-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Important Discussion
- Thread starter Blewy
- Start date
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Jamee999 said:
Then have a system like Super 14.
THis season they play, say, 12 games.
1. Home
2. Away
3. H
4. A
5. H
6. A
7. H
8. A
9. H
10. A
11. H
12. A
The next season they play it opposite...if they're in the same division. Those who are promoted/relegated have to face this after being rewarded/punished
Okay, maybe not that idea..
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
Its Divison One that have the extra games against different teams. D2-4 play each other twice..Jamee999 said:
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
It might be a bit long, but...
What about having 22 rounds, so that Div 1 play each other twice, and Div 2-4 play each other 3 times, and Div 2-4 have a general bye at one stage?
What about having 22 rounds, so that Div 1 play each other twice, and Div 2-4 play each other 3 times, and Div 2-4 have a general bye at one stage?
It seems like a really interesting idea, would certainly make division 1 a lot stronger whilst allowing more games which would really decide who was the strongest. Im all for it if thats the way we're going. As i may have mentioned before i'll give just about anything a shot.
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
What is the deal with the two Div 6 sides jumping in front of the Colts (who were in Div 4) seems a bit strange to me?Blewy said:
Slats4ever
International Vice-Captain
that's why i like it to. It really will help decide who is infact the strongest..
Another thing I like that hasn't really been mentioned yet is that it gives teams who are down the bottom a realistic chance of getting to the top sooner rather than later.
Another thing I like that hasn't really been mentioned yet is that it gives teams who are down the bottom a realistic chance of getting to the top sooner rather than later.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
Why don't we just make each team play each other 4 times? Or merge 1 and 2, 3 and 4, and 5 and 6. Seems much easier to me.
Like the second option more because as Slats said, it'd give teams at the bottom a chance to get to the top reasonably soon.
Like the second option more because as Slats said, it'd give teams at the bottom a chance to get to the top reasonably soon.
I'm going to go against what everyone else is saying and say that I like WCC the way it is right now...currently the season goes for 20 weeks and in my opinion that is an excellent amount of time. I'm also not sure about 12 teams in D1 (ie uneven teams may not be the go, and as was said earlier, D1 should be an exclusive club...rather then the most teams)
That said, the idea could be a brilliant success, and if we went for it I wouldn't have huge objections...
I'm just saying that maybe we shouldn't rush in to radical changes to a competition that has had no real problems for seasons on end...(But whatever we do is cool)
That said, the idea could be a brilliant success, and if we went for it I wouldn't have huge objections...
I'm just saying that maybe we shouldn't rush in to radical changes to a competition that has had no real problems for seasons on end...(But whatever we do is cool)
andyc
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I'm inclined to agree with you there. If it ain't broke don't fix it, right.Mr. P said:
But there certainly is a case to be made about sides in the lower divisions being able to move up quickly. There were quite a few very strong teams in Divs 5 and 6 last season and there's gonna be some now, and it's certainly a bit of a hassle having to do so much to move up a division, and by the time you get moved up one or two divisions, your better players may have retired, been traded off or you may have had to let some go.
Slats4ever
International Vice-Captain
yeah perhaps i should mentioned it earlier. there might be a case for 3 groups of 12!!! make things simpler
bugssy
Cricketer Of The Year
didnt i mention something like this a while ago...... but i like the idea.............broncoman said:seeing as though its 50% my idea ill have to support it!
but in all honesty this is a good move if you guys support it, the structuring means teams that went well last season are still advantaged... it also gives teams a chance to improve their divisions a bit quicker...
Last edited:
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Slats4ever said:
Asked Simon..he said people in the middle would lose interestm which is probably true, because they won't get a chance to get promoted, or sweat of relegation.
ash chaulk
International Captain
i have mixed feelings for the idea....
i like the idea of making the divisions bigger
i think that the lowest division should have the most teams as someone said division 1 should have the least to make it a priviledge to make it to the top.
i like the idea of making the divisions bigger
i think that the lowest division should have the most teams as someone said division 1 should have the least to make it a priviledge to make it to the top.
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't like the idea of not getting to face some teams on my home turf. Thus, I ask, how would you decide which teams you play once and which teams you play twice?
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
Maybe a better option is to add 4 new teams and have 4 divisions of 10
superkingdave
Hall of Fame Member
How about 3 groups of 12, Everyone plays each other once (11 games) then the top 6 play each other once and the bottom six play each other once? total 16 games.
It would be a bit better than say a club getting relegated from Div 1 because their extra games are against TN and a couple of other gun sides whilst their relegation rivals play less good sides.
It would be a bit better than say a club getting relegated from Div 1 because their extra games are against TN and a couple of other gun sides whilst their relegation rivals play less good sides.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
That's probably my main problem with it too.Mr Mxyzptlk said:
I should have mentioned the 'keep it as it is' idea, because it isn't exactly broke at the moment.