Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**Kim** · 31-03-2010, 09:09 AM

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/c...081734.ece

I hope the players will accept the inevitable drop in wages for less cricket.

Theconference idea - three groups of 6 - where you play the teams ouytside your conference is particularly barmy.

Good old ECB. We finally get the CC standard up. So lets change it

**Paul** · 31-03-2010, 09:16 AM

Its rediculous, the last few summers its a case of the cricketers not playing enough because of all the bad weather, if this three groups of 6 comes in thats it for me I think.

windy · 31-03-2010, 10:31 AM

As usual the ECB take something which should be simple and aim to make it horrifically complicated. If they go for conferences i hope they go for the random option as it would become boring seeing the same teams every season play at Edgbaston.

What is so hard about the 3 top teams plus the runner-up playing off in semis and a final? You could have the same for the bottom teams to find the loser of the year and the rest could make up the last 1-2 games with friendlies, tour games, England A, Minor County XIs et cetera.

Terry · 31-03-2010, 10:35 AM

(31-03-2010 09:09 AM)Kim Wrote: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/c...081734.ece

I hope the players will accept the inevitable drop in wages for less cricket.

Theconference idea - three groups of 6 - where you play the teams ouytside your conference is particularly barmy.

Good old ECB. We finally get the CC standard up. So lets change it

Drop in wages? You must be joking (I suspect you were).
It would be an interesting calculation to look at how much county cricket was played in the 50s and 60s and how much players got paid then and now. If you factored in the far higher number of overs per day that the players bowled then, the rates of pay per over played would be staggeringly different, even allowing for inflation.
That's not to say that pay 50 years ago was adequate - only that at county level, there is no real connection between amount of cricket played and what the players get paid.

Warleybear · 31-03-2010, 01:47 PM

There'll be 12 counties in a handful of years anyway. One league of 12 teams - 11 games.

Not only is cricket dependance on Sky under pressure - but OFCOM are on Sky's case anyway (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8596083.stm) .......... which may result in pressure on what Sky pay for sport anyway? Cricket needs to control its costs. Perhaps whether membership costs are £ 165 or £ 365 - whether gate charges are £ 10 or £ 50 - its all a blip in the ocean comapred to the games dependancy on Sky?

Leicester Exile · 31-03-2010, 01:48 PM

What utter nonsense. Reduce the number of 4 day games, see the standard at Test level drop and then the ECB can then wonder why. I've said it before - the more T20 games played the sooner the public will get bored with it and start selecting the games to watch resulting in lower overall attendances.

Warleybear · 31-03-2010, 01:52 PM

Sadly we will loose a number of counties. George D fears a couple - I fear a handful. Somewhere between the ECB's incopetance, Sky and the counties greed there will be tears. 12 counties - 11 games. Not what I want - but a glimpse of the future?

**ddb** · 31-03-2010, 03:03 PM

(31-03-2010 09:16 AM)Paul Wrote: Its rediculous, the last few summers its a case of the cricketers not playing enough because of all the bad weather, if this three groups of 6 comes in thats it for me I think.

will you jump into a canal?

(sorry)

**Paul** · 31-03-2010, 03:12 PM

Nah DD I just meant as far as 4 day cricket is concerned. I would still goto the one day stuff. It would be interesting to know what the players think?

**ddb** · 31-03-2010, 03:18 PM

what if our club was called Warwickshire (enter sponsor here)