English Domestic Cricket: The Way Forward (PART TWO) - World A-Team Cricket Forum

Andy Mellon · #1 (**permalink**) 14-06-2005, 01:39 PM

(Please Note: This is a continuation of a prior article posted on this forum; please see http://www.world-a-team.com/showthread.php?t=3323 for part one of this article)

Pseudo-Australian Model

The pseudo-Australian Model is one that is practised in several countries of the cricketing world and is generally imposed on them by virtue of the country in which they live. The countries in question are Zimbabwe, New Zealand, Bangladesh and the West Indies. From the outside, all three of these countries appear to be using the Australian model. Each of the countries mentioned has 6 state teams (except Zimbabwe which has 4) which play in a first-class and one day tournament. The difference is, however, that due to the comparative sizes of these countries, there is no real alternative. None of these countries could support an English style system due to the lack of population or the absence of enough regions containing enough people to gain any kind of support for their team. The other major difference between these countries and the Australian model is that the supporting club structure underneath the first class game does not provide the same level of competition as seen in Australian grade cricket or South African provincial cricket. Hence, there is not the same competition for berths in the first class teams as there is in those countries which use the Australian model.

The failure of this structure can be seen in the form of innovations seen or discussed in these countries in recent years. For example, in the current domestic season, the ZCU in Zimbabwe took the decision to allow the Namibian national team to compete in the domestic championship in order to increase competition for the Zimbabwean state sides. Similarly, a couple of years ago the WICB in the West Indies allowed the Kenyan national team to compete in their national championship for a year. Their counterparts in New Zealand have also discussed the possibility of entering a ‘North Island’ and ‘South Island’ team into the Australian Pura Cup to enhance the competition in their domestic game.

It can be seen from this that none of the countries that are forced into using this system are 100% happy with it. On top of this, if this were introduced into the English game the effect would be a watered down and less effective version of the Australian Model. As a result, there is very little chance that a system modelled on this would be tried in England.

Subcontinental Structure

So, you think that England has problems with making domestic cricket appealing and yet competitive? The same problem can be said to be shared with our counterparts in the sub continent. India and Pakistan enjoy the largest fanbase of any countries in the cricketing world, yet the attendances for their domestic games are poor at best. Coupled with this is the fact that the workings of their domestic competitions are complex at best and altered with alarming regularity. The Pakistani structure, for example, has the Quaid-e-Azam trophy, which compares to the regional structure seen throughout the world, but along side this there is the PCB Patrons’ Trophy which is contested by departmental teams such as Pakistan Customs, Habib Bank and the Karachi Port Trust.No other country has organisations, public institutions and banks playing in the main domestic competitions. The result of this is that attendances are very low for these games as it has been found to be difficult to generate much public interest in games for which cricket fans do not feel any allegiance for the teams playing.

These two competitions are played alongside each other, so that all players turn out for a regional team (e.g. Karachi Whites) in the Quaid-e-Azam Trophy for the three months of the season, and then for a departmental team in the next tournament (Patrons' Trophy) for the other 3-4 months. This does not encourage team spirit to form when everyone plays for two different teams and thus have two different sets of team-mates each season.

The Indian cricket structure has shown similar organisational disasters. Once again, the system undergoes regular upheaval – the latest being completed in 2002/3. The Ranji Trophy is the main competition. This is contested by Indian states. This was split into two divisions in 2002/03 in a move akin to the changes seen in English cricket 5 years ago. The main public relations own goal that was scored in the 2002/3 changes was in the Duleep Trophy. This is effectively the Indian equivalent of the Australian Model. Prior to 2002/3 this was contested by zonal teams for which players in the regional teams had to fight for places. In the changes in 2002/3, the zonal teams were swept away to be replaced with ‘Elite Teams’. These were teams made up of the best players seen in the two divisions of the Ranji Trophy, but fans stayed away from these games due to the fact that teams were titled “Elite Group A” for example.

As a result, the structures seen in Pakistan and India give little assistance to providing ideas for reforming of the English game.

Conclusion:

None of the alternatives seen throughout the cricketing world really provide a model for guaranteed success of the English game. Whilst reform is necessary to maintain or even enhance the competitive nature of English cricket, none of the main alternatives provide the answer. If this is the case, then what is the way forward? Is CountyCricket a failure? Will the existing competition allow England to nurture the players to beat the best the rest of the world has to offer? Well, I have to admit that I’m not in a position to give you a definitive answer. Whoever can devise a way to increase competition for places in county cricket whilst maintaining supporter loyalty will have found the perfect way for county cricket to thrive. Recently, it has been argued that the influx of Kolpak players will provide this extra competitive edge. With more high-class foreign players in the county game then less ‘free spots’ will be available in the team sheet for poor quality English players. The English youth players may have to wait a couple of years longer to oust someone from the 1st XI, but by the time they do, they may well be a leaner, meaner cricketer for it. So, without knowing it, the EU may have solved the problem. The only way to be sure is to wait, listen and watch this space.

With many thanks to Maranello, Beny and bdmoderator

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: