Advertise on CBF

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8

Author Topic: Changes to cricket games that you think would encourage more participation  (Read 5818 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

enlightened

  • Club Cricketer
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 108
  • Trade Count: (0)

My favourite form of cricket is Test cricket - if that ever dies then cricket will be a poorer game because of it - there should be some form of club cricket that mirrors the outcomes that are possible from a Test match. Win / lose cricket would dramatically reduce my enjoyment of the game.
Logged

SLA

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 503
  • Trade Count: (0)

I'm sorry but I don't agree. In some games they might do in others (most, in our league) they do not.

If you want to know who is the better team between one who took 7 wickets in a game vs a team who only got 6 wickets in another is not fair or transparent. A team who were easily winning might shove their 9, 10, 11 in to have a net as it doesn't make a different to their points total, but the losing team pick up cheap bonus points. A better way to separate teams would be head to head results and then net run rate.

I'd love to know which teams think taking fewer wickets or scoring fewer runs is an advantage. Yes you can bowl wide outside of off to a packed off-side field but that is still a legitimate way to take wickets when you have scoreboard pressure. You can't bowl down leg or use too much short stuff anyway.

If you really want that them, have a single point for taking all 10 wickets in either innings. 1 point for get 90% of the runs or getting the runs with 4 overs to spare (40 over cricket). 20 points for a win and 10 for a draw/tie/cancellation. Maximum 2 bonus points available per team.

Some people seem convinced that scrapping bonus points will suddenly enable teams to score a huge amount of runs. I'm pretty sure everyone is trying to do that but usually fail. The bonus point system in our league means that a team can block out to deny a comfortably better team 5 points, which is 20% of the total available. That is usually a motivation for some players. They don't actually try to score many runs to gain points. They like to spoil someone's day rather than achieve something positive for themselves.

I think bonus points add an unnecessary layer of complexity in an already complex game. They promote stodgy, back-to-the-wall batting at the end where the emphasis is on denying to opposition points rather than gaining your own. They draw out an already long day (which discourages participation) and they often mean lower order batsmen lose the freedom to play how they want. They are pressured into blocking and scraping a few extra runs instead of having a go at playing some nice cricket. Not everyone of course can or does want to do that but the choice is there.

Using net run rate as a separator in the league standings is enough to encourage a team not to jack it in too early. If you get thrashed, it will significantly harm your NRR. The point of NRR is that it doesn't come into play until two teams are on the same points from the results of their games. A team can just aim to get their bonus points without ever really trying to win a game and end up higher in the league that a team who actually wants to participate in a contest.



We seem to be talking at cross-purposes. You are arguing against a specific type of bonus point system that rewards defensive batting, but that is not the type of bonus points system I am arguing in favour of.


Ironically, NRR is a negative measure because it encourages defensive bowling rather than attacking bowling because it rewards economy rather than wickets. Bonus points for runs and wickets work better!


PS: I've never known a cricket team to even consider how many points the opposition are getting. Most are purely concerned about their own points, which means they need to attack, both with ball and bat.
Logged
T20 cricket 1995-present, Saturday league cricket 1997-present.
L3 Cricket Coach, L2 Baseball Coach.
Running total: Countries played cricket in: 7. Counties played cricket in: 14

DorsetDan

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2215
  • Trade Count: (0)

The game we play should reflect the game you watch on television, be it 20-20 or one day, and it shouldn't be any more complicate wrt bonus points etc than that IMO
Logged

SLA

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 503
  • Trade Count: (0)

The game we play should reflect the game you watch on television, be it 20-20 or one day, and it shouldn't be any more complicate wrt bonus points etc than that IMO


Surely it should be the other way round? Professional cricket is funded by recreational cricketers as a means of providing an advert for our sport and to attract new players. So professional cricket should reflect recreational cricket and not the other way round.
Logged
T20 cricket 1995-present, Saturday league cricket 1997-present.
L3 Cricket Coach, L2 Baseball Coach.
Running total: Countries played cricket in: 7. Counties played cricket in: 14

HallamKeeper

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 363
  • Trade Count: (0)

Yeah it does seem so.

We don't play at a high standard so everyone initially wants to score as many as possible or stop the opposition scoring as many as possible. Most teams have one or two decent bats but usually 3 decent bowlers who dominate games. The second half will nearly always start with teams going for the win. Then, when they don't look like winning they can often play very negative cricket to deny points to the winning team and also scrape a few themselves. They wouldn't bat like this if they were close to winning.

I guess in better leagues the batting is much better and deeper so allowing a team to just score 180-5 would be beneficial if you wanted to bowl very negatively.

My whole point is that it is a very long day (we finished at 8pm on Saturday). A lot of people are leaving the game because they want a Saturday night free. Or they don't want to commit over 8 hours door-to-door to something. In our league you sometimes get a chance to finish early if a game is one-sided (a rare treat) but then someone decides to drag it out.

I'm questioning if I will play next season. I might do but I am getting sick of missing friends' birthday meals, bbqs, or just general socialising. If I could restrict cricket to 6 hours 11am-5pm then I can go for breakfast or dinner. My other option is to play occasionally but I've never been able to do that, I think you need to commit to a league.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2018, 11:24:03 AM by HallamKeeper »
Logged
The artist formerly known as CalverKeeper

SLA

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 503
  • Trade Count: (0)

Yeah it does seem so.

We don't play at a high standard so everyone initially wants to score as many as possible or stop the opposition scoring as many as possible. Most teams have one or two decent bats but usually 3 decent bowlers who dominate games. The second half will nearly always start with teams going for the win. Then, when they don't look like winning they can often play very negative cricket to deny points to the winning team and also scrape a few themselves. They wouldn't bat like this if they were close to winning.

I guess in better leagues the batting is much better and deeper so allowing a team to just score 180-5 would be beneficial if you wanted to bowl very negatively.

My whole point is that it is a very long day (we finished at 8pm on Saturday). A lot of people are leaving the game because they want a Saturday night free. Or they don't want to commit over 8 hours door-to-door to something. In our league you sometimes get a chance to finish early if a game is one-sided (a rare treat) but then someone decides to drag it out.

I'm questioning if I will play next season. I might do but I am getting sick of missing friends' birthday meals, bbqs, or just general socialising. If I could restrict cricket to 6 hours 11am-5pm then I can go for breakfast or dinner. My other option is to play occasionally but I've never been able to do that, I think you need to commit to a league.


I am barely playing weekend this season for similar reasons. I have a young family now and I cannot justify being out of the house from 12noon to 9pm every Saturday, as much as I enjoy Saturday cricket. Last year I tried playing alternate games, but it really didn't work at all, I never found any kind of form, and I didn't enjoy it.

This year I am throwing myself into midweek T20 cricket instead, which is less of a time commitment. It seems to be working better as I am actually enjoying the games I get to play.


The MAJOR problem we have as a club is that the league we are in is very badly organised, and its letting our players down badly. For some reason the league decided on small leagues with only 12 fixtures, and with some clubs having consecutive bye weeks in the middle of the summer. The problem is that they are also very lax on letting teams default without penalty. The upshot of this is that our 2nd XI have gone 7 weeks now without playing a game. 7 weeks in the middle of the summer, with all this sun!

and guess what is happening -  a lot of our players have had enough and have said there is no point being in a cricket club if you never get to play a game so they will take up golf instead.
Logged
T20 cricket 1995-present, Saturday league cricket 1997-present.
L3 Cricket Coach, L2 Baseball Coach.
Running total: Countries played cricket in: 7. Counties played cricket in: 14

HallamKeeper

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 363
  • Trade Count: (0)

Our league ask for feedback each year, I always respond with fewer overs, earlier starts and encourage quick over rates (bonus points for over rates would be good).

Either people don't bother to give feedback or there is a very silent majority saying everything is fine. More likely the people who run the league don't want to change it. 6 more teams are leaving this season for county leagues.
Logged
The artist formerly known as CalverKeeper

DorsetDan

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2215
  • Trade Count: (0)


Surely it should be the other way round? Professional cricket is funded by recreational cricketers as a means of providing an advert for our sport and to attract new players. So professional cricket should reflect recreational cricket and not the other way round.

Slight semantics, but the point was to standardise cricket formats/ rules to aid participation.

I can't imagine turning up to play rugby across a county border to be told "the way we play here is 2 points for a try and 5 for a tackle because we want to give everyone a chance, even the teams that don't see the ball all day".

If you really believe professional cricket would be better served by the disorganised approach of amateur cricket that changes its mind every two seconds with no relationship to what players actually want then crack on... no, scrap that I just described the ECB. As you were :)
« Last Edit: July 16, 2018, 05:26:59 PM by DorsetDan »
Logged

SLA

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 503
  • Trade Count: (0)

Our league ask for feedback each year, I always respond with fewer overs, earlier starts and encourage quick over rates (bonus points for over rates would be good).

Either people don't bother to give feedback or there is a very silent majority saying everything is fine. More likely the people who run the league don't want to change it. 6 more teams are leaving this season for county leagues.

I answer similar polls, I have also run a poll within our club in the past.

Honestly, most people responded that they didn't want shorter games and they didn't want earlier starts. They liked 40 overs and they were fine with 1:30pm starts. They thought the travel times were generally fine. They did want quicker over-rates but there isn't much you can do about that.

Every year our league has a vote on various issues from number of overs to bonus points system. Mostly things are the way they are because that's what the majority of players want to do.

Logged
T20 cricket 1995-present, Saturday league cricket 1997-present.
L3 Cricket Coach, L2 Baseball Coach.
Running total: Countries played cricket in: 7. Counties played cricket in: 14

HallamKeeper

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 363
  • Trade Count: (0)

I answer similar polls, I have also run a poll within our club in the past.

Honestly, most people responded that they didn't want shorter games and they didn't want earlier starts. They liked 40 overs and they were fine with 1:30pm starts. They thought the travel times were generally fine. They did want quicker over-rates but there isn't much you can do about that.

Every year our league has a vote on various issues from number of overs to bonus points system. Mostly things are the way they are because that's what the majority of players want to do.

Sorry, forgot to be more clear. We currently play 46 overs from 1.30pm. I suggest we play 40 overs from 12 or earlier if teams agree.

I think you could introduce a bonus point for bowling overs on time. You should be able to bowl 40 in 2.5 hours. Lost balls seems to hamper this at smaller grounds but I don't see why you can't have 4 or 5 spare balls ready and the batting team go look for them (which they should do anyway).
Logged
The artist formerly known as CalverKeeper

smilley792

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8751
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Willoooowwwww

Sorry, forgot to be more clear. We currently play 46 overs from 1.30pm. I suggest we play 40 overs from 12 or earlier if teams agree.

I think you could introduce a bonus point for bowling overs on time. You should be able to bowl 40 in 2.5 hours. Lost balls seems to hamper this at smaller grounds but I don't see why you can't have 4 or 5 spare balls ready and the batting team go look for them (which they should do anyway).

Theres a rule in our league that after the first 3 balls The bowling side supply, after that the batting side has to supply them

Id lost 3 of hathersage balls in the first 3 overs and our skipper was not happy!
We did have most of our players looking for them though.
Logged
@chrisjones792
Fastest ton- 54balls

six and out

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • Trade Count: (0)
    • MKCC website

Sorry, forgot to be more clear. We currently play 46 overs from 1.30pm. I suggest we play 40 overs from 12 or earlier if teams agree.

I think you could introduce a bonus point for bowling overs on time. You should be able to bowl 40 in 2.5 hours. Lost balls seems to hamper this at smaller grounds but I don't see why you can't have 4 or 5 spare balls ready and the batting team go look for them (which they should do anyway).

We play exactly that mate... 40 overs in 2.5 hours. And you get penalised 6 runs for every over you are short! It soon speeds the game/people up.

We start at 1.30pm for the majority of the year and are still done by 7pm most games.
Logged

HallamKeeper

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 363
  • Trade Count: (0)

We play exactly that mate... 40 overs in 2.5 hours. And you get penalised 6 runs for every over you are short! It soon speeds the game/people up.

We start at 1.30pm for the majority of the year and are still done by 7pm most games.

That seems more sensible. I'd just like to be done for 5.30ish so I can have a beer with the team and still make it home to go out with my girlfriend for food or something. Would make my life so much easier.
Logged
The artist formerly known as CalverKeeper

six and out

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • Trade Count: (0)
    • MKCC website

That seems more sensible. I'd just like to be done for 5.30ish so I can have a beer with the team and still make it home to go out with my girlfriend for food or something. Would make my life so much easier.

Haha.... Yep I think that's a common theme.

I actually think we may go to 12.30pm starts next season, as there is a rumour going round at the moment that it will be put forward at the league AGM.
Logged

SD

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 613
  • Trade Count: (0)

We play exactly that mate... 40 overs in 2.5 hours. And you get penalised 6 runs for every over you are short! It soon speeds the game/people up.

We start at 1.30pm for the majority of the year and are still done by 7pm most games.

Slow over rates are endemic all the way from test level to the lowest of the amateur leagues.  That rule sounds entirely sensible to me.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8
 

Advertise on CBF