I think there is a general consensus that there is not enough positive cricket and too many bore draws in the County Championship these days. Obviously, the mind-numbing debacle that occurred yesterday when Yorkshire chose to bat the match into oblivion rather than even consider going for a result is bad for the 4-day game, and only serves to drive the paying customer away.
What can the ECB do to encourage more positive cricket? Does the points system need to be revamped? Should teams be fined (points) for the sorts of events that transpired yesterday? Does the demotion system encourage conservative tactics?
Your ideas, please. (We'll send along your comments to the club and to the ECB.)
1. instant relegation for sides refusing to enter into the spirit of playing entertaining cricket for the benefit of the paying spectator.
2. instant dismissal of any captain unable to agree on a contrived declaration unless resolved by referral to ACAS prior to the start of 4th days play
3. transfer of any captain to Surrey or Middlesex for next season for failing to show proactive approach
4. making them be forced to play a 5th and 6th days play if necessary thereby jeapordising the players free time with families, on the golf course or at their benefit matches at local club sides
5. in the event of a draw at the end of the 4th days play, captains forced to take part in a winner takes all 'old fashioned duel' where they start in the middle of the pitch and walk towards the set of stumps at either end of the pitch and then grab the middle stump with the Sky camera in it and turn and throw it at the opposition captain. Hawkeye, slow-mo and a vote amongst the Sky commentary team to determine the outcome if necessary.
As described on another thread, I would like to see compulsory declarations on day 4 when the the bowling side reach the point of needing 6 an over to win.
Bonus points only apply to a rain-affected match, otherwise it's 22 points for a win and NOTHING for a draw.
Slash the weekly wage and introduce a bonus system based on wins only. No bonuses for draws, but £1000 a man bonus for any game actually won.
I think we might see a more positive approach from all members of the team...
More seriously, first innings bonus points only count for the first 100 overs - far too many teams bat on for too long in the first innings accumulation of bonus points to the detriment of the game.
Also, no points for the draw to the team that won the toss - the onus should be on the team that won the toss to make every effort to win the game. The team that loses the toss can have points for the draw because they earn some credit from avoiding defeat...
No bonus points at all and nothing for a draw or loss. 4 points each if rain takes any part out of the match. An alternative is a reserve day or extra hours played on subsequent days. This would encourage teams to declare behind on first innings, forfeit innings and actually play to win. If we had one division of 18 teams with no promotion and relegation, the rules could remain the same as sides would not be worried about losing.
Steve, I think your suggestion would have made sense in the days when pitches crumbled. But, generally now, due to the various loams used and other technicalities I don't pretend to understand, pitches usually get easier by the third and fourth days.
This was supposed to produce more skilful bowlers for test teams ("outside edge" cricket etc.), but in fact it seems to have produced a situation where bat dominates ball and bore draws ensue. This season's championship has been mostly pretty dull, because Durham have tended to win, Worcestershire have tended to lose and almost all the other teams have tended to draw (at least against each other). Championship cricket has barely been worth watching at Edgbaston or (with the exception of one notorious match) at Taunton.
The effect at Test match level would seem to be that, while we may have enough good bowlers to win the Ashes, we probably won't produce enough good batsmen to defend them.
I'd do something to try & improve the pitches we are getting. As has been said it gets easier to stay in as the game goes on ... BUT apart from Scarborough the bounce/pace has been such that its difficult to force the pace.
I don't want points for a first innings lead as it would just enourage teams to bat on & on & on
The problem about improving pitches is that this is what the authorities think they are doing. Having grasped the elementary notion that a "good" pitch enables a batsman to play his shots with confidence and hence produces attractive strokeplay, they've gone on to draw the erroneous conclusion that a pitch which is perfect for batting for the whole four days is the best route to attractive cricket of a high standard. Unfortunately, it isn't.
One of the ideas behind this was that average county trundlers wouldn't take wickets on good pitches and would therefore retire and make way for better young bowlers, who would lift us back up the international rankings. There may be a little bit of merit in this idea, but any change to the balance of the game obviously affects all aspects of it. If batting is made easier, then there will be fewer batsmen who have sound defensive techniques, as this is one of the things you can dispense with on certain featherbed tracks. And, of course, there's no way of knowing how many potentially fine bowlers have chosen to leave the game rather than bowl on wickets that never give them the slightest encouragement. There are certainly a few spinners around the county second XIs and the leagues who could have had decent county careers in the days when a third-day pitch would crumble.
There's something to be said for using the points system to encourage counties to play for a win, but unless the pitches can be made to show what we used to think of as "normal" wear and tear, we could simply end up with the lottery of endless contrived finishes.
I thought one reason for moving from 3 to 4 day cricket some years ago was to avoid the need for contrived finishes and agreed declarations as well as reducing the number of bore-draws as a result.
Is it now time to move from 4 day to 5 day cricket so that the longer format of the game matches the test match arena as we all know the county game is only here to service the test arena.
The problem is of course that games v Worcts would still be over in 2 days and Taunton and Edgbaston would still be a batters paradise.
At least Stu could redo his calcs and see how many days cricket he would get and how many overs per season for his membership fee
The tedium would merely be stretched over five days instead of four!
If anything we should go back to three day cricket - and follow Dews' idea of producing wickets that are much more difficult to play on.
There has to be something wrong with any system that rewards Somerset for producing wickets like the one we see at Taunton.
with respect to stu the less overs the less value for money argument is a bit of a red herring. it would apply if you watched every day played, but if i am average i see 1 or 2 days of a home cc game. about 75% of 1 day games, no 20/20 games and the odd away day. i do not think this would change very much. and the pogramme is always reduced by weather and early finishes.
One way to improve things is to stop b*ggering around with the fixtures. When I started watching cricket there would a game starting roughgly every other Saturday so if a nice day was forecast people would think 'lets go to the cricket' .... now even 'regulars' have problems knowing when games are going to start
As an example ... on Saturday there was a couple next to me in the pub trying to work out why lunch had been taken at 12:30 ... after a few minutes I had to inform them that because it was September the game started at 10:30 rather than 11:00 so everything was 30 minutes earlier.
Interestingley tea was taken as 14:40 on Thursday (rain), 15:35 (slow over rate) on Friday & 15:10 on both Saturday & Sunday.
oh for the days of George Gunn (I think) who on one occasion played out a maiden over before lunch and set off to the pavilion only to be told by the umpire that lunch was not at 1.30 but 2.00pm that day.
On facing his next delivery he raised his bat and let the ball hit the stumps leaving the crease with the comment that 'I take my lunch at 1.30pm and nothing is going to stop me'.
How about two conferences of nine teams each? Each team plays the other once (four home/four away). Top two in each conference play semi-finals and winners go on to a final. Maximum of ten games. All games played midweek in late June,July and August over five days.
Points allocation: 14 for winners; 2 points the draw. Bonus points: 4 for bowling (after 3/5/7/9); 4 for batting (250/300/350/400 up to 100 overs).
40 over competition featuring all counties in a single league. Teams play each other once each on the same day each weekend. Points allocation - 4 for a win; 2 for a no result; 1 bonus point for bowling out the opposition and another for scoring at more than 6.5 runs per over.
20 over competition to be played in May and early June under provisions similar to those proposed by ECB.
September: Two representative five day matches played between the two conferences.
Space in late April/early May for practice matches between teams, to be organised on an ad hoc basis.
Fantasy land, I suppose - but for me, this would suit just fine even though there is less overall cricket to watch.
As far as I'm concerned any less championship cricket is a no no ... & playing everything mid week will just get rid of us few regulars that are under 60