Saturday 5 May 2012
CALL TO RECONSIDER U13s BATTING AND BOWLING RESTRICTION?
The debate about whether under-13 age group players should be allowed to bat and bowl, rather than just field, in Lincolnshire County Cricket League games has resurfaced, having been a talking point for many years.
A senior player has emailed Lincs Cricket Latest. He's not hiding his identity but has asked us not to reveal it, as he does not want it to appear he's making "an attack on the league."
He says: "I can't believe what I have heard tonight. In the ECB handbook a youngster can play when at U13
level if deemed good enough and with consent from parents etc. Lincs League doesn't operate this.
"Why have we got inconsistencies like this? (Not that you can provide the answers). The whole junior age
cut off was challenged by the Northern Leagues prior to the changes. I personally think the (Lincs) League is missing a trick. Cricket does itself no favours at times."
We replied to our correspondent saying a rule change proposal seeking to permit U13s to bat and bowl was
narrowly defeated at the AGM last October. The voting was much closer than it had been previously on this topic. However, the majority (and the Lincs League is a big one in terms of clubs) voted against allowing U13s to bat and bowl.
If you read the ECB wordage on this, the governing body sits on the fence. It does not make U13s batting and bowling in adult cricket a direction or instruction to its member leagues, but leaves it up to individual competitions.
The majority in the Lincs League still support erring on the side of caution in respect of young players' safety, even though they are covered by the helmet rule.
There are also concerns about whether quick (adult) bowlers might feel obliged to ease off a bit against
U13 batsmen.
It could well be that the next Lincs League AGM, this October, will see another rule change proposal put
forward for consideration from within the member clubs. We shall have to wait and see.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
With regard to under 13s playing in Lincs League a majority of the League Clubs supported adopting the ECB guidelines.
ReplyDeleteThe proposal was overturned once the votes of the Committee were counted, and the casting vote of the Chairman.
Secondly the ECB do not sit on the fence. They say, subject to strict conditions, that under 13s can play in open age cricket.
Unfortunately they leave it to the discretion of the league as to whether to adopt the considered guidance of the ECB.
One aspect the ECB are against is simply using under 13s and below as fielders, which is exactly what Lincs League rules support.
time for a bob comment..................
ReplyDeleteYou are right in some aspects,however the committee gave the matter a considerable amount of time at our pre-AGM meeting . Our decision was made and we voted on it in accordance with League rules and I had the casting vote. If you think there is NO "FENCE SITTING" then you are labouring under a misconception.
ReplyDeleteWhy does the Governing Body rule that this particular age group play on shorter pitches and with a smaller ball than the next age group up who,like adults,use a heavier ball and play on full size pitches.
Please don't take the parts of the ECB Guidance that suit your side of the discussion point because the full picture doesn't appear unless you take into perspective their first two bullet points which I will reproduce next .
"Not to place a young player in a position that involves an unreasonable risk to that young player,taking into account the circumstances of the match and the relative skills of the player"
"Not to create a situation that places members of the opposing side in a position whereby they cannot play cricket as they would normally do against adult players"
Those two points are extremely relevant in any standard of our great game.There is enough risk to an adult when facing a projectile aimed in his general direction at some pace by a bowler some 22 yards away .Would that same bowler deliver the ball in the same manner to a 13 year old?
In my opinion as a qualified coach and co-founder of the Grimsby under 13 League the risk to such a young player would be too great as would the pressure on the fielding captain and his bowler.What would the Umpire do if he considered that the young player couldn't handle the situation.
I have coached many young players over the years and am proud to have seen 3 progress to the First Class game ,1 of whom in fact played Test Cricket. None of those young men suffered in their development by not playing adult cricket whilst under 13, so why should any one suffer by having to wait for ONE SEASON .
I'm afraid a lot of parents have a jaundiced opinion of their off -springs ability and some clubs are desperate for players on occasions and are using the under 13 argument for the wrong reasons.Would those parents be happy if their youngster arrived home with a broken finger or arm ? Injuries which an adult could get I know ,but the adult doesn't need written parental permission or Coaches approval,and is usually old enough to understand those risks/dangers.
The "sitting on the fence" aspect of this situation is quite simply this and to quote :
Clubs and Leagues can apply more strict restrictions on the participation of young players in open age cricket at their discretion.
We make our decisions by democratic vote at our AGM and if the voting is tied the Chairman has the casting vote so unless you are accusing us of not following correct procedure the voting at last years AGM was 100% correct and if any club wants to put the rule change forward again at this years AGM they can certainly do so .
THINK LONG AND HARD ABOUT THIS MATTER , MAKE SURE YOU FULLY UNDERSTAND THE SUBJECT AND PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT THE REASONS ARE RIGHT AND PROPER . MAKE SURE YOUR CLUB HAS EVERYTHING IN PLACE INCLUDING A CHILD PROTECTION POLICY AND CONSIDER THE POSITION OF THE UMPIRE DURING THE GAME AS WELL AS PUTTING THE CHILD'S WELL-BEING AND DEVELOPMENT AS A PLAYER AND A PERSON UPPERMOST IN YOUR DELIBERATIONS .
THANKS FOR TAKING THE TIME TO READ THIS , I TOO FEEL VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THE SUBJECT AND WANT DECISIONS TO BE MADE FOR IMPROVEMENT NOT JUST TO EASE PLAYER AVAILABILITY. BOB WELTON
It could be that this October's AGM will see another proposal to change the rule and that the majority, this time round, might support it (given the closeness of the vote in 2011). However, the clubs that make the rule change proposal will need to consider VERY CAREFULLY INDEED how the rule is drafted. It needs to be watertight. I've said this before at meetings, wearing my umpire's hat: If the referee in a boxing match decides a fighter isn't fit to defend himself, he stops the contest on safety grounds. If you are umpiring a game of cricket and an U13 comes to the crease who doesn't appear to be up to the task in terms of reacting to the pace of the bowling, what course of action is open? If our league rule is amended to allow U13s to bat and bowl, it's presumed some signed letter will be shown to the umpires before the start of the match (as was the case with exemption from wearing a helmet)/ Who will sign it at club level and verify an U13 player is considered to be of sufficient ability to play men's cricket in the Lincs League?
ReplyDeleteMy understanding is that written parental consent as well as written confirmation from a minimum Level 2 coach has to be given to the Umpires and one would assume the opposition captain before the start of play . This could be very difficult to administer on a game by game basis as playing conditions can vary due to the weather as well as the strength of the opposition . Personally it is a situation fraught with difficulties and possible litigation if a child is hurt or worse . I sincerely hope that clubs understand completely what they may be letting themselves in for, I would hope that matters such as insurance are covered in any rule change proposal . Each club should have to prove to the League that they are fully covered for any eventuality so that the League as an entity isn't responsible for injury etc.this should be done at point of registration and if passed the child must have been a regular playing member of a County Team not a squad member or a District player . I have a County Cricket Board meeting tomorrow and a League Chairman's meeting next week and will make sure this subject is discussed at both .WATCH THIS SPACE !!!!!
ReplyDelete1. According to the Cleethorpes website, Guy Welton played for Cleethorpes as an under 13. I presume that he was one of the 3 players you were referring to.
DeleteWhy has your opinion changed now ?
2. The ECB are not sitting on the fence, as you put it. They say that under 13s can play subject to strict conditions. If they had any doubts they wouldn't say that.
3. The ECB also say that under 12s and below should not play. The Lincs League allows players of any age and ability to field where, in my experience, they will be far more prone to injury.
I haven't heard any mention from the Lincs League about the precarious insurance position from following the LL rules.
The best insurance is to follow ECB guidelines.
4. Whatever our opinions the fact is that the ECB has more of the facts gathered from all over the country where their guidelines are followed, as well as greater skills and knowledge.
What does the leadership of the Lincs League think they know that the ECB doesn't ?
Guy Welton was not under 13 when he played for Cleethorpes , but in my opinion as his Father and Coach he was not ready to play adult cricket and in fact only made 5 appearances in 1991, not in the Lincs League but in the Ridings League under the captaincy of John Hood.I was in fact Captain of their LL side and didn't select him once."THESE ECB GUIDELINES DID NOT EXIST AT THAT TIME ANYWAY". My opinion has not changed one bit "a child generally is not mentally or physically capable of playing adult cricket" there will no doubt be the odd exception to this but I don't believe it harms their development one bit to wait for one season.
DeleteIf there is no "Fence Sitting" why is it left to the discretion of clubs and Leagues to decide.Guidelines are not rules , they set down criteria to follow but then don't make the decision .That, as ever, is left to Leagues to decide at AGM's
Where I have seen under 13's fielding they have always been in safer positions such as Third Man or Fine Leg where the chance of injury is so small as to be insignificant.Your experience is obviously far greater than mine so I will bow to your superior knowledge.I would also assume that your coaching qualifications are far higher than mine and therefore your opinion is more valuable.
As far as Insurance is concerned my worry is that we now live in an age of "ambulance chasers" and I'm sure that you wouldn't want to put the League in a position where we might face legal action for injury.
If your last statement were true why aren't these "facts" published , they may have "greater skills" but have"NO KNOWLEDGE AT ALL" of our playing standards or the ability of our children which is why "MR ANONYMOUS" they leave the final decisions to us and only give " GUIDELINES"
Does anyone have any further thoughts on Nigel's point re: how to ensure that Umpires aren't left feeling vulnerable with regards to the ability of players to cope with the bowling on offer? It seems to me that this isn't solely an issue for U13 players, as regardless of age limit, I'm sure most of us have seen people come out to bat who patently don't have the skill or ability to cope with the bowling on offer. Should the league's rules provide umpires with the ability to intercede if this situation arises?
DeleteThere's nothing explicit in the Laws of Cricket with regards to a batsman's ability to cope with the bowling on offer - which seems to be the main issue here. Although clause 6 of Law 42 does state that when assessing dangerous or unfair bowling, the relative skill of the striker needs to be taken into account.
Does anyone have any knowledge of how other leagues, such as the Lincs ECB Prem and the Lincoln & District league provision for this in their rules? Did their umpires have similar concerns when they introduced this rule? And if so, how were they assuaged?
From a personal standpoint I think U13 players should be allowed to play. The duty of care lies with the club - as it does with every junior player that plays in the league - to only pick players who are capable of playing in the team that they've been selected for. The points that have been made earlier in this thread with regards to putting the appropriate policies and provisions in place at each club are important and valid, but they apply to anyone under the age of 18 who is playing in the League and are not solely an issue for U13s. As clubs we're missing out on the opportunity to strengthen our teams - particularly in the lower reaches of the League - because of the rule. And our players are missing out on an important year in their development. Equipment, coaching and player development continue to progress rapidly and every year there are any number of youngsters who are capable of contributing to their club's 2nd and 3rd XIs that are denied the opportunity to play cricket. If they're good enough, then they're old enough.
The issue is should a child be allowed to play in adult matches !!!
DeleteIf your club is so bereft of adult talent that it would be strengthened by a child taking part then I worry for the state of our Game.I've seen adults not able to cope with slow bowling too (over 700 wickets during my time at Cleethorpes!!!). You, like the others are missing the point.Please read the first two bullet points of the ECB Guidelines,then ask yourself why do ALL games for this age group play on shorter pitches with a smaller ball.
Why do organised leagues exist at this and other "age groups" and why does each County run Junior teams for "age group " players. Why don't 15 to 65 year olds play in the under 13 and below Leagues? My great fear is,and always has been,that pushing for these children to be allowed to play in adult Leagues is purely because of a shortage of adult players and not, as is often quoted to further develop the player. I know of at least one County where players cannot take part until the age of 15 ,so here in Lincolnshire we are not too bad are we? Surely if your club has had a youth development policy for more than 3 years it should have a number of 14/15 year olds who can play at adult level , if not how can you argue for under 13's strengthening 2nd/3rd teams? Maybe your ideas should be put in the Rasen deep-freezer, the duty of care lies with us ALL ,Leagues included.One County Coach tells me he has only had 2 players in 15 years at under 13 level he considers were capable enough of playing adult cricket at such a young age.So Lincolnshire must be exceptional to have so many in the north of the County all of a sudden.Sorry but your points have not persuaded me to change my viewpoint,but it is up to the member clubs to put the rules in place not me,and if it is their wish then so be it I can't stop them nor do I want to.As I've said many times it is the clubs who put rules in place NOT THE CHAIRMAN !!!!!
If the issue concerns whether or not children should be allowed to play in the league why stop at preventing U13s from playing? Bearing in mind your points with regards to clubs providing age group sides up to U17 and the county up to U19, surely this suggests that NONE of these players should be eligible to play in an adult league?
DeleteFollowing your points to their logical conclusion I assume that you're looking forward to a member club proposing a rule change that prevents anyone under the age of 17 (or perhaps even 19) from playing in the league. After all, if their clubs and the county are providing age group sides for them to play in, then surely their development would be hindered by playing in an adult league.
Don't talk such absolute tosh Fridge . You fail to understand probably because you are not a parent,that the whole crux of the matter is based around whether to allow under 13's to play cricket in an adult competition.You,like your generation fail to grasp the concept that under13 children under the Laws of cricket play on shorter pitches with a smaller ball.Please don't insult me by throwing "RED HERRINGS"into the argument,get off your rear end and produce good cricketers who at 14 years old can participate if they are "good enough" to be selected.I suspect you wouldn't be able to spot one as you don't seem to spot the fact that only Under 13's should not play adult games within our league at present or that the ECB sit on the fence on the matter.
DeleteApologies for the tosh Bob. I think it's important to be clear on this point though. You bandy around the words children and child for U13s as if they do not apply to U14s. Children don't suddenly become adults the September after their 13th birthday.
DeleteUnfortunately I'm not a parent, but in running our 2nd XI for three years I did have to spend time every season explaining to a number of parents why their County U13 players were not eligible to bat or bowl in the league. Especially as other leagues, including the ECB Premier and the Lincoln Sunday League to name but two, do allow U13s to play.
I'd like to think that Market Rasen have as good a record as some and better than many in producing talented young cricketers at the moment and long may this continue. We've been lucky to have a number of talented players come through the ranks in recent years who, in the opinion of our coaching staff and their parents have been capable of playing in the league - certainly in Div 4 - when they've been in the U13 age group. We're happy to abide by the majority verdict and, ironically, I don't think we have a single U13 player this season who we would be looking to play in the league even if the rules allowed it. However, that doesn't alter my opinion that changing the rules to allow this would be beneficial for both players and clubs.
Blaming the ECB on this is unfair. This is a matter for leagues to decide upon, in the same way as leagues define the number of teams and divisions that they are constituted of or the number of overs and innings per side in a match. The Lincs League voted for the status quo at the last AGM, albeit narrowly, and that's the way it is at the moment. That doesn't mean that opinions on this can't be sounded during the course of the season prior to a club(s) proposing a rule change at the next AGM. But this is a league decision and a league decision alone.
Its the last game of the season, you need 1 wicket to win the league with 3 balls left, your big nasty opening bowler is ready to bowl, your opposition send out their number 11 who is an under 13 cricketer.
ReplyDeleteDo you a - rip one past his nose end and follow up with a yorker
b - bowl fast full and straight
c - slow down to eliminate potential injury.
This could happen what would you do.
Or are the league correct in not allowing this potential problem to happen.
The ECB are the governing body but it doesnt mean they are right all the time.
Over to you guys
If this situation occured then he would not have been selected according to the ECB guidelines.
DeleteWouldn't the same argument apply to an under 14 ?
The only difference is that the under 13 has passed the criteria and is one of the best in the county, whereas the under 14 could just have been walking past the ground.
In the case of a Lincs League fielder it could be an under 10 who was just walking past the ground.
Obviously ANONYMOUS knows in advance that the situation described by Gaz is going to happen and selections would be made accordingly .If his/her crystal ball is that good please send 6 numbers between 1&49 by Friday night then I will be able to take a long break from this rubbish .GAZ you are spot on WELL DONE .
DeleteIt's a fair question, but I would suggest that this applies to any batsman who is obviously lacking the technique or ability to cope with fast bowling, regardless of their age.
DeleteIf my bowler's got three deliveries left I go with b, followed by a. If the opposition have picked the player then they obviously consider him to be capable of contributing.
I rest my case , it says a lot if you are prepared to instruct your fast bowler to let one rip past a juniors nose end when he is batting at no.11 . If that under 13 player was good enough to be selected to play ,surely he would have batted much higher than 11.A senior player would,in my opinion, be able to deal with that sort of delivery much better than a 12/13/14 year old .SPIRIT OF THE GAME !!!
DeleteOnly after he's failed to bowl him out with the first delivery though Bob!!!
DeleteThat doesn't matter a jot , your comment proved my point.You are not interested in development at all , just getting 11 players on to the field and "TO HELL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES" deliberately bowling short at a child batting at no. 11 shows abuse by both clubs . Which is why I am totally against children playing in an adult competition, your comments do your cause more harm than good.Put your ideas into the deep-freezer Rasen Fridge they need preserving for centuries !!!
ReplyDeleteApologies Bob, a poor attempt at humour.
DeleteJust so we're clear though, I would never countenance a club putting any player - regardless of age - in a situation in which they do not have the technique and ability to cope. I can only speak for the club I play for, but if we selected an U13 player in our side it would be because they believed that player to be able to contribute at the level the team play at.
I have no objection to you disagreeing with me on this point, but in shouting down all and any feedback on this from myself and others I think it's your own cause you're harming.
If any club is to propose a rule change on this for the AGM then player welfare, the position of umpires and the clubs' own policies on player development, care and insurance would all need to be taken into consideration.
Just to put you right Fridge I don't have a cause and I'm not shouting anyone down.I speak to many people on this subject from coaches to club secretaries and even players.The general opinion is that this age group rarely produces a player who can compete with adults during their under 13 year or in fact as some have stated even at under 15.The whole thing is a very murky area that is fraught with danger , better to err on the side of caution like me than create a monster.
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be a lot more heat than light being generated.
ReplyDeleteCleethorpes have put the proposal forward intermittently for a few years based on our own experiences, which would appear to have been replicated around the country judging by the ECB guidelines.
We have played under 13s in senior cricket for a number of years. Last year we played 4 under 13s in 36 games in other leagues. There have been no incidents, no fast bowler issues or anything like.
Presumably there has been no pattern of incidents around the country otherwise the ECB would change its guidelines.
In truth if we had followed the guidelines to the letter only one of the four would have qualified to play senior cricket. This would suggest to me that there is a considerable margin of safety in the ECB guidelines.
It should be remembered that the guidelines aren't just written for Lincs League standard cricket but youngsters potentially playing premier league cricket against first class bowlers.
I am afraid this stuff about a nasty quick bowler in the last over underestimates the ability of the under 13s who pass the guidelines.
The fact is that only 4 or 5 under 13s are likely to pass the criteria. The question is does the Lincs League want to play a part in the development of exceptional talent, or just be a middling league in a middling county.
The Yorkshire League permit under 13s to play. I remember one getting 60 not out against us a few years ago. It clearly aids a player's development to play as good a standard as they can handle.
We have an under 12 playing for us now who is quite good enough to play in our fourth team. It may be that he plays Yorkshire League before he is permitted to play Lincolnshire League. What does this say about the Lincs League ?
It seems obvious to me that an exceptional under 13 is going to be better equipped than an incompetent under 14 or 15, and therefore the risk profile has not increased. If this under 13 happened to replace the incompetent under 14 or 15 then the risk will have reduced.
I suspect Cleethorpes will be putting the proposal to adopt the ECB guidelines forward again this year. I can't quite see why it is so controversial to follow what the ECB suggest. They will no doubt have done exhaustive research on the subject and have far more experience than us.
That is obviously a considered response and I'm sure you are correct in your assumptions about the odd player but we are not the Yorkshire League . Not many grounds in our League are up to First Class standards as are a number of Yorkshire League pitches .All the clubs in our League strive to prepare the very best pitches to play on but although we aspire to reach the "dizzy heights" we probably fall short in some areas despite our volunteer groundsmen putting in sterling work.You must appreciate that a lot of our clubs grounds are community playing fields with all the problems that brings.Not all clubs have the benefits of a Cleethorpes,Harrogate or a Scarborough but we are proud justifiably of what we have got.Nobody seems to be grabbing the concept that the "GREAT AND GOOD" of the cricket world stipulate that this particular age group plays on shorter pitches with a smaller ball,WHY DO THEY DO THAT AND THEN ISSUE WOOLLY GUIDELINES AND LEAVE THE FINAL DECISION TO US AT THE LOWER END OF THE GAME ? Having played cricket at a good standard for a number of years ,qualified as a coach, to silence those who would be critical, and started your clubs under 13 coaching section as well as being co-founder of the Grimsby area under 13 League ,Manager of the County clubs 2nd eleven and the county under 15's I feel that I'm well qualified to give an unbiased opinion.I have been very fortunate to have had a son good enough to make a career playing First Class cricket and I can assure you that at the age under discussion he was not ready to play regular adult games,he played 5 games only in his first year of senior cricket because Cleethorpes were desperate for numbers and I wouldn't play him in your Lincs League side which I skippered.Against my better judgement he played in the Ridings League under John Hoods captaincy with a little success but nothing exceptional.What seems obvious to you as an officer of your club is not so obvious to me I'm afraid.I can't comment on the ability of any of your clubs 12 year olds because I haven't seen them play but nothing you have said in your blog persuades me to change my view,however as I've said it's not my decision to make it is up to the Leagues member clubs,I only hope that the decision is made for the right reasons and that any rule change proposal is designed to safeguard these children - for that is what they are !!!
ReplyDeleteWhat i just cant understand is why it used to be ok and it isnt now - i first played 15th July 2000 - Having been born 13th December 1986 - This made me an under 13 player playing in senior cricket. John Danson bowled me my first ball - didnt slow down and the wicket was fairly wet- why was i not considered in any danger then but i would be now - where have things changed - a week later mark metcalfe and alan holborn threatened my existence with a peppering of bouncers - where have things changed - why did the same umpires allow me to take that peppering but not the current players. Something has changed in the attitude of parents toward sport and that is wrong. Umpires dont fear players getting injured - they fear the threat of the police/social services or whoever it is that gets involved when a cricketer gets injured. I agree with Bob in principle - players are not strong enough to perform to any significant degree or safely with the exception of the odd one. If the rule comes through - its watertight and prevents any potential 'flouting/bending' with regards to the standard of the cricketers allowed to play - i reckon id support it - but why there is a need to discuss it or worry about peoples safety is really a sad indictment of the people that exist in our country.
ReplyDeleteWell said Neil , although I wouldn't agree entirely with you . The reason it's being discussed is because our superiors at the ECB can't make a decision to clear the MESS up and people's interpretation of their flimsy guidelines suits only them and the club(s) they represent and they haven't considered the wider view .Bob is spot on with his reasoning,you would be hard pressed to find anyone with a better knowledge of cricket at ALL levels. He is obviously very protective of the League's reputation and concerned that the young player is pushed by parent(s)/clubs into a level of cricket they can't really cope with both mentally and physically.Junior soccer is littered with pushy parents often out of control on the sidelines shouting and bawling at their off-spring who,in their eyes never makes a bad pass or misses a shot on goal.I've even heard them encouraging the youngster to kick lumps out of the opponents,they wouldn't be so keen if their boy was playing against adults .Shock/Horror an under 13 playing adult soccer couldn't/wouldn't happen !!! Don't be so sure if the loonies get control of the asylum anything could happen !!! I am afraid Neil that if Bob is right ,and I think he is ,the Solicitors could have a field day if anything went wrong.It's not just injury that is potentially the problem it could be verbal abuse/threats anything that a child is not normally equipped to deal with when it is coming from an adult.How many clubs have a CHILD PROTECTION POLICY OR A WELFARE OFFICER to deal with these potentially serious problems ?
ReplyDeleteThanks for you remarks ,but as I've said before , I don't like anonymous messages I much prefer to know who I'm talking to. Please identify yourself in future.
ReplyDeleteTHANKS
BOB WELTON