<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Ball_Sup (Phil)
(Login ball_sup)

Re: Alternative T20 Proposal

March 12 2017, 4:40 PM 


Well, let's start with ..... currently, there are only two shows in town. a) the redevelopment of the Headingley Football Stand (in order to win/retain Test matches, World Cup games & ECB T20 Franchise) and b) the future format of ECB T20 Franchise from 2020 (and hence the future of CCR - County Cricket Remnant).

NEITHER of these two Game Changers is covered in the pre-AGM Paperwork. In the sense of there is no hard & fast information, options to consider nor proposals to vote on. Alright our good friend Verbal Update will be present at the meeting. As will his neighbour - how come the tea has gone up by 10p in the Long Room. Your "alternative proposals" etc.... our MEMBERS CLUB just doesn't work like that. It's all just Forum Filler. And, I regret that.

I had shot my mouth off on earlier threads about not taking on more debt to build a stand for two other teams. With bile filled suggestions as to how to organise the awarding of International Cricket, the profits & the funding of necessary ground developments. You (ie Pyrahtechnics) have chosen to have a shot at how to organise the future of County T20. And, good on yer.

My view is anchored in an 18 County Solution. Primarily, because, well, you know, we already have 18 Counties. So, I'm tending not to get sucked into the Money Guarantee world of 8 New Franchises. I'll happily say it - I'll take less money from an 18 County T20 solution & ground developments can go.... for me. So, I have some sympathy with the basics of your alternative proposal. I have some experience of Big Bash. I'm a member of some Australian State Cricket Associations. I'm a lapsed Member at Sydney Thunder T20. And, I've attended games and made prejudiced assessments with my own eyes. There are weather & climate & population issues. There are 6 states to 8 franchises is easier than 18 Counties to 8 franchises issues. But, my overwhelming view is - by luck or good judgement, Cricket Australia have been able to create a "Water Cooler Tournament". At work the next morning - as people are getting a cup of tea, a glass of water & firing up whatever they fire up at work, they are talking about the Big Bash. It's Captured Imagination. It's not high quality in the sense of Big Stars. Aussie Test players rarely feature & some overseas players we would see as ex England County Journeymen. (It is, however, quite high quality in terms of evenly matched teams, providing exciting games).

It's BECOME A THING. And, no amount of ECB Shenanigans will guarantee that (in my opinion). To rival the Big Bash, new ECB Franchise T20 has to become an event.

I'd like to make two points as to why I think Big Bash has become an event.

1. A sensible, most games matter, underkill vs overkill fixture list. ECB T20 Blast - don't you play 14 games per County to get down to the last 8. Absolute Madness. Fodder Cricket. Dead Rubber. Madness. A successful ECB T20, be it revamped 18 County T20 Blast or Shiny New 8 Franchise, will never capture imagination if there are 6 games a night for 3 months. Less IS More.

2. Free to air TV. You can't talk about it at work if you ain't seen it........



(Login dpressed)

Re: Alternative T20 Proposal

March 12 2017, 8:07 PM 

Sorry Phil but the Aussies are adding extra teams to the Big Bash

Geoff B
(Login Coastalview)

Turkeys voting for christmas.

March 12 2017, 9:41 PM 

I know it's not only for the Big Bash, but the taxpayers of Western Australia face a $1.6 billion bill for their shiny new stadium in Perth. Not sure how much that is in real money but it ain't hay!.

I'm sure they had any number of super glossy reports from several fine upstanding consultancy firms, who they paid a great deal of money to no doubt, to explain what a great idea it all was and how it would all pay for itself in the long run.

The ECB have been tinkering with the county T20 format since 2003 and they, and their consultants, won't stop until they have bled it for all it's worth.

There might well be a few more bob to be earned in playing all the matches in a block, in August, hopefully in the fine weather, with some box office names.

Then again you might find a typical family of four, or five, who might have attended 2 or 3 walk-ups on a Friday night over the season, may only attend once, or not at all. They may well have a tight budget over the holiday period.

Even the ECB's figures showed that the T20 blast, Friday night, appointment to view was growing on people. There's loads of reasons why it isn't perfect, but sometimes you have to make the best of what you have.

The Counties, who we are told are the ECB, can stop the madness that is the city based T20, and any further tinkering with the blast.

I don't suppose they will.

(Login sid-don)
Assistant Moderator

Re: Turkeys voting for christmas.

March 12 2017, 10:18 PM 

I won't be at the AGM and if I was I'm not articulate enough for the job, but someone has to challenge the top table about the club seemingly being happy to add its signature to the death warrant to county cricket.

I can almost guarantee more time will be spent on the price of tea in the long room and the state of the ladies loos at Scarborough.

Graves only thinks about money, Strauss only thinks about team England, if we want county cricket to survive we have to start fighting back.

(Login StuartRA)
Assistant Moderator

Re: Turkeys voting for christmas.

March 13 2017, 5:33 PM 

Agree Sid especially with your last sentence. We are a members club. Shouldn`t we be having a vote on whether we want to except the new proposals or not. Will we get that vote? No chance!! Not at this AGM as nothing on the agenda on those lines. Next year will be to late as the meeting and vote by the counties whether to accept the ECB proposals or not is next month.

Because of the huge debt and the possibility of the plug being pulled on it, it is a case of if CG says jump, we jump and if he says jump higher we jump higher. The "cash tills" are ringing loudly in the finance dept of YCCC. What is good for cricket or not is of minor importance to the finance guys.

This message has been edited by StuartRA from IP address on Mar 13, 2017 5:34 PM

Opening stand
(Login Openingstand)

Let’s hear you!

March 13 2017, 8:25 PM 

Twelve months ago the Members Committee claimed to speak on behalf of the members on the issue of an election to the Board.

Surely the format of a game that we love is of even greater significance - but our committee is silent….

(Login sooty-yorkie1)

Re: Let’s hear you!

March 13 2017, 8:54 PM 

I've not been to an AGM before or read the rules, so perhaps someone could clarify. For all the different names, how much practical difference is there between the AGM and say a fans forum at a football club?

(Login Pyrahtechnics)

Extraordinary General Meeting

March 14 2017, 1:11 AM 

Can the members or the members committee call for an Extraordinary General Meeting regarding the new T20 proposals, before the Counties meet up again and make any decisions?

From a members perspective - having a devalued 50 over competition reduces the value of membership.
From a YCCC perspective - having a devalued 50 over competition reduces matchday revenue generated.

Then there are Division 2 Counties who can't win the County Championship title or realistically win promotion to Division 1, who use the 50 Over Competition as a genuine chance of winning silverware and keeping their members/spectators interested. All they have left is 2nd rate white ball competitions to play for, hardly a selling point to grow future audiences.

The £1.3 Million compensation from a new Twenty20 competition has strings attached. It also does not compensate for the loss of two County Championship matches as well as a devalued One Day competition, therefore the true value is less than £1.3 Million.

I was originally in favour of the 8/10 County Championship structure as the ECB claim it would improve fast bowlers workloads and Andrew Strauss wanting an extra 2 One Day matches to compensate, but the fixture list is as congested as ever and no white ball matches have been added to make up for the loss. Quite simply, these new Twenty20 proposals just add to the demise of County Cricket and we will end up with a marginalised domestic system.

remit 1
(Login remit1)


March 14 2017, 10:39 AM 

Twelve months ago the Members Committee claimed to speak on behalf of the members on the issue of an election to the Board.

Surely the format of a game that we love is of even greater significance - but our committee is silent….

The MC is entirely consistent. A year ago it followed the wishes of the Board…It is doing the same now.

You’re living in a different world OS if you think the MC sees its role as putting forward the view of the members!

(Login StuartRA)
Assistant Moderator


March 14 2017, 10:50 AM 

sooty-yorkie1 --- The AGM differs to a fans forum in that it is more structured and formal. There is an agenda that is followed quite strictly and a few questions are allowed, but nothing like a fans forum when many questions are asked and answered.

(Login sooty-yorkie1)


March 14 2017, 12:27 PM 

Right, i meant more in a practical sense, to have influence or input. Or is it just a more formal version of said fans forum?


(Login dpressed)


March 14 2017, 1:03 PM 

The AGM is now just a glorified talking shop & sadly the members committee do their best but they don't have any power. The 'club management' make decisions & if we don't like them, then tough.

But it was always so. When we still had a committee the membership agreed to go to Durkar & look at restoring outgrounds. Neither happened.

(Login sid-don)
Assistant Moderator


March 14 2017, 2:57 PM 

Although I agree with Dpressed, the committee were elected by the members so there was some democratic accountability.

Each region had representation, directly elected by the members with each standing for re-election every three years. The whole Boycott revolution of the late 70s/ early 80s came about by members disagreeing with club policy and consequently electing people who shared their views.

This model no longer applies. The senior management make decisions, members, now although effectively season tickets holders, renew or not.

As an aside the only time I've challenged Stephen Mann and the members committee in its post 2002 form was about the lack of YCCC cricket in South Yorks and the huge number of 2nd team games about played at York (Clifton park and Stamford Bridge), his response, 'the bacon sandwiches are better at Stamford Bridge'. He didn't seem overly concerned that YCCC had effectively withdrawn from a major part of the county and we're failing to connect with the membership. There was no response when it was pointed out the token one day of 2nd team cricket played at Shaw Lane, Barnsley is frequently the best attended on the circuit.

This message has been edited by sid-don from IP address on Mar 15, 2017 10:02 PM

(Login Danum)

AGM: 2 key issues

March 16 2017, 7:14 PM 

Well. it's less than 48 hours to the AGM and I'd like to pick up on some of the posts earlier. As I said in my own post to this threa on 24 February, there are two key issues at this meeting and they are both crucial to the well-being of the club and for the game we love in its 4 day format.

Ball_sup is right to point out that both issues - the new stand development and the new T20 'franchise' competition - are to be dealt with as 'updates at the meeting'. A charitable view of that way of going on would be that matters in relation to both have still some way to run, so it would not have been possible to say anything in the papers for the meeting without the risk of it being out of date by the time of the meeting. A less charitable view might be that the board is going to attempt to bounce the meeting into some form of 'passive acceptance' of whatever courses of action they are intending to take.

Sooty-yorkkie1 asks if the AGM is just another members' forum. Well, no it isn't. It is meant to be a means by which the board reports to the members and is held to account for their actions. It is a formal meeting with an agenda and is strictly controlled business. There is scope to raise issues under Any Other Business but that is rarely a means to make a point with any impact and, coming right at the end, can be curtailed by the chairman on the pretext of not wanting to detain people who need to get away. It is far better to raise points under specific agenda items. Both the key issues can in fact be raised under the agenda item on the Chairman's report as he refers to both in his written statement and has promised the said updates on them. But quite how effectively members can in fact hold the board to account is a questionable matter, for reasons I will outline later.

Sid-don says he doesn't feel qualified to challenge the top table. Well, I intend to listen to the updates and take it from there. I don't have any qualms personally on making a challenge.

Several posts refer to the ineffectiveness or silence of the members' committee. There are reasons for this. The role of the members' committee is defined very precisely in the rules and the club's governance structure as being concerned with 'membership benefits' and 'facilities at matches'. No more; no less. Certainly not anything to do with substantial issues of finance or major investment decisions such as the new stand. I spoke at some length with Stephen Mann just before he stepped down and elicited some very interesting information from him. He told me that under Steve Denison he had finally been allowed to attend the board meetings in an observer role, which he saw as positive progress when compared with the situation under Colin Graves who he said would never allow any 'ordinary' member anywhere near the boardroom. It was for these reasons that I lost any interest in perhaps standing for the members' committee. I have no interest in operating within an environment where my input would be limited to such as the price of tea in the Long Room, the latest complaints about over-bearing stewards in the ground and yes, the decision to charge 50p for scorecards that is hidden away as 'benefit' in the membership pack that landed today.

The simple fact is that the legal ownership of the club being vested in its members is merely an inconvenient truth for the current management of YCCC who, I am sure, would rather see us as season ticket holders with all the lack of influence you would have at a league football club. This has been the case since 2002 when the club was forced to go cap in hand to Graves to secure its survival and was further enshrined in the 2005 rules which gives rise to the this detached form of governance. Now of course, we are £19million pounds in debt to Graves and his family - and over the years he has been able to exploit that to exert control.

So are we, as members, utterly powerless? Pretty much so in reality - but not entirely. I mentioned the inconvenient truth of the club being ultimately owned by its members (see note 13 of the Notes to the Annual Report and Accounts). Well, another inconvenient truth is that within the club rules, the board needs approval at a general meeting to raise the club's borrowings above £25million (they currently stand at £24.650million). Hence my earlier concern at a possible attempt to bounce the meeting on Saturday. In my view, just as the club has been obliged to call an Extraordinary General Meeting to deal with the sad death of John Hampshire and the presidency, so it should put any approval of an increased borrowing (to finance the new stand, for example) to an EGM, by a properly notified and full explained proposal, called at 21 days' notice.

And there is one more inconvenient truth. Any paid up member of greater than 12 months' standing, can under the rules, petition on a the club on a specific issue to hold an EGM. To do so, the member must collect the signatures of 400 paid up members with voting rights (the 12 month rule).

Last September I attempted to do just that over the second of the key issues - the ECB's proposed T20 competition - after I read in the press that at a meeting governed by non-disclosure agreements and paranoid secrecy, only 3 counties had voted against allowing the ECB to develop its proposal to the next stage. Yorkshire was not one of those clubs. So I asked the chief executive and chairman in emails to explain how and why Yorkshire had shifted its position from Steve Denison's public statement at a members' forum in 2016 when he said Yorkshire was set against a city based franchise competition. I never received replies to any of three emails, but through this forum and by other means of an online petition, I set out to try to force an EGM at which the club would have to explain itself.

Believe it or not, I received just two , yes two, messages of support from this forum, on a matter that must be dear to the hearts of just about everyone who is worried about the future of county cricket. At that point, and because I was away in the USA for five weeks, I had to withdraw. That's why I say we are pretty much powerless, if we can't summon the will to make a challenge.

On Saturday, I will want to challenge any suggestion that the club takes on new borrowing (if indeed such a proposal comes). Sure I want a new stand (who wouldn't?), but not at any cost and not at still further risk to our underlying finances. I want to make the chairman and chief executive explain why they changed the club's position on the T20 without having the grace to inform members. In his report, Mr Denison says 'we don't want any team at Headingley to have Leeds in its name'. To my mind this is a weasel statement that falls well short of what he said at the forum. The T20 issue rumbles on with reports in the press of more counties being alarmed at the ECB's attempts to 'bully' them over media rights and other issues. This has Graves written all over it; is Yorkshire being bullied?

There is a simple choice here - members can meekly acquiesce in whatever the board throws at them or they can make the board understand they cannot be ignored. But if I'm a lone voice, or there are very few of us, well then we get the club we deserve. Am I trying to take YCCC back to the divisions and bitterness of the 80's, when members over-turned the committee? No, but I am determined the club listens to and allows the members an effective voice on matters such as these.

(Login StuartRA)
Assistant Moderator

Re: AGM: 2 key issues

March 16 2017, 8:09 PM 

Thanks for your detailed posting Danum. Hope you get all the support you want, you certainly will get it from me. Look forward to hearing you at the AGM and hopefully some answers from the Board to your concerns and points.

The only way to deal with the "bully boys" of the ECB is to stand up to them. But you can bet your last dollar that YCC will not make that stand.

This message has been edited by StuartRA from IP address on Mar 17, 2017 6:20 PM


Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: AGM: 2 key issues

March 16 2017, 8:35 PM 

Danum - I am very much with you in principle, but I'm just not a political/accountant/committee sort of bloke. So we sit back and let the 'experts' run the show, which is how **** happens, of course.

I do think you might make your point more persuasively, though, if you could manage not to hide behind a username.

Geoff B
(Login Coastalview)

Re: AGM: 2 key issues

March 16 2017, 8:43 PM 

I totally agree about the 2 key issues and I'll be with you.

I will even wear a jacket in order to look respectable.

Just Grazing
(Login Justgrazing)

Re: AGM: 2 key issues

March 18 2017, 10:32 AM 

An excellent post which I wholeheartedly endorse.

I am right there with you on this.

(Login StuartRA)
Assistant Moderator


March 18 2017, 3:05 PM 

from Todays YP re financing.


It is a never ending circle of debt and more debt!!

We are around 23m in debt, so we borrow 16.5M more to develop the stand, so we get 4 T20 franchise matches and International cricket after 2019, which helps us pay the existing debt off quicker, but the debt is bigger, so it takes longer, and the circle continues.....

Who can guarantee that in 10 years time we will not have to build another stand or do some more ground updates to enable us to continue to host test matches or ODI`s, so we then borrow more and the circle never ends.

Square the circle now, pull the plug on the stand development, manage and budget our finances yearly from 2019 with no test matches, and get the existing debt paid off.

This message has been edited by StuartRA from IP address on Mar 18, 2017 4:20 PM

Ball-Sup (Phil)
(Login ball_sup)

Re: Finance

March 18 2017, 7:24 PM 


I'm with you all the way mate. That is the right answer. We've come from a difficult place of having to pay to "own" the ground. And then having to pay to develop the ground. That puts us financially behind some other Counties. In all walks of life, lots of people want lots of things that they can't afford. In the end, they have to settle for what they can afford.

That's where we are. Apparently, we want Test Cricket, ICC Tournaments & Shiny New T20. But, the numbers suggest we can't afford them.

Now is the time to recognise that & be sensible.

No Test Cricket
No ICC Cricket
No ECB Franchise T20
Take the money the ECB are guaranteeing to all Counties from Franchise T20.
Be Yorkshire again.
Build a strong brand.
Make the bits of Headingley Rump into a fantastic place for Members & others to watch County Cricket.
Forget Construction.
Forget Finance.
Forget Council Grants.
Become a Cricket Club again.

That's all positive. I can get behind it.


< Previous Page 1 2 3 4 58 Next >
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2018 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