Skip to main content

Changes to County Championship Structure

Martin Moxon, Yorkshire's director of cricket, has proposed that the County Championship be changed from the current two divisions to a conference system.  There would be three six team mixed ability conferences at the start of the season, with each county playing 10 games.  Then the counties would be streamed by results into three new divisions and five more games played.  But all 15 games would count towards the final rankings.  Cricinfo have done a story on the proposal which includes an interesting statement, "Andrew Strauss, the director of England cricket, is known to favour a fall to as low as 10 (first class) games."  But also reports that six of the smaller counties led by Sussex's Rob Andrew support the Moxon proposal for a 15 game first class season.


At first glance it is hard to see much merit in Moxon's plan.  One good point is the suggestion of increased prize money going down to 15 place, but you don't need the convoluted conference structure to achieve that.  And as Essex have shown if small counties are fed up with being useless at 4 - day cricket they need to: Develop their own players and appoint a good coach (A judicious Kolpak recruit can help as well).  Fiddling around with the system so no - one is  at the bottom all the time is a good idea for school sport's day but no way to run a professional competition.



I have Posted before on the introduction of central contracts in 2000 and their impact on England's performances in test matches (You'll see I think performances probably have improved since 2000 but not by as much as you might think.)  What I should have mentioned is a two division county championship also started in 2000 and would have played a role in improving test team standards.  Moving away from the best playing the best and the discipline of promotion and relegation might well result in a worse test team.  



But I wonder what is really going on here?  2020 will see the introduction of a new ECB 20/20 competition.  It's always seemed unlikely the schedule the counties agreed to for 2020 and beyond will be what we end up with.  For a start it implies the best county 20/20 cricketers won't play any domestic 50 over cricket.  I think this is why Andrew Strauss is letting it be known he wants to move to a 10 game first class season (3 divisions of 6 teams playing home and away presumably).  The counties especially the smaller counties are realising that if you give a bully what he wants the bully will come up with more things he wants, it's the bullying not the stuff they're after. 


I rather suspect (and hope) the smaller counties are forming alliances and starting the debate rather than letting the ECB divide and rule as they did in the past.  So I'm in an odd position: I think the proposal is a silly idea and would prefer three merit based divisions to three conferences. But I do like the fact the counties are standing up for themselves and are prepared for the debate to be in public.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

County Championship Salary Cap

This is post about salaries in county cricket. The first class counties are subject to a cap and a collar on amounts paid in wages to cricketers.  They must pay above a collar, currently £0.75m, and below a cap, currently £2m. There is an agreement for both the collar and the cap to increase over the next funding round to 2024. In 2024 the collar will be £1.5m and the cap £2.5m What is less clear is what payments count towards the cap and collar.  I assume employers' national insurance (a 13% tax on wages) isn't included.  Similarly I assume payments to coaching staff don't count towards the cap as if they did, Somerset, Lancashire and Yorkshire would all be over the current £2m cap.  I've gone through the accounts of the first class counties to see what, if any, disclosure, they include on players' wages.  What gets disclosed varies enormously, quite a lot for some counties, nothing for others.  Additionally there is a possibility the information include

Mo Bobat and County Cricket

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

English County Cricket Finance: 2018 Bentley Forbes Rankings

I have gone through the most recent financial statements for the English first class counties,  made an estimate of the financial strength of each and given them a Bentley Forbes Consulting ( TM ) financial sustainability ranking.  The overall table looks like this. County      Profit Assets Ranking Position Essex   4   4   4   1 Surrey   1   7   4   1 Nottinghamshire   5   5   5   3 Somerset   2   8   5   3 Derbyshire   8   3   5   5 Leicestshire    6   6  6   6 Sussex  15   1  8   7 Middlesex  14   2  8   7 Kent     9   9  9   9 Worcestshire    3  15  9 10 Gloucestshire   7  12  9.5 11 Northamptonshire   11  13  12 12 Glamorgan   16  10  13 13 Durham     12  14  13 13 Yorkshire    10  17  13 15 Warwickshire   17  11  14 16 Lancashire   13  16  14 17        The approach is to rank the counties for profitability and balance sheet strength and combine the two measures in a sustainability ranking. The balance sheet strength is itself a combination of thre