Cricinfo has this interview with ECB "Performance Director" Mo Bobat. Bobat makes an interesting claim about county cricket, "Take something like county batting average. We know that a county batting average does not significantly predict an international batting average, so a lot of the conventional things that are looked at as being indicators of success - they don't really stand true in a predictive sense." And later in the article there is a graph, showing county averages plotted against test averages for 13 English test batsmen. This is reproduced below. better than random? raw data suggests no meaningful link between championship and test averages 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Test County Championship Sam Curran England players' batting averages
Nick Bloom has recently published a book on county cricket, " Batting for Time: The Fight to Keep English Cricket Alive". I haven't read the book, but the review in the Daily Telegraph got a lot of attention for a quote from Durham Chief Executive Tim Bostock describing county members as Luddites. The "L" word is only the half of it, Bostock also describes county members as the "lowest common denominator." This is a companion piece to an article published last year in the Telegraph where an unnamed ECB source described county members as "fleas on the tail of the dog." The middle - management rungs of English cricket's bureaucracy have an odd attitude towards paying customers. Of course contempt for customers can extend to the free market but the rule is it shouldn't be openly expressed, even a bank that has me on hold for half an hour will say every two minutes "your business is important to us". If English cricket had