Forum

Just a suggestion, for the top four sections could we have the NRR shown in the league tables from the first match? I know there's work involved, but it would create total transparency from the outset.
It would also be good down the leagues although I'm sure many teams don't go out on a Saturday afternoon thinking about their run rate.
It won't solve this year's problem but it could make it better for everyone going forward.

One aspect of the debate over NRR that caught my eye was the message that appeared on the NCU website that the NRR in Section 2 was "so close that it had to be re-checked thoroughly" - or words to that effect. That raises a the question to me of what criteria were used to determine how "close" is "close" for the matter to be reviewed and what would be the knock-on effect in other Sections in determining "last year's position" at the end of the 2016 season.

Donacloney asked to see the NCU run rate spreadsheet a few days before their game with Cliftonville . We found 3 errors that all had a detrimental effect on our run rate , mainly to do with rain affected games and duckworth Lewis .
We went from being ahead of Cliftonville's run rate to Being considerably behind .
There is an obvious flaw in the NCU's method of collecting the information which needs to be addressed !

Something for the NCU heir achy to work on over the winter , unfortunately too late for Laurelvale

David,
Why do you think it would be different in the premier league? People make mistakes all the time. Bit harsh on whoever did the run rates.

Can't see why this is now being perceived as Laurelvale's fault. We have spotted an error in NRR calculations and informed the NCU, meaning Saintfield were promoted. This is not our gripe!

The problem is that when NRR's were first published with 4/5 games to go we had a substantial gap in our favour. Why then would we risk defeat by trying to drastically raise our NRR? The policy was to ensure victory in the knowledge that Saintfield had to do the chasing. To find out after all games are completed, that these calculations were wrong is the hard part to take. We have been denied promotion and not been given a chance to rectify the situation. None of this of course is any fault of Saintfield who are promoted with a higher run rate which we don't dispute.

The fault lies with the NCU, one which they have swept under the carpet like nothing happened. I'm not so sure the whole situation would have been the same had this of happened in the Premier League title race!!

Chris, as far as Laurelvale were concerned they had no reason to maintain the gap, they just had to ensure the gap wasn't closed. But as we now know this was on the false premise that there was actually a gap....

Totally agree NRR should be updated and calculations made available to check

Craig- If you knew Saintfield were trying to "win big" to close the NRR gap why weren't you doing the same to maintain the gap?

NRR should be updated after every game and the clubs given access to the calculations so there is the opportunity to fix any errors immediately.

craig how do you expect to be treated like a victim when you stepped on the field in april you obviously knew the rules sounds like your team was content to coast to safety instead of giving your all someone said to me this year dont leave it to the next man and i have taken that to heart far better to take it on the chin look forward to next year for you have learned life as in cricket is not always fair and its not always someone elses fault and it is so easy to play the blame game ps my views are my own

Before I start these comments are my own!

I left a post on 23 rd August stating my concern that NRR hadn't yet been posted for our league . How I wish I had posted this earlier ! All of a sudden NRR run rates appeared to apparently give us an idea of who was ahead etc.

Unfortunately Laurelvale appeared to be the victims of incorrectly collated match figures and NRR and instead of trying to win the last few games comprehensively we were content to win whilst on the flip side Saintfield were trying to win big to close an apparent gap.

Consequently , Laurelvale in my opinion have been wronged but have been nothing short of exemplary in their approach to this debacle. We have been honest all along with our match figures and all credit must go to Saintfield who ultimately were the better side - I just wish we would have known what we were playing for over the last few matches!

Well done @TavernersCC !!
2015 winners of the border league challenge.
Monaghan 111 from their 20.
Taverners 112-5 from 19.4

A big thanks to all the lads who have represented the Taverners cc this season. On our first attempt at competitive cricket for years, we finished our season with eight wins from Ten matches, topped the league and won the final.
Not forgetting our annual charity matches which raised enough funds to set up a table cricket game for a local youth group for disabled kids.
A fantastic cricket season well done to all the Taverners.

Well that is quite a signing by CIYMS and should help enhance the profile of NCU cricket. There is bound to be some crowd when Kemp is batting at Derriaghy.

Yes indeed Fred, nothing like a bit of experience in the team!

Asides from our pro, we have a good healthy slice of senior players throughout our side as well as the younger gugs, and it's a blend that generally works well.

With chaps like Robbie Streat, Transporter and the Maralin duck, to name but a few, though not quite in Gerald's age bracket but still considerably older than myself, yet they're all useful cricketers who enjoy the game as much as anyone else if not more so?

What they lack in physical agility, they more than compensate with in guile, shrewdness and no little amount of banter, the final quality being the most important in my humble opinion!

40 over games in section 1.

Templepatrick CC are NOT in favour of this.

We feel that NCU cricket matches are continually being reduced and opportunities to play games also and still we don't see any real increase in participation.

You will see once the AGM proposals come out that our proposals are about increasing the opportunity for people to play.

Longer games also give more opportunities for more people to get involved in the game therefore more enjoyable.
The NCU structure already offers a range of game lengths, so those that fancy shorter games are catered for in junior leagues.

Please don't take 50 over cricket away from those that are keen to play it.
Those keen to play less overs have their preference already in place.

C Boomer

Our Club has seen a resurgence in the over 40s coming back to play cricket for our 2nd XI, We decided to abandon the youth policy (joke) as most of the guys in their 20s said they were unable to commit to play every weekend as they had to spend more time with their partners/wifes. It seems to me that after 20 years of marriage the over 40s return to cricket to spend more time with their team mates. So anymore over 40s wanting to play for Donaghadee give me a shout

Jeff, it's now too late for Notices of Motion to this year's AGM, which closed on Tuesday (15th September), but if you can demonstrate that there is a concensus for 40 over cricket amongst the clubs in Section 2 the Union will be more than happy to arrange a meeting over the winter with a view to formulating a Motion for the 2016 AGM and discussing any other issues which may effect Section 2 clubs.