Player Club Moves For 2019

Status
Not open for further replies.
brandon said:
NEPL falling apart at the seams. Before long teams will have to play each other three times :lol:
Click to expand...

The NEPL would be 1 team short if Stockton left immediately. Not quite sure how it is 'falling apart' or how teams would have to play each other three times.

My guess would be that they'll continue with 1 team short for this upcoming season, and have no relegation from NEPL to NEPL1 at the end of the 2019 season. Promote two from the leagues below NEPL for the 2020 season and the league will be back to full allocation.

This has been rumoured for years about Stockton and it makes sense given their location and the increase in Tyneside based NEPL teams.
 


BatEleven said:
The NEPL would be 1 team short if Stockton left immediately. Not quite sure how it is 'falling apart' or how teams would have to play each other three times.

My guess would be that they'll continue with 1 team short for this upcoming season, and have no relegation from NEPL to NEPL1 at the end of the 2019 season. Promote two from the leagues below NEPL for the 2020 season and the league will be back to full allocation.

This has been rumoured for years about Stockton and it makes sense given their location and the increase in Tyneside based NEPL teams.
Click to expand...

Guessing there will be a proposal to still relegate 1 to reduce meaningless games, which will naturally get rejected in a "turkeys voting for Christmas" style ballot.
 
Carteron said:
Guessing there will be a proposal to still relegate 1 to reduce meaningless games, which will naturally get rejected in a "turkeys voting for Christmas" style ballot.
Click to expand...

I think precedent has been set with no relegation in previous years such as when Seaham Harbour dropped out of NEPL1 at the beginning of last season.
 
BatEleven said:
I think precedent has been set with no relegation in previous years such as when Seaham Harbour dropped out of NEPL1 at the beginning of last season.
Click to expand...
So the farce continues, so they'll be accepting the team that finishes 10th in the DCL next year then. To find a club that meets the criteria. Think it needs a serious review since the whole system in its current format is unsustainable.
 
The proposal is to relegate 1 club next season and promote the winners of both the DCL and NTCL without any need for a playoff. That is what is being voted on at the NEPL AGM later this month.
 
robkitchuk said:
So the farce continues, so they'll be accepting the team that finishes 10th in the DCL next year then. To find a club that meets the criteria. Think it needs a serious review since the whole system in its current format is unsustainable.
Click to expand...

Any update on whether you've got extra sides for next year? Seaham H 2s must be likely?
 
robkitchuk said:
So the farce continues, so they'll be accepting the team that finishes 10th in the DCL next year then. To find a club that meets the criteria. Think it needs a serious review since the whole system in its current format is unsustainable.
Click to expand...
Discussions around DCL and NEDCL uniting are due to take place soon with a NYSDL type format being proposed, unfortuantly I can see it failing mainly due to approach of some of the main protaganists around the although I hope they do join forces as I think it will benefit all clubs going forward.
 
eddyfinn said:
Discussions around DCL and NEDCL uniting are due to take place soon with a NYSDL type format being proposed, unfortuantly I can see it failing mainly due to approach of some of the main protaganists around the although I hope they do join forces as I think it will benefit all clubs going forward.
Click to expand...
It makes sense in many ways, but sceptical about a number of points. Ie NEDCL has a full compliment of umpires, would we ever see that again. Paid players, no longer playing overs cricket (major stumbling block), and the cost of fines which would bankrupt many NEDCL clubs.
 
Last edited:
robkitchuk said:
It makes sense in many ways, but sceptical about a number of points. Ie NEDCL has a full compliment of umpires, would we ever see that again. Paid players, no longer playing overs cricket (major stumbling block), and the cost of fines which would bankrupt many NEDCL clubs.
Click to expand...
Agree, it makes sense in many ways, so, lets do it.
Paid players is a scourge on all levels of cricket and if clubs want to pay "ordinary" players then, sadly, it is up to them, and if they go bankrupt then it is nobody's fault but their own. The same clubs cannot then claim that they cannot pay "fines". Just heard this week that one DCL club has had "money offers" made to 2 of their second team players from other DCL clubs !!
Agree with the fines comment, dock points not money from the clubs who do not have money to waste.
Still playing "overs cricket", just it is 95 instead of 90. Yes it does have the "draw" option and I still feel that cricket, at all levels, should place as much emphasis on taking 10 wickets as it does on scoring runs to win games.
As for the Umpires, yes the NEDCL has enough umpires but every other league is short. Share them out so all games get at least one qualified umpire.
I have no problem calling the merged league the NORTH EAST CRICKET LEAGUE, as it could attract clubs from just over the Durham borders, e.g Northumberland, Cleveland and even North Yorkshire.
Also would propose shorter games, 40 overs per side ?, for second team cricket, if that is what clubs would want ?
Get the debate moving, and for the good of local cricket sit down and talk sense with each other.
Do not have one club or one league digging their heels in and stopping progress. We saw what that did for the Durham Senior League.
 
Ageing trundler said:
40 overs a side is ideal for many leagues to stop the haemmoraging of players. 1.30-6.30, plenty of time before and/or after to do the things that put most people off playing every week.
Click to expand...
We play 40 overs and I must say I'm not a fan, bowler restrictions sometimes hinder bowlers getting into a rhythm and batters struggle to build an innings if they are not big hitters.
 
Up the BR said:
We play 40 overs and I must say I'm not a fan, bowler restrictions sometimes hinder bowlers getting into a rhythm and batters struggle to build an innings if they are not big hitters.
Click to expand...

The problem is mate especially at second team level where participation is decreasing players don’t want to play cricket nearly all day and 40 overs could be a good compromise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top