League cricket - the amateur club game - in the western part of Scotland is due for a revision. And when better to consider it than during an extended break from the game caused by the COVID pandemic?
Even before the virus, both the cricket and wider worlds have changed since the return from the national league in 2012 (back to an 8 team Premier Division, 50 over competition). However the Western District Cricket Union (WDCU) structure has barely changed in this time.
The union is aimed at “allowing the game to flourish and grow at all levels”. The only way to meet this aim is to adapt the competition. Change is due.
Background
What has changed since 2012?
Twenty20 has become the most popular professional format.
The Scottish team have become stronger and have ambitions for full membership
Regional cricket is a true bridge between club and playing for Scotland (and the gap between league and region cricket has increased)
Fewer people play club cricket and their are fewer clubs.
Demographics have changed: fewer lower income players, more women and more Asian players.
Running a cricket club is more expensive and time-consuming
Cricket is unpopular with schools, outside of private schools
Work habits have changed with more flexibility and less “9-5”
There is no more time, but there are more options for leisure and more involvement in family time, meaning leisure time is more highly valued.
Summers are warmer but wetter, leaning matches towards shorter formats.
It’s also worth remembering what’s the same compared to 2012: Facilities have not changed much, including the quality of pitches. Professional players are restricted to one per team and still dominate (although thanks to restrictions, less so). There are around a dozen “big” clubs but no club has totally dominated in this time.
The clubs are broadly the same with goals of individual clubs are to be both social and competitive, wanting regular weekend cricket and a general reluctance to change format too much, or travel too far to play. Smaller clubs have more of a focus on the social element, bigger clubs on the competition, but there is a great crossover.
Nevertheless, a lot has changed.
Goals
With this background in mind, what are the priorities for club cricket under the WDCU?
The survival and flourishing of cricket clubs
More people playing cricket more often.
A higher standard of cricket at Premier level (better feeding Western Warriors).
All are achievable if the structure responds to the changes in cricket. With that in mind, it make sense to have:
Shorter formats to both save time, adjust to changing weather patterns and increase T20 performance.
More local matches to save travel.
Fewer “dead rubbers” to make matches more competitive.
Additionally, the following are helpful goals but will not be covered here:
Better pitches.
Coach development.
Reduced influence of overseas professionals.
New structure
With these goals in mind, it makes sense to have a more flexible structure to accommodate clubs, grow the game and raise standards. Here is the proposal.
The WDCU will be split into two (connected) structures:
WDCU Conference: For "grass-roots" teams (1st , 2nd, 3rd and 4th XI's) currently in Division 2-4 or Premier Reserve.
WDCU Premier: For the top 20 1st XI's
Each structure provides Saturday cricket every week for every club. The key difference is the Conference is more focused on meeting the participation needs of clubs and the Premier has more focus on performance (although both allow for both as club cricket requires both to function well)
WDCU Conference
The Conference is 38 teams, split into rough geographical conferences of 8-10 teams: Teams play home and away matches in a T20 format, the champion of each conference is decided by the league winner.
The conferences include 1st-4th XI teams.
1st XI teams who win their conference play a play-off match to decide who is promoted (replacing the bottom of the Premier). 2nd-4th XI sides cannot be promoted, but can win the conference.
WDCU Premier
The Premier competition is more performance-based so the 18 game league has been replaced by a tournament.
A cascade structure means there is a knockout element to increase meaningful matches, but each team still gets the chance to play every Saturday no matter how they perform.
The competition has 20 teams to start, with the champions decided from a final four.
We get there like this:
Qualifier Round (4 weeks): Teams play in rough geographical groups of four. T20 format. The top 2 teams in each group progress.
Premier 50/20 Round (10 weeks): Here the competition splits into two. The top 10 teams play the Premier 50, the bottom 10 play the Premier 20
Premier 50: Two regional groups of five play eight 50 over matches each. Points from qualifiers are carried over. The top two in each group progress.
Premier 20: Ten teams play 18 matches of T20. The winner is Premier 20 Champion, the bottom side is relegated to the Conference
Premier Finals (4 weeks): Premier League, McCulloch Cup, Rowan Cup: The top 4 teams from Premier 50 play 3 50 over matches and a T20 finals day (Rowan Cup). The bottom 6 play in the McCulloch Cup.
Premier League: Four teams play four 50 over games. Points are carried forward from previous rounds. The top team wins the league.
Rowan Cup: 4 teams play a T20 day (semis then final). The winner wins the Rowan Cup
McCulloch Cup: 6 teams play 10 T20 games. Points carried forward from previous rounds. The top team wins the McCulloch Cup
Benefits
Although more complex, a cascade system like this has great benefits for the game:
More of the best teams playing against each other in meaningful matches (up to seven times in two formats), leading to better Warriors players.
More opportunities for “giant killings”
More local matches, especially at conference level
A mix of formats with a bias to T20
The ability to replay Saturday T20 games that are lost to rain
No single club can dominate as only the double is possible (and their are more trophies overall, giving more teams a chance).
Challenges
What are the down sides to this form of restructure?
First, most clubs are conservative in outlook and will see a big change as against the fabric of the club game (home/away league). A reduction in 50 over cricket will be seen as a departure from the status quo. Most clubs (and all 2nd XIs) will only play 20 over cricket so many committees might object based on not wanting to change. Smaller clubs with big ambitions may also object to the regional nature of conferences.
Fewer 50 over games could mean a reduction in quality of play, although this may be mitigated by only the better teams playing in meaningful matches.
Additionally, this system is far more complex. This requires more admin for allocating fixtures. It is also more confusing than home/away league. This could discourage clubs from wanting to change from a well-established structure. Practicalities of fixture scheduling might also be off-putting unless a proper schedule can be agreed.
Ideally the benefits will be seen to outweigh the costs, but there is flexibility built into the system if compromise is required.
Conclusions
While this is a though exercise, it shows that creative formats can fit both club requirements and the needs of the modern world. If the result of a complex system is more cricket played to a higher standard then it is worth consideration.