<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>  
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 8:46 AM 

Yes Stu, but that is what i have been saying for a while.

The financial success of t20 is threatening the very existence of county cricket

if my employer offered me 1.8 million to change my working practices i would not need asking twice.

Like you, i fear that county cricket as we know it will soon become akin to village cricket with players aspiring to get into the t20 sides.

There is only one way to stop that and that is to make county cricket more attractive, which would mean a major overhaul.

I would suggest each innings restriced to 96 overs, with the fielding team having extra overs if they bowled out the opposition before 96 overs.

Bad light (unless dangerous) to be a thing of the past.

shaking hands at 4.50 to be a thing of the past.

every county team to be involved in matches of some description on saturday sunday and bank holidays.

severe run penalties for teams failing to maintain 16 overs an hour.

second innings number of overs allowed to be recalculated in case of weather interruptions.


    
This message has been edited by Blackpooltyke on Sep 9, 2016 8:53 AM


 
 
Ball-Sup (Phil)
(Login ball_sup)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 9:12 AM 

Peter Blackpooltyke

May I ask a question about your suggestions?

If YCCC made 300 in their 96 overs on Day 1.
And the other team made 300 in their 96 overs on Day 2.
And YCCC made 300 in their 96 overs on Day 3.
Leaving the other team to make 301 to win in their 96 overs on Day 4.

What is the result if they make 290-1? Have they drawn or lost?


 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 9:27 AM 

match drawn.

its not limited overs, there would be no fielding restrictions, however wides would have to be stricter than they are now, but not as strict as t20 is. This would be to stop total negative bowling as we encountered against notts earlier this season

 
 
Tyke1950
(Login Tyke1950)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 9:41 AM 

....not just wides. Fielding restrictions would need to be imposed.
It's going to get awfully like the limited over arrangements.

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 9:52 AM 

no. absolutely no fielding restrictions and no limit on number of overs each bowler can bowl.

it is in the interest of fielding sides to bowl out the opposition as they would then have more overs to bat themselves.

The third innings can be declared if the batting team wanted more overs than 96 to bowl out the opposition.

for example

team a scores 350 in first innings in 96 overs
team b scores 280 in 80 overs
team a can now bat for 114 overs, leaving 96 overs to bowl out team b
they score 350 in 96 overs then declare, thus giving team b 114 overs to score 421 to win.

This would make all games much more competitive and attractive to watch without becoming a one day 50 over a side slog.

Its not perfect, but we need to do something to make county cricket self sufficient, if we do not achieve that then it will always be at the beck and call of more financially successful cricket.

Once county cricket becomes profitable, they can stick 2 fingers up to the ecb and its t20 franchises.

 
 
Ball-Sup (Phil)
(Login ball_sup)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 11:06 AM 

Peter Blackpooltyke

And...

If YCCC make 300 in their 96 on Day 1.
The other team make 300 in their 96 on Day 2.
And YCCC make 300 in their 96 on Day 3.
Leaving the other team to make 301 to win in their 96 on Day 4.

But, it's raining in the morning. They finally get on after scheduled Tea. 32 overs left. Do the other team still have to make the full 301 to win? Or do they get a reduced target?

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 11:25 AM 

no, its not limited overs. match will be drawn.

The only difference is that each team will be restricted to 96 overs batting in each innings, unless you have bowled the other side out in the previous innings in less than 96 overs in which case you can also take their overs.

Only other rule change would be in calling wides for negative bowling.

this would make bore draws such as the current hants game a thing of the past.


    
This message has been edited by Blackpooltyke on Sep 9, 2016 11:56 AM


 
 
Ball-Sup (Phil)
(Login ball_sup)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 11:34 AM 

Peter Blackpooltyke

Cheers. So the thing I don't understand from the original post with your suggestions is the final bit about recalculating overs in the second innings in the event of weather interruptions.

Can you help me out with an example of what that is about?

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 12:14 PM 

ok, team a scores 280 all out in 80 overs
team b scores 380 in 112 overs
start of day 3 it rains and 30 overs are lost. remaining overs in the match then are therefore 96x2-30 = 162.

therefore both second innings will be restricted to 81 overs each.

team a then scores 280-6 in 81 overs leaving team b to score 181 in 81 overs to win

if more rain arrives and they end up 160-2 with the match abandoned its a drawn game.

this may need tweaking as i am thinking it out as i go....a bit like jamming happy.gif

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 12:27 PM 

Ok Team A - 220ao in 80 overs. Team B 430ao in 112 overs. Team A - 320-3 in 96 overs. Are we really saying Team B now require 111 in 96 overs?!

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 2:52 PM 

yes, by virtue of their 210 run lead in the first innings.


 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 3:01 PM 

Ok, i don't think this has any legs.

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 4:31 PM 

oh right then let team a bat on to 550-7 and shake hands at 4.50, sure that will bring in the crowds.

Dwight, my idea may need working on, but even as it stands it is sure as hell better than what we do now.

maybe allow team a in third innings same number of overs that team b took in their first innings.


    
This message has been edited by Blackpooltyke on Sep 9, 2016 4:34 PM


 
 
Ball-Sup (Phil)
(Login ball_sup)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 5:00 PM 

Peter Blackpooltyke

Please take this one in the spirit of discussion. Rather than shooting you down in flames. As you say, your ideas may need work & tweaking.

But, I'm struck by...while 550-7 & a handshake may not bring in the crowds, I'm not sure chasing 111 in 96 overs will either.

And ... to you Dwight, (turn it 180) why have team A only made 320-3 - that's ridiculous cricket, they know that'll leave team B an easy target. They should have cracked on a lot more in Day 3.

Peter can speak for himself. But, that's sort of his point. Put extra checks n balances in so that the team batting third know how many overs the team batting fourth will have. They have to structure their innings accordingly.

(My knee jerk is I'm against this 4x96 overs formulation btw)

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 5:12 PM 

They were 50-3 after 25 overs, didn't want to risk being bowled out on Day 3. So dug in with the hope of weather intervening on the last day!

I can't see how this would attract new fans, more chance of putting off existing ones.

Fans are barely turning upto 50 over games, so 96 x 4 won't excite many.


 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 5:36 PM 

well then perhaps the tweak is to allow team a 112 overs, the same number that team b had in their first innings, that way they have the time to match team b's first innings score, allowing team b to score more than team a's first innings score in the same number of overs.

I'm not saying its perfect but some form of limited overs, even if its only in the first innings is needed in order to alleviate the 500 plays 500 bore draws.

How else can county cricket attract spectators and thus finance?

In the days before limited overs cricket, first class cricket was much better supported.

Can anybody think of any other ways that county cricket can get the bums back on the seats?

 
 
Guest
(Login WhiteroseDave)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 7:01 PM 

On the topic of proposals for the new T20, George Dobell has written (another) excellent article which I think sums up a lot of our thoughts and fears on the matterhttp://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2016/content/story/1056059.html

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 9 2016, 7:18 PM 

One day, and it may not be a distant day, the spectators will tire of the £6 pints, the soggy chips, the slack over rates that short-change them of their £90 Test tickets and spend their money elsewhere. The ECB disrespects them at its peril.

indeed!

 
 
Guest
(Login sooty-yorkie1)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 10 2016, 7:09 AM 


Can anybody think of any other ways that county cricket can get the bums back on the seats?


I'm not sure there is, the counties and the ecb, i would say, clearly think the same hence the rush for 20/20. I bet the thinking is that the 4 day game is pretty much at its maximum attendance and that there isn't really any room to grow. Whereas 20/20 can appeal to many more people who don't really really watch cricket or quite possibly have never watched cricket ever.

There could be something in targeting the newly retired, of which there are many. However i think people tend to be creatures of habit, I'm not sure there would be many new comers to the game at 60+.

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: new t20 proposals

September 10 2016, 7:40 AM 

The ECB and the counties could start believing in it for one thing. Part of the TV deal should be a ten minute round-up of the county scene during lunch or tea, keeping people updated with scores, tables, etc. as if someone watching cricket might naturally be interested.

At county level, there are posters up outside Headingley promoting internationals and t20, and we got the ridiculous 'It's not just the cricket' email recently. Will there be anything up - or in the local press - suggesting that it might be worth going to see the last home game with the Championship in the balance?

 
 
 
< Previous Page 12 3 4 5 6 Next >
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>  
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
All IP addresses are recorded. We reserve the right to remove personal attacks, sexist, racist, homophobic, defamatory or abusive comments, comments likely to incite religious hatred, those disposed to wind others up, and unapproved advertising.

Email us: Whiterosecricket@hotmail.co.uk