Could English cricket take a leaf out of MLB/NFL's book?

[dcnstntn]

Personally I do not like the league format used in English cricket. Much like US sports, most teams from year to year seem able to challenge for honours. Sometimes teams in Division two are capable of defeating a lot of teams in Division one which makes the league system pointless in my opinion.

Due to this I wonder if a revamp of English cricket should be made, loosely similar to Major League Baseball or NFL. I'm not talking of changing rules in the game, but simply adopting the divisional and play-off structure.

Why not break the league in to regions, and have each team playing each of the other counties (Due to the number of teams, alternating home and away every other season). For example, Essex, Surrey, Middlesex and Kent could be in one division but still play the likes of Yorkshire, Lancashire, Sussex etc.

With their being 18 counties, two groups of 5 and two groups of 4 could easily be adopted, with the winner of each division and the two other top teams advancing to the final 6 (Divisional trophies for each divisional winner)

Teams with best points records 1 and 2 would already qualify with home advantage for the semi's and bypass the QF stage.

Quarter Finals:

The team with the 3rd best record playing the team with the 6th best record (Winner plays 2)

The team with the 4th best record playing the team with the 5th best record (winner plays 1)

Winners of the above two games playing teams 1 and 2 in the Semi finals.

Final at Lords.

I believe a County Championship and OD league format like this would increase competitiveness for honours and in all improve the league.

If anyone is familiar with the Home run derby in MLB, could a six hit derby work in cricket too?

Just an idea. Maybe it will be put down by most people on here, but County Cricket has to change somehow because it just isn't producing enough top class players.

 

[silentstriker]

Maybe a wicket taking derby. Don't want to encourage any more six hitting tbh.

 

[Richard]

Me, I'd like to see one big league comprising FC and OD (50-over) points running throughout the season, making it equally important to try in both forms of the game, then one knockout with a Lord's final, then 2 weeks of Twenty20 in the middle of the season.

At least, that's in-a-nutshell. There are many more little things to add to that, but it'd be a start.

 

[Swervy]

Personally I do not like the league format used in English cricket. Much like US sports, most teams from year to year seem able to challenge for honours. Sometimes teams in Division two are capable of defeating a lot of teams in Division one which makes the league system pointless in my opinion.

Due to this I wonder if a revamp of English cricket should be made, loosely similar to Major League Baseball or NFL. I'm not talking of changing rules in the game, but simply adopting the divisional and play-off structure.

Why not break the league in to regions, and have each team playing each of the other counties (Due to the number of teams, alternating home and away every other season). For example, Essex, Surrey, Middlesex and Kent could be in one division but still play the likes of Yorkshire, Lancashire, Sussex etc.

With their being 18 counties, two groups of 5 and two groups of 4 could easily be adopted, with the winner of each division and the two other top teams advancing to the final 6 (Divisional trophies for each divisional winner)

Teams with best points records 1 and 2 would already qualify with home advantage for the semi's and bypass the QF stage.

Quarter Finals:

The team with the 3rd best record playing the team with the 6th best record (Winner plays 2)

The team with the 4th best record playing the team with the 5th best record (winner plays 1)

Winners of the above two games playing teams 1 and 2 in the Semi finals.

Final at Lords.

I believe a County Championship and OD league format like this would increase competitiveness for honours and in all improve the league.

If anyone is familiar with the Home run derby in MLB, could a six hit derby work in cricket too?

Just an idea. Maybe it will be put down by most people on here, but County Cricket has to change somehow because it just isn't producing enough top class players.

yeah I wouldnt be against something like that.

I think 10 first class matches a season is sufficient for each county... that way it would be easier for the county games to be scheduled to avoid test matches. I would be scheduling the first class games so that days 3 and 4 are on the weekend. First class games only played once every two weeks. The middle week taken up with and extended Pro40 tournament which runs through the whole season.

I would bring back the knockout tournament as well.

I would start 2020 in July, and have it so the end part is in the summer hols for kids.

oooh, I would do all sorts..heheheh

 

[dcnstntn]

Seriously guys, for any of you who are not sure about how the NFL and MLB seasons work, please investigate each on wikipedia, or the league websites.

One thing I can say for the Yanks is that they definitely know how to make their sports competitive.

 

[Richard]

One thing I can say is that I've never had a clue about most of the Yanks' sports.

Mind, there are plenty of 'em on here who know their cricket, though.

 

[open365]

The problem with a knockout structure is that A) The weather in England is **** so there's a high chance the game would be rain affected

and B) Not enough county games end in a result, the game would probably end in a draw.

 

[dcnstntn]

Would any one be against limiting the number of overs a side can bat in the longer format of the game? Say give each side 180 overs for the 4 day form of the game, and they can bat whatever they like in each innings as long as they do not go over a combined 180 overs, or is that messing too much with cricket?

Baseball for example has 9 innings per side (only need 3 out to finish an inning). If the game is drawn at that time they play extra innings until a team gets a lead when both teams have played the same number of innings. In cricket could play even be extended for an extra period until all wickets are taken or a team bats to the score, so could an extra day be scheduled for this occurrence or play extended on the final day if there are only say 1 or 2 wickets left?

 

[Richard]

Would any one be against limiting the number of overs a side can bat in the longer format of the game? Say give each side 180 overs for the 4 day form of the game, and they can bat whatever they like in each innings as long as they do not go over a combined 180 overs, or is that messing too much with cricket?

Yes. The whole ethos of FC cricket is that there is no limit on overs. You play as many as you can bowl in 4 days, and as many as anyone can and wants to bat for.

 

[open365]

In theory it's not a terrible idea, but aswell as what Richard pointed out, the problem is that in circumstances where a team could bat for 180 overs and not be dismissed(unless the teams are really unequal) then the likeliehood is that the other team will bat for 180 overs and the game will end in a draw anyway.

Personaly i'd like to see championship games played over 5 days

 

[Swervy]

Seriously guys, for any of you who are not sure about how the NFL and MLB seasons work, please investigate each on wikipedia, or the league websites.

One thing I can say for the Yanks is that they definitely know how to make their sports competitive.

NFL for me is the greatest sports league in the world. It has basically done everything right to make the sport competitive throughout the league, its marketed itself to perfection, it rakes in the dosh, and it is great to watch.

 

[dcnstntn]

Yes. The whole ethos of FC cricket is that there is no limit on overs. You play as many as you can bowl in 4 days, and as many as anyone can and wants to bat for.

OK should domestic cricket be extended to five days of play rather than four in an attempt to simulate test cricket, and hopefully get more results?

 

[open365]

I'm a big follower of the NBA, at first i thought it was a great system but during the playoffs the format seemed a bit flawed and the interest for the final was not as high as i thought it would be.

What's the differences between that and the NFL?

 

[Swervy]

Yes. The whole ethos of FC cricket is that there is no limit on overs. You play as many as you can bowl in 4 days, and as many as anyone can and wants to bat for.

I am sure there was a time when teams could only bat 100 overs in the first innings (or a 120 maybe). I might be wrong but I am sure it was when it was 3 day per game

 

[Richard]

OK should domestic cricket be extended to five days of play rather than four in an attempt to simulate test cricket, and hopefully get more results?

TBH, that's something I'm not sure about. It might work (obviously, if done, it'd require a reduction, and quite a large one, in the number of games) but equally, no-one anywhere else does it.

It's something that, almost certainly, couldn't do our cricket much harm but I don't know about the costs it'd ensue. Nor can I see many people being in favour.

 

[open365]

OK should domestic cricket be extended to five days of play rather than four in an attempt to simulate test cricket, and hopefully get more results?

IMO, definitely, far too many county matches end in boring draws, adding a fifth day would generate more interest for the game because of there being more results and would improve the standard of cricket.

 

[Richard]

I am sure there was a time when teams could only bat 100 overs in the first innings (or a 120 maybe). I might be wrong but I am sure it was when it was 3 day per game

Maybe. If so it was as stupid as 3-day cricket was. 3-day cricket and covered wickets simply does not mix.

 

[Swervy]

I'm a big follower of the NBA, at first i thought it was a great system but during the playoffs the format seemed a bit flawed and the interest for the final was not as high as i thought it would be.

What's the differences between that and the NFL?

NFL, 32 teams, 12 go through to playoffs which is straight knockout, all the way through to the Superbowl.

Everything is gear towards winning the Superbowl, so you have to time your peak to perfection.

 

[dcnstntn]

I'm a big follower of the NBA, at first i thought it was a great system but during the playoffs the format seemed a bit flawed and the interest for the final was not as high as i thought it would be.

What's the differences between that and the NFL?

The NBA is something I do not take an interest in. Anyone know?

 

[Swervy]

The NBA is something I do not take an interest in. Anyone know?

I think each playoff game is played over a series of games, which I dont like at all