules as they were set mid summer and activated before the final game

Always hate to hear solicitors involved etc for local cricket.
 
minty said:
So the appeal can only be against Willington inappropriately calling the game of for Covid which is not likely to be proven. Appeal can't be for the rules as they were set mid summer and activated before the final game

Always hate to hear solicitors involved etc for local cricket.
Click to expand...
That’s untenable though, you’d have to go through the same process for all the Covid cancelled games earlier in the season, not just the Willington game.

Castle Eden went in to game knowing exactly what they needed, they didn’t get over the line, I don’t see any legal case tbh.
 
BatEleven said:
My understanding:

A query was raised in May/June time that average points is not fair, as win/lose games have different maximum winning points in comparison to win/lose/draw games. The League met in June and announced to all clubs that if no win/lose games were off due to COVID then they would stick with average points (at this point only win/lose/draw games had been off due to COVID). If there were both win/lose and win/lose/draw games off due to COVID, the league would change to percentage points for fairness in terms of points available in the two formats.

Prior to the final week of fixtures, there had been no win/lose games called off due to COVID. However, in the days leading up to the final round of fixtures, Willington called their final game off due to COVID. This meant NEPL1 would change from average points to percentage points. This change meant that Newcastle finished ahead of Castle Eden (rumoured to be by 1 point) and were therefore promoted to NEPL.

Castle Eden then lodged an appeal. I believe the appeal was that the league should not have accepted Willington calling their game off due to COVID (There have been rumours that a lot of their first team were at a music festival). The league however didn't really question other games being called off for COVID earlier in the season, so I don't see how they could start questioning these things.

I was told yesterday that Castle Eden have now got solicitors involved. This has all got a bit messy and in my view, everyone was aware of the rules regarding points in the event a game is off due to COVID.
Click to expand...
Allegedly, Willington players told an Umpire, the week before, that they were struggling to get 2 sides out for the last games of the season.
They "fulfilled" one game on the last Saturday. Unfortunately for Castle Eden it was the 2nd team game.
Should they have fulfilled the 1st team game then Castle Eden would have been promoted.
In this situation, should you play the 1st team fixture if you can only get one team out ?? I do not know the answer to this !
 
badger55 said:
Allegedly, Willington players told an Umpire, the week before, that they were struggling to get 2 sides out for the last games of the season.
They "fulfilled" one game on the last Saturday. Unfortunately for Castle Eden it was the 2nd team game.
Should they have fulfilled the 1st team game then Castle Eden would have been promoted.
In this situation, should you play the 1st team fixture if you can only get one team out ?? I do not know the answer to this !
Click to expand...

so the team who called a 1st team game off because of Covid, Willington, played a 2nd team game on the same date ?!? If so that’s a shocker of a decision as the higer graded game always takes priority.
 
safccfas said:
so the team who called a 1st team game off because of Covid, Willington, played a 2nd team game on the same date ?!? If so that’s a shocker of a decision as the higer graded game always takes priority.
Click to expand...
Yes, they did. Did this happen on other occasions when 1st team games were off earlier in the season?
 
SAFC2012 said:
Yes, they did. Did this happen on other occasions when 1st team games were off earlier in the season?
Click to expand...

don’t know. But there were different isolation rules then. Teams were either good to play or not, teams weren’t mixing etc. In this instance and at the time in question you only needed to isolate if you tested positive (I think anyway, not 100% on timings). If correct then the one or two players who tested positive could have been replaced by 2nd team players. If that left 2nd team short then quite frankly that’s tough shit and just how club cricket / sport works.
 
safccfas said:
don’t know. But there were different isolation rules then. Teams were either good to play or not, teams weren’t mixing etc. In this instance and at the time in question you only needed to isolate if you tested positive (I think anyway, not 100% on timings). If correct then the one or two players who tested positive could have been replaced by 2nd team players. If that left 2nd team short then quite frankly that’s tough shit and just how club cricket / sport works.
Click to expand...
Anyone who can’t see what’s happened there is either an idiot or willingly turning a blind eye.
 
safccfas said:
so the team who called a 1st team game off because of Covid, Willington, played a 2nd team game on the same date ?!? If so that’s a shocker of a decision as the higer graded game always takes priority.
Click to expand...
Absolutely spot on and if this is what has happened it's a bad decision from the league. I just feel for Castle Eden, great club with good lads who have worked all season, for what at the moment, is for nowt.
 
As someone further up alluded to some were at music festival and posted on their own social media, also their 1st team captain supposedly suspended for the final match
 
Gateshead Fell did the same earlier in the season, fielded a second team when they had a Covid outbreak in their first team squad.

I wouldn’t be too quick to judge, clubs have had a hell of time putting 3 teams out every weekend this year due to Covid, people needing holidays after the traumas of 2020. Of course the principle is right that 1st team fixtures should always be prioritised, I think a bit of latitude has been necessary though this season. I hope things return to full normality next season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top