Here's a handy summary of the rule change proposals to be considered at the Lincolnshire County Cricket League AGM at Rase Park, Market Rasen, on Wednesday night (7.30pm start).
The summary has been produced by Glen Sands, the league fixture secretary and acting general secretary.
1 ) Proposal from Cleethorpes CC and Market Rasen to adopt the ECB guideline that U13's be allowed to bat and bowl in the Lincolnshire League.
2 ) Proposal from Barton Town CC that bowlers be limited to a maximum of 10 overs in the Lincolnshire League. Similar proposal from Haxey CC only that no player be allowed to bowl more than 1/3 of the allotted innings.
3 ) Proposal by Barton Town CC that rule 3.3 be changed to read : the offending team who fails to fulfill a fixture will be deducted 5 points whilst the non-offending team will be awarded 20 points ( replacing the current 15 ).
4 ) Proposal from Barton Town CC that rule 6.9 ( f ) re payment for teas be changed. They propose one of two alterations. Firstly that the away team not be charged for teas in league games but pay £30 in Cup matches and secondly that the away team pay £30 in both league and Cup matches , replacing the £25 payment.
5 ) Proposal from Haxey CC that rule 3.1 re George Marshall and Bob Welton Cup fixtures be changed to read ALL George Marshall and Bob Welton Cup fixtures be played on a Sunday so as to free up extra Saturdays for league matches. They also propose that the penalties for clubs inputting their scores on the play cricket website be stringently adhered too so as to encourage clubs to input the information quicker.
Clubs to be reminded that a certain amount of leniency was shown in the first year but for the 2012 season that will change. The management committee propose that the fine for failure to fill scoresheets correctly be changed from £5 to £10.
Haxey CC propose that rule 5.3 be changed to read that all Premier Division clubs MUST provide a scorer.
6 ) Proposal from Nettleham CC re 7.3 that points awarded for an abandoned or postponed match be changed from 5 points each to 7 points each , bringing the rule into line with the ECB Premier. They also proposed that all 2nd teams below Lincs League Division One should play in the Bob Welton Cup and not the George Marshall Cup so as to reduce the number of mismatches.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's about time a limit is put bowlers,and sure if it is applied few teams will see be impact in their league positions than past season,now more 2 man bowling attacks.
ReplyDeleteAndy Richley said:
ReplyDeleteI can see where the bowling limit rule change comes from, especially when it comes to making sure that team's don't limit opportunities for less-experienced bowlers, but the points I'd make in response are:
1. As a batsman I want to pit myself against the best bowling that the opposition has. Simply seeing off the allocated overs that a side's leading bowler(s) has and then milking the part-timers reduces the challenge.
2. It seems unfair to limit a side from using their best bowlers as much as they wish to when their best batsman can happily bat 45 (or 50) overs, should he have the capacity to.
3. There's an art to bowling long spells - particularly for spinners. Limiting bowlers to 10 overs will negate that.
4. The onus should be on clubs to develop balanced bowling attacks that share the overs over the course of the season. Few clubs can succeed in the long-term with only a two-man attack. If for no other reason than the rest of the bowlers in the side get fed up with the lack of opportunities and go elsewhere.
5. Prescribing an over limit turns the captain into a number cruncher, not someone who is able to shape the game to their will.
6. Over limits don't take into account varying pitch conditions throughout the course of the season. Not may spinners are going to get through more than 10 overs in April and May. But come the end of August you may come across a raging turner where the seamers get 4 overs to take the lacquer off and then the ball's chucked to the team's best twirler.
Andy Richley added:
ReplyDeleteObviously anyone who's seen me bat knows that 1 is highly unlikely, but we all have our illusions!
I agree 100% with the bowling rule. I know the onus Should be within the club to create a bowling attack but Ive seen it within my club where our 3rd change bowler (or myself who is not an opening bowler) only gets 2 overs at the end because the captain "has" to keep his opening bowler on for 15+ overs to keep him happy (whether he is bowling good or bad in some cases).
ReplyDeleteTo Andy I would say it shows a better club and a better captain to have and use 5 bowlers properly instead of leaving one bowler to grind out a spell. It deters younger bowlers from playing knowing that one bowler bowl his end out and at most your going to get 5 overs at the other end.
Seeing league rules follow cup rules where there has to be 5 bowlers bowling a max of 9 overs would see a much better standard of cricket.
Andy replied:
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point on younger bowlers not being given an opportunity when skippers fail to rotate their attacks and keep a bowler on for too long just to salve their egos. However, introducing an overs limit is a very blunt instrument to fix that issue. It also means that talented young bowlers are unable to develop the ability to bowl longer spells that they'll need if they want to progress into ECB Premier or Minor Counties cricket.
I'm not sure how I see this improving the standard of cricket in the Lincolnshire League either. In my experience, very few teams have a fifth bowler who they'd regularly want to trust with 9 overs (or even 5 in Haxey's suggested change) in every game. Forcing teams to 'find' those overs from part-time bowlers is going to make bowling attacks worse overall, not better.
I think the overs rule change proposal has great intentions with regards to providing young bowlers with more chances to bowl initially than they get at the moment. But I think the long-term impact of this will be detrimental to both the league and player development.