Would like to know what our cricketing experts think about his suggestions ....
We've read the article through several times & are non the wiser !
Either JA has been drowning his Ashes' sorrows or the Fanackapans are thicker than they thought !
Answers on a pc , please.
Yes, fine words from Aggers in terms of advocating change ... but, as a cricket enthusiast (just like Atherton before him), he misses the point ... or chooses to miss the point.
Cricket people see Test match cricket as the pinnacle of the game. County cricket is there to support that.
But only a handful of people want to watch it.
The paying public wants instant gratification ... hence T20, hence the Hundred.
So, the format of the game that brings in the money is not conducive to developing the skills required for Test match cricket.
Only old-school lovers of the game bemoan the situation ... Atherton, Agnew, me, you etc. No-one else is bothered.
As much as I believe Aggers has got it wrong so far as franchises is concerned, I'm afraid you do keep missing the point. There are a lot of people who want to watch Test cricket which is why so many fixtures are instant sell outs - and they do make millions for the ECB. To be able to do play that you have to have a school and that is the County Championship. That can be a loss leader for Counties because an annual membership allows people to go and watch all forms of the game. If it were more competitive then more people would watch it too.
Where do players who get to learn how to play T20 hone their skills before they reach County standard? At County age group matches and Club games. No crowds at those. In Australia the likes of Alex Carey and Travis Head (man of the Ashes series) not only played Sheffield Shield prior to the Ashes but also for their clubs, Glenlg and Tea Tree respectively. I don't hear calls from Australia to stop Sheffield Shield do you? In fact, Tom Harrison has had the cheek to ask if we can send out players to play over there - but they only get a few hundred to watch Sheffield Shield.
You only have to see how many on this one site have a massive interest in the Ashes. And how so many Test series sell out here. But you are not going to produce Test players with "wham/bang thank you mam" cricket. If we can put a system in place that becomes more competitive, that doesn't wrap England internationals in cotton wool the whole time and allows counties up to three overseas players to raise that standard even more then that will improve out Test side. And a three tier with six teams at the top will make it very competitive. But counties have to buy into that and supporters of those counties outside the top six have to buy into it too. One up / one down will enable year on year promotion and relegation without wholesale changes to the infrastructure.
Would like to know what our cricketing experts think about his suggestions ....
We've read the article through several times & are non the wiser !
Either JA has been drowning his Ashes' sorrows or the Fanackapans are thicker than they thought !
Answers on a pc , please.
Yes, fine words from Aggers in terms of advocating change ... but, as a cricket enthusiast (just like Atherton before him), he misses the point ... or chooses to miss the point.
Cricket people see Test match cricket as the pinnacle of the game. County cricket is there to support that.
But only a handful of people want to watch it.
The paying public wants instant gratification ... hence T20, hence the Hundred.
So, the format of the game that brings in the money is not conducive to developing the skills required for Test match cricket.
Only old-school lovers of the game bemoan the situation ... Atherton, Agnew, me, you etc. No-one else is bothered.
As much as I believe Aggers has got it wrong so far as franchises is concerned, I'm afraid you do keep missing the point. There are a lot of people who want to watch Test cricket which is why so many fixtures are instant sell outs - and they do make millions for the ECB. To be able to do play that you have to have a school and that is the County Championship. That can be a loss leader for Counties because an annual membership allows people to go and watch all forms of the game. If it were more competitive then more people would watch it too.
Where do players who get to learn how to play T20 hone their skills before they reach County standard? At County age group matches and Club games. No crowds at those. In Australia the likes of Alex Carey and Travis Head (man of the Ashes series) not only played Sheffield Shield prior to the Ashes but also for their clubs, Glenlg and Tea Tree respectively. I don't hear calls from Australia to stop Sheffield Shield do you? In fact, Tom Harrison has had the cheek to ask if we can send out players to play over there - but they only get a few hundred to watch Sheffield Shield.
You only have to see how many on this one site have a massive interest in the Ashes. And how so many Test series sell out here. But you are not going to produce Test players with "wham/bang thank you mam" cricket. If we can put a system in place that becomes more competitive, that doesn't wrap England internationals in cotton wool the whole time and allows counties up to three overseas players to raise that standard even more then that will improve out Test side. And a three tier with six teams at the top will make it very competitive. But counties have to buy into that and supporters of those counties outside the top six have to buy into it too. One up / one down will enable year on year promotion and relegation without wholesale changes to the infrastructure.
It's not really the best measure though, is it? 44k views since November ... why the Djokovic thread has 28k.
I get that Test matches are often sold-out in England ... but a lot of people are there for the experience, corporate hospitality etc. They would be just as happy (happier?) at the T20 version. Attendances worldwide are not impressive ... and, as for the 'millions' that Test matches may bring in for the ECB, I wonder how sustainable things would be if they had to rely on that income only.
There may be a lot of people 'interested' in Test cricket ... but that interest may simply extend to looking at the score every now and then, and moaning about the state of things. There are very few who will bother to attend on a regular basis ... and similarly for County cricket. And, of those who do, the numbers are dwindling due to age and infirmity.
The game has morphed into the equivalent of pool where it used to be snooker. So, other skills become more important and old skills fall by the wayside.
All a bit of a misunderstanding…the neighbours heard glass smashing and called the Police, it wasn’t a fight, the England players kept dropping the glasses of beer the Aussies passed their way.
The bigger problem is the standard of first class cricket played in England, not merely the dates on which it's played. Scheduling the same, poor teams, playing the same, poor standard of cricket in different months isn't going to make England the best team in the world. But having better players, concentrated into fewer, higher-standard, closely-fought first class matches would be one step on the path to improving the performance of the Test team.
The bigger problem is the standard of first class cricket played in England, not merely the dates on which it's played. Scheduling the same, poor teams, playing the same, poor standard of cricket in different months isn't going to make England the best team in the world. But having better players, concentrated into fewer, higher-standard, closely-fought first class matches would be one step on the path to improving the performance of the Test team.
I'd have a five tier county system that incorporates the 18 first-class counties and the 20 minor counties.
Div 1 = 6 teams Div 2, 3, 4 and 5 = 8 teams
Each team plays home & away. The six teams in the top tier will get ten matches - you could even have an eleventh game at the back end of the summer to determine the overall County Champion. The other four divisions will have a 14 game season. Make a big event of it and take Championship final around the country to get as many regions of the country invested in it as possible. You could even have promotion/relegation play-off matches between the bottom sides of one division and the top sides of another. Make the games mean more and encourage the crowds to come and watch the county game.
Having a limited number of top tier division 1 counties would concentrate the top batting talent against the top bowling talent. Making it possible for first-class counties to drop out if the top couple of levels and face minor county opposition will discourage poor play at the bottom of the first-class game with badly prepared pitches etc.
I believe that I have been mentioning for the last eight years not just the fact that County Age Group Cricket is heavily private school influenced but also that the cost of actually training, the selection process and all the kit has to be funded by the parents. I'm amazed though that former players like Prior and Key were not aware that this was the case when they were playing.
The structure and associated costs of age-group cricket mean the most talented children are not all coming through, says former England wicketkeeper Matt Prior.
He says the average cost is £1,000 per child each season - £400-450 in coaching, a minimum of £300 on kit, and then travel - and believes it should be free.
"In simple terms you are not selecting the best, most talented cricketers, you are selecting the ones that can afford it," Prior told BBC Sport.
"That is a very different thing.
"You are ultimately narrowing down your base and the number of kids that will have the opportunity to go on and work on their potential, and hopefully achieve their potential, and go on and represent not just the counties but England."
Prior replied to a post on Twitter saying he agreed with former England and Kent batter Rob Key - now a Sky Sports commentator - when he said he thought "age-group cricket should be free".
Another Twitter user - Chris Mclennan - then said he had spent more than £550 on his son in a single season and had done so at U15, U16 and U17 level.
Former England spinner Graeme Swann replied saying "pricing young talent out of a youth system is atrocious".
Prior told BBC Sport he had spoken to another ex-Sussex and England cricketer, and both believe their parents would not have been able to afford the associated costs now if they were just starting their careers.
"I personally think it should be free," said Prior, who made 157 appearances for England between 2007 and 2014.
"It grates that these kids are selected - they go to trials and then they are selected to represent the county, or they are selected to go into the pathway - and then you, as a parent, have to pay for that selection. Where is the honour in that?
"If you are selected for your county, that should be a feather in your cap. It's like being given a job and then being asked to pay to go to work - it just would never happen."
Prior said he had spoken to his former county Sussex numerous times but it had fallen on "deaf ears, time and time again".
Sussex Cricket chief executive officer Rob Andrew told BBC Sport: "We have made a charge for the pathway programme for many years. The programme across boys and girls runs at a financial cost to the club and continues to do so.
"We appreciate that the cost may be prohibitive for some families, and where this is proven we try to assist in order that no talented individual misses out from taking part.
"We review this on a regular basis, and with the appointment of Mike Yardy into the academy director role, he is conducting his own review of the current programme he has inherited and we will look at his recommendations.
"We strive to make the programme as widely available as possible and to provide value for money for the amount and quality of cricket that is provided."
Prior hopes England's 4-0 Ashes defeat in Australia will be "the necessary evil for people to stand up and start looking at the game as a whole".
"Cricket already has many barriers. You can't have the jumpers for goalposts… stumps, bats, access - there are so many barriers," said Prior.
"We've seen very clearly what has happened with regards to diversity, but diversity doesn't stop there. There is also a wealth element and a class element, and making sure that this game is open and accessible to everyone.
"We are getting forced to have some uncomfortable conversations. Maybe this is the moment. Maybe this is what it's taken for it all to change."
Comments
Where do players who get to learn how to play T20 hone their skills before they reach County standard? At County age group matches and Club games. No crowds at those. In Australia the likes of Alex Carey and Travis Head (man of the Ashes series) not only played Sheffield Shield prior to the Ashes but also for their clubs, Glenlg and Tea Tree respectively. I don't hear calls from Australia to stop Sheffield Shield do you? In fact, Tom Harrison has had the cheek to ask if we can send out players to play over there - but they only get a few hundred to watch Sheffield Shield.
You only have to see how many on this one site have a massive interest in the Ashes. And how so many Test series sell out here. But you are not going to produce Test players with "wham/bang thank you mam" cricket. If we can put a system in place that becomes more competitive, that doesn't wrap England internationals in cotton wool the whole time and allows counties up to three overseas players to raise that standard even more then that will improve out Test side. And a three tier with six teams at the top will make it very competitive. But counties have to buy into that and supporters of those counties outside the top six have to buy into it too. One up / one down will enable year on year promotion and relegation without wholesale changes to the infrastructure.
It's not really the best measure though, is it? 44k views since November ... why the Djokovic thread has 28k.
I get that Test matches are often sold-out in England ... but a lot of people are there for the experience, corporate hospitality etc. They would be just as happy (happier?) at the T20 version. Attendances worldwide are not impressive ... and, as for the 'millions' that Test matches may bring in for the ECB, I wonder how sustainable things would be if they had to rely on that income only.
There may be a lot of people 'interested' in Test cricket ... but that interest may simply extend to looking at the score every now and then, and moaning about the state of things. There are very few who will bother to attend on a regular basis ... and similarly for County cricket. And, of those who do, the numbers are dwindling due to age and infirmity.
The game has morphed into the equivalent of pool where it used to be snooker. So, other skills become more important and old skills fall by the wayside.
All things change. Aggers needs to realise that.
It seems that the trigger for the police arriving was Graham Thorpe smoking a cigar indoors...
I'd have a five tier county system that incorporates the 18 first-class counties and the 20 minor counties.
Div 1 = 6 teams
Div 2, 3, 4 and 5 = 8 teams
Each team plays home & away. The six teams in the top tier will get ten matches - you could even have an eleventh game at the back end of the summer to determine the overall County Champion. The other four divisions will have a 14 game season. Make a big event of it and take Championship final around the country to get as many regions of the country invested in it as possible. You could even have promotion/relegation play-off matches between the bottom sides of one division and the top sides of another. Make the games mean more and encourage the crowds to come and watch the county game.
Having a limited number of top tier division 1 counties would concentrate the top batting talent against the top bowling talent. Making it possible for first-class counties to drop out if the top couple of levels and face minor county opposition will discourage poor play at the bottom of the first-class game with badly prepared pitches etc.
Just an idea of the top of my head...
The structure and associated costs of age-group cricket mean the most talented children are not all coming through, says former England wicketkeeper Matt Prior.
He says the average cost is £1,000 per child each season - £400-450 in coaching, a minimum of £300 on kit, and then travel - and believes it should be free.
"In simple terms you are not selecting the best, most talented cricketers, you are selecting the ones that can afford it," Prior told BBC Sport.
"That is a very different thing.
"You are ultimately narrowing down your base and the number of kids that will have the opportunity to go on and work on their potential, and hopefully achieve their potential, and go on and represent not just the counties but England."
Prior replied to a post on Twitter saying he agreed with former England and Kent batter Rob Key - now a Sky Sports commentator - when he said he thought "age-group cricket should be free".
Another Twitter user - Chris Mclennan - then said he had spent more than £550 on his son in a single season and had done so at U15, U16 and U17 level.
Former England spinner Graeme Swann replied saying "pricing young talent out of a youth system is atrocious".
Prior told BBC Sport he had spoken to another ex-Sussex and England cricketer, and both believe their parents would not have been able to afford the associated costs now if they were just starting their careers.
"I personally think it should be free," said Prior, who made 157 appearances for England between 2007 and 2014.
"It grates that these kids are selected - they go to trials and then they are selected to represent the county, or they are selected to go into the pathway - and then you, as a parent, have to pay for that selection. Where is the honour in that?
"If you are selected for your county, that should be a feather in your cap. It's like being given a job and then being asked to pay to go to work - it just would never happen."
Prior said he had spoken to his former county Sussex numerous times but it had fallen on "deaf ears, time and time again".
Sussex Cricket chief executive officer Rob Andrew told BBC Sport: "We have made a charge for the pathway programme for many years. The programme across boys and girls runs at a financial cost to the club and continues to do so.
"We appreciate that the cost may be prohibitive for some families, and where this is proven we try to assist in order that no talented individual misses out from taking part.
"We review this on a regular basis, and with the appointment of Mike Yardy into the academy director role, he is conducting his own review of the current programme he has inherited and we will look at his recommendations.
"We strive to make the programme as widely available as possible and to provide value for money for the amount and quality of cricket that is provided."
Prior hopes England's 4-0 Ashes defeat in Australia will be "the necessary evil for people to stand up and start looking at the game as a whole".
"Cricket already has many barriers. You can't have the jumpers for goalposts… stumps, bats, access - there are so many barriers," said Prior.
"We've seen very clearly what has happened with regards to diversity, but diversity doesn't stop there. There is also a wealth element and a class element, and making sure that this game is open and accessible to everyone.
"We are getting forced to have some uncomfortable conversations. Maybe this is the moment. Maybe this is what it's taken for it all to change."
https://amp.abc.net.au/article/100807496