Forum

Interested and indeed shocked at the developments from the NCU AGM last night when the main proposal of the evening was not sufficiently supported to get the 60% needed. I really thought that its progression into the rules was a mere formality given most of what had been said about 8 team leagues.
I wouldn't like to see any particular club(s) or representatives singled out or castigated for voting against the proposal though because what some people might have viewed as progress wouldn't necessarily be the opinions of every committee.
Personally I reckon it fell down with the lower league clubs because the restructuring season put a glass ceiling on top of clubs in the 2009 season with promotion not an option and a lot of meaningless cricket happening throughout. Whether that is something that would improve the standard in the short term would be open to debate. Either way, no doubt the same proposal might hit the table again this time next year, and with a few changes will no doubt get through.

Clarence Hiles doesn't quite come out and say it but there will always be a suspician that the timing of the CSNI appeal was a calculated one to have an impact on dinner. Coupled with their vote against the restructuring to 8 team leagues (surely they can't be worried about relegation) it seems that any NCU target is good enough.
Any chance of a reasoned argument to justify that vote against 8 team leagues from any of the regular CSNI contributors?

Paul I agree, how about removing two teams from section 1 and promoting 1 team from section 2. I know the teams in section 1 would not be happy at a section 2 side getting their place but if you phased this over two years then you would have two less sides in section 1 and it would still give section 2 sides something to play for. All in all the change IS DRASTICALLY needed if we are to benefit from Ireland improving as a nation in cricketing circles. Believe me the sacrifice now would / will benefit not only players but supporters alike.

Someone seriously has to put there foot down here, the big 3 are without question going to be playing a lot of 20/20 games next year. Its like a scenario that rose in the cups a while back against them when all of a sudden opposing teams covers seemed to be left off so that they could force a bowl out! League could end up being decided by a 20/20! We already have a competition for that!!!

From being at the meeting last night it seemed that most, if not all Section 1 clubs voted for the 8 team league structure. Where the proposal fell down was that most Section 2 and 3 teams voted against it - as is their right to do so, you could say understandly seeing as how there is no promotion from section 2 next year. Maybe 3 down from Section 1 and 1 up from Section 2 might have got the proposal through, but I guess we'll never know!

Re 20 over match 2, I have to agree with Robin - If there is a sniff of rain will teams want to play against the so called big 3 in a 50 over match or take their chances in match 2 - time will tell.

re. james belfast

couldn,t agree with you more james, the 20 over replays will be the best way for some clubs to get a victory so expect a lot of 50 over match 1 games postponed with some club grounds clearly not up to senior standard after one days rain.
your earlier question "can players not be bothered anymore" was answered at the end of this season when some clubs had to play 3rd 4th eleven players on their first team.
i get the distinct feeling that some clubs dont want to play competitive cricket.
heres hoping for a hot 2009 and no mickey mouse league matches.

I agree with Rodneys comments and I am disappointed that the new structure will not come into effect after 2009. I feel sorry for Andy Clement and his development team - they went to a lot of bother to see if the Clubs & CAPTAINS would be interested in such a change. I wonder how many senior captains were representing their clubs, rather than "club suits" as they are called.
However, I think if this is proposed again in future, it will be carried - just a shame as each year is one wasted. People have to realise that, with the climate as it is now, there are not going to be enough dry Saturdays to play X cup and 18 league fixtures.

Disappointing but predictable votes last night.

I would echo Rodney's sentiments about the league structure. Laurelvale could well have ended up in a lower league but I would have voted for the change.

What is going to be done about section 4 now ?

I am also disappointed that replays will be sorted out over 20 overs. It really does take away from a proper 50 over league.

a few interesting ones from the AGM. Am i right in saying you can play a pro in the cup if you are playing agaianst a club in the same section as yourself? So a section 2 side cannot play their pro against a section 1 side?

And although i would say some of the top sides might disagree with the match two games being 20 overs but i personally think its a great idea and you could find a lot of guys being more committed and not missing as many games if they realise that its a forty over game rather than 100. Certaintly if we get a great summer it might seem a bit odd playing a 20 over a side game on a sunny day where a 50 over game could have been played.

interesting times

Rodney
I’m surprised the league restructure was defeated but as far as increasing the standard is concerned, I must say I’m gob smacked that Instonians proposal to play 20 over replays in Senior Cricket got passed at the NCU AGM last night.
Do we not already have a 20 over competition?
It is a sad indictment of our cricket that Senior League cricket matches will be decided in this fashion, without even trying to play the standard 50 over replay.
Can players not be bothered anymore?
Did the ‘Premier League’ clubs vote in favour of this?

Interesting to see the league restructure was defeated last night at the AGM. As a result I believe the standard of the NCU will not improve any time soon. It would be interesting to see the stats on who of the 36 voted against it - did they vote against it because it would negate their position in the leagues? Personally, even if our club was in a position where the change had a negative affect on us, I would still vote for it because it's the only way the standard of the union will improve - the best teams playing each other every week. Again it would be interesting to see how many voted against it based on their own position as a club rather than thinking about the overall picture of cricket not just in the NCU but also in Ireland.

Your thoughts?

I heard on the grapevine that Downpatrick are "courting" the two Boultwood brothers who moved to CIYMS last year. From the outside looking in, it would seem to be a strange move for them, with CI blooding them slowly into the Premier League and the two brothers playing roughly half CI's 1st XI fixtures. They are young lads earning their spurs and CI have given them the opportunity and both seem capable of becoming permanent fixtures at the highest level over the next few years...

First time on here and just thought i'd have a go at my own section 2 team of the year. Some very interesting selections from some of you!! Where is my name on your lists??? Well here goes

1. D.Kennedy
2. T.Stewart (gotta get me in there!)
3. S.Sharkey
4. R.Owens
5. J.Kennedy
6. S.Johnston
7. G.Ferguson
8. A.Kirkpatrick (WK)
9. M.Glass
10.L.Connor
11.I.Cleland

What you think lads?? I think statistically this season that would be a very strong team to beat. Lee Connor was on top form this season as were most of the batting line up. I went for Kirkpatrick behind the stumps purely because i saw him bat and keep first hand when we played down there and he helped win the match for them. Let me know what you think!!

from what ive seen in section 2 this year,id like to throw a few names forward for the section 2 team of the year. Saintfields Tommy Stewart for being a very solid an consistant number 1 batsman, lee connor of Dundrum arguably the best bowler in section 2 this season and joel maguire also of dundrum had a good season with the ball. Ian Cleland of Woodvale would always be in my team. Happy arguing guys.

Lot of good "older" players in the league, be interesting to see how that team would do against an under 25 team from the league say.