However, Serial 3 proposes a change for compulsory re-arrangements from the third Friday to Sunday and, with Serial 13 carrying punitive four points penalties for clubs not fulfilling fixtures, are we targeting clubs that don’t play on Sundays?
We live in an age when much is made of civil and religious liberty, both in everyday life and in legislation. Nowhere is that more evident than in Northern Ireland where we have paid heavily for political and religious intransigence, triumphalism and bigotry over hundreds of years. It is an area where cricket and sport in general has given a wide berth, so why do we now wish to enter this arena and force clubs with well-known objections to Sunday cricket to play on their Sabbath?
Sport, politics and religion don’t mix, and everyone has a democratic right to decide what they want to do on their Sabbath. Over the years the NCU has recognized religious liberty and allowed a concession to clubs that have religious objections to playing on a Sunday. So why change now? Of course, there are challenges for Friday re-arrangements, but it is comparing apples with oranges to set the economic factors of taking time off work on a Friday afternoon with Sunday sport. Let the delegates decide, but hopefully common sense will prevail. Live and let live, and steer clear of divisive issues that drag down the whole ethic of sport.
The Working Group may have got this one wrong, but they appear to have got plenty right and listened to the views of cricketers following last year’s AGM. It seems logical to only have an 8-team Premier League and to introduce Duckworth Lewis to all Senior League matches. Promotion to the smaller Premier League could be reduced to one team, and provision for 50-overs re-arrangements is a welcome movement away from the smash, wallop and bang culture of Twenty20 cricket.
Replacing an overseas player seems logical, but it needs to be carefully policed, while the increase of adult subscriptions to three pounds is a 50% increase in tough times. However, it will help balance the union’s coffers and it seems logical that clubs who pay huge sums to local and overseas players are capable of finding the extra cash.
Dundrum is the only club to put forward a Motion, which indicates significant apathy or significant satisfaction with the way things are being run in the NCU. As is often said, it is a thin line that separates insanity and genius so perhaps the same could be said in this instance?
The AGM belongs to the clubs and it is your votes that carry the weight. I appeal to all clubs to be fully represented and to both senior and junior cricketers to come to the meeting and express your views. It is very important to the future development of cricket that the AGM remains a platform for healthy debate and collective agreement going forward.
Clarence Hiles
Editor
