Essex Outfielder : The Unofficial Essex CCC Forum
Cricket => Essex Eagles T20 => Topic started by: alji on November 27, 2015, 10:47:09 PM
-
I wonder if the Eoin Morgan who has criticised the standard of our T20 tournament is the same Eoin Morgan who in 10 games for Middlesex last season scoring a paltry 237 runs at a well below par strike rate of 112? The standard was clearly far too good for that Eoin Morgan to cope with.
-
He obviously needed a break...another one.
-
Perhaps it's just Morgan who isn't good enough for our Domestic T20?
Last season's stats for him do suggest that to be the case!!
-
Seems a compromise has been reached for the new format
Ihttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2016/07/26/ecb-plan-english-crickets-most-radical-ever-overhaul-with-t20-co/
-
Seems a compromise has been reached for the new format
Ihttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2016/07/26/ecb-plan-english-crickets-most-radical-ever-overhaul-with-t20-co/
"One televised match per week". So what happens when this game is rained off? More woolly thinking.
Several counties are very successful at filling their grounds for T20 games - see the article.
I agree that playing the games in a 4-6 week block in June/July/early August is the way to go. Get the big names in and market it properly.
-
A slightly different take on the ecb discussions from the Daily Mail
http://dailym.ai/2axQlzt
What's interesting is the county's against a franchise model
-
Food for thought for all the Surrey bashers on here.
-
Anyone who works in London will know how well the Surrey marketing department sell the 20/20 at the Oval.
This aggresive marketing has only happened in the past 2 years and attendances are rocketing as a result.
I went to the Middlesex game and it was a full house and how much was taken in other revenues is uncountable, they had to shut the shop and let 20 in at a time, so that will give you some idea of the monies going into Surrey CCC coffers.
With average crowds of 20k for each home game its not difficult to see there opposition to the franchise operation.
If it becomes a franchise operation then it may become a bit more difficult to attract the likes of Sanga, Finch, Bravo etc and sign Stoneman and many more.
-
its not difficult to see there opposition to the franchise operation.
If Surrey wanted a franchise they would get one.
So would MCC/Middlesex.
Essex would be left out in the cold which would be the final slap in the face to their fruitless T20 ambitions.
-
Essex are staging the Final of the Womens T20 ..... the Kia Suoper League. It’s on 21st August, a Sunday.
-
its not difficult to see there opposition to the franchise operation.
If Surrey wanted a franchise they would get one.
So would MCC/Middlesex.
Essex would be left out in the cold which would be the final slap in the face to their fruitless T20 ambitions.
So why are they anti franchise?
Also there wouldnt be 2 in London so forget that one
-
its not difficult to see there opposition to the franchise operation.
If Surrey wanted a franchise they would get one.
So would MCC/Middlesex.
Essex would be left out in the cold which would be the final slap in the face to their fruitless T20 ambitions.
So why are they anti franchise?
Also there wouldnt be 2 in London so forget that one
Oh yes there would. Sydney and Melbourne can accommodate two so why not London?
-
So why are they anti franchise?
Maybe they can see beyond narrow self interest?
Also there wouldnt be 2 in London so forget that one
Sydney has 2 BBL franchises & Lord's & the Oval regularly sell out.
Not having 2 teams in London makes no sense unless they're looking at drop in wickets at football stadiums.
-
its not difficult to see there opposition to the franchise operation.
If Surrey wanted a franchise they would get one.
So would MCC/Middlesex.
Essex would be left out in the cold which would be the final slap in the face to their fruitless T20 ambitions.
So why are they anti franchise?
Also there wouldnt be 2 in London so forget that one
The reasoning being that the 2 blueprints state that the franchises would include 6/8 seperate cities to accomodate cricket in all regions.
-
You've answered your own question with 6/8 cities.
Plus no way will Surrey & Middlesex members get behind a combined London team.
So any franchise would have to rely entirely on pissed up office workers for a fan base.
-
I think one of the reasons why Surrey are so anti franchise is that under this system they pretty much sell out the Oval every match and make a lot of money for themselves. Whereas under the franchise system they would have to share this money with counties like Essex who wouldn't be involved. The way the franchise system is being sold to the counties is that if it happened the income would be shared among the 18 counties. Surrey would lose out financially.
-
You've answered your own question with 6/8 cities.
Plus no way will Surrey & Middlesex members get behind a combined London team.
So any franchise would have to rely entirely on pissed up office workers for a fan base.
If you read its 6/8 seperate cities that is quoted
The combination of the 2 London counties is another reason why Surrey have turned the corner as I suggest that the home of cricket would be used because of the tradition.
Surrey and Middlesex 20/20 is already 90% pissed up office workers and corporate ventures, so that wont change.
-
The combination of the 2 London counties is another reason why Surrey have turned the corner as I suggest that the home of cricket would be used because of the tradition.
So the ECB want to kibosh 2 grounds that regularly sell out in favour of one?
I thought franchising was all about making money.
-
under the franchise system they would have to share this money with counties like Essex who wouldn't be involved.
I'm sure RTD will be carrying drinks for some oufit or other. ;)
-
under the franchise system they would have to share this money with counties like Essex who wouldn't be involved.
I'm sure RTD will be carrying drinks for some oufit or other. ;)
So would you if the money was good enough.
-
under the franchise system they would have to share this money with counties like Essex who wouldn't be involved.
I'm sure RTD will be carrying drinks for some oufit or other. ;)
So would you if the money was good enough.
& my main employer gave me plenty of time off to do it.
Not to mention a leadership role when I deigned to turn up. ;)
-
under the franchise system they would have to share this money with counties like Essex who wouldn't be involved.
I'm sure RTD will be carrying drinks for some oufit or other. ;)
So would you if the money was good enough.
& my main employer gave me plenty of time off to do it.
Not to mention a leadership role when I deigned to turn up. ;)
You have a job?
-
Interesting that Stratford is mooted as a possible base for a Franchise, if so then effectively it stabs Essex in the back as we have high hopes of using the OS for T20, I thought we had a strong claim bearing in mind Stratford was in the old Metropolitan County of Essex but doubtless the ECB will go for the biggest financial gain & won't worry too much about Counties suffering & losing out. In a straw poll in today's Daily Mail only Warwicks are wholly in favour with at least 10 Counties inc Essex opposed which says a lot for me, in all honesty I don't see many real cricket followers aligning themselves with a Franchise especially if few if any of their own County players are included, as another poster has said Sorry & Middx fans won't get behind a London Franchise & neither will Essex fans I reckon - I certainly won't as I follow Essex not an amalgam of us Sorry, Kent, Middx etc.
If they have a 2 division County T20 they have to play it in a condensed period with Test players available as well which they rarely are at present otherwise they probably won't attract top players from Overseas.
-
8 franchises 9 test venues of which Durham doesn't make money. So the other 8 pretty much cover the regions. Ought to bring in more money for all the counties. 4 day tests and a 4 day championship ought to keep most of the old guard happy for now. I suspect the biggest problem in getting the changes made will be Sky. Still interesting times ahead.
-
under the franchise system they would have to share this money with counties like Essex who wouldn't be involved.
I'm sure RTD will be carrying drinks for some oufit or other. ;)
So would you if the money was good enough.
& my main employer gave me plenty of time off to do it.
Not to mention a leadership role when I deigned to turn up. ;)
You have a job?
Why do you think RTD is my hero?
He's the king of excused boots. ;D
-
I thought we had a strong claim bearing in mind Stratford was in the old Metropolitan County of Essex
A claim that would carry more weight if the club didn't think people beyond Shenfield don't count.
-
Of course Warwickshire are in favour. They are already a franchise called Birmingham funded by their council.
I really hope this idea never gets off the ground. As for 4 day Tests, we need 5 days in this country to allow for the weather. The idea that they would bowl more overs in 4 days is plainly absurd. A days play would never end as they try to fit the overs in.
-
All ths Sky pundits seem to think it is a good idea.
I hope the counties only agree to it if it is on free to air TV.
-
All ths Sky pundits seem to think it is a good idea.
I hope the counties only agree to it if it is on free to air TV.
The two statements above indicate that it isn't a good idea and in no way will it be free to air. The S*¥ goons just beach what they're told and I fear that no free to air broadcaster would bother to spend money needed - unless it was turned into a reality TV show...which actually sounds like a damn good idea.
day 86 and James is upset because Ryan is batting above him in the order...meanwhile, in the video room, Ravi is musing why one side of the coin is called tails when it doesn't have a picture of a woman's backside on it...
-
Of course Warwickshire are in favour. They are already a franchise called Birmingham funded by their council.
I really hope this idea never gets off the ground. As for 4 day Tests, we need 5 days in this country to allow for the weather. The idea that they would bowl more overs in 4 days is plainly absurd. A days play would never end as they try to fit the overs in.
Quite right re over rates. On day 1 of the last Test Pakistan bowled only 89 overs in the day plus the extra half hour, despite Yasir Shah bowling 31 of them. The only answer is to add penalty runs to the batting side's score each hour at so many per overs not bowled.
-
I'm afraid the franchise idea will happen. The ECB don't care about traditional supporters and I think there will be enough 'football supporters' to make it work.
-
Interesting that Stratford is mooted as a possible base for a Franchise, if so then effectively it stabs Essex in the back as we have high hopes of using the OS for T20, I thought we had a strong claim bearing in mind Stratford was in the old Metropolitan County of Essex but doubtless the ECB will go for the biggest financial gain & won't worry too much about Counties suffering & losing out. In a straw poll in today's Daily Mail only Warwicks are wholly in favour with at least 10 Counties inc Essex opposed which says a lot for me, in all honesty I don't see many real cricket followers aligning themselves with a Franchise especially if few if any of their own County players are included, as another poster has said Sorry & Middx fans won't get behind a London Franchise & neither will Essex fans I reckon - I certainly won't as I follow Essex not an amalgam of us Sorry, Kent, Middx etc.
If they have a 2 division County T20 they have to play it in a condensed period with Test players available as well which they rarely are at present otherwise they probably won't attract top players from Overseas.
there not targeting real cricket fans...
-
I can understand that they are not targeting those who regularly attend county cricket, but how do you get the initiated to come along in large numbers? Whatever they say about the current t20 format, it has grown on the back of "genuine" supporters, alongside heavy marketing to get peripheral supporters involved. Plus, they are using smaller grounds that have much more atmosphere than, say, the likes of Old Trafford.
This seems to be an idea built on someone who's looked at countries where there is massive interest in the game (I.e. India and Bangladesh), where there are massive conurbations (at least in proportion to the country - I.e. Australia). Transferring this model to a country which has a long established set of tribal boundaries (I.e. Yorks vs Lancs) based on county rather than city, seems rather foolish.
-
Especially as there was another massive crowd at Lord's last night.
Still throwing the baby out with the bath water does seem to be the ECB's modus operandi.