Forum

Seems like most of the debate on the AGM is taking place now. I'm told the vote to change junior and minor cricket was unanimous so who are all these dissenters representing? Themselves I suspect.The NCU is dominated by junior cricket interests and voting strength as someone has already pointed out. As for the eight team league and less games maybe we should look back at the scores in the last few weeks of the season and see whether CI, Lisburn and Instonians delivered premier league performances.

Ryan, Andy,

I don't think that my posting (or the Victoria CC ones) are "excessive and overly intensive". It shows that people care and also that the impact on many senior clubs hasn't yet been adequately addressed, at least for many of us. You make a rather sweeping statement that "the 8 team structure is for the good of cricket", that "90% of cricketers should appreciate this" and you imply that we are all against any change ("not in my backyard syndrome"). It seems that you've completely missed my points.

First, I'm totally behind helping Irish cricket. I'm also totally behind the decision to reduce the PL to 8 teams. Moreover, I've no problem with the PL being the main focus on NCU cricket. I can see why you guys who play in the PL are very satisfied with the outcome. But some respect should be shown to the majority of senior clubs who while aspiring to play in the PL are unlikely to ever do so. Sometimes, one size doesn't necessarily fit all.

And I'm certainly not against change. Quite the opposite in fact but there needs to be a good reason for turning your world upside down as it could well do for many S2 and S3 clubs. I'm prepared to listen to any arguments put forward in favour of reducing S1 and S2 to 8 teams and S3 to 13 teams but none of you have addressed any of the points that I or others have raised?

Some may be content enough with 18 wkts. at an average of 10.1 with an economy rate of 3.6, but not me !
I still desire and will improve on this for next season !

So whatever league my team are playing in, or whoever the opposition are, one thing is for sure, I'll be trying my dame-dest, to win every game for my club next season, cause I just hate losing and being a some-what late starter as a cricket player, at only 46 yrs. old by next year I feel I'll be at the peak of my game !

So watchout whoever you are next year, if you're on the end of my sights, I'll not be aiming for 'flesh-wounds', no doubt about that !

I usually take October off for a bit of a break, but I'll be commencing outdoor training again in November, so maybe the 'part-time' cricketer and P.Carpenter will join me in Moira Demense or Lurgan Pk. take your pick ?

My own team mates never do, cause I can't get them away from Mourneview Pk.
(Fat lot of use that will do them, I see my prediction that Glenavon F.C. would be in free-fall soon, is well under way! They never listen do they?)

David Edwards indicates that in his view I have "besmirched" Dr Power by "intimating" that the next motion was on the meeting with some degree of haste. For the record, I dont suggest that this was done in an "underhand" way by Murray. He has consistently spoken in favour of 8 team leagues and I am sure that he was mightily relieved that the vote carried by the slimmest majority possible. He is fully entitled to that view, and I respect him for wanting to pursue it with vigour. I dont think anyone at the meeting, whether for or against the motion, would have had the time to work out the percentages before the next motion was called and I, for one, didnt have the opportunity to call for a recount before we were onto the next motion of business.

I simply wonder, and I do so without any attempt to besmirch Murray, you or any of the other delegates present who voted in favour, whether a recount would have been called for if the vote had shown there to be 59.8% in favour. This is not an attempt to cling on to the past as you put it, but if the future means less cricket, a senior cup final still unsponsored, more slap and tickle cricket to fill the void, then I would have felt a little more comfortable if I could have been sure that it was teams really wanted (as opposed to what the NCU really wanted). I assume all of the NCU officials entitled to vote, did so in the affirmative, and I wonder how that leaves the vote on a club basis.

That said, I accept the result and of course myself and my club will try to ensure that the suggested aims and objectives of the reduction are met. I hope that you, as a decision-maker with the NCU, are right. I will be the first to congratulate the NCU if we can look back in 5-10 years time at a greatly improved situation, with lots of good competitive cricket, and clubs thriving.

So I do genuinely hope that the NCU view is right. Speaking personally I for one wouldnt want to see less people playing less cricket at senior level on the basis of "increased competitiveness". It may be an exaggeration but the ways things are heading I fear that the season will be mid May to mid July, culminating in the unsponsored senior cup final being a 10 over bash in 26 degrees heat on a sunny Wednesday afternoon to make sure it doesnt clash with the Linfield v Glentoran pre-season friendly on the Saturday.

As they say, the proof of the pudding etc.....

Why didn't the NCU go the whole hog and rename all leagues below Section 1 as the "junior section". No-one at the top table really cares about sections 2 and 3.I attended the NCU dinner last saturday and noted Mr.Power's comment that he had visited 50% of grounds during the year.How many of those grounds were in section 2 or 3? I would have a guess not very many.I see a comment that section 3.1 should be positioned above section 2.3.Talk about fast tracking! Why don't the NCU just sit around a table and decide which team goes in which league.

Re. David Edwards.

I am not associated in anyway with Victoria CC but it is typical of the condescending attitude of the Northern Cricket Union and its elected officials that they would naturally assume and disregard any dissent in such a way.

Eight team leagues might well be the answer for Premier clubs who aspire to compete in the Challenge Cup, Clubturf and BKISC, but for anyone below Premier whose cup campaign doesn't go beyond May it doesn't appear to matter that their fixtures will be dramatically reduced, let alone having little incentive to play for in the 2011 season but for survival itself. I can't think of any sport that is improved by less exposure.

Re: David Edwards

P Carpenter is not a member of Victoria C.C., so if you take offence at his comments you cannot attach them to the comments of the "Victoria representatives" as you put it!

The changes were carried by democratic vote. Every clubs representatives vote in their own clubs best interests. On this occasion I don't think that the changes are a positive step for the so-called smaller clubs within the union. This does not make my comments, or any of the "Victoria representatives" comments as scare-mongering, merely stating that the changes were not in the interest of our club.

The bottom section of the senior league will basically be "the scrap" of the other sections!

Guys some excessive and overly intensive postings on the forum in recent days.
The 8 team structure is for the good of cricket. 90% of cricketers and clubmen surely appreciate this. There will always be a vocal minority.

the current debate shows the dichotomy that occurs on every proposed change. On one level everyone agrees that "somebody" must do "something" for the good of cricket but when "something" is done then the "not in my backyard" syndrome kicks in.

As an attendee at the NCU AGM last night I'm glad to see that eight team leagues has been introduced albeit by the slimmest of majorities. However some of those who objected to their introduction are seemingly not prepared to let go of the past. Michael Foster was more than prepared to voice his opinions and in my opinion besmirtches the reputation of the NCU President by intimating that there was some underhand purpose behind the speed with which he moved on to the next agenda item without requesting a recount. Perhaps Michael you could have voiced an opinion on that at the time and a recount I'm sure would have been permitted.
Jonah notes that he has heard that eight team leagues will be 2 up and 2 down but no such decision has been made so this can be discounted as mere scaremongering; dodgy maths by the way because this would mean 4 teams out of the 8 leaving each league with the exception of Section 1 of the Premier league... I make that 50% which I think makes 1 up and 1 down the more likely option but that decision will be made in consultation with the clubs I expect.
The Victoria representatives, at least I'm surmising that P Carpenter is in some way affiliated to that club, believe that this is all a plot to look after the big clubs and keep the serfs in their place. The NCU is even considering no promotion or relegation from the top league! This is not the ICC where the power is in the hands of a few it is equally spread amongst the clubs by being dependent upon the number of teams that you enter which is a fair approximation to the relative percentage of members of the NCU. As such, such a change could only take place with the permission of 60% of the membership that attends the AGM... unlikely I'm guessing.
This will be one of the rare occasions when I'm going to agree with Andy Kennedy. I've done the maths on behalf of the Development Directorate when the 8 team league proposal was first put forward and a team reaching the final of all domestic competitions would find themselves playing 31 long fixtures when (including bank holidays) there are only 47 available dates and fewer still for non Sunday playing teams. A few wet weekends and space for the much clamoured for inter-provincials puts a big hole in the spare capacity... and then there's time needed for the T20.
I see the 8 team leagues as having several benefits. Firstly, it means that the leagues should be more competitive and that should benefit Irish cricket as a whole. It also means that cricket will not become a full time occupation during the summer and that takes the pressure off those with wives, girlfriends or a social life.

Junior Cricket,
Gents the thinking behind the restructuring of leagues was to enable every team to find there level. too avoid one sided games and to encourage senior players to keep playing and or return to the game. As far as i am aware the consensus from the roadshows would be to retain the 2 up 2 down for the coming seasons to enable clubs to find their level quicker, However this was not taking into account the changes of the new junior league 1 too an 8 team league in 2012. Therefore I suggest that the issue of promotion and relegation be looked at again to take into account this update, perhaps going straight to 8 team leagues throughout the junior league for 2011 could be an option. As for the prospect of waringstowns 2,3,4 and 5's being in the same league, sorry but my reading of the proposals from the task force where that no more than two from one club in one section ( I think this is a bye law and therefore does not need to go through agm). I think the agm answered some questions but created some new ones which in all honesty were not forseen.

I have no problem with the Premier League being reduced to 8 clubs and think that all clubs should be prepared to make a small sacrifice in the hope that this change might raise standards in Ulster and Irish cricket. However, I said ‘small’ sacrifice. I really can’t understand why this change had to have such a dramatic effect on all 37 senior clubs. Were the implications thought through for S1, S2 and S3 clubs? For example:

- The 4 bottom clubs in S1 will be ‘relegated’ to S2 in 2012. It’s even more dramatic further down with only the top 4 clubs in S2 remaining there in 2012 meaning the bottom 6 clubs in S2 face ‘relegation’ to S3. Furthermore, all 7 clubs in S3 have no chance to be promoted before 2012 and then from a league of 13!

- an S2 side will play 18 games in 2011 and then in 2012 either play 14 in S2 or 12 in S3. Was it really such a problem to play 18 league games? Is such a drastic reduction needed? With work and holiday commitments, many 1st XI players could end up playing half-a-dozen games a season. Is that really what 1st XI players wanted?

Why wasn’t a simple solution for 2012 to have 8 in the PL, 10 in S1, 10 in S2 and 9 in S3? The 2 up 2 down for which there seems to have been good support would have remained except between the PL and S1. And if S1 also wanted to reduce the number of games to be able to play in the Clubturf or whatever, then a reasonable compromise would surely have been 8 in PL, 9 in S1, 10 in S2 and 10 in S3. What does it matter outside the PL exactly how many teams there are?

What if I propose this at the 2011 AGM for 2012? Is it too late to think a bit more about the 29 senior clubs who won't play in the PL in 2012?

I sat on the small subcommittee for Cricket Ireland on the eight team leagues for top flight cricket.

It appears to me that the proposals put in front of the NCU bear no resemblence whatsoever to those put forward by the subcommittee so could someone clarify for me what has actually been passed?

So far it seems there are 8 team leagues from 2012 and no promotion to the top flight next year. So what has been agreed?

Is there promotion from Sections 2,3 and 4 for 2011? If not then there is most definitely relegation from those leagues.

Assuming there is no promotion next season then there are 4 teams relegated from Section 2 into 3. There are 6 teams relegated from Section 3 into Section 4. Section 4 will consist of the 6 teams relegated from Section 3 plus the top 2 from Section 4. A new Section 5 will emerge from the rest.

Bearing in mind that there are 6 teams who have missed out on promotion in 2011 this means a total of 23 out of 27 clubs will be adversely affected in order to accomodate the top ten. Where is the fairness in that?

Roy - 8 leagues in junior league from 2012, not next season. Also your tables are a bit out - the current div 3 section 1 go in at a league above the old division 2 section 3 (rationale being the top thirds teams are stronger than the lowest seconds teams). There will be no promotion next season but 2 teams will be relegated from junior league one (2.1) + from each of the other leagues below (with no promotion). So, part time cricketer view is half right - there may well be meaningless games for those who achieve safety, which is effectively the only thing all but the top sides in the premier league + 2.1 will be playing for next season. Should be fun!!!

Michael - that was my mistake (re no promotion/relegation) in my haste to put the news on to the NCU site last night. Now removed.

The Junior League structure comes in to place for the 2011 season.