Will we see a greater shift in momentum now that we move north?

[91Jmay]

I grew up in an upper working class household - we weren't poor in that we were always well fed and clothed and never went short on anything but there wasn't money for a whole load of cricket gear either.

Not that it mattered as the game was never really open to me. We didn't play it at school, we played in the local park with our mates. The park did have a cricket field but we weren't allowed to play on there.

The local park sides did have a junior section and I did go for a while but never felt totally at home even though I only lived 5 minutes from the park.

There was no attempt by the clubs to engage with local schools etc. We used to watch the local park sides play at the weekend but there was never any attempt to get us involved with the club, except when the clubhouse burned down and they wanted us to post flyers to local houses to try to raise money. We did this and they gave us a few old cricket balls but it was never why don't you come next week to the junior section. 90% of the juniors were related to the senior players.

Football on the other hand was open to everyone. If I had been good enough, I would have played for the school, then the district etc etc. Loads of lads from our school have played football professionally, but there's never been a professional cricketer.

My school never played it either. Just linked you to a local club if you liked it

 

[Nas207]

My london secondary comp actually did play cricket, but we would have to travel hours to play or get a net in. We rarely won a game as you'd expect. As an adult I've had a few teaching gigs at private schools. One London one in particular (not naming it) i worked at briefly and it was literally cricket paradise in terms of facilities/atmosphere. Think Hogwarts for cricket. At my comp we were considered weirdos for liking cricket, literally only had a team due to a couple of cricket mad teachers.

 

[slowfinger]

well what got me into cricket when I lived in St Helens near Merseyside at age 6/7 was playing soft ball against the garage. All you needed then was a plastic bat and used the garage/bin as a wicket. I think after playing 2 years of that non-stop and breaking the garage door a few times I was ready to try out indoor cricket, and didn't end up playing any hardball until I was about 10 years old.

But you can see the progression there - and I think that should be available to most people. Loads of neighbours in my estate would end up playing with me and we even ended up setting up matches in the local park after a while.

 

[Nas207]

well what got me into cricket when I lived in St Helens near Merseyside at age 6/7 was playing soft ball against the garage. All you needed then was a plastic bat and used the garage/bin as a wicket. I think after playing 2 years of that non-stop and breaking the garage door a few times I was ready to try out indoor cricket, and didn't end up playing any hardball until I was about 10 years old.

But you can see the progression there - and I think that should be available to most people. Loads of neighbours in my estate would end up playing with me and we even ended up setting up matches in the local park after a while.

One of my best mates aged 8 - 9 was a pakistani lad and we would play 6-7 hours in the park every weekend. This park was a shithole but for some reason had a fenced area which was perfect for cricket. Think its been knocked down now.

 

[Daemon]

Cricket will always be less popular than other sports here i.e., the UK) though. The barriers to entry are enormous, and that's without (directly) considering factors like elitism and race.

Realistically, a young person wanting to get into cricket will need some, if not most, of the following:

- bat
- ball
- gloves (and WK gloves perhaps)
- pads
- helmet
- club membership
- access to facilities

All this does not come cheap (at all), and a lot of it will need to be replaced with age/growth etc.

This is to say nothing of the time commitment required (i.e. because cricket is a long game).

Whereas, to get into football a young person needs the following:

- ball (or a friend who has one)

Another big hurdle is also the learning curve.

If you suck at football you can at least just be a useless goalie or run around as a defender and never get the ball. But if you're new to cricket and suck nobody will want to play with you.

 

[Nas207]

Another big hurdle is also the learning curve.

If you suck at football you can at least just be a useless goalie or run around as a defender and never get the ball. But if you're new to cricket and suck nobody will want to play with you.

True to an extent. I know several cricketers who came in totally fresh and were at least servicable. Raw athleticism is still a thing.

 

[CartyDurham]

England players 'disappointed' at lack of northern venues for 2027 Ashes

Jack Leach, Mark Wood surprised at allocation for Australia's next visit, with Headingley and Old Trafford omitted

www.espncricinfo.com

The players are disappointed in how the FTECB is going and cutting the north of England out of the next ashes

this is part of my point about test cricket could easily be in big trouble in the future as the FTECB wants it centralised in small areas of the country

the youngsters will be unable to see the England players in the flesh and won’t be inspired . Sky has been trumpeting record viewing figures but they are less than a million people out of a U.K. population of 65 million

it’s a real minority sport

 

[Yeoman]

It does seem strange that both Headingley and Old Trafford should miss out at the same time. Even in a year when one of the ‘new’ test grounds is given a game one would have thought it logical to have one in the midlands and one in the north as well as the two in London.

 

[GIMH]

London getting three Tests a year leaving the rest to fight over three is laughable.

 

[Molehill]

London getting three Tests a year leaving the rest to fight over three is laughable.

The problem is, each London Test problem generates about double the revenue as anywhere else (especially the Lord's ones).

 

[slowfinger]

let's just have all 5 tests at Lord's then, or 4 at Lord's and one at the Oval

 

[Ali TT]

let's just have all 5 tests at Lord's then, or 4 at Lord's and one at the Oval

7 tests a year - 3 at Lords, 2 at the Oval and 2 at the best ground in the country (Trent Bridge).

Not the first time no matches up north in a recent Ashes, was the case in 2015 too. We won that series.

 

[sledger]

London getting three Tests a year leaving the rest to fight over three is laughable.

Yeah. Should have four. And the fifth should be played in Hampshire.

 

[Yeoman]

The problem is, each London Test problem generates about double the revenue as anywhere else (especially the Lord's ones).

You’re of course right and money makes the world go round of course.

To play devils advocate though, one could argue that the Ashes tests would sell out anywhere even if you doubled the prices so you might as well take it round the country. It’s more for other, lower profile series that you need to give attendance and gate receipts a boost by focusing on London.

 

[slowfinger]

Yeah. Should have four. And the fifth should be played in Hampshire.

it's alright, the very vocal, historic Southampton crowd have made their voices clear and secured a venue for the next Ashes.

on an aside, how often do Australia deviate from Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide? Maybe Hobart some times? Hpow much of their decision is based on 'sales' ?

 

[Ali TT]

it's alright, the very vocal, historic Southampton crowd have made their voices clear and secured a venue for the next Ashes.

on an aside, how often do Australia deviate from Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide? Maybe Hobart some times? Hpow much of their decision is based on 'sales' ?

I don't think sales is the key factor as these are the historical locations of state cricket in Australia but given the populations of those urban centres are about ten times or more bigger than the alternatives, it wouldn't make much economic sense to play elsewhere on a regular basis

I'm not convinced it was right for the ECB to add 3 extra test grounds in the 00s but now with 8 test grounds there will always be losers every year. Also, there's some political sensitivity about touring sides playing at Lords even now. Not sure refusing India a match at the home of cricket would go down well...

Could anyone remind me if there's any other international cricket in England between now and the next home Ashes and whether any of it will be played in Manchester or Leeds?

 

[GIMH]

I can understand every tourist getting a game at Lord’s; it has prestige that no other cricket venue does. That’s the truth, as much as Aussies might pretend the MCG or SCG are somehow up there.

The Oval on the other hand should get in the mixer with the rest of them.

 

[slowfinger]

I can understand every tourist getting a game at Lord’s; it has prestige that no other cricket venue does. That’s the truth, as much as Aussies might pretend the MCG or SCG are somehow up there.

The Oval on the other hand should get in the mixer with the rest of them.

I agree with this, even though the Oval crowd is way better from my experience
And some how Edgebaston is also sacrosanct. Surely Edgebaston should be as much in the mixer as Old Trafford

 

[Ali TT]

Rains too much in Manchester

 

[trundler]

Rains too much in Manchester

Should only schedule tests there in June then.