You can't make us select only ONE of those options - i'd happily select at least three of those!
I do think that the two divisions has been a very positive step - producing much more exciting and meaningful cricket and removing some of the dreadful bores we used to experience. I'd go further and increase the prize money for individual games to encourage more captains to seek ways of producing definite results. Yorkshire seem to have a real policy of not contriving results - we never set aggressive targets or collaborate on creating artificial run chases - I think perhaps a more imaginative captain should be more flexible - look at Irani at Essex or Adams (Spit!) at Sussex.

1) Return to 3 day format but with a 4th 'reserve day' only to make up for time lost by rain/bad light, if this has exceeded say 3 hours during the first 3 days.

2) Stop knocking off overs for a change of innings - this should already have been allowed for in the 104 overs.

3) Stop ending play for the day if a wicket falls in the last over - why shouldn't the over be completed?

4) Bonus points only for the first 90 overs of the 1st innings' to hopefully speed up the game.

5) Change admission mode from daily admission to a 'match ticket', so non-members can come and go as they wish. I would have travelled to away games if this had been the case, but can't afford £15 admission every day. And what non-members will pay this if the weather forecast is poor? Also introduce a family match ticket which should increase long term support and club shop sales etc.

6) Put some cricket trivia questions on the electronic screen during the lunch and tea intervals.

Alas the Network54 "votelet" system only allows for one choice in its online polling system. I'm afraid we are constrained by the technology.

Cheers,

Robert

Good god Steve I actually agree with you on something. Times sure are a changing?

But I must pull you up on the point of Imaginative declaration. We did against Notts last season at Headingley and it worked didn't we? Not sure of the figure but I’m sure someone will put mee right.

And please don't make me look at Irani the though of that just made me bring my dinner back up. As for Adams well he’s got one of the best teams in the country so he can afford a little flexiblilty were as perhaps we can’t?

I'd firstly have championship matches beginning on a friday, thus guaranteeing some cricket to watch over the weekend. I'd make the current pro 40 a 50 over per side competition to take place on tuesday and/or wednesday evenings.
I'd also abolish central contracts but give the England coach licence to pull any player out of any match if he thought it of benefit to the national side, payment for actually playing for England would rise as would payment to any county who had a player missing because of an England call.
I'd also push Sky to cover one match per round of matches instead of the current two per season, with channels galore and slots to fill I'm amazed it is not currently happening.
At times (high summer, long nights) we could look at starting games later in order to attract any one who wants to watch after work and I could see some very good friday attendances with people taking the odd half day to watch the first day of a county match. Letting schoolkids in for fee or very reduced rates after school time would also be good. Free earlier if they have a valid reason for missing school and missing school to watch Yorkshire play cricket sounds valid enough to me!

Random jottings;

Return some cricket to the outgrounds - always got decent crowds at Abbbydale and Acklam Park. Even better crowds at st Georges Rd Harrogate. We at YCCC, not West Yorks CC, not Leeds CC!!

Match ticket not day ticket - other counties do this and it works.

Family tickets - they also work

Offer a better experience - attending Headingley can be depressing. Have some sponsered freebies (American baseball teams are always doing this sort of thing). Invite some past players to be in the east stand at lunch - anything to add some value. Make the experience a bit more enjoyable.

Better catering - food for non members is embrassing. Food for members is limited and very traditional.

Issue a 'rain check' if the weather spoils the day. You live in Doncaster, fancy a day at Headingley, the weather is a bit 'iffy', you ain't going to go, are you?!! - free admission to a future match.

Start games on a Friday - guarenteed w/end cricket and league players / watchers / umpires can start the w/end early.

Get the England players more involved - excellent crowds for Hampshire match at Leeds last year to see Vaughan and Warne.

Have a more co-ordiated fixture list - even the most committed fan gets lost with the every changing start days for games.

Until the issue of contracted players is sorted (England's top stars don't play for their counties anymore), county cricket will continue to decline.

What other sport denies their rank-and-file fans the opportunity to see their best players turn out for their own teams? This is absolutely the "best" way to kill cricket at the grass roots.

I favour a minimum obligation of 4-6 matches per season for contracted players. In fact, I see no demonstrable benefits from contracting players, and I'd like to see CC's scrapped altogether.

And lets face it, aside from one moment of brilliance against the Aussies in 2006, England still field a very average cricket team.

....and too complex a subject to have as a poll restricted to one choice because of the software.

Oddly enough I was thinking of starting a thread along similar lines, so the posts of the last few days must have posted similar sublimable messages in our minds. My focus though was in telling the Yorkshire Cricket Management how we would like them to represent us in future discussings with the ECB on the future of English cricket.

I will read all these posts with interest but I would like to think hard before I venture any suggestions!

Sorry lads but Central Contracts are here to stay. Hopefully the next England coach will understand that some players need to play to keep in touch which may result in England players having more games.

As I've said elsewhere we need a better structure to the season. I have enough problems knowing where & when Yorks have a game & I try to structure my life round cricket. Most 4 day games are Wednesday starts, which often result in blank Saturdays. I for one are totally fed up of finding things to do in Scarborough because a game has finished. If one walks round the resort on these days it's full of bored looking menof a certain age.

BUT championship games also start on Sunday (Lancs away), Tuesday (Worcs away ... booo I enjoy weekends in Worcs), Thursday (Lancs home) & Friday. How on earth is a casual cricket watcher supposed to beable to keep up.

Even people in the Headingley area will be confused. Last season Yorks had a big banner for the August fixtures on the Winter shed. Great you may say, but the sign was still there when we played Durham in September !!

It used to be so much simpler when we had a full three day county championship and the old Sunday League. I suspect that the powers that be don't understand that most of us need to have some sort of order in the fixture list - we all have enough complexities in other things in our lives. The comfort of knowing that if a Test is coming up, it will start on a Thursday is a very important thing - it may sound ludicrous, but it's not.

The 2007 Headingley test vs West Indies starts on Friday 25th May

When cricket was cricket and God was in his Heaven, tests always started on a Thursday. You could plan your holidays and movements without having a list of fixtures in front of you, but no longer.

A passing thought:

Profits, like sausages... are esteemed most by those who know least about
what goes into them. -Alvin Toffler, futurist and author (1928- )

which is probably why the ECB is making money and b------g about with Thursday starts!

The Champion County may not necessarily be won by the most deserving side because of the vagaries of the weather, the central contracts theft etc.

If the runners-up are within ten points (the value of a win over a draw), then the Championship to be decided by a play-off over five days (to give best chance of a result) at home to the leaders. That should pull in crowds as it's essentially a cup final. Should the margin be more than ten points then the match is either not played or becomes a four-day Champion County v the Rest as we used to have, but played seriously and giving the fans an extra chance to pay homage to the winners.

I think this concept or similar was quite successful in Australia in the Sheffield Shield/Pura Cup, but I'm not sure how they handle it now. It does make second place a much bigger deal than just money. I expect the fixture list is a bit congested for this, or o/seas tours start too quickly or it's a daft idea anyway, or what do you expect from the Philippines?

There are some great ideas here. Alas, I think the CC is headed for oblivion. One thing is a certain, it won't be revitalized until Central Contracts are scrapped and the cricket authorities stop trying to tacitly scrap it.

Most of the top players no longer want to bother with the CC (note matt Boggard's comments) and would just as soon play test cricket and the odd OD.

Provided he stays healthy, Gough would certainly improve Yorkshire's championship attendance - not to mention our performance (on and off the dance floor)

What did Hoggard actually say?

I'm genuinely interested as I don't know.

Thanks in advance.

I was disappointed to read this on the Forum, and Id like to see the original words.

An interesting abstract on the economics of county cricket


Attendance at County Cricket: An Economic Analysis

David Paton & Andrew Cooke

Journal of Sports Economics, Vol. 6, No. 1, 24-45 (2005)

In this article, we use attendance data from the two main domestic cricket leagues in England and Wales to estimate the impact of a series of recent structural changes. We find that changes to the organization of cricket in England have had major impacts on attendance. Attendance is significantly higher when an international match is not scheduled at the same time, when the game is played in the evening under floodlights, and when the game is played at a "minor" or festival ground. Festival matches are estimated to increase average attendance at County Championship matches by over 1,400 and at National League matches by nearly 400. This finding provides strong evidence in support for of a move toward greater use of festival grounds around the counties. We also find evidence that the presence of players centrally contracted to the national side significantly boosts attendance, particularly at one-day games.


For a PDF version of the study:

http://jse.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/6/1/24

Good stuff, Statman, I devoured it eagerly, every word. I agree with most of it but if I were forced to voice a contrary opinion it would be:

As an empirical multivariate study relying on a hedonic/product characteristics equation related to the short-run uncertainty of outcome variable, they do manage to produce an insignificant coefficient in the Hausman test, which is really interesting when you consider the lagged dependent variable. A priori, I do relate to the serial correlations using the LM5 test certificate in tandem with the Prais-Winston estimation procedure, despite the heteroscedasticity and contemporaneous correlation which does upset the random effects Tobit specification.

I faced a similar problem when I analysed three cases of drivers who had failed breathalyser tests. They had been drinking respectively, rum and coke, vodka and coke and brandy and coke. My statistical analysis of the cause of their drunkenness failed to get them acquitted (purely through the magistrate’s ignorance) but you can’t win them all.

Now that most of the dramas of the last half-year are behind us, all we can do is take the field and start to win. There'll certainly be a lot of interest in this new-look Yorkshire side - people will come for support, curiosity, or even to be able to tell their neighbours "I told you so!".

The thing that I am disappointed with is that the chances for our youngsters, so obviously available three months ago, seem to be evaporating. I hope Gough and the new Coach put the highest priority on the youngsters. They'll say they will, but they have to walk the walk not just talk the talk.

As a pensioner, I know I would attend more matches if they were more reasonable on the ticket prices. I might even take my wife - I might!

The question is it worth saving? Couldn't the counties put their energies into a format that would be more cost effective and would allow the top players to participate in? Maybe its time to consider dropping some of the economically insolvent counties or combing some counties. Obviously the current system isn't working.

I think limiting the first innings to a set number of overs has some merit. Surely, there should be an overs limit of somne sort. I like 120-125 overs. That allows teams to build an innings, eran bonus points but not kill the match as a competitive entity. Runs, wickets, and overs - thats what it should all be about. It would certainly be more fan friendly.

....and that was with three day matches where there would have been more point.
In another post I've stated my indifference to artificial ways to spice up the game. Perhaps we should penalise flat tracks in the same way that we penalise wickets that are under-prepared, in fact penalise them more as they prevent a proper game being played.

I'd still suggest that it's down to the Captains and players to aggressively attack the opposition - they've got four days to get the result they want and they must go for it. Forcing a result through artificial rules has to be a condemnation of the players, their quality and attitude.

AS a younger member, I like the idea of restricting the overs for each first innings. Too many matches are de facto draws after the first two days when teams put up huge totals. And why shouldn't the number of overs be limited, after all its a game of wickets, runs, and time (overs)? Surely, 120-125 overs would be reasonable. That way a team could still get a substantial total, while still keeping it a contest. Besides, both teams would be playing by the same rules, so there would be no advantage to either side.

The England "stars" need to play more championship cricket. Since contracts came into being, the championship has been diminished. In the long run that will prove to be disasterous. Contracted players should be expected to play at least 1/3 of the county games, say 5 or 6 a season.

I see Sir Geoff opts for a three day championship. Who better to judge?

Perhaps you should send the results of this poll off to the ECB, Robert. The posters at the White Rose are very knowledgeable and our opinions might be worth considering.

Ian

Bring back the stars...Limit the first innings to 125 overs...start matches on Thursdays or Fridays...Let kids under 16 and seniors in at a big discount...It's not rocket science!

The more I thinka bout and with the comments poster here, the more I'm convinced that a reasonable first innings overs limit (120?) is the way to go. It would force the teams to get on with it, and would likly lead to fewer draws.

And why shouldn't cricket be time sensitive? Almost all other sports are.

1. Two Divisions as now.

2. Top Division initially (from 2008) plays all matches from 13.30 to 21.30 with floodlights. ECB finances floodlights initially where necessary paid back over 4/5 years. First two sessions 2 1/2 hours, last session 2 hours. 1 hour lunch, 30 minutes tea. Rain interruptions taken off lunch, tea, added half hour at end etc. Perhaps last session with white ball.

3. Second Division same from 2009.

4. Three day matches mid-week, except for final two matches which cover weekends and hours could be changed. Weekends for one-dayers, plus attractions to make family day out (nurseries/supervised play areas at £2 an hour, stalls, bingo whatever!).

5. 100 overs maximum first innings 4 batting, 4 bowling points, or if we stay with 4-day matches then 125 overs.

6. 3 points for first innings lead in drawn game, 2 points for drawn game, 12 points for win.

7. Penalties for bad and 'too good' wickets.

8. If less than 12 points separates 1st and 2nd then one final match, but only if there are two sides in this final equation.

9. Some seats with desks so scholars can do homework - don't laugh I played chess for Leicestershire and had to do my homework at the same time! (I won lots of games against non-plussed 30-50 year-olds.)

We need to play cricket when today's people can watch, but we need to keep the essence of cricket. It is fundamentally wrong to support cricket by subsidising it from other sources - that is icing on the cake, so if we are selling bread lets make that bread available and high-value.

Enough for now, hope you enjoyed that!

This may have been discussed already, but I'm of the opinion that the points system in the county championship needs revamping. There is currently too much emphais on draws, and too many points awarded for mediocre performances.

I'd go back to the 4 batting & 4 bowling points rather than 5 batting & 3 bowling. The 5 points for batting encourage teams to provide 'feather beds' which result in 'high scoring draws' rather than getting results.

Anyone who think that s high scoring draw should go the the Old Trafford Roses game. I saw the whole game in 2005 A batsman could stay in all day provided they didn't mind scoring at about 2.5 runs an over. Craig White filled his boots. I didn't go in 2006, but mates said it was a repeat of the 2005 game .... guess who got another Roses ton!

I wonder if Mr. Engel (the Editor of Wisden) reads this forum. It seems we've anticipated many of his comments re. scheduling.

The bane of county cricket is the drawn match. With a third of the games ending in "no deciosn" I'd like to see a system in place to encouarge more positive results. Certainly a reasonable limit on fisrt innings would be in order, but what about an overal limit. Why should teams be able to bat on infinitum.

What about an overall limit of 175 overs per team for theoe two innings combined? It would certainly add more strategy and more urgency in the batting.

Interesting results. It seems the ECB are doing just about everything wrong.

Shane Warne's take on improving the county competitions Click for story

Thanks Alex. There isn't anything particularly innovative there, but it's well-reasoned common sense and a pleasure to read coming from Warne.

Good discussion, gentlemen and ladies. So, who is going to send this thread off to the ECB?