Advertise on CBF

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8

Author Topic: Changes to cricket games that you think would encourage more participation  (Read 2892 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tim2000s

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10655
  • Trade Count: (+19)
  • If I only could bat....

Following the discussion in the "Changes due to the world cup" topic, I thought this deserved a topic of its own.

It can't have gone un-noticed that one of the fastest growing forms of cricket in the UK is Last Man Stands which offers teams the opportunity to play 20 overs a side in two hours, either after work or at some point on a weekend.

I struggle to play a 45 or 50 over match at a weekend simply due to the time commitment (starting at 1pm and not finishing till 7.30pm plus any travel doesn't fly in our household any longer).

Likewise, I really don't see the need for a 30-45 minute break between innings so that both sides can sit down and have some food.

Given some of the ideas on the other topic, what would you change in Weekend Cricket to make it more attractive given the changes in society that have taken place?
Logged

Seniorplayer

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5620
  • Trade Count: (0)

Make Divisions more localised cut down distances players travel to away games save on  on travel time 3 hour round trips are no fun.
Cut breaks between innings in  45 / 50 overs matches to 15 mins.
Logged

iand123

  • Moderator
  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3876
  • Trade Count: (+12)

Earlier starts for me. Theyve made our starts 12:30 but we still end up finishing near to 7 with travel on top of that (we are in a league that isnt regionalised so can play anywhere in Kent).

I'd also make more of a punishment for over rates, its getting a joke how slow teams are. Difficult to implement as it requires umpires on both sides but currently there is no incentive for teams to get through overs in a reasonable time
Logged

DorsetDan

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1619
  • Trade Count: (0)

Time is an issue. It doesn't need to be reduced overs but stricter over rates, reduced faffing at tea/ waiting for the opposition to show etc. Earlier start times are definitely appealing. Cricket takes a full day at the moment and I'm sure there are better ways to do it to be home at a decent time.

Players attitudes are one of the major issues for me playing Saturday cricket. Even on a Sunday, cricket seems to attract hyper competitive, hyper aggressive knobbers with very little talent to back up their attitude. You wouldn't get away with it in any other sport so I don't know why it is tolerated across all levels of cricket. I can think of literally only one or two teams I've enjoyed playing against.
Logged

t2ylo

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 406
  • Trade Count: (0)

I wanted to echo some of the themes already...

1) Proper pyramid structure with more localised games - often I have driven past 20+ other cricket clubs to play a fixture in the Somerset Shrubbery League. Local rivalry was one of my favourite parts of cricket growing up, playing next village/town/city each year, having friends from the opposition that you knew over the years and looking forward to a proper good hard (but sporting) game. This may also cut out some of the nonsense & sledging.
2) Shorter games at lower levels (40 overs) 1pm start and really strict on timings to bowl your overs - amazing how fast this got done with England kicking off at 3pm
3) Tighter on strict tea interval time
4) Get rid of the nonsense about switching between internal teams - if you play for that club and you can only play at home, have to finish on time to go out, work Saturday morning or have family and they like to come at watch then let people play. With one eye on 'strengthening' in last 4 games, but spirit of cricket applies on and off the field.
5) Higher levels should mirror the 50 over game but recreational cricket should be more, well, recreational
Logged
Cricket is battle and service and sport and art

Douglas Jardine

jjelricksmith

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 227
  • Trade Count: (0)

Make Divisions more localised cut down distances players travel to away games save on  on travel time 3 hour round trips are no fun.
Cut breaks between innings in  45 / 50 overs matches to 15 mins.

Agree with this in lower divisions but there are clubs near me where they have players good enough to be in our division but the swamp they play on means they aren't allowed to come up. Some pitches simply wouldnt be safe in higher divisions, pair this with the skill gap becoming far larger between a division and lowering competitiveness for a season. I dont have any issue travelling 45mins for some away days, lift sharing and allocating my summer saturdays to cricket means this really isnt an issue as you go into the middle or top divisions.
Logged

mattw

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2217
  • Trade Count: (+9)
    • PRYZM Cricket

I think a few changes need to be made;
- Earlier start times (based purely around food, I start at 12:30pm - so if we're playing away, breakfast in the morning but then you start at around lunch time and the next time you eat (if you're fielding) is usually around 3:30pm). I have personally struggled in relationships when I arrive back at 8:30-9pm on a Saturday evening after playing an away game (I had to reword that one), as my partner isn't happy that I'm gone for the whole of Saturday. There are a few other factors in this, mainly that I don't think as many people only work Saturday mornings these days and one of the biggest factors - whilst you can go out and have a few drinks on a Friday night, since I've hit 30 - the hangovers last longer and longer, meaning that I tend not to drink the night before a game, then you cannot really make plans on Saturday evening as you may not even get back until 8:30-9pm etc.

- Less time wasted, I agree with some that less faffing around and stricter punishments on over rate. When I played in the Worcester League there was so much faffing around (but also this can be contributed to 'leg-side wides', as sometimes teams would concede 50 or so extras, meaning that's nearly 10 extra overs bowled.). Now playing in the Warwickshire Prem, it's a lot quicker and teams take the over rate seriously.

- Only Win/Lose games - I've never been a fan of win/lose/draw - for me this does not relate to any cricket that I've ever seen play on the international/county circuit, so why do we, as amateurs play this format? There's literally nothing more boring than posting a total of 250+ batting first, to see the oppo come out and block for the draw from ball one. Whilst I enjoy the challenge of trying to get batsmen out, I feel that this promotes negative cricket from all parties and the result becomes a formality. This could mean that a lot of games finish a lot sooner, making it more enjoyable for everyone. The only positive about win/lose/draw is for the team finishing the game 9 down and scraping the draw. Maybe there needs to be a higher swing in points to promote pushing for the win. I would suggest that the winning team still gets maximum points, then the team with the losing draw gets a few additional points for not being bowled out.

- Whilst 50 overs is played at the elite level, and therefore teams up around that upper echelon would need to play that format - I don't think 45 / 50 overs is required. Since T20 has been introduced and given it's popularity - I think there should potentially be a T20 only league for people that cannot commit to playing the whole day to play cricket. Also for the batsmen out there, there's nothing worse than dedicating your day to playing cricket but you get a first-ball duck - so another format could be 2 x cumulative T20 cricket games. This then gives people a chance to redeem themselves and not feel like their Saturday is wasted if they don't perform well with the bat. I've seen too many batsman walk away from the game due to poor form, thus losing their enjoyment - so I feel that this would improve the rate of people falling away from the game. Ultimately the team could win it in one game, by posting 200+, then bowling the team out for 50 both times. So the only negative is I find is if there is a complete mismatch where it may be less enjoyable for the losing sides.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2018, 08:53:30 AM by mattw »
Logged

SLA

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 192
  • Trade Count: (0)

Following the discussion in the "Changes due to the world cup" topic, I thought this deserved a topic of its own.

It can't have gone un-noticed that one of the fastest growing forms of cricket in the UK is Last Man Stands which offers teams the opportunity to play 20 overs a side in two hours, either after work or at some point on a weekend.

I struggle to play a 45 or 50 over match at a weekend simply due to the time commitment (starting at 1pm and not finishing till 7.30pm plus any travel doesn't fly in our household any longer).

Likewise, I really don't see the need for a 30-45 minute break between innings so that both sides can sit down and have some food.

Given some of the ideas on the other topic, what would you change in Weekend Cricket to make it more attractive given the changes in society that have taken place?

Promoters have been trying for years to get last man stands to take off around here, but no-one is interested, because its a stupid, (No Swearing Please) format where you have to pay a franchise fee, which is really taking the piss. Cricket belongs to the people, we shouldn't have to pay anyone for the right to play.

Logged
40-over Cricket: 150* off 108, 8-3-19-7
T20 Cricket: 127* off 64, 4-1-12-6
Countries played cricket in so far: 6

SLA

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 192
  • Trade Count: (0)

We play 40 over win/lose cricket on a Saturday. I don't see any advantage in playing longer games than this. I do favour a bonus point system that rewards teams that bowl the opposition out or knock off the runs at a certain rate to keep a small element of the W/L/D style of play.

There are not many ways you could improve this. Starting the game earlier would lose more players than it attracts. Playing only local games would mean more mismatches because not all local teams are the same standard.

One thing I would do is scrap the tea break entirely. As soon as one team comes off the field, strap the pads on and get going. Provide a buffet for each side to graze on whilst batting.

The BIG problem we have in our league is teams defaulting. We are a small village club with 2 teams who have NEVER defaulted a game in our entire history. To do would be a betrayal of the cricketing commuting and an abrogation of the responsibility we have taken on to the league.

Other teams are less principled, and are more than happy to sack off a game at the last minute because they'd rather go down the pub than play with 10 men. Clubs like this should be kicked out of the league, full stop.


I would also give immediate one match bans for all sledging, with season-long bans for any repeat offences.
Logged
40-over Cricket: 150* off 108, 8-3-19-7
T20 Cricket: 127* off 64, 4-1-12-6
Countries played cricket in so far: 6

mo_town

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 551
  • Trade Count: (+1)

Earlier starts for sure. But I have heard enough people grumble 'Sat mornings are for kids and afternoons are for cricket', so not sure if it will ever happen. Less travel would be great as well.
Logged

richthekeeper

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 848
  • Trade Count: (+2)

I wanted to echo some of the themes already...

1) Proper pyramid structure with more localised games - often I have driven past 20+ other cricket clubs to play a fixture in the Somerset Shrubbery League. Local rivalry was one of my favourite parts of cricket growing up, playing next village/town/city each year, having friends from the opposition that you knew over the years and looking forward to a proper good hard (but sporting) game. This may also cut out some of the nonsense & sledging.

This is the number one reason people have been exiting my old club. We went from playing in the top division of a localised league in south east wales to playing in the 2nd division of the South Wales premier. This meant instead of 20 minute away trips, we have an hours drive every other week. It completely took the shine off cricket for me.
Logged

richthekeeper

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 848
  • Trade Count: (+2)

Also I agree with @mattw on the 2xT20 format.

We played this in an inter-club friendly last season and will do again this year. Its a fantastic format which brings the excitement of a T20 with the tactics of a test match. Rather than playing two separate games we just play a two innings game of 20 overs per side. Its absolutely brilliant and as a batsman you get to have two goes :)
Logged

SLA

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 192
  • Trade Count: (0)

Also I agree with @mattw on the 2xT20 format.

We played this in an inter-club friendly last season and will do again this year. Its a fantastic format which brings the excitement of a T20 with the tactics of a test match. Rather than playing two separate games we just play a two innings game of 20 overs per side. Its absolutely brilliant and as a batsman you get to have two goes :)

I've never really seen the appeal. So its basically just two T20s back to back, where the aggregate score wins?

Surely the point of a T20 is that its short and sweet, so why would you want to play 2 T20s in a day? Doesn't that undermine the entire point of playing T20? Why not just play a 40 over game?

Logged
40-over Cricket: 150* off 108, 8-3-19-7
T20 Cricket: 127* off 64, 4-1-12-6
Countries played cricket in so far: 6

SLA

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 192
  • Trade Count: (0)

I- Whilst 50 overs is played at the elite level, and therefore teams up around that upper echelon would need to play that format - I don't think 45 / 50 overs is required. Since T20 has been introduced and given it's popularity - I think there should potentially be a T20 only league for people that cannot commit to playing the whole day to play cricket.

I would be utterly incredulous if there was a single area of the country that doesn't already have an existing T20 league.

Saturday is for 40 over league cricket, Sunday is for friendlies (30 overs or declaration cricket depending on your preference), and Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday are all for 20 over cricket.
Logged
40-over Cricket: 150* off 108, 8-3-19-7
T20 Cricket: 127* off 64, 4-1-12-6
Countries played cricket in so far: 6

iand123

  • Moderator
  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3876
  • Trade Count: (+12)

The Kent league are suggesting a restructure where outside the top 3 divisions will be regionalised. I think its a good idea in some part but do worry it will make people gravitate towards teams in those 3 divisions to play the better standard?

We currently play 46 overs but i honestly dont see why it cant be 40. Maybe premier leagues might want to play 50 overs but i dont see why others need to?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
 

Advertise on CBF