Voice of fair play
Striker
Well think we are in agreement, but think it’s of no relevance whatsoever to this debate.
Strauss and his stupid ideas....
- Thread starter GordonMuchallNo1Fan
- Start date
TheRey
Winger
Tories are scum. Strauss is a Tory. Connect the dots.
Voice of fair play
Striker
Hway mate, you know it has nowt to do with the review, unless you saying if Strauss was a lib/dem he would have wrote a different report?Tories are scum. Strauss is a Tory. Connect the dots.
brandon
Striker
A Surrey member’s letter to their board:
My submission to Surrey's General Committee on the HPR recommendations 10 and 11
General
The terms of reference and scope of the review are not sufficiently broad. As members of a county cricket club with a proud 176-year history, we are not looking exclusively through the lens of what may be required to produce world-beating England teams. We are of course looking through a financial and commercial lens. We are also looking through the eyes of our members who are the lifeblood of our club, and who do not want to see any less Surrey cricket.
Recommendation 10: Produce a coherent domestic schedule
Redommendation 11: Upgrade the standard and intensity of our competitions.
County Championship
Regardless of how the divisions are structured, 10 county championship games are simply unacceptable. 14 is the minimum we should agree to.
Firstly, reducing the number of matches would devalue the achievement of winning: poor weather affecting matches would render the outcome of the championship which our former Chairman (now the ECB Chairman) regularly referred to as the “gold standard” a lottery.
Secondly, members want to see more, not less, championship cricket. Any further reduction in championship matches would inevitably result in the demise of outground cricket. If there were only 5 home matches per year, then they would all have to be played at HQ. Members love to experience first-class cricket at iconic venues like Scarborough, Cheltenham and of course at Guildford.
“Red-ball festivals”
We should reject outright the proposal for “first-class cricket festivals”, a second-rate “sop” to members deprived of red-ball cricket in August. These fixtures would lack context or significance, and I suspect would become glorified friendlies. They are no substitute for championship cricket.
T20 blast
I am personally less concerned about a small reduction in T20 group matches, but from a commercial perspective this cannot be good for the club, and many of our members would be disappointed to see fewer home games.
One-day cup
I support moving the one-day cup to the start of the season. It has been a pale shadow of its former self in the past two years, shorn of almost all of the players best suited to the format.
The Hundred
Any “High Performance Review” which does not highlight that this is inflicting serious damage on the county and Test game is not worth the paper on which it is written.
The Club should insist that the ECB reconsiders the Hundred in light of experience, regardless of whatever contracts may have been signed with TV stakeholders. Specifically, the following questions need to be addressed:
Is it making money?
To what extent is it really bringing in new fans, and how many more existing lovers of cricket is it alienating in the process?
What damage is it inflicting on the county game and test match cricket?
Surrey can be under no illusion about the existential implications of The Hundred for the future of the club. The ECB’s end-game is to end up with 8-10 first-class teams. But they will probably not be counties. They are likely to be franchises, with outside investors allowed to - indeed encouraged to - invest in them.
Summary
If we are not prepared to reject Recommendations 10 and 11 in the Strauss Report, we are knowingly giving the green light to the end of county cricket within the next decade. As the Committee charged with upholding and representing the interests of by far the largest members’ club among the English counties, you owe it to the game as a whole as well as our members to prevent this from happening.
My submission to Surrey's General Committee on the HPR recommendations 10 and 11
General
The terms of reference and scope of the review are not sufficiently broad. As members of a county cricket club with a proud 176-year history, we are not looking exclusively through the lens of what may be required to produce world-beating England teams. We are of course looking through a financial and commercial lens. We are also looking through the eyes of our members who are the lifeblood of our club, and who do not want to see any less Surrey cricket.
Recommendation 10: Produce a coherent domestic schedule
Redommendation 11: Upgrade the standard and intensity of our competitions.
County Championship
Regardless of how the divisions are structured, 10 county championship games are simply unacceptable. 14 is the minimum we should agree to.
Firstly, reducing the number of matches would devalue the achievement of winning: poor weather affecting matches would render the outcome of the championship which our former Chairman (now the ECB Chairman) regularly referred to as the “gold standard” a lottery.
Secondly, members want to see more, not less, championship cricket. Any further reduction in championship matches would inevitably result in the demise of outground cricket. If there were only 5 home matches per year, then they would all have to be played at HQ. Members love to experience first-class cricket at iconic venues like Scarborough, Cheltenham and of course at Guildford.
“Red-ball festivals”
We should reject outright the proposal for “first-class cricket festivals”, a second-rate “sop” to members deprived of red-ball cricket in August. These fixtures would lack context or significance, and I suspect would become glorified friendlies. They are no substitute for championship cricket.
T20 blast
I am personally less concerned about a small reduction in T20 group matches, but from a commercial perspective this cannot be good for the club, and many of our members would be disappointed to see fewer home games.
One-day cup
I support moving the one-day cup to the start of the season. It has been a pale shadow of its former self in the past two years, shorn of almost all of the players best suited to the format.
The Hundred
Any “High Performance Review” which does not highlight that this is inflicting serious damage on the county and Test game is not worth the paper on which it is written.
The Club should insist that the ECB reconsiders the Hundred in light of experience, regardless of whatever contracts may have been signed with TV stakeholders. Specifically, the following questions need to be addressed:
Is it making money?
To what extent is it really bringing in new fans, and how many more existing lovers of cricket is it alienating in the process?
What damage is it inflicting on the county game and test match cricket?
Surrey can be under no illusion about the existential implications of The Hundred for the future of the club. The ECB’s end-game is to end up with 8-10 first-class teams. But they will probably not be counties. They are likely to be franchises, with outside investors allowed to - indeed encouraged to - invest in them.
Summary
If we are not prepared to reject Recommendations 10 and 11 in the Strauss Report, we are knowingly giving the green light to the end of county cricket within the next decade. As the Committee charged with upholding and representing the interests of by far the largest members’ club among the English counties, you owe it to the game as a whole as well as our members to prevent this from happening.
Provider
Striker
Looks like it's not only this board saying this type of thing.
Bri
Striker
This is exactly right from my perspective and the logic is clear: To decide to create or continue The Hundred is to decide to damage Couinty Cricket.
Aidan11
Winger
The Hundred is a vanity project that the ECB expected to be hugely popular. They insulted regular cricket fans with their Mums and Kids comment. They have dug their heels in and refuse to admit this is a white elephant. Viewing figures are down 20% on last year. The biggest insult (admittedly this was by Sky) was to shaft the Ashes series by squeezing it into the early part of the summer.
The ECB are not fit for purpose. It's as if they hate proper cricket fans and want to do everything to piss them off.
GordonMuchallNo1Fan
Striker
it's a very valid point this
Inside Forward
Midfield
Less proper cricket so that they can shoehorn the 16.4 into the calendar.
GordonMuchallNo1Fan
Striker
Club Statement: Members’ Forum on High Performance Review - Derbyshire County Cricket Club
cricket.derbyshireccc.com
Bri
Striker
It's crazy.
So Josh, if you want to play less cricket the answer is in your own hands. Instead you shoot off all over the world playing in the T20 international circus, I'm not surprised you're tired, but not all cricketers have your advantages.
Less cricket mean fewer clubs and fewer professional cricketers.
100%
Sir Geoffrey has spoken (from behind a paywall). Andrew Strauss' review will kill county cricket – it must be stopped
Last edited:
Ottery
Full Back
sorry, but a public schoolboy with no real grasp of the world beyond his bubble.
Great cricketer mind
Provider
Striker
I can't believe he's being serious here. If he wants to play less cricket then he can play in one less franchise competition?
When was the last time he played in the County Championship or 50 over cup anyway?
Aidan11
Winger
This is what annoys me. The cricketers who are moaning about too much cricket seem to be the ones hawking themselves around the franchise circuit. It's THEIR choice.
Most of them are internationals anyway so would barely play in the county championship. Just want to make big money for a few T20 games. I have no problem with this but it's hypocritical to moan about playing too much for their county
