Local league cricket

[Voice of fair play]

They saw the bigger picture alright. I remember speaking to our club representatives and they all said that they were concerned at the influence people like Geoff Cooke were having on the DSL and that there were people of influence who were only concerned with the County and not local cricket. The predictions they made at the time that the preoccupation of some influentiual individuals with the County would lead to the decline of local cricket have proved very accurate.



No irony at all the Durham Senior League were concerned with their clubs. The people concerned with setting up the pyramid system in the NE were totally preoccupied with the County and as a result club cricket has markedly declined as many predicted it would at the time.




They werent blocking progress. Many of the reps I spoke to were expressing views such as why is Geoff Cooke interfering in our league.?
The pedictions they made at the time have been reamrkably accurate. Many of them expressed the view that were influential people trying to interfere with the league who were solely pre-occupied with the County and that would lead to the decline of club cricket with many clubs going to the wall.
They have been proved totally right. I have spoken to some since who expressed the view that they have no sympathy with the plight of Durham as they were responsible for destroying club cricket in the region.

What about before the county and before Geoff Cooke.

The DSL always blocked a team progressing well before all the stuff you mentioned.

That is simply a fact you can’t dispute!

A team could finish top of the coast league several times and in some cases were clearly a better team than the bottom team in the senior league yet they were blocked progressing.

I fail to see how you can possibly jusify that in anyway as it is clearly unfair to any fair minded person.

In fact all you have come up with is don’t relegate a side in case they might just might come good in a few years time.

It’s a terribly weak argument whichever you look at it.

 

[wicketkeeper]

What about before the county and before Geoff Cooke.

The DSL always blocked a team progressing well before all the stuff you mentioned.

That is simply a fact you can’t dispute!

A team could finish top of the coast league several times and in some cases were clearly a better team than the bottom team in the senior league yet they were blocked progressing.

I fail to see how you can possibly jusify that in anyway as it is clearly unfair to any fair minded person.

In fact all you have come up with is don’t relegate a side in case they might just might come good in a few years time.

It’s a terribly weak argument whichever you look at it.

And yet the system worked perfectly well with many more people attending games than now.
It could be argued that the DSL actions led to more competitive cricket with good Coast league sides determined to beat Senior League teams. These days can you really see teams from the DCL having a chance to beat Soluth Northumberland. In fact I bet they dont even enter the same competitions.
Seaham Harbour survived for years in the Senior League even though their facilities were not the best. By all accounts their facilities have massively improved yet they are going to the wall under this system. It is undeniable that there are more clubs failing and folding under this system and that can only be bad for local cricket.
Cricket is not like football it can take time to develop cricketers. Which team is likely to give a young bowler a chance to bowl in their first team if relegation is hanging over the head?-None. So the system is counter productive to developing young players.

What about before the county and before Geoff Cooke.

The DSL always blocked a team progressing well before all the stuff you mentioned.

That is simply a fact you can’t dispute!

A team could finish top of the coast league several times and in some cases were clearly a better team than the bottom team in the senior league yet they were blocked progressing.

I fail to see how you can possibly jusify that in anyway as it is clearly unfair to any fair minded person.

In fact all you have come up with is don’t relegate a side in case they might just might come good in a few years time.

It’s a terribly weak argument whichever you look at it.

We have moved from a system of very competitive leagues to one where we have one league of a good standard dominated by teams with money and the rest of the leagues are quite frankly a very poor standard.

 

[Voice of fair play]

And yet the system worked perfectly well with many more people attending games than now.
It could be argued that the DSL actions led to more competitive cricket with good Coast league sides determined to beat Senior League teams. These days can you really see teams from the DCL having a chance to beat Soluth Northumberland. In fact I bet they dont even enter the same competitions.
Seaham Harbour survived for years in the Senior League even though their facilities were not the best. By all accounts their facilities have massively improved yet they are going to the wall under this system. It is undeniable that there are more clubs failing and folding under this system and that can only be bad for local cricket.
Cricket is not like football it can take time to develop cricketers. Which team is likely to give a young bowler a chance to bowl in their first team if relegation is hanging over the head?-None. So the system is counter productive to developing young players.




We have moved from a system of very competitive leagues to one where we have one league of a good standard dominated by teams with money and the rest of the leagues are quite frankly a very poor standard.

You don’t talk some bad shit mind.

Your arguments are soo all over the place it’s untrue.

Young bowlers never got the chance to develop in them days, in fact a lot of times one bowler bowled 27 overs from one end and the overseas pros you keep mentioning bowled a hell of a lot of overs in them days too.

Young bowlers did not get the chance to develop at all because the cricket in the senior league was very very competive and the senior players did all the bowling.

Now I agree with you about the overall standard been worse nowadays, but to suggest young bowlers were developed more in the senior league is complete and utter bullshit.

It’s quite laughable you suggesting soo actually.

 

[Ageing trundler]

Hetton Lyons even ended up joining the Durham County League in the end. Look where the are now.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Hetton Lyons even ended up joining the Durham County League in the end. Look where the are now.

Helton Lyons back then in the 80s etc while in the coast league were better than senior league sides such as North Durham, Wearmouth, Seaham Harbour but were blocked from progressing, that is just fact, whichever way @wicketkeeper wants to put it,

 

[minty]

Attendances were dropping massively before the premier league was even formed. Many factors for that so the NEPL surely can't be blamed for that one.

Surely the reps shouldn't have been concerned about the impact on the DSL but the impact on their individual club. There goes the problem, clubs should be thinking of their players and not a bloody league system.

Anyway, were nearly into the last third of the season and plenty to play for across most leagues with titles, promotions and relegations. Least it makes the game more bloody interesting compared to the days when Seaham Harbour and Durham City finished bottom year after year

 

[Voice of fair play]

Attendances were dropping massively before the premier league was even formed. Many factors for that so the NEPL surely can't be blamed for that one.

Surely the reps shouldn't have been concerned about the impact on the DSL but the impact on their individual club. There goes the problem, clubs should be thinking of their players and not a bloody league system.

Anyway, were nearly into the last third of the season and plenty to play for across most leagues with titles, promotions and relegations. Least it makes the game more bloody interesting compared to the days when Seaham Harbour and Durham City finished bottom year after year

While I agree with nearly all that, and I know its a moot point because I understand and I agree with what you saying in the bigger picture.

However I have to point out Durham City did not finish bottom year after year, in fact quite the opposite for a lot of years had a excellent side and actually provided some players for Durham in the days of the minor counties such was the calibre of their side back then.

But of course I know what you saying and agree.

 

[wicketkeeper]

You don’t talk some bad shit mind.

Your arguments are soo all over the place it’s untrue.

Young bowlers never got the chance to develop in them days, in fact a lot of times one bowler bowled 27 overs from one end and the overseas pros you keep mentioning bowled a hell of a lot of overs in them days too.

Young bowlers did not get the chance to develop at all because the cricket in the senior league was very very competive and the senior players did all the bowling.

Now I agree with you about the overall standard been worse nowadays, but to suggest young bowlers were developed more in the senior league is complete and utter bullshit.

It’s quite laughable you suggesting soo actually.

Totally disagree . There are numerous examples from your own club if you actually think about it. Its a common sense argument. Tell me a premier league football club in relegation trouble who will give young players a chance. If you are threatened with relegation your last concern is developing young players.

You don’t talk some bad shit mind.

Your arguments are soo all over the place it’s untrue.

Young bowlers never got the chance to develop in them days, in fact a lot of times one bowler bowled 27 overs from one end and the overseas pros you keep mentioning bowled a hell of a lot of overs in them days too.

Young bowlers did not get the chance to develop at all because the cricket in the senior league was very very competive and the senior players did all the bowling.

Now I agree with you about the overall standard been worse nowadays, but to suggest young bowlers were developed more in the senior league is complete and utter bullshit.

It’s quite laughable you suggesting soo actually.

Laughable to suggest teams threatened with relegation won't give young players a chance . Really?

Attendances were dropping massively before the premier league was even formed. Many factors for that so the NEPL surely can't be blamed for that one.

Surely the reps shouldn't have been concerned about the impact on the DSL but the impact on their individual club. There goes the problem, clubs should be thinking of their players and not a bloody league system.

Anyway, were nearly into the last third of the season and plenty to play for across most leagues with titles, promotions and relegations. Least it makes the game more bloody interesting compared to the days when Seaham Harbour and Durham City finished bottom year after year[/QUOTE]

Nobody cares.

 

[minty]

While I agree with nearly all that, and I know its a moot point because I understand and I agree with what you saying in the bigger picture.

However I have to point out Durham City did not finish bottom year after year, in fact quite the opposite for a lot of years had a excellent side and actually provided some players for Durham in the days of the minor counties such was the calibre of their side back then.

But of course I know what you saying and agree.

I was on about the last 10 years or so.l when the NEPL was formed. I was aware they were on of the leading teams a while back

 

[Voice of fair play]

Totally disagree . There are numerous examples from your own club if you actually think about it. Its a common sense argument. Tell me a premier league football club in relegation trouble who will give young players a chance. If you are threatened with relegation your last concern is developing young players.



Laughable to suggest teams threatened with relegation won't give young players a chance . Really?

Your all argument is just plan selfish and incredibly blinkered.

'Don't relegate a team in case they come good'

What about the team wanting promotion does it matter if their good?

' players might leave a team relegated'

What about the players that might leave a good team because they blocked promotion and want to play better level do they not count or matter?

 

[wicketkeeper]

Your all argument is just plan selfish and incredibly blinkered.

'Don't relegate a team in case they come good'

What about the team wanting promotion does it matter if their good?

' players might leave a team relegated'

What about the players that might leave a good team because they blocked promotion and want to play better level do they not count or matter?

You can say whatever you want but the proof is there for all to see. Seaham Harbour and South Hetton didnt fold in the senior league. The league looked after its clubs.

I was on about the last 10 years or so.l when the NEPL was formed. I was aware they were on of the leading teams a while back

Exactly! but who cares about that eh?

Your all argument is just plan selfish and incredibly blinkered.

'Don't relegate a team in case they come good'

What about the team wanting promotion does it matter if their good?

' players might leave a team relegated'

What about the players that might leave a good team because they blocked promotion and want to play better level do they not count or matter?

You have an excellent example from your own club. Bottom two for one decade one of the best clubs in the region the next.

 

[Voice of fair play]

You can say whatever you want but the proof is there for all to see. Seaham Harbour and South Hetton didnt fold in the senior league. The league looked after its clubs.



Exactly! but who cares about that eh?



You have an excellent example from your own club. Bottom two for one decade one of the best clubs in the region the next.

That’s the whole point I can see the bigger picture and fairness for all unlike you obviously.

 

[wicketkeeper]

I was on about the last 10 years or so.l when the NEPL was formed. I was aware they were on of the leading teams a while back

Thats the point. Teams like Durham City have made a huge contribution to North East cricket over the years and were a founder of the DSL. They shouldn't have been cast aside in favour of 'Johnny Come Lately' nobodies.

That’s the whole point I can see the bigger picture and fairness for all unlike you obviously.

Tell that to Seaham Harbour or South Hetton or the DSL

 

[minty]

Thats the point. Teams like Durham City have made a huge contribution to North East cricket over the years and were a founder of the DSL. They shouldn't have been cast aside in favour of 'Johnny Come Lately' nobodies.


Tell that to Seaham Harbour or South Hetton or the DSL

Didn't help them though and players probably hated playing getting beat most weeks. Least now with genuine pyramid clubs find their level and enjoying competing against like for like teams. I'm sure if you ask the current players at Durham City for example, would they prefer to play and compete or just to survive I know what they would say. Their committee may say otherwise but it's the players who count the most in my opinion.

The DSL would have forced teams to have juniors and second teamteams out....not sure how they would have helped both South Hetton and Seaham Harbour....changed the rules and allow teams to field 1 team???

 

[brandon]

Teams like Durham City have made a huge contribution to North East cricket over the years and were a founder of the DSL. They shouldn't have been cast aside in favour of 'Johnny Come Lately' nobodies.

THERE IT IS!!!!

If the DSL was so mint, why don’t you recreate it and see how many teams actually want to play in it?

 

[The Voice Of Reason]

LCC opening bat 131 in a 15x15 tonight !

 

[Eggman]

'Johnny Come Lately'

House !

 

[brandon]

LCC opening bat 131 in a 15x15 tonight !

A FAR better format than The Hundred.

 

[The Voice Of Reason]

A FAR better format than The Hundred.

177 mate ball smashed all over

 

[wicketkeeper]

THERE IT IS!!!!

If the DSL was so mint, why don’t you recreate it and see how many teams actually want to play in it?

I haven't met one player from DSL who hasn't said it should not have been destroyed.

Didn't help them though and players probably hated playing getting beat most weeks. Least now with genuine pyramid clubs find their level and enjoying competing against like for like teams. I'm sure if you ask the current players at Durham City for example, would they prefer to play and compete or just to survive I know what they would say. Their committee may say otherwise but it's the players who count the most in my opinion.

The DSL would have forced teams to have juniors and second teamteams out....not sure how they would have helped both South Hetton and Seaham Harbour....changed the rules and allow teams to field 1 team???[/

It didn't help them because of the actions of self important administers who cared nothing about history and destroyed the best league there has ever been and ever will be in the NE.

That’s the whole point I can see the bigger picture and fairness for all unlike you obviously.

Fairness for all which has led to a massive drop in standards barring one league and a huge drop in interest in club cricket.