cricket
Latest News:


WELCOME TO THE MIDDLESEX ROOM, THE ONLY MESSAGE BOARD ON THE INTERNET DEDICATED TO MIDDLESEX CCC

RIP JT Murray Middlesex legend

 

All change yet again
BeefyRoberts (IP Logged)
31 October, 2018 13:32
So,according to Twitter postings and ECB website (JW,link please,thanks),the CC is to change as predicted and it's 3 up 1 down next season.But....season 2020 reverts to two up and two down.A seeding format is also being looked at for Div 2 in 2019 and Div 1 from 2020.
The 50 over comp is to run along side the 100 rubbish,and ECB say no overseas players allowed to play in 50 over game,probably so they can all play in the 100 circus/rubbish/disaster.
Also a mention about minor counties playing first class county in 50 over from 2020.

Just a brief comment on the new,crazy set up we will be expecting to enjoy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 31/10/2018 13:33 by BeefyRoberts.

 
Re: All change yet again
dingy bags (IP Logged)
31 October, 2018 19:55
All this is to fit in the 100 cobblers and give it prime time. Given that there is a T10 competition this winter, to which some of our boys are going, the 100 already looks less of the startling innovation a few people see it as. It can only damage the Blast in particular, which many counties have made work well in financial and in cricketing terms. So, a loss in revenue direct to counties, making them more dependent than ever on ECB. The report into the problems behind Aussie cricket, particularly the dangers of over-centralisation, sounds a stark warning about players getting right away from their roots. Those that go from the IPL, to the watered-down Blast and on the the 100 will have little contact with county cricket as we have understood it up to now.

Seedings - is this so the perceived 'stronger' sides in the 10 team division (Div 2 next year but Div 1 thereafter) get to play perceived 'weaker' counties twice? How are these strengths judged? How do you compare, for 2019, the strengths of Lanky and Worc (relegated) against counties finishing third and fourth (Sussex and Middlesex) in Div 2? Will we be seeded?

When Strauss took over, the stated intention was to concentrate on 50 over cricket and win the World Cup. Now, the 50 over will be a competition with no overseas players (all in the 100 - or NOT!!) and with lots of second teamers. No joined up thinking there!

God knows what the actual scheduling will look like.

Some good things - if more outgrounds are being used, they will be fun to visit, as will the warm-up matches against minor counties (although some counties will not welcome the extra fixture). For Middlesex, who have traditionally had a bigger playing squad than many. the 50 over comp will give a few youngsters more of a chance. Having said this, on our T20 form, we will have fewer players drafted into the 100 cobblers than most!

If, as hinted, the 50 over divisions are not divided north and south (ie the same teams we play at T20), we might actually get to play most if not all of the other counties in one form or another, as should happen.

At least this set of proposals is not the work of a few power-mad, deluded despots, but the results of a proper consultation with the counties. However, the hand of the ECB is detectable, eg no overseas players in 50 over comp - just imagine if a top Indian batsman did not fancy the 100 but was happy to play 50 overs for a county. A bit of a diversion from the new showpiece event there!

All this could be avoided if we forgot the 100 cobblers and had a T20 competition with a premier division and a division 1, still with finals day but with promotion and relegation, which would bring a bit more drama. Base this on counties and you bring county members along with you, instead of alienating them. You can jazz it up, allow 3 or even 4 overseas players and play some games in larger stadia if you really have to. This would sell to the media.

The 100 might be a partial success but it can only harm the rest of domestic cricket and thus a number of counties. More power will rest with the ECB which is one of the motives, imho, behind this.

 
Re: All change yet again
rod/ed (IP Logged)
31 October, 2018 19:58
Again it will be " unthinkable " for us to gain promotion.

Looks like the minor county fixture will be a friendly.So expect a weakened XI and disappointed minor county supporters expecting to see the 'stars'.

50 over not regional so perhaps a day out at Blackpool or Scarborough await

 
Re: All change yet again
Jonathan Winsky (IP Logged)
31 October, 2018 20:19
Middlesex’s website has posted the statement written by ECB.

A lot of counties will be happy about the switch to a 10-team division one, as it means that more than half of the counties will have division one status. Well, it makes a big difference to me psychologically, as it increases Middlesex’s chances of having division one status. I think the main reason why this change was made was because it was felt that having an 8-team top flight caused teams to think short-term due to a fear of relegation, which wasn’t conducive to quality cricket or producing players for England.

Something else which will be widely-welcomed will be the seeding system for determining the fixturelist in the 10-team division, which will be division two in 2019 and division one thereafter. I tend to feel that it is an advantage to play the top and bottom teams twice (as this gives two opportunities to stop the top teams gaining points and two opportunities to play the sides everyone seems to be beating) and to play the mid-ranked sides once. I would like to think that the fairness of each teams’ fixturelist evens itself out, although people who have the time to analyse everything will probably say that the system is unfair. It would have been nice had we been able to play two full Championship matches v bottom-placed Glamorgan in 2018, but we instead played them just once in a match in at Lord’s in which just 48 overs were bowled across the four days.

It is interesting that the article repeatedly makes mention of the ‘New Competition’, and does not refer to it as ‘The 100’. However, I am not sure how likely it is that it will be anything other than a 100-ball competition, despite most people believing that it should be a Twenty20 competition.

I anticipated that that the county Twenty20 and 50-over competitions would be similar to at present, albeit with the Twenty20 competition taking place in June and July, and the 50-over competition coinciding with The 100.

I appear to have been proven correct about the Twenty20 competition. The move to an earlier slot (although admittedly one it used to occupy until a few years ago) means that more matches will coincide with the period when school pupils and those in higher education are preparing for or taking exams, which will not be helpful for attendances. I think that some counties were hopeful that the amount of group stage matches could increase from 14 to 16, but I am not sure whether that would have been a good idea.

However, I have not been correct proven in anticipating that the only changes to the 50-over competition would be the switch to when The 100 takes place, as the groups appear set to cease being dividing along North and South lines, and overseas players will not be allowed to play. The absence of overseas players and of players engaged at The 100 means that the standard of the 50-over competition will be impaired. That is why I prefer the idea of counties playing 50-over matches during this period rather than Championship matches, although of course it is a unfortunate that this means that supporters will have no Championship matches to attend during this period.

I am not sure whether these minor county v first-class county 50-over matches will carry List A status (as they did in the days of the various knockout competitions which ran between 1963 and 2005) or whether the result will count for anything.

The increase to three teams being promoted in 2019 would make it even more disappointing if we once again fail to go up. One of the promoted places will certainly go to Worcestershire, as they seem to have spent most of the last 18 years in either the division two promotion places or the division one relegation places. Ourselves, Lancashire and Sussex will also probably all expect themselves to be in the promotion battle, although we will have to see whether anyone else can mount a challenge.

 
Re: All change yet again
Defcon1 (IP Logged)
01 November, 2018 09:59
I'd say it's correct that the 8-team Division 1 format has instilled too much fear.

With three up next season and a new guy in charge we should at least have a fair chance of being among them. I'm feeling positive for the first time in a while.

The rest of it - T20, 50 overs, 100 Balls whatever - not bothered.

 
Re: All change yet again
dingy bags (IP Logged)
01 November, 2018 12:02
A further thought - if they are looking at seeding Div 2 next year, will this delay publication of the fixtures?

 
Re: All change yet again
chunkyinargyll (IP Logged)
01 November, 2018 12:59
I don't know about 'official seeding', but all they need to do is play fair, and make sure those teams that only played Glamorgan once last year get to play them twice in 2019.

We couldn't do much about the fact the rain ruined our one match against them in 2018, but a second match would have been a near guaranteed win (going by their results against everyone else).

 
Re: All change yet again
BeefyRoberts (IP Logged)
01 November, 2018 13:59
So,seeding...this gets us as a probable stronger side to play the counties termed weaker twice?
How do they decide the seeding?
Even if a seeded county plays a non-seeded county,still doesn't mean a seeded county will win.
I also think it's a bit of a kick in the teeth for so called weaker counties.Bit like ECB saying your not a good county,and we don't see you getting promoted.
Who would of thought Kent would get promoted?
Would they of been an un-seeded county?
Why not just have two divisions of 9,play eachother twice?
Would the t20 be seeded next? If it was,would we be a seeded county?

 
Re: All change yet again
Seaxe_Man (IP Logged)
01 November, 2018 14:39
Apart from the obvious contenders in 2019 Lanky, Worcs, Sussex. I expect the three up scenario will persuade the so called also rans to invest a few quid this winter.

Probably one of Derby, Northants, Gloucs or Leicester will emerge from the pack.

Three up a big motivation for these clubs and a one off opportunity.

Plus, Hampshire's head coach is leaving. Any takers?

 
Re: All change yet again
Jonathan Winsky (IP Logged)
01 November, 2018 19:57
Quote:
Jonathan Winsky
Something else which will be widely-welcomed will be the seeding system for determining the fixturelist in the 10-team division, which will be division two in 2019 and division one thereafter. I tend to feel that it is an advantage to play the top and bottom teams twice (as this gives two opportunities to stop the top teams gaining points and two opportunities to play the sides everyone seems to be beating) and to play the mid-ranked sides once. I would like to think that the fairness of each teams’ fixturelist evens itself out, although people who have the time to analyse everything will probably say that the system is unfair. It would have been nice had we been able to play two full Championship matches v bottom-placed Glamorgan in 2018, but we instead played them just once in a match in at Lord’s in which just 48 overs were bowled across the four days

The problem with trying to come up with a fair fixturelist for division two in 2019 and for division one thereafter is that different people will probably have different ideas about what a fair fixturelist would be. As I have said, I feel that if a side is challenging for promotion or the division one title, it could be beneficial to play the other sides at the top twice each in order to have an opportunity to deny them points, although two negatives of such a fixturelist would be that it would give the opponents maximum opportunity to deny you points, and it would mean that the team would probably have a tougher fixturelist than some other counties. Of course, a side in mid-table or near the bottom may prefer not to hope to play so many matches against the top sides.

My guess is that the way the seeding system will work is that each county will be given a rating based on their performance in the previous season(s), and the fixtures computer will be asked to ensure that the total ratings of the opponents on each counties’ fixutrelist will all be a roughly similar amount. However, it is inevitable that teams will still complain about not getting enough opportunities to face the strugglers, not getting enough opportunities to take points off the teams around them in the table, or having a tougher set of fixtures than the teams around them in the table.

 
Re: All change yet again
tallliman (IP Logged)
02 November, 2018 09:05
Was the last Mx minor counties game the one where Andre Adams' Herefordshire beat us?

Disappointing lack of prominence for the four day game in the new structure. Everything seems a fudge to put in an unnecessary new competition. 2 divisions in t20 could work but Notts (for example) would lose the 2 full houses it gets v Derbyshire and Leics. I just think that consistent scheduling and promotion would help.

 
Re: All change yet again
chunkyinargyll (IP Logged)
04 November, 2018 12:23
one thing confuses me-

From 2020 the much reduced in status 50 over comp will see two groups of nine, with each team playing the others in their group home and away- in other words 16 games, instead of 8.

So- 8 days extra 50 overs cricket, or the equivalent of 2 extra 4 day championship games- which would get us back to 16 championship matches. Or is there something else they're not telling us- like fewer T20, or championship reducing further.

[www.theguardian.com]

 
Re: All change yet again
dnb (IP Logged)
04 November, 2018 14:31
The Guardian seems to have this wrong...see extract from ECB article below:

“From 2020, the county 50-over competition will be played during the New Competition, in July and August.

The counties will be split into two groups of nine – not necessarily along existing North and South lines – and will play each of the other eight counties in their group [four at home and four away] before the top three qualify for the knockout stages.

Overseas players will not be permitted to take part in the county 50-over competition.”

 
Re: All change yet again
chunkyinargyll (IP Logged)
04 November, 2018 15:00
It's difficult to know what to believe.

The 100 Cr*p is meant to last 6 weeks isn't it?

So that would leave counties who don't qualify from the group stage with just 8 days cricket (only 4 days at home) in 6 weeks, but play everyone twice (as Vic Marks has written) would double it to a more respectable 8 days at home, and 16 altogether.

I think dnb is probably right, as this is the first time I've heard 16 50 over matches mentioned. But at one stage they were talking about alternating daily between 100 cr*p and 50 overs, so, say franchise cr*p Tues, Thurs, Sat, and 50 overs Wed, Fri, Sun, which would make 3 matches a week possible.

The important thing is that cricket fans attend the 50 over stuff in larger number than these 'new, yet to be discovered' fans.

 
Re: All change yet again
Mark Drukker (IP Logged)
04 November, 2018 21:31
In the old 28-game championship, Middlesex always played Surrey, Sussex, Yorks, Lancs and Warwicks twice, and counties like Leics and Derbys once.

"not necessarily along existing North and South lines" may mean small adjustments so that Gloucs and Worcs play each other, and Middx and Northants. That's what happens in the Minor Counties 50 over competition.


Middx often play a 50-over friendly against Berkshire at the start of the season, so they may be formalizing that. There are 20 minor counties and only 18 1st class counties.


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?