• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Members Forum - 30th July 2025

When scheduling was being discussed (Bostock?) it was said that you couldn't start play at 10.30am in September because the batting team would be three down in no time at all. He said there is still light at 6pm. Does he realise we do start at 10.30am in September and his 'three quick wickets' statement is again, not backed up with any form of evidence whatsoever.
 

Can the members enforce regime change at the top? Reading this thread Surely no members in attendance will have come away happy with Bostock…
 
seaham ftm said:
Can the members enforce regime change at the top? Reading this thread Surely no members in attendance will have come away happy with Bostock…
Click to expand...
With Durham only being one of two counties who aren't owned by their members I doubt it, they already have no say in who gets elected to the top positions. Members can always start a no confidence petition but even then the board can choose to take no notice of it.
 
SuperSub said:
With Durham only being one of two counties who aren't owned by their members I doubt it, they already have no say in who gets elected to the top positions. Members can always start a no confidence petition but even then the board can choose to take no notice of it.
Click to expand...
Us, Hampshire and Northants.
At the end of the day we're little more than season ticket holders.
 
Need to form some kind of anti-Bostock group and have a protest and banners at the ground. The national cricket press would need to be informed as well as videoing the protest on FB cricket groups.

Bad publicity is the only way to drive them out.
 
Aidan11 said:
Need to form some kind of anti-Bostock group and have a protest and banners at the ground. The national cricket press would need to be informed as well as videoing the protest on FB cricket groups.

Bad publicity is the only way to drive them out.
Click to expand...
It would have no effect whatsoever. Both Bostock and North can do whatever they like and will only go whenever they themselves decide to go.Franchise cricket will knacker cricket completely.
How can prioritising a competition which restricts viewing to a small proportion of the population do anything other than stagnate the game?
 
Last edited:
Its a disgrace that for a members forum Bostock had somewhere else to be, how long did it last a couple of hours tops? on an evening too, i do tend to agree that club seem to want a hundred franchise and the money that brings, but i bet its sold straight away to them up the road, but Bostock talked of expansion of teams being in the next couple of years a couple of years ago now, are they waiting for the new TV deal to expand it?

he was on a podcast a while back and said we were ready to go as soon as the ECB would let them

3000 members seems like bollocks too, even on busy days its 1500 tops, there been blast games that would have been lucky to have 3000 in, im sure that must include junior members and or T20 season ticket holders
 
Just copied this from the Lancs members group thing.........

Essex told their members forum tonight that they are opposing the reduction from 14 CC games. Surrey, Somerset, Middlesex Kent, Essex, Derbyshire &Yorkshire against the reduction. Needs 12 votes to pass.SGMs at Lancashire & Nottinghamshire on the way their boards handled it
 
Dan..Dan..Dan..Dan said:
Just copied this from the Lancs members group thing.........

Essex told their members forum tonight that they are opposing the reduction from 14 CC games. Surrey, Somerset, Middlesex Kent, Essex, Derbyshire &Yorkshire against the reduction. Needs 12 votes to pass.SGMs at Lancashire & Nottinghamshire on the way their boards handled it
Click to expand...

If that is true then that is enough to defeat the proposal. Surprised Yorkshire are against it though. Seeing as it was Graves who brought it in.
 
Aidan11 said:
If that is true then that is enough to defeat the proposal. Surprised Yorkshire are against it though. Seeing as it was Graves who brought it in.
Click to expand...
The Yorkshire members had a vote on this. One of Bostock’s gripes at the meeting is that YCCC have >10k members and only 680 or so exercised their right to vote, so the decision was being made by a small proportion of individuals. He said this was better left to management to decide, as in Durham’s case. (I summarise here)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top