Latest news:

Q & A. Part 2

Seaxe Man is watching you

By Seaxe Man
December 6 2017

Sease Man provides further details of the MCC Middx Q & A. I don't believe he has omitted a single word that was stated.  

Q. Keith Mein. MCC/MX match day experience. MX members experience much 'no cando' in the ground. Felt like second class citizens.

GL - just arrived so could' not express opinion on customer experience.
Q. Middlesex Room Upper option. Work?
GL - winter 2018.
Q - Fingers. MX Room - he saw NW Hospitality boxes as an option for ICC. Plus the Upstairs option would require a lift - casual dress code mentioned. How would that work? If you entered via the Pavilion.
GL - boxes mentioned were valuable.
Q - Gary Hamilton - disabled cricket followers - discounts and free entry for carers - disabled membership.
RG - disabled categories - agreed - though he added - at the moment trying to reduce membership levels. But in favour.
GL - could not answer at this stage.
Q Tony Jaffer - Middlesex Room - the decision came out of the blue.. Was there any planning?
GL This was a SGM decision - 240 MCC members were involved. Was not included in the MCC AGM Agenda.
Q Jim Knight - subject wickets - we need proper cricket wickets - he heard Mick Hunt had retired - we need wickets fit for purpose - Mr Hunts replacement - could that be a Middlesex groundsman.
GL Can't see any likelihood of a Middlesex groundsman and Mick Hunt has not retired. MCC now have three drop in wickets to help with the balance of a small square.
RG - said Gus has got the wickets he wanted - Lancs - worn wicket - points could have been deducted.
Q. Middlesex Room - questioner understood only MCC members involved. Should we be consulting Middlesex members as well?
GL - papers relate to all options for a replacement. When these papers are completed and ok'd. The information therein would be passed to Middlesex for comment.
Q - use of the pitch as it relates to new T20 in 2020. Does this put the existing T20 Blast and Middlesex at risk?
RG - New T20. Middlesex voted against along with two others but majority in favour.  If the new T20 fails - not good - Lords needs to be involved to ensure its success. A total of 4 games in a six week period. Unlikely that MX will not get games.
GL Important new T20 provides a crossover to gain a new audience. 4 additional games should not prevent Middlesex cricket being played in that period.
Q. MCC members were not interested in promoting county matches.
RG MCC strongly support Middlesex.
GL MCC members will have varied interests.
Q Andy Higgs. We were unable to use the lights versus Essex after the follow on was not enforced and declaration delayed. So fourth day was dark as forecast. Not being able to use the lights not helpful.
GL - Westminster Council are being  approached with a view to having day time lights. He pointed out that during the winter MCC have to dismantle the lights to comply with the licence at considerable cost.
Q Steve Baldwin. Middlesex Room alternative, The President's Suite. Could dates be made available for 2018. In 2017, it was found to be closed when it was alleged to be open. Stewards said only told on the morning.
RG . This is a extremely rare occurrence. 3000 MX members have no email address, so difficult to keep all informed.
Q Roy North. Playing side review. 
RG. This has been passed to an outside agency to look at what we did wrongly leading to relegation.
Few changes are expected. Young players to be given their chance after the loss of Ryan Higgins. Max Holden to be brought back into the squad. Captaincy under review but unlikely that there will be a new captain.
Statement Mike O'Farrell Chairman - commented that the MX dressing room at Taunton was not a happy place after defeat by Somerset and the players realisation of relegation. Heads in hands etc. Mike expects that the Middle should progress back into the top division come 2018.
Q. Brian Dodds. - the Lords square is small, therefore to free up strips he felt that Eton v Harrow and Oxbridge should be sacrificed.
GL. Commented that those matches are historical.
Q. J.Fitz . Middlesex Room. Should it finish in the Upper Allen. What is the dress code likely to be.
GL. Dress Code policy moving forward.
Q. Lady local resident. Mentioned she lives nearby. Felt there was no advertisement of many (smaller) matches. She attended one, where  ' there was one man and a dog there'. There was no food facilities for her family other than the Tavern which she did not like.
GL Accepted that there was a lack of engagement with local people. Needs to look into with a residents panel. Questioner said that that did exist but gets no information.
Q. Re MX family day. There was no information on this.
RG Good point. Commented that there is Ladies day which was well advertised. 
Q, Fingers. Over rates. What is being done?
RG. Commented Dave Houghton has timed all of our pace  bowlers in an attempt to rectify this long standing problem.. Pointed out the first priority is to win the match. 
Q. Ticket pricing. Children should be free.
GL.Sympathetic but pointed out that the existing price is only five quid. Felt that the new Big Bash which will have free to air matches, will sustain the interest of youngsters.
Q. Arrogate. Appeal after relegation happened? 
RG. We did appeal before. No clear route for appeal. Went back and followed procedure. However, no joy. He, RG, still felt it was the incorrect decision.
PS. One guy had an interesting theory.on our relegation. It was not Arrowgate. Nor the unenforced follow on v Essex, or the possible run chase versus the Mexicans. Nor the 11 points garnered from 4 matches. Namely Chelmsford 2, Southport 3, Lords v Warwick 3 or Taunton 3. No the problem was elsewhere..I wonder what he meant..
The meeting closed at 7.05 pm.
Seaxeman. The Nursery Pavilion Lords 30th November 2017.


View a Printer Friendly version of this Story.

Bookmark or share this story with:

Q & A. Part 2
Discussion started by Middlesex till we die , 06/12/2017 17:41
Middlesex till we die
06/12/2017 17:41
What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017:12:19:22:50:31 by Leprechaun.

06/12/2017 21:00
Thanks Roy,in depth report.
Just one...Why was a review of last county season passed to an outside agency to see where we went wrong?

Hope these QnA sessions continue,as it looks a really good way of keeping members abreast of what is going on.

07/12/2017 07:05
How can the review be passed to an outside agency?!!!!

Who will do it?



The Police complaints commission?

The only people qualified to judge were a cricket team went wrong are retired and present day cricketers.

If it's going to be an 'outside agency' maybe we are going to ask Alec Stewart and Surrey to carry out an independent review of were we went wrong for us.

We already know were we went wrong.

Essex. Set the tone for the rest of the season.

07/12/2017 08:54
If the works took place from Winter 2018 for our Room being in the Allen upper,would it be ready for the new season in 2018?
Just thinking that,going by how long the Warner Stand actually took.
Also,if work was to start and delays,would mean one more area less for us to use and for H&S would it put the seats outside the old room out of action?

Primrose Hillbilly
07/12/2017 10:16
Failure to score enough first innings runs to enable us to dictate the course of the game thereafter and place the opposition under pressure.

Lesson 1 - Get a substantial first innings lead.

Lesson 2 - Refer to Lesson 1.

To where do I send my fee note, made out in Guineas, Imperial Pounds, Shillings and thruppeny bits, to reflect the age and enduring wisdom of the advice?

07/12/2017 12:26
Thanks Roy,in depth report.
Just one...Why was a review of last county season passed to an outside agency to see where we went wrong?

Hope these QnA sessions continue,as it looks a really good way of keeping members abreast of what is going on.

Beefy/chunky.The outside agency (employment) question was not explained as to why? And it prompted no response that I can recall from the punters.

Principally I suspect because the MX section of the audience already knew the answer as to why relegation happened.

As to the the employment of the outside agency.

My guess is that the Board want to make sure that the review is seen to be neutral and without judgement made by vested interests.

Just guessing but assume MX staff will be interviewed but who knows.

ie they (The Board) do not wish MX members to get the wrong perception when the review hits the fan.. I don't think I am a 'million miles away' on that IMHO.

Of course the 64 dollar question is this. When this Review Report is published. Will the MX membership, around 8500 in number, get to see its conclusions? Often promised but seldom happens.

The Middlesex Room conclusions (location of) to be reached by the MCC Committee is a similar situation.

Will MX get a look in and the General Membership appraised by seeing it's findings?

Of considerable interest to the General membership as the questions on the MR dominated. Lets face it. With its demise we (MX) aint' left with much facilitywise.

07/12/2017 12:42
If the works took place from Winter 2018 for our Room being in the Allen upper,would it be ready for the new season in 2018?
Just thinking that,going by how long the Warner Stand actually took.
Also,if work was to start and delays,would mean one more area less for us to use and for H&S would it put the seats outside the old room out of action?

Beefy. From what was said at the Q and A by Guy Lavender. In his view only two feasible options.

1. Reinstate the site in the Lower Allen. This looks by far the most achievable and was supposed to have happened this year 2017. And we reasonably could expect that to happen in early? 2018.

2. Because MCC require office space, the reason for the current situation, then moving the MR to the Allen Upper could happen. And may well be the preferred choice.

However, from observation, that would seem a much bigger task. and costly. As Fingers pointed out a lift is required.

Putting in a bar and restaurant facilities no small job. The one there now. Not adequate. Carpeting, glass partition, it goes on.

Dress code questions if access via Pavilion in smart casual wear.

The original Room in 1989 was heavily sponsored by the late Ron Gerard and Gubby Allen. Plus the Seaxe Club and various sponsors at that time.

If OK'd. Work on this option could not commence until the winter of 2018.

07/12/2017 13:47

I take your point that a review by an outside agency might make management look open and transparent- but an equally valid opinion is that if they really don't know what went wrong, and need someone to tell them, then that looks pretty damn incompetent.

If the idea is players will only give their thoughts confidentially (so management don't know who said what in the review) what are they going to do if the review comes back with 100% blame attached to the captain? They've already said they expect Franklin to remain in post- so that must be pre-judging this review before it has been completed. Or what if they all blame Scott? Already a bit late to go shopping for a replacement if all the players confidentially put the blame on him.

First rule of management- Never conduct an independent review in to your performance, unless you know before hand it will exonerate you of any blame.

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