The future?

[nat]

I was told tonight that the vote was 9-9

Yep, those against were;

Essex, Kent, Middx, Surrey, Derbyshire, Notts, Glammy, Glos, Yorkshire

Lanky members voted FOR a reduction (56%/44%), figure that one out.

So once again Ciderset embarass themselves (I don't think they had a member's vote)

This is not the end. The ECB/PCA will be back. I'm already reading of the idea of circumventing members' wishes in a future decision. Talk of at least one or two counties de-mutualising (at the behest of the ECB and rogue CEOs).

Be watchful.

[kingstonj1]

The members are a tiny minority dictating how the game is run...only so long will their views be a factor here

I want 16 games a season 2 divisions of 9. It won't ever happen again and a reduction is sadly inevitable.

Money talks.

It's nothing to do with playing too much. For most players other than the quick quicks it's not an intense physical sport. It's just not. Playing lots has no impact on ability to perform it's an utter bs argument and the pca ought to be ashamed of themselves for spinning it.

It's purely about opportunitysand time to go and be a gun for hire in the t20s t10s and hundred

If none of those comps existed the debate wouldnt be happening.

It's pure greed. If I was a player though I would also be greedy. It's the administrators who can stop this. They have enough money they dont need more short form but again they are greedy instead of offering the best product.

[vim]

Regarding the PCA. I see that Sam (Arthur Scargil) Cook, is allowed to have quite a bit of a say when discussing the response to these proposals.

[bwildered]

 So how many attended the SGM, and the vote of hands was ?

[Andy]

The PCA are now threatening a strike demonstrating the same level of awareness as our union leaders in and the current Mayor of Mancky.

[JasonP]

The PCA are now threatening a strike demonstrating the same level of awareness as our union leaders in and the current Mayor of Mancky.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c4g961134g2o

They don't even know what they want themselves.  I was listening to the Surrey v Notts match last week and the Surrey commentator on at the time said that every single member of the Surrey squad wanted to keep 14 first class matches.

"There are polarised opinions across the game. Some counties wanted 10 Championship matches, others were adamant that 14 was the minimum they wanted."

Mitchell said not every playing group from the 18 counties wanted a reduction in Championship matches - five sets of playing staff told the PCA they were in support of a 14-match season.

[SirChef26]

The PCA are now threatening a strike demonstrating the same level of awareness as our union leaders in and the current Mayor of Mancky.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c4g961134g2o

They don't even know what they want themselves.  I was listening to the Surrey v Notts match last week and the Surrey commentator on at the time said that every single member of the Surrey squad wanted to keep 14 first class matches.

"There are polarised opinions across the game. Some counties wanted 10 Championship matches, others were adamant that 14 was the minimum they wanted."

Mitchell said not every playing group from the 18 counties wanted a reduction in Championship matches - five sets of playing staff told the PCA they were in support of a 14-match season.

This is because each player has their own individual situation which will dictate their own opinion. If you're a bog-standard county cricketer or just play red ball, don't have a 100 contract and don't play franchise cricket, then you will want 14 games. Whereas if you're at the top tier of the domestic game, perhaps on the periphery of international selection and a seasoned 100/franchise globetrotter, you will want a reduction in Championship games. You don't mind going on strike to get it as you have a nice 100 contract and the guarantee of winter franchise gigs to sustain your pay packet, whilst the lesser cricketers are out of pocket.

As I've said before, if they strike, the lesser cricketers will not have a job to come back to, because when the counties are forced to lay off cricketers in order to make up the revenue loss, it'll be those cricketers who are laid off first.

As for the big name cricketers, those under contract by counties (not centrally), should not be issued a single NOC if they go on strike. Don't let them play a single franchise tournament, keep them stuck at home with no money coming in.

[kingstonj1]

Cox I suspect would be a prime striker

Its bllx Mitchel and the pca should be looking after the many not the few focusing on the bog standard county players...the top players are fine money wise and will remain so however many cc games they play. It's just a few more bucks they can make by a reduction. Pure greed. Your Jamie porters and tom Westleys are those the pcs should be looking out for. Player who will never get a franchise gig and whose career and wage is built on 4 day cricket.

Pca need to realise this as Alex says if they strike the lesser player who are the majority will be unemployed.

[Andy]

As long as the players realise that there are conflicting interests the members and media should really get onto the backs of any would be strikers. 

This could turn into a Packer style situation for English cricket and the negative effects of Packer rumbled on for years. However the Packer players had a point especially the Aussie and Windies.

[stewyww]

Cox I suspect would be a prime striker

Its bllx Mitchel and the pca should be looking after the many not the few focusing on the big standard county players...the top players are fine money wise and will remain so however many cc games they play. It's just a few more bucks they can make by a reduction. Pure greed. Your Jamie porters and tom Westleys are those the pcs should be looking out for. Player who will never get a franchise gig and whose career and wage is built on 4 day cricket.

Pca need to realise this as Alex says if they strike the lesser player who are the majority will be unemployed.

Won?t be a problem for Cox. He can just pull another ?injury? out of the bag if he thinks he might have to play more than 10 games.

[stewyww]

So let me get this right. 13 four day games wouldn?t justify striking - but an extra 4 day game would.
Therefore I assume if their county get to the quarter-finals of the T20 and then finals day (totalling 2 additional days), plus say the semi-finals and final of the Metro Bank Cup (a further 2 days), totalling 4 extra days in total, the players would down tools and refuse to play?

I would like an answer please, Mr Samuel Cook.

[kingstonj1]

So let me get this right. 13 four day games wouldn?t justify striking - but an extra 4 day game would.
Therefore I assume if their county get to the quarter-finals of the T20 and then finals day (totalling 2 additional days), plus say the semi-finals and final of the Metro Bank Cup (a further 2 days), totalling 4 extra days in total, the players would down tools and refuse to play?

I would like an answer please, Mr Samuel Cook.

It's utter nonsense.

What none of the reducers mention is that most 4 days games don't last 4 days anyway, weather and early finishes mean the number if days cricket is misleading.

It's all pure greed

[nat]

So let me get this right. 13 four day games wouldn?t justify striking - but an extra 4 day game would.
Therefore I assume if their county get to the quarter-finals of the T20 and then finals day (totalling 2 additional days), plus say the semi-finals and final of the Metro Bank Cup (a further 2 days), totalling 4 extra days in total, the players would down tools and refuse to play?

I would like an answer please, Mr Samuel Cook.

So they are required to be 'at work' for 14 x 4 day games = 56 days. Plus let's say 7 x travel days plus 14 x pre-match training days.

Plus 12 x T20 games plus 6 x travel days plus 12 x pre-match training days.

Plus 8 x ODC games plus 4 x travel days plus 8 x pre-match training days.

Gives a total of 77+30+20 = 127 days.

The season runs April-Sep so around 180 days.

So they are 'working' for approx 2/3 of the available days.

So they get more free time than normal working people.

Good luck with the strike Sammy boy.

[bwildered]

So how many attended the SGM, and the vote of hands was ?

Answer my own question - meeting moved from cricket school to pavilion- 34 attendees.

[spirali]

If you're a bog-standard county cricketer or just play red ball, don't have a 100 contract and don't play franchise cricket, then you will want 14 games. Whereas if you're at the top tier of the domestic game, perhaps on the periphery of international selection and a seasoned 100/franchise globetrotter, you will want a reduction in Championship games.

This may be a tempting analysis but it doesn't square with the fact that the entire Surrey playing staff, which includes more big(gish) names and Hundred players than any other county, were apparently against a reduction. So there must be other factors shaping player opinions.

Surrey play home CC games in front of decent-size crowds, and won the title three years running. Maybe their players actually like the CC, regardless of their own personal standing and earning power. If that's what it is, then it suggests plenty of players at other counties don't like it, or at least aren't that bothered.