*Official* English Domestic Season (2004)

[Craig]

He is against it.

 

[Richard]

I know I am, Craig, but there's no need to say it twice.
Personally I believe that two overseas players doesn't add much to the English game in terms of raising the standard and takes a hell of a lot of cash out of it.
One would be far better IMO.

 

[marc71178]

But when the money goes to prolonging the career of a county stalward, one would question the wisdom in it.

By employing a 2nd Overseas player, I believe all that is happening is the worst English player in the side is dropped.

Now that is surely raising the standard of the cricket and teaching these players they need to fight more for it.

Is it any coincidence that one of our strongest periods Internationally in the last generation was when there were 2, 3 or even 4 Overseas players?

 

[Neil Pickup]

If it was poor investment cash/standards wise, would the in-it-for-profit county chairman make it?

I think not.

 

[Rik]

Barnett played for Shropshire last season.

Don't think so somehow :duh:

Tim Mason formerly of Essex and Leicestershire was our pro last season, and Steve Adshead formerly of Leicestershire and now at Worcestershire, was basically a Semi-Pro.

I can't remember who Barnett played for, but we tried to court him but he declined. This season we have Neil Smith, the former England and Warwickshire Off-Spinning All-Rounder as our pro. I hear he still gives Simon Hughes knightmares :saint:

 

[Neil Pickup]

Blame ITV Teletext for that. Could be Staffs...

And Nightmares has no "K"

 

[Rik]

No, his average shows he's scored runs in County Cricket - that doesn't mean he's batted well.

Yes Marc, it does, even in County Cricket which you seem to rate about as high as Village Cricket despite supporting Warwickshire.

So you are making out he lucked all his runs or was gifted them by hopeless bowling? Or maybe, just maybe he was a quality batsman who scored his runs because he batted well but like everyone had his fair share of luck?

 

[Rik]

And Nightmares has no "K"

It does, http://www.knightmare.com

 

[Rik]

I know I am, Craig, but there's no need to say it twice.
Personally I believe that two overseas players doesn't add much to the English game in terms of raising the standard and takes a hell of a lot of cash out of it.
One would be far better IMO.

I'm with Richard here, it doesn't aid the development of young players who would usually be given the place taken by the 2nd overseas player, it's an expense which doesn't give much back in terms of crowds, simply because very few people go to County Cricket matches anyway and also I don't see the point in giving players from other countries experiance in England so they can come back and make us pay for it. Australia don't, the West Indies don't (although they do allow developing teams and A teams), so why should we?

 

[Langeveldt]

By employing a 2nd Overseas player, I believe all that is happening is the worst English player in the side is dropped.

Thats probably the best way of looking at it.. Very good but obvious observation, It also raises the interest of the CC when top players are performing...

And if the County players think its demeaning that overseas players are coming in and doing better than them, then they wont be very good as England tourists, or competitive cricketers for that matter...

 

[Neil Pickup]

It does, http://www.knightmare.com

While that was one of my very favourite programmes as a child, it ain't a bad dream. It's got a "K" there because it had something to do with a Knight (the 'chess' game?! )

Bad Dream nightmares have no K due to the night-time when they are experienced

 

[Rik]

While that was one of my very favourite programmes as a child, it ain't a bad dream. It's got a "K" there because it had something to do with a Knight (the 'chess' game?! )

Bad Dream nightmares have no K due to the night-time when they are experienced

I was taking the P...:rolleyes:

Yes sometimes people make spelling mistakes, just like yourself. And I didn't even need to get Rod Marsh to tell me that

 

[marc71178]

This season we have Neil Smith, the former England and Warwickshire Off-Spinning All-Rounder as our pro. I hear he still gives Simon Hughes knightmares :saint:

Good old smudge - still coaches at my old school I believe...

I must admit to being disappointed when I umpired him that he didn't get a decent bat...

 

[marc71178]

Thats probably the best way of looking at it.. Very good but obvious observation, It also raises the interest of the CC when top players are performing...

I did an article on this very subject as my entry onto staff here.

Unfortunately we lost it in one of the upgrades and I'm ashamed to admit that I ddin't keep a copy

 

[Richard]

But when the money goes to prolonging the career of a county stalward, one would question the wisdom in it.

By employing a 2nd Overseas player, I believe all that is happening is the worst English player in the side is dropped.

Now that is surely raising the standard of the cricket and teaching these players they need to fight more for it.

Is it any coincidence that one of our strongest periods Internationally in the last generation was when there were 2, 3 or even 4 Overseas players?

Yes, it is coincidence.
Sadly, The First-Class Forum have taken it that it isn't.
It's also, of course, well known that the overseas players back in those days were often regular internationals - not that many are these days. This, of course, will not only increase their available knowledge to pass on but also increase the likelihood of people who can learn taking notice.
The money spent on one overseas player would be equivalent to that of 3 or 4 Englishmen. Given that squads need to be trimmed anyway (no-one doubts that professional county staffs are far too big) this is simply, in my view, a waste of money.
Anyway, the raising of the standard is achievable by only one thing - a change in attitude of the typical county cricketer. It's been clear for donkeys that the old incentives (eg: look - this player's better than you) don't cut the mustard, because plenty of players just don't give a damn.
Nor are all the arguments like "Twenty20 will raise the standard of fielding" true in any way; the only way the standard of fielding will be upped is if players practise their fielding more. Incentives need to be more than new competitions. Because plenty of players don't give a damn about the competitions or the game of cricket. That is the only problem that needs to be changed.

 

[chris.hinton]

thinking about it would it be better to have

- 8 "Super" Teams which would have 15 pros in each team

- 18 Counites to exist but operate on a Semi-pro scale

- Minor Counties to exist but no players will be pro

 

[Richard]

IMO there is scope for all the counties to be equally pro.
The way I understand it, other countries have a much less "closed-shop" approach to professional cricket and why we have such is totally beyond me.

 

[marc71178]

The money spent on one overseas player would be equivalent to that of 3 or 4 Englishmen. Given that squads need to be trimmed anyway (no-one doubts that professional county staffs are far too big) this is simply, in my view, a waste of money.

So in spite of the fact you think squads need to be trimmed, when there is the opportunity of trimming, you don't think it a good idea?

Doesn't that kind of contradict?

 

[Richard]

I think they should be trimmed so the money is saved.
Not trimmed because money needs to be saved.

 

[Craig]

Predict MR Ramprakash to make 1876 runs @ 75 with 15 tons and with a highest score of 397.

He makes the score of 397 against Cambridge UCCE, but holes out to deep midwicket when he tries to blast the wicketkeeper - who is given the ball - out of the ground and is caught.

Stuart Law to score 1700 runs @ 60 this season.