**UPDATE - Durham County junior cricket 2013**

[Sweeper]

4 geographical leagues, North East, South East, Central and South West.

NORTH EAST LEAGUE

Gateshead Fell
Bill Quay
South Shields
Felling
Marsden
Whiteleas
Whitburn
Wearmouth
Hylton
Boldon CC
Boldon CA

CENTRAL LEAGUE

Sunderland
Eppleton
Burnmoor
Hetton Lyons
Houghton
Philidelphia
Washington
Chester-le-Street
Kimblesworth
Durham City
Brandon

SOUTH EAST LEAGUE

Seaham Park
Seaham Harbour
Dawdon
Silksworth
Ryhope
Murton
South Hetton
Easington
Horden
Peterlee
Castle Eden

SOUTH WEST LEAGUE

Langley Park
Crook
Esh Winning
Evenwood
Mainsforth
Shildon
Tudhoe
Ushaw Moor
Etherley
Newton Aycliffe
Bishop Auckland
Willington


Each area to start the season by playing a cup competition to find the County representative for the ECB Under 13 and 15 National Club Championships, followed by the main league season, where each team will play each other once and ending with the current DCB championships which will be fully integrated into the league structure instead of sitting as a separate entity as present. Other cup competitions encompassing all clubs are still to be considered.

Age group specifics -

Under 11’s – to be 8 a side, pairs, 20 overs, played on a Sunday morning, clubs with good numbers would be allowed to enter 2 teams.
Under 13’s – to be 11 a side, 20 overs, played on a Wednesday evening.
Under 15’s – to remain as 11 a side, 20 overs, played on a Monday evening.
Under 18’s – also remain as 11 a aside, 20 overs, played on a Tuesday evening.

Another meeting on Monday 22nd October to discuss some more issues in a bit more detail, but this is the nuts and bolts of it.

 

[EGG]

Some strong teams in the Central League ,well it cuts my journey times down a bit from what i was doing season just gone in DSL

 

[MJR]

Before I state that moving a team at u11 who have been playing 'proper' cricket for years, to playing 8-a-side is such a backward step I find it hard to believe, could someone tell me what the rules of this format are?

How many overs can a player bat for/bowl for/ is the ground a lot smaller given you'll only have 6 fielders to position?

I'm struggling to comprehend it at the moment, and like I say, for lads who have played few seasons at 11-a-side to move to this format, well, not convinced to say the least...

 

[Sweeper]

Before I state that moving a team at u11 who have been playing 'proper' cricket for years, to playing 8-a-side is such a backward step I find it hard to believe, could someone tell me what the rules of this format are?

How many overs can a player bat for/bowl for/ is the ground a lot smaller given you'll only have 6 fielders to position?

I'm struggling to comprehend it at the moment, and like I say, for lads who have played few seasons at 11-a-side to move to this format, well, not convinced to say the least...

Couldn't agree more, and I'm realLy suprised that the powers that be cannot see this.

We are holding a coaches meeting at our club soon to discuss new format generally and I'd imagine u11 8-a-side pairs will be the main talking point. No decisions taken yet but it may be that we consider ourselves best served by pulling out of that league and arranging 11-a-side friendly games. The kids will get a lot more out of that.

 

[Greavsie]

Not sure what the whole issue of 8 a side cricket is .

It ensures that everyone plays a decent part in the game and surely at U11 that is important.

For example, I played U11 as a 9 year old (Year 4). Had we not played pairs cricket, I would rarely have batted or bowled. I may have lost interest and stopped playing. Instead, I stuck with it, played U11,13,15,18 3rds and 2nds for the same club before moving on in early 20s.

I get the advantages of playing 11 a'side (especially the value that you have to pace on your wicket) but surely we need to think of the development of the cohort of kids at your club and not just the 3 or 4 outstanding ones who will do most of the batting and bowling.

Sorry if I sound like a communist

 

[eddyfinn]

Not sure what the whole issue of 8 a side cricket is .

It ensures that everyone plays a decent part in the game and surely at U11 that is important.

For example, I played U11 as a 9 year old (Year 4). Had we not played pairs cricket, I would rarely have batted or bowled. I may have lost interest and stopped playing. Instead, I stuck with it, played U11,13,15,18 3rds and 2nds for the same club before moving on in early 20s.

I get the advantages of playing 11 a'side (especially the value that you have to pace on your wicket) but surely we need to think of the development of the cohort of kids at your club and not just the 3 or 4 outstanding ones who will do most of the batting and bowling.

Sorry if I sound like a communist

This. If you think an 10 year old will be bothered about some rules changing then you will be wrong too.

 

[Greavsie]

This. If you think an 10 year old will be bothered about some rules changing then you will be wrong too.

Mate, footy changed to 7 a side at U10s 15 years ago and IMHO its a much better spectacle.

I watched an U11 game at Hastings Hill last night and it was crap. No time on the ball and kick and rush. Believe U11 is going to 9 as side soon anyway.

 

[Sweeper]

Not sure what the whole issue of 8 a side cricket is .

It ensures that everyone plays a decent part in the game and surely at U11 that is important.

For example, I played U11 as a 9 year old (Year 4). Had we not played pairs cricket, I would rarely have batted or bowled. I may have lost interest and stopped playing. Instead, I stuck with it, played U11,13,15,18 3rds and 2nds for the same club before moving on in early 20s.

I get the advantages of playing 11 a'side (especially the value that you have to pace on your wicket) but surely we need to think of the development of the cohort of kids at your club and not just the 3 or 4 outstanding ones who will do most of the batting and bowling.

Sorry if I sound like a communist

11-a-side cricket at u11 is set up so that everyone is involved - batsmen have to retire at 20 (and the most able players get these quite sharpish) so teams generally use AT LEAST 8-9 batsmen in an innings. Similarly, a team must use at least 8 bowlers (4 can bowl 3 overs each, then a maximum of 2 per bowler). In reality, most clubs (including ours) have a wicket keeper and then the other 10 players bowl 2 overs each.

The huge difference is that pairs cricket is so detached from 11-a-side that it's practically a different game. The 11-a-side version gets kids used to bowling and fielding a proper cricket ball; and batsmen sharp learn how to value their wicket. In pairs if a batsmen has a swipe and is bowled, their team loses a few runs but they then just pick their stumps up and continue batting.

For those sides that have been playing proper u11 cricket for a number of years now; this is a massive step backwards.

 

[Greavsie]

I hadnt realised those safe guards were in place mate. They certainly were not a few years ago.

In that case i can see your point in a lot of ways. What are other counties policies? Is there a national directive?

 

[The Colonel]

The issue of teams going from playing the longer form of the game at U11 level to pairs cricket was always going to be an issue however as the way the DSL went on it would be fool hardy for clubs to ditch the new setup and play "friendlies".

You will wither on the vine and would be excluded from the mainstream competitions including selection for DCB teams as quite simply you wouldnt be part of the set up.

Cheerio to you clubs who do that - its been nice knowing you.

The draw back of playing the longer form of the game at U11 level is that if you have 3 or 4 strong players, they invariably open the bat week after week, make 20 and the rest hardly bat.

I heard about the 8 a side proposal during the week and going from 10 a side pairs cricket to 8 a side is a definite step forward for those who already play pairs cricket as kids would now bat more and bowl more eg batti8ng 5 overs per pair rather than 4.

As far as I'm aware there is only the former Coast league who do not play pairs cricket at U11 level, the rest did, so 8 a side rather than 10 a side can be seen as a compromise.

My lad would play in the Central League but the problem with this is that he would now only get to play 10 games a season which is a paltry number and I would need to talk to his club to find out what extra they are going to do for him ie Under 13 cricket or turn a blind eye to him playing for another club in another league until he gets to U13 level.

for those who do not play pairs cricket; what happens (I'll use the 8 a side example) is that you name 8 players and you bat them in 4 pairs. So 2 lads open the bat and irrespective of whether they are out or not they see out their 5 overs. However if they are out the team loses 8 runs as a penalty (they may change this penalty to say 5 runs under the new setup, I guess thats in the fine detail).

Basically:

Team A, bats 20 overs - makes 80 runs but in doing so loses 10 wickets, penalty runs 80. Net score = zero. Experience shows that if you get a net score of say 60 plus then it is very hard to beat.

A "proper" cricket ball is played with at U11 pairs cricket already and I'm not sure where a view that any other sort of ball is used comes from.

I hadnt realised those safe guards were in place mate. They certainly were not a few years ago.

In that case i can see your point in a lot of ways. What are other counties policies? Is there a national directive?

The ECB encourages leagues to play pairs cricket at U11 level or so I am told. I doubt that the DCB will change that thinking here in the County.

The Central League looks very strong with Durham City, CLS, Washington and Brandon all playing at a reasonable standard. Someone is going to get edged out of the County Cup and wont be happy. It definitely ups the ante.

another thought I had is what happens if say Brandon field 2 teams. Do they play in the same league and if so how do they square that one?

Mate, footy changed to 7 a side at U10s 15 years ago and IMHO its a much better spectacle.

I watched an U11 game at Hastings Hill last night and it was crap. No time on the ball and kick and rush. Believe U11 is going to 9 as side soon anyway.

The problem at U11 level playing 10 per side is that:

1. teams complain that they cant get 10 players and it gives them a reason not to play fixtures, and
2. it lowers the quality

8 a side would mean a much higher standard of game and no real chance of using the "cant get a team" excuse as a reason for not fulfilling fixtures.

Not sure what the whole issue of 8 a side cricket is .

It ensures that everyone plays a decent part in the game and surely at U11 that is important.

For example, I played U11 as a 9 year old (Year 4). Had we not played pairs cricket, I would rarely have batted or bowled. I may have lost interest and stopped playing. Instead, I stuck with it, played U11,13,15,18 3rds and 2nds for the same club before moving on in early 20s.

I get the advantages of playing 11 a'side (especially the value that you have to pace on your wicket) but surely we need to think of the development of the cohort of kids at your club and not just the 3 or 4 outstanding ones who will do most of the batting and bowling.

Sorry if I sound like a communist

Spot on post. This is the reality of the situation.

Couldn't agree more, and I'm realLy suprised that the powers that be cannot see this.

We are holding a coaches meeting at our club soon to discuss new format generally and I'd imagine u11 8-a-side pairs will be the main talking point. No decisions taken yet but it may be that we consider ourselves best served by pulling out of that league and arranging 11-a-side friendly games. The kids will get a lot more out of that.

They do see it but they were never going to ditch pairs cricket across the County. For the better players the longer form of the game is the way forward as I found out last season when my lad played for the DSL.

However for the players "who develop later" then the longer form of the game does nothing for them as they inevitably are out early having faced about 4 balls and thats it.

For the longer term good of youth cricket its probably pretty essential that they try and keep the interest of the players "who develop later" shall we say.

Pairs cricket was never going to be popular to those who didnt play it. I pointed that out to the club my lad plays for so they know what the likely reaction is.

However to re-iterate this, if the DCB sanction pairs cricket at U11 level then you either go with it or tell your lads that they are no longer eligible for selection for DCB teams. Tell them that your club has taken its bat home and have just chopped its nose off to spite its face.

they should be ok with that.

 

[mickonline]

Sorry, totally agree with Greavsie here.

The whole reason for pairs cricket is so every kid gets a game, and plays an important part of that game. Yes the better players come into the game last couple of pairs to score the runs (watched my son score 52 from his four overs, with an out) but with good coaching the later developers are taught the value of their wicket (-8 runs)and start to develop the odd shot to score a couple of runs, likewise with bowling.

I know the argument that everybody gets to play in a 11 per side game but in reality that rarely happens. I've watched games where the top three, after being taught "the value of their wicket", block the shit out of the ball for twenty overs terrified to get out because the pressure is on them to score the runs. I've lost count of the amount of games I've watched where a team only scores 50-60 runs from 20 overs.

With good coaching pairs cricket is a good foundation for 11 per side, again I've watched my son a few times at under 15 level bat at three after the players who are taught "the value of their wickets" have batted 15 overs for their 50, which are good scores, but he would come in with his pairs cricket experience and score 50 from 5 overs, top averaging in the league and still valuing his wicket!!!

The better players will be developed into the under 13's anyway and the elite will be picked for representative cricket, but pairs keeps the late developers involved (there are always late developing gems). Its fantastic to watch when a kid you expect to score minus runs manages to score a couple without being out, or the poor bowler who manages to take a couple of wickets, its as important as the good kid who scores 50. Kids have plenty of years to play serious cricket, just let them enjoy the game while they are kids.

 

[The Colonel]

Sorry, totally agree with Greavsie here.

The whole reason for pairs cricket is so every kid gets a game, and plays an important part of that game. Yes the better players come into the game last couple of pairs to score the runs (watched my son score 52 from his four overs, with an out) but with good coaching the later developers are taught the value of their wicket (-8 runs)and start to develop the odd shot to score a couple of runs, likewise with bowling.

I know the argument that everybody gets to play in a 11 per side game but in reality that rarely happens. I've watched games where the top three, after being taught "the value of their wicket", block the shit out of the ball for twenty overs terrified to get out because the pressure is on them to score the runs. I've lost count of the amount of games I've watched where a team only scores 50-60 runs from 20 overs.

With good coaching pairs cricket is a good foundation for 11 per side, again I've watched my son a few times at under 15 level bat at three after the players who are taught "the value of their wickets" have batted 15 overs for their 50, which are good scores, but he would come in with his pairs cricket experience and score 50 from 5 overs, top averaging in the league and still valuing his wicket!!!

The better players will be developed into the under 13's anyway and the elite will be picked for representative cricket, but pairs keeps the late developers involved (there are always late developing gems). Its fantastic to watch when a kid you expect to score minus runs manages to score a couple without being out, or the poor bowler who manages to take a couple of wickets, its as important as the good kid who scores 50. Kids have plenty of years to play serious cricket, just let them enjoy the game while they are kids.

Wow. Your son is Ricky Ponting.

Agree with your post though.

 

[mickonline]

You will probably know him!!!

Which club is yours?

That central league looks the pick of the bunch:
C.L.S.
Hetton Lyons
Durham City
Brandon
Washington
Sunderland
All capable of winning there!!

 

[The Colonel]

You will probably know him!!!

Which club is yours?

That central league looks the pick of the bunch:
C.L.S.
Hetton Lyons
Durham City
Brandon
Washington
Sunderland
All capable of winning there!!

My lad plays for CLS and will be in his last year next year. Which club does your lad play for and at what level?

Yes, already e-mailed someone about those 6 clubs all of which would have chance of winning it. However Durham City are still very strong and would start favourites.

One of their lads, now moved up, scored 50 odd last year v Boldon.

 

[mickonline]

C.L.S.!!!!!!!

Last year of under 18's

Would you care to guess?

Lets have a think!!

CP
RH
JH
BE
JB

All in their last year!

 

[The Colonel]

C.L.S.!!!!!!!

Last year of under 18's

Would you care to guess?

Lets have a think!!

CP
RH
JH
BE
JB

All in their last year!

Connor, Rhys, Jack, Brett & Jonathan - I'll not put their surnames. I probably know you if you tell me which one is your son.

My son opens the bat for the Under 11's and plays for the County. HD.

 

[mickonline]

Got you!

Mine bowls a bit as well. Big and nasty!!

 

[eddyfinn]

Mate, footy changed to 7 a side at U10s 15 years ago and IMHO its a much better spectacle.

I watched an U11 game at Hastings Hill last night and it was crap. No time on the ball and kick and rush. Believe U11 is going to 9 as side soon anyway.

Completely agree with you mate

 

[brandon]

Proper shit draw for Brandon. Going to be a nightmare for parents to get their kids across the NE to play away at places like Houghton, Sunderland, Washington, etc. I mean fuck me, who thinks of this shit?? The South West division is basically the County League lineup, which they've been in for the last 20 odd year.

 

[The Voice Of Reason]

Proper shit draw for Brandon. Going to be a nightmare for parents to get their kids across the NE to play away at places like Houghton, Sunderland, Washington, etc. I mean fuck me, who thinks of this shit?? The South West division is basically the County League lineup, which they've been in for the last 20 odd year.

Agree

Can't see Houghton having a team