RB’s “better than the ECB” Blueprint for County Cricket

1.Change the structure of the cricket season each year.

2. Start talking about next year's structure from the beginning of current season.

Keep the CC as it is. The 50 over game is dying on its
arse so make it knockout. This would free up space for more
CC games this time of year in August. The CC games can
be played alongside the 100. The 100 teams can’t use any
county players where fixtures clash with the CC. Players
were missing when the Lions game was on so the 100
teams can cope.

Sack off the 100. Sack off the T20. Pay players and administrators less money. Play cricket in whites and with a cricket ball.  Re-nationalise the railways and public utilities.

In a few years time, the BBC may lose the licence fee, which would possibly be the end of national cricket exposure on FTA. Gone will be the 100, test match highlights, TMS, local radio commentary and maybe the website updates. Granted these may go to other channels, but it would be a severe loss to cricket if it happens.

In fact, loss of cricket might be the least worst thing as far as the general population thinks.

Counties to play one 4-day and one limited-overs fixture per week for duration of cricket season. All players available unless selected to play for England.

* Overseas players to be registered at start of season.

There are issues to be considered. First the loss of players to the IPL, the Horrid Hundred and Internationals (including the Lions!). Second the schedule, there is too much demanded of the best players.

The structure is wrong, we must go back to two divisions of nine in the championship where everybody plays everyone else twice. I would suggest some sort of merging of the Hundred and the Blast with promotion and relegation. The crucial point being that these teams become county sides owned and managed by the 18 counties, not franchises. I don't care too much if the rules and razzamataz are hundredish, just get a sensible structure and kill the franchises.

There are no easy answers. We cannot stop the IPL, if we ban our players from it they will leave. We could however schedule less international cricket and allow players to play for their counties more.

The new ECB Chairman has shown some awareness of the issues, but I doubt he will be able to make the right changes, the current review if implemented is likely to be another blow to county cricket. I do not feel optimistic.

Players choose counties and England; or IPL and a life of franchising. How often do we see Jason Roy and the Currans? Release them. None of them were good enough for England at Test level.

County Championship appearances in last 4 years........................2019/2022

TOM CURRAN..................1

JASON ROY......................1

offdrive4 wrote:There are issues to be considered.    First the loss of players to the IPL, the Horrid Hundred and Internationals (including the Lions!).   Second the schedule, there is too much demanded of the best players.  

The structure is wrong, we must go back to two divisions of nine in the championship where everybody plays everyone else twice.   I would suggest some sort of merging of the Hundred and the Blast with promotion and relegation.   The crucial point being that these teams become county sides owned and managed by the 18 counties, not franchises.   I don't care too much if the rules and razzamataz are hundredish, just get a sensible structure and kill the franchises.    

There are no easy answers.  We cannot stop the IPL, if we ban our players from it they will leave.   We could however schedule less international cricket and allow players to play for their counties more.

The new ECB Chairman has shown some awareness of the issues, but I doubt he will be able to make the right changes, the current review if implemented is likely to be another blow to county cricket.   I do not feel optimistic.

This is the ONLY compromise route out of the current mess. We cannot sustain two short-form tournaments without creating real and lasting damage to everything else we play, including international cricket. I have said all along that 20 balls are not worth dying in the ditch over, but that if we do not kill the franchise teams then some or even all counties will ultimately be toast.

I don't think Richard Thompson would have accepted the gig if he felt his hands were going to be tied by whatever Strauss comes up with. His influence will be key, but the next four weeks are crucial: county members have to bombard their CEOs and Management Committees with emails making clear that they expect them to reject any proposal to reduce the amount of championship cricket (including this latest regional red-ball August nonsense). The other key point to make is that we expect all 15 of the counties which are owned by the members to consult the members (ideally by arranging an Extraordinary meeting) about what is being proposed before responding to the ECB. Lancashire and Yorkshire have so far arranged such a meeting.

Jackers, I think even the Counties not owned by members should nevertheless consult their members and not impose important changes without a 'by your leave'! Where members do own the clubs it should be automatic to listen to the members views on critical decisions, otherwise vote the rascals off.

The ECB seems to think it does not need to take into account the views of county supporters, but counties own the grounds and hold contracts for the players. There is not a host of new supporters just waiting for the hundred to introduce them to cricket.