Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > The Kim Jones Domestic Cricket Forum
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 24th August 2018, 11:40   #18781
paulsre
World Class
 
paulsre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In a class 101 Met Cam time machine to the past
Team(s): Stockholm Taverners CC, Farsta BCCE, County cricket, MCCU cricket, England, Scarborough CC
Posts: 6,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky View Post
I'm not picking on Notts here as it's been a general theme with a load of counties this past few months, but there are a load of average cricketers moving round. It seems like players who aren't good enough to play internationals, Lions or possible franchise cricket are a commodity worth paying for.
I just wonder why this is frowned/commented upon in cricket when mass player movement is the norm in practically all other team sports?

Does cricket still have some legacy from the past when it was considered not the "done thing" to switch clubs?

In other sports if a club has a bad season or two it's not uncommon to change almost the entire team.
paulsre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 11:46   #18782
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulsre View Post
I just wonder why this is frowned/commented upon in cricket when mass player movement is the norm in practically all other team sports?

Does cricket still have some legacy from the past when it was considered not the "done thing" to switch clubs?

In other sports if a club has a bad season or two it's not uncommon to change almost the entire team.
I don't mind players moving around (though I preferred it when they'd do it at the end of the summer) , it's just the quality of player that I find concerning. It's like a bang average pro is more attractive than producing or signing top quality talent, and I can only see standards dropping if that's what the future looks like.
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 12:07   #18783
Fred
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky View Post
I don't mind players moving around (though I preferred it when they'd do it at the end of the summer) , it's just the quality of player that I find concerning. It's like a bang average pro is more attractive than producing or signing top quality talent, and I can only see standards dropping if that's what the future looks like.
I'd agree. How many times does it work successfuly? Maybe 100 transfers in the last 5 years. Foakes is probably the only one that has been an unqualified success in that period. How many no longer with their second or third club? Any suggestions?

Last year, as I've said before it was a joke that Sibley and Clarke managed to play for and against they past and new counties in the T20 (with Surrey meeting Warwickshire in the QF). Whilst other sports allow transfers mid season, the players are normally cup tied.

At least Jordan Clark isn't now on loan to Surrey!
Fred is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 12:55   #18784
paulsre
World Class
 
paulsre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In a class 101 Met Cam time machine to the past
Team(s): Stockholm Taverners CC, Farsta BCCE, County cricket, MCCU cricket, England, Scarborough CC
Posts: 6,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky View Post
I don't mind players moving around (though I preferred it when they'd do it at the end of the summer) , it's just the quality of player that I find concerning. It's like a bang average pro is more attractive than producing or signing top quality talent, and I can only see standards dropping if that's what the future looks like.
Yes, I see.

It just seems the current system is still based on olden days, where player movements were uncommon. Thus basically a club can just say "We'll have him" if a player's contract is expiring and the other club gets nothing.
paulsre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 13:02   #18785
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,577
Terrible forecast for Sunday. Could be a massive toss to win.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 13:04   #18786
Prince of Denmark
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Sydenham Hill
Team(s): Surrey CCC, Dulwich Hamlet FC, England
Age: 52
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred View Post
I'd agree. How many times does it work successfuly? Maybe 100 transfers in the last 5 years. Foakes is probably the only one that has been an unqualified success in that period. How many no longer with their second or third club? Any suggestions?

Last year, as I've said before it was a joke that Sibley and Clarke managed to play for and against they past and new counties in the T20 (with Surrey meeting Warwickshire in the QF). Whilst other sports allow transfers mid season, the players are normally cup tied.

At least Jordan Clark isn't now on loan to Surrey!
Foakes hasn't had the opportunity to be ruined by England yet. This time last year you could have said Mark Stoneman was an unqualified success.

As for Clark, it was very noticeable that he didn't play against Surrey this week, despite match figures of 7-97 in Lancashire's previous match.

I wonder whether Plunkett will come on loan now Pillans is confirmed as signing a three year contract with Yorkshire? It could be useful to have him for next week's match with Nottinghamshire with Sam Curran in the squad for the Test that starts a day later and Dernbach an injury doubt.
Prince of Denmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 13:04   #18787
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 28,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred View Post
I'd agree. How many times does it work successfuly? Maybe 100 transfers in the last 5 years. Foakes is probably the only one that has been an unqualified success in that period. How many no longer with their second or third club? Any suggestions?

Last year, as I've said before it was a joke that Sibley and Clarke managed to play for and against they past and new counties in the T20 (with Surrey meeting Warwickshire in the QF). Whilst other sports allow transfers mid season, the players are normally cup tied.

At least Jordan Clark isn't now on loan to Surrey!
How many players in county cricket are an unqualified success anyway?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 13:08   #18788
Prince of Denmark
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Sydenham Hill
Team(s): Surrey CCC, Dulwich Hamlet FC, England
Age: 52
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred View Post
I'd agree. How many times does it work successfuly? Maybe 100 transfers in the last 5 years. Foakes is probably the only one that has been an unqualified success in that period. How many no longer with their second or third club? Any suggestions?

Last year, as I've said before it was a joke that Sibley and Clarke managed to play for and against they past and new counties in the T20 (with Surrey meeting Warwickshire in the QF). Whilst other sports allow transfers mid season, the players are normally cup tied.

At least Jordan Clark isn't now on loan to Surrey!
Foakes hasn't had the opportunity to be ruined by England yet. This time last year you could have said Mark Stoneman was an unqualified success.

As for Clark, it was very noticeable that he didn't play against Surrey this week, despite match figures of 7-97 in Lancashire's previous match.

I wonder whether Plunkett will come on loan now Pillans is confirmed as signing a three year contract with Yorkshire? It could be useful to have him for next week's match with Nottinghamshire with Sam Curran in the squad for the Test that starts a day later and Dernbach an injury doubt. It might also suit Yorkshire to have Pillans as an option if mutual loans can be arranged.

It doesn't really seem appropriate for players to effectively work out their notice before joining a new club in the same league.
Prince of Denmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 14:41   #18789
Fred
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Denmark View Post
As for Clark, it was very noticeable that he didn't play against Surrey this week, despite match figures of 7-97 in Lancashire's previous match.
He claimed on twitter he wasn't fit. But was hopeful of playing the T20 game, which of course he did.

Lancs had merely said he wasn't available for selection.

They can't really say that next week. Or can they? Mute point what was making him unavailable. His injury? Surrey, unable to secure the usual immediate loan made it a condition? Or Lancs deciding that he would not be fully focussed? We may never know.
Fred is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2018, 14:50   #18790
Fred
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother View Post
How many players in county cricket are an unqualified success anyway?
fair point, but, more likely those whose original county keep offering them new contracts.
Fred is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2018, 10:17   #18791
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Denmark View Post
They're allowed to do that because it's only a little county and they can't be expected to produce all their own players.
Quite. Not having a city of 8 million to draw up on hurts.

Our cheque book doesn't seem powerful enough to drag players away from other big counties though, just the likes of Derbyshire and Leicestershire. Unlike Surrey who just hoover up the biggest names form Test playing counties.

Whether Slater is an improvement on Libby is yet to be seen, he can't do much worse than Nash has done. Given Libby's recent successes in converting himself into a half decent batsman in the shorter form (proves he has something about him) I'd hope Notts stick with him alongside Slater.

Last edited by Notts Exile : 28th August 2018 at 12:27.
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2018, 11:05   #18792
paulsre
World Class
 
paulsre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In a class 101 Met Cam time machine to the past
Team(s): Stockholm Taverners CC, Farsta BCCE, County cricket, MCCU cricket, England, Scarborough CC
Posts: 6,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post

Whether Salter is an improvement on Libby is yet to be seen, he can't do much worse than Nash has done. Given Libby's recent successes in converting himself into a half decent batsman in the shorter form (proves he has something about him) I'd hope Notts stick with him alongside Slater.
I would sincerely hope Notts give Libby an extended run, as now he just seems to be coming into his own as a player (he is the 10th highest run-scorer in Division 1).
paulsre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2018, 14:42   #18793
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 28,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post
Unlike Surrey who just hoover up the biggest names form Test playing counties.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2018, 14:59   #18794
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,495
Stoneman, Borthwick, Plunkett, Clark (whom Lancs would have loved to stay).

The amount of rubbish aimed at Notts is ridiculous. Lancs grabbed Jennings and Onions from Durham last year but Notts' capture of Coughlin was the one roundly criticised (by Botham in particular).
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2018, 17:34   #18795
Prince of Denmark
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Sydenham Hill
Team(s): Surrey CCC, Dulwich Hamlet FC, England
Age: 52
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post
Quite. Not having a city of 8 million to draw up on hurts.

Our cheque book doesn't seem powerful enough to drag players away from other big counties though, just the likes of Derbyshire and Leicestershire. Unlike Surrey who just hoover up the biggest names form Test playing counties.
You've been banging this drum all season on various threads.

The county of Surrey as of 1845 when the club was founded encompasses about one quarter of what is now Greater London; namely the boroughs of Lambeth (where The Oval lies), Southwark, Wandsworth, Merton, Sutton, Croydon, Kingston and half of Richmond (the only borough to straddle the Thames, the other half being n Middlesex). The four most southeastern boroughs (Lewisham,Greenwich, Bexley and Bromley are historically Kent. Five or six boroughs in the northeast are Essex and the remainder are Middlesex. The largest towns in Surrey as defined by modern boundaries are Guildford and Woking, with a population of around 60,000 each.

Cricket fields and cricket clubs in Inner London boroughs are few and far between and I doubt many schoolchildren other than a tiny minority who attend posh schools get an opportunity to play proper cricket either at school or at a local club, because there probably isn't one.

I would imagine Yorkshire is probably the county with the greatest resources in terms of population and opportunity to play locally. It's geographically the largest county in England, there are several large cities such as Leeds, Bradford, Sheffield, Hull and many large towns, there's an extensive network of clubs and leagues, yet the recognised 20 or 30 years ago that they were handicapping themselves with their Yorkshire-born players only rule.

This isn't the Olympics where the best in the World may come from a tiny place and will always represent them and win things. It's professional sport, and the most successful clubs will recruit the best outsiders they can to blend with local players, which is exactly what Surrey have been doing recently.

As it happens Surrey could field a pretty good Championship XI consisting entirely of players they've developed themselves: Burns, Harinath, Patel, Roy, Jacks, Pope, Sam Curran, Clarke, Tom Curran, Dernbach, Virdi. Then there's also Atkinson, Dunn, Meaker and van den Bergh.

Oh, but hang on, we haven't been able to pick Roy or Tom Curran so far because they were lured away by the IPL, spent most of the season on ODI/T20 duty for England, then got sent back injured. Then there's Sam Curran and Pope currently absent on England Test duty. I suppose we could always throw some 17 year old academy players in at the deep end. Oh, hang on, we've already done that when Jamie Smith played a couple of T20 matches shortly before signing his first professional contract.

I don't quite get this notion that Surrey (or anyone else) should make do with what they've got just because there's a large conurbation on the doorstep. Sport doesn't work like that. The largest populations don't always produce the greatest concentration of talent for all manner of reasons. If it's OK for Notts to poach players from Derbyshire and Leicestershire in order to be competitive in Division 1 where on earth are those counties supposed to replenish their squads from in order to sustain even a moderate level of success?

There's also a restraint of trade issue. When Stoneman & Borthwick moved to Surrey their native club was in the middle of a financial meltdown and not in a position to offer them their true worth. Should they have been compelled to take a pay cut and stayed there? And if it wasn't acceptable for Surrey to sign them why should it be acceptable for Nottinghamshire or anyone else to sign them?

When I first began following county cricket in the 1970s most players spent their entire career with one county unless they became surplus to requirements and someone else offered them a second chance. Ironically the first player I recall agitating for a move ostensibly to further his career (or accepting an uninvited approach) was Chris Broad when he moved from Gloucestershire to Notts. I vaguely recall the TMS pundits chuntering disapprovingly about it on the radio. Can't remember who now, but one opinion was that he isn't as good as he thinks he is, not England class, and he ought to do the decent thing and knuckle down to playing for Gloucs. A year or two later he was man of the series on a victorious Ashes tour.
Prince of Denmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2018, 00:50   #18796
Mad Dog
Bat In Hand
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 24
Enjoyable bravado from Harry Gurney's in his Surrey v Notts preview:

“We’ve got four really big games coming up and we’ve still got an outside chance of winning the championship."

I'll have some of what The Gurnster is smoking! But seriously, I imagine most Notts fans will be looking the other way.

Nightmarish fixture run in (Surrey and Somerset obvious innings defeats)... a recent history of ending seasons with as much force as a Gurney cover drive... no batsman averaging over 37... Ball/Nash/Footitt(?) and presumably Broad MIA. Oh and most other teams have a game in hand.

Could be relying on scraping a tight one against Essex or the seemingly self-combusting Yorkshire.

Pile 'em on Notts!
Mad Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2018, 11:03   #18797
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Denmark View Post
You've been banging this drum all season on various threads.

.............

I don't quite get this notion that Surrey (or anyone else) should make do with what they've got just because there's a large conurbation on the doorstep. Sport doesn't work like that. The largest populations don't always produce the greatest concentration of talent for all manner of reasons. If it's OK for Notts to poach players from Derbyshire and Leicestershire in order to be competitive in Division 1 where on earth are those counties supposed to replenish their squads from in order to sustain even a moderate level of success?
I am not suggesting that Surrey should make do, more that those following such counties should stop throwing stones at Notts' glass house when they themselves live in greenhouses. I was pointing out that Notts have reasons for needing to bring players in from elsewhere and that need is perhaps greater than some others (Surrey, Yorks and Lancs for starters) because of the size of the county and competition for players in the (very small) region.

Many on here take great delight in attacking Notts whenever they sign someone yet in reality Notts aren't the most active in that aspect, Surrey certainly have been in recent years. Re the 'Rey, I would love to see the figures, not that we ever will, because the type of player being brought in is vastly different to those Notts are bringing in. Has the salary cap leveled things out? Even between the Test hosting counties?

Don't get me wrong, Surrey have a great business and are very successful commercially, though again it might be difficult to not be when you have such a vast population wanting to watch cricket on your doorstep.

You made another point about Chris Broad. I think players moving between counties went back before that, certainly Notts, who were rubbish during the fifties and sixties according to my old man, were often supplementing a poor squad with discards from elsewhere. I'm sure that players have always moved around, it's just becoming more prevalent now.

Anyway, Slater looks likely to make his debut for Notts at The Oval today. I'm sure he will be well tested.
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2018, 12:03   #18798
oldandfat
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 858
Ambitious players at smaller/non-test venues/Div 2 Counties now need to move to progress their career. If you want to play for England you are more likely to get picked if you are playing for Surrey than Derbyshire
oldandfat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2018, 12:57   #18799
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 28,379
Quote:
I am not suggesting that SurreyNotts should make do, more that those following such counties should stop throwing stones at Notts'Surrey's glass house when they themselves live in greenhouses. I was pointing out that NottsSurrey have reasons for needing to bring players in from elsewhere and that need is perhaps greater than some others (Surrey, Yorks and LancsLeics, Derby, Northants for starters) because of the size of the county and competition for players in the (very small) region.amount of international call-ups.

Many on here take great delight in attacking NottsSurrey whenever they sign someone yet in reality NottsSurrey aren't the most active in that aspect, SurreyHants certainly have been in recent years although Notts have been more active than most. Re the 'ReyNotts, I would love to see the figures, not that we ever will, because the type of player being brought in is vastly different to those Nottsothers are bringing in. Has the salary cap leveled things out? Even between the Test hosting counties? Do they just overpay mediocrity?

Don't get me wrong, SurreyNotts have a great business and are very successful commercially unviable without the ECB grant, though again it might be difficult to not be when you have such a vast population wanting to watch cricket on your doorstep.
chip on your shoulder.
Fixed that for you. Please don't make an Essex fan defend Surrey again.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2018, 13:04   #18800
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother View Post
Fixed that for you. Please don't make an Essex fan defend Surrey again.


I'll keep providing the bait then if you hate it so much.
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 23:36.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org