Save The County Championship 1 - Article in the Cricketer /Petition as Advertised

 

The petition for an EGM  as highlighted on the recent View from the bridge podcast, "Future of of County cricket" can be found here

09/06

As Nick Evans suggests, this article in the Cricketer is likely to be written following a briefing by the ECB.

It doesn't make pleasant reading.

Plans for the new men's domestic schedule are likely to take a significant step forward this week, with the first-class counties set to agree on a shortlist of three options.

 

The Cricketer understands that the steering group leading the review hopes to finalise these options on Wednesday (June 10). They will then be discussed by the counties - and, it is claimed, with other stakeholders - before a meeting at the start of July.

 

It is then hoped the Professional Game Committee (PGC) will make a recommendation to the ECB board, with final agreement reached by mid-July.

 

It seems, at this point, almost inevitable that the number of County Championship and Men's T20 Blast games will be cut, with very few of the plans seen by The Cricketer retaining 14 games (as a minimum) in either competition.

 

Related: The changing status of the T20 Blast: How The Hundred and lifestyle changes are challenging the counties in 2025

 

There is something close to consensus over the future shape of the limited-overs competitions. The Blast, for example, looks set to be reduced to 12 matches - 10 is a possible, but unlikely scenario, too -  with the counties hoping that better scheduling of games, with more on Friday nights or Sunday afternoons, can more than compensate for the reduction of fixtures.

 

Ticket sales have dropped sharply over the last couple of years, and between 2023 and 2024, 16 of the 18 counties experienced a reduction.

 

It also seems highly likely that the One Day Cup will continue to be played at the same time as The Hundred, with talk of playing it early season having been all but abandoned.

 

There is more disagreement over the future shape of the Championship. Among the likely options on the shortlist is something very similar to the Bob Willis Trophy, featuring three conferences of six teams each, which would mean all 18 teams could win the title at the start of the season.

 

Another option, favoured by a significant number of counties, features two groups of six. Counties would play all teams in the opposite group home and away (meaning 12 games) before two semi-finals and a final.

 

The remaining six teams would only play each other, but, mitigating concerns they could be 'left behind', two of them could be promoted each year. This option could involve play-offs against the sides bottom of the other two groups.

 

Both these options mean the Championship could be decided by a final in years to come. This is not a universally popular proposal, with some feeling it is an inappropriate end to a league season.

 

The final option will retain a two-divisional structure involving promotion and relegation. It's yet to be agreed how many teams would be in each division. A top tier of seven, eight, 10 and 11 teams have all been discussed, though 10 seems the likely option at this time.

 

In all options, there would be a reduction in the number of games. Most teams would play 12.

 

There has been pressure to reduce the amount of cricket played for some time. The PCA, the players' union, argue that the current schedule has safeguarding implications, while the early start to the season has compromised the quality of cricket. All proposals would see the season start later and provide more time for training and travel.

 

The ECB hope there will be no need for a vote and instead is optimistic that discussion can produce consensus.

 

Either way, it means the schedule for future seasons is likely to have been agreed upon within about a month.

05/06

Nick writes:

Hi Folks,

 

Lancashire held a members’ forum on the Schedule review yesterday. Here are some notes on it. The highlighting is mine.

 

Thanks to those who went to the forum and asked questions. A quick summary of the points made.

 

Daniel Gidney confirmed that Lancashire would survey members on the options that were on the table and give them a binding vote.

 

It may be, though, that a significant majority of the other counties have by then already agreed on a change thus making Lancashire's vote academic.

 

12 counties have to agree on a change.

 

No options for changes to the schedule were discussed during the meeting. It was denied that the changes published in the Cricketer and shared on social media was a done deal.

 

There are more engagement sessions amongst the counties during June.

 

The counties are hoping to reach agreement by the end of the month if at all possible.

 

It was stated many times that the current schedule isn't fit for purpose and needs to slim down. However different counties want different reductions. Cost management was mentioned though DG said Lancashire had enough non-cricket income to take a broader view.

 

Some want to keep 14 Blast games. Some want 10.

 

Daniel Gidney repeated many times that the only way to keep 14 County Championship games was to play 2 games alongside the 100. George Balderson agreed with that. However, getting 12 counties to agree is a challenge as the last time there was a vote on this, only 3 counties agreed to it (Lancashire being one).

 

Rob Andrew from the ECB confirmed that the ECB wanted the counties to make the decision. The ECB were feeding in the England Men's team view.

 

Mark Chilton said that the consensus amongst county cricket directors was for slightly fewer games. Players wanted more rest and recuperation to be able to put themselves in the best frame to play as well as they could for members in county cricket as well as to bid for places in franchise cricket or international selection. The back-to-back games with late night travel in the Blast was stated to be a problem. George Balderson largely agreed whilst referencing the difference between players who didn't really have much prospect of franchise or international selection today vs those that did.

 

It was a good discussion with many questions asked and answered. Better in truth than most other counties are doing.

 

The nagging feeling I am left with is that most of the counties are going to hide behind a variation of "it's all very complicated" and "we were outvoted" to justify not having an open discussion about the real options.

 

The County Cricket Members Group survey suggests that keeping 14 CC games is the priority. If members want that then they are going to have to make the case to their clubs a lot more fervently. Gidney closed by asking Lancashire members to make any strong feelings known to the MRG.

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

04/06

 Chair's Response

Chair Replies to Nick /CCMG

Nick

Thank you for your email and I trust you are enjoying the cricket.

Thanks also for letting me know of the progress of the petition.

I don't know if you were in attendance for the recent Members Forum, where the same question was asked.

My response is that I and the club believe we need to deliver a full consultation to members before coming to any conclusions on domestic structure.

This process was outlined further in our most recent Member Communication, with more details planned later this week.

I look forward to discussing this with you in due course.

Thanks again.

Andy

Mr Hunt remembers the Forum differently to myself. Several members questioned the Chair & CEO as to where they stood in discussions about the number of CC matches in future schedules. The room wanted a committment to defend the Championship to a 14 match minimum, but members were told that it was far too complex for ordinary supporters to comprehend - hence the proposed briefings and meeting, now described as"consultations". Consultations about the sale of the R*ckets and the impact on NCCC were promised during the winter and nothing has happened yet. Impact going forward is critical when discussing fixture schedules... Dave

In the Chair/CEO most recent communication:

At the forum, we committed to a period of consultation and the launch of channels of feedback to allow all voices to be heard.

We will begin this process in the days following the conclusion of the Test, and will offer a range of avenues through which you will be able to give your views – including in-person forums and opportunities to share your opinions with us online through a dedicated portal.

02/06

Petition Target Achieved

Hi Folks,

 

We now have over 110 signatures – thank you all.

Some points:

1.    We need to decide when to formally send the petition to NCCC. Holding an SGM costs the club money so in my opinion we mustn’t do it just because we can. The rules are unclear (to me at least) about whether an instruction to hold an SGM can be withdrawn. So, I’d welcome feedback on timing please.

2.    Please keep signing the petition if you haven’t done so already.

3.    NCCC seem to be completely ignoring the issue despite the email sent to members over a week ago blaming the test match for the delay. The consultation should have been started in February/March. I hate to be cynical, but are they delaying so long so that they can then say it’s too late?

4.    Let’s hope NCCC (realistically in the shape of the Chair) commit to not voting for any reduction in the 14 CC games. Some other counties are being forced to have SGM’s demanding no decrease in CC or T20 games so we’re not asking for as much at Notts.

5.    It’s not impossible that some counties might see “Votes of No Confidence” in their Chairs/committees/boards on this issue. God forbid we have to go down that route.

6.    I have to say that in my opinion the most sensible thing for the ECB, PCA and all the counties to do now is to say that the changes, whatever they may be, will come in 2027 to give us all time to do this properly and thoughtfully.

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield S

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

30/05

Hi Folks,

 

In the absence of any communication from NCCC this week, it is now even more important that we have the safety net of being able to call an EGM. Please sign the petition, hopefully we will not have to use it, think of it as buying an umbrella or an insurance premium.

 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe4JfZPOgsVT_tI2Bv-rP8tVnVGWG4oKEvfcgchUSHFViVVKA/viewform?usp=dialog

 

I will be at TB tonight with printed copies of the petition if anyone wants to sign via paper. My mobile number is below if you want to contact me. I’ll also be with Alan Higham who started all this rolling nationwide.

 

What we are facing is this (from Alan H):

 

I've had two county bosses contact me in the last 24 hours unprompted.

 

Both confirm that the 8 match CC before the Blast in June and then 3/4 play offs in September is the preferred solution. Top division of 10 to remain so the 8 games means you don't play one county and in div 2 you play one county twice!

 

The playoffs are back-to-back games in September vulnerable to weather and failing light. 4 back-to-back games is one of the main PCA complaints so why they think it's a good idea to have the finale of the competition done in such intensity at the end of the season is beyond me.

 

If you think the above is a good idea, then fine. BUT if you don’t, please sign the petition.

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

 

07799063184

26/05

Hi Folks,

 

A couple of updates for you.

 

1. I was at the Derbyshire forum on Thursday, attended by the chair, CEO and three other members of the Board (committee). Firstly, the Chair said his personal opinion was that we should stick to 14 CC matches per season. He said it wasn’t (yet) official Derbyshire policy but the nods on the top table implied it wouldn’t be long before it was. Wouldn’t it be nice if we knew what the Notts Chair and committee members thought was well? But, of course, communication with individual committee members at Notts is frowned on in case they get asked awkward questions, we have to wait for individual committee members e.g. DG, DP, RS to come to us, while the others appear to remain mute. Anyway, back to DCCC. Their view is that to ease the scheduling issues two CC games should be played during the franchise tournament in August. The vast majority of members present seemed to think this was a reasonable compromise.

 

2. Next Lancashire, a county where the Board regard their members as a nuisance at best. Even they are better than Notts on this issue at least – see below:

 

Lancashire Members' Domestic Schedule Open Discussion

 

Dear Member,

 

Following the Members' Forum in April as well as recent consultation with Chris Peacock, Board Member for Member Communication and Services, and valuable input from the Members' Representative Group, we are pleased to confirm the Club's next steps in engaging with Members on the domestic cricket schedule.  As part of our continued commitment to transparency and collaboration, the Club will:

1. Host an open discussion session with Members at Emirates Old Trafford, providing an opportunity to share views and ask questions. Rob Andrew (ECB - Managing Director – Professional Game) will join a panel of Lancashire Cricket officials for the open session which will take place in between the Women’s and Men’s games at the T20 double header on 4 June 2025.
2. Conduct an electronic vote on possible ECB outcomes, enabling Members to formally express their preferences.

These steps are designed to ensure that your voices are heard and considered as part of the ongoing dialogue around the future of domestic cricket. The Members' Open Session will be held at UA92 on Wednesday 4 June at 5pm. Please register your attendance via the form below. Registration closes on Wednesday 28 May. We will share further details on the electronic vote as soon as we are in a position to do so.

 

So, please sign the petition that has been circulated to you. I hope we will not need to call an EGM, BUT, I feel we need to have that card in our hand should Notts not consult us in any meaningful way. If you haven’t received the link to the petition via email, it is on Nottsview here and on the Facebook site. We have 54 signatures at present, we need 100.

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

24/05

As alluded to by a naughty anonymous in the comments. From The Cricketer

22/05

Former chair of the PCA says cut the Championship

Has the announcement by the Chair and the CEO of a future menu of events to discuss future scheduling been enough to defuse the situation?

Do members believe that if there is a strong concensus within the membership, adamant that no reduction in the County Championship is the only way forward, that the Chair and the CEO would argue that case and vote accordingly in future ECB and peer discussions?

I've had some feedback along the lines of what petition?

So here is a link

20/05

Here's what Bracegirdle has to say.

Today the CEO and Chair have reacted, or at least deferred some action until after the test match this week...

read here

19/05

The Club have had 10 days to advertise their first forum, debate, information evening, Zoom call - whatever it is...

if they want to inform members, canvass opinions etc, shouldn't they be acting with more haste if there are to be multiple events and different kinds of events over the summer?

As a cynic I would expect the ECB and its poodle CEOs to do whatever they choose to do, as usual,

ref: the Regional / City T20 Franchise competition experiment - that morphed and was imposed on counties, members were briefed on one thing and were left with something entirely different and non-wanted.

Isn't now the time we need to show "them" what our priority is is any future schedule.

17/05

IT'S TIME TO ACT NOW, BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!

As you will recall at last week's Members' Forum, calls were made by several members to the Chair and to the CEO for them to commit Nottinghamshire to argue, in discussions at the ECB and with their County peers, to preserve the County Championship schedule at 14 matches per season, as we have in 2025.

Both the Chair and the CEO rejected these calls, but intimated that Members would be able to discuss this matter and the wider schedule at smaller meetings, focus groups and information briefings etc - none of which in reflection commits Nottinghamshire's vote, when it come to one, to reflect what the members of the club want, if a 14 game Championship is what members want.

Only the CCMG have asked or canvassed members on this matter, the ECB certainly haven't.

Dr Nick Evans, the Notts representative in the CCMG, wishes for your support in calls for a Extraordinary General Meeting, he writes

Hi Folks,

 

I think after the last members’ forum and its failure to address any issues satisfactorily, that we will need to call an Extraordinary General Meeting to protect the County Championship. This will need 100 signatures from current members.

 

I really hope we don’t have to call an SGM as it costs the club money. However, I believe there has been insufficient consultation with member son the issue to reducing the number of County Championship matches from next season, i.e. there has been no survey from Notts asking for members’ views on the generality of the situation.

 

If you believe that the time has come to make a stand, please read the proposed resolution below and enter your details on the Google document at this link. Your data will not be used for any other purpose than to call for an SGM on this one occasion.

 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe4JfZPOgsVT_tI2Bv-rP8tVnVGWG4oKEvfcgchUSHFViVVKA/viewform?usp=dialog

 

Thanks,

 

Nick

 

Nottinghamshire CCC 2025 EGM resolution

 

The undersigned members of Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club (the Club) require an Extraordinary General Meeting under Rule 9.10 to be called by the General Committee (GC).

As required by Rule 9.10, the resolution to be considered at the meeting and the statement to be sent with the meeting notice to all members is set out below.

 

Domestic schedule review

 

Club members wish to discuss and vote on this resolution before the Club Chair casts any vote on behalf of the Club on any proposals to reduce the amount of county cricket scheduled.

 

The resolution is that: The Club shall oppose any proposal reducing the number of County Championship games

 

Statement on behalf of the Petitioners

 

1. The Club has promised a members' consultation and forum to consider formal proposals for a new schedule. However, these proposals may all involve reducing county cricket and the General Committee is not bound to follow members' wishes.  An EGM gives members a chance to vote on the position the Club should take on any proposals to reduce the amount of county cricket. This request was submitted before proposals have been finalised so there is sufficient time to hold the meeting (requiring 28 days’ notice) before county Chairs are asked to vote on them. The GC is asked to hold the meeting before the Chair votes on any proposals that reduce the amount of County Cricket.

 

Background

 

2. The ECB and counties are reviewing the county cricket schedule with decisions reported to be expected by the end of June for implementation in 2026. A lead option is reported to be a reduction in Championship matches from 14 to 12 and in T20s from 14 to 10 or 12. This could mean 10-12 fewer days of county cricket. At least 12 counties have to agree to any change to the current schedule.

 

3. The GC have been reluctant to give any commitment to maintaining the County Championship in its current format. This means that the Club may agree to a reduction. The petitioners believe this issue is so central to members’ interests and to the future of the county game that the General Committee’s and members’ views must be aligned.

 

Proposed Resolution

 

4. This resolution requires the Club to vote against proposals to reduce the number of County Championship matches.

 

5. The Resolution refers to ‘any’ proposals; because, at the time the resolution was written, no firm proposals had been published

 

Case for keeping the present number of county matches

 

6. Currently, excluding play-offs and finals for T20 and 50-overs competitions, each county plays a maximum of 78 days a season: 56 for the Championship, 14 for T20s and 8 for 50-overs matches. This represents only just over one third of days available from April to September and means considerably less county cricket being played than in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Important concerns raised by the Professional Cricketers Association (PCA) about players’ welfare need to be considered against this broad picture.

 

7. If the Championship and T20 competitions were cut as reported in the media, this could involve a reduction from the present maximum of 78 days to 66 or 68 (13-15%). This would mean significantly fewer opportunities for members and fans to watch and for players to develop their skills. With the entrenchment of the Hundred in August, based in the big cities, it would also risk a sharply reduced visibility for the county game which is played across the wider geography of the country.

 

8. Some might argue that shrinking the fixture-list is required to cut costs. But that is surely a policy of despair. Where necessary, counties should act to put their finances on a sustainable basis without detriment to their primary activity - to play cricket.

 

The Resolution

 

9. Though much is made of England selection now relying less on Championship performances, it remains the case that players’ skills, at least initially, are developed in the county system. The England set-up could not survive without the counties’ contribution.

 

10. A reduction in the number of Championship matches from 14 to 12, soon after its reduction from 16 (a 25% reduction overall) severely limits the opportunities available to players, especially younger players, to play first-class cricket. With likely weather interruptions, 12 games can easily shrink to 10.

 

11. The Championship, as the ECB acknowledges, is our Blue Riband tournament. It is said that it remains the competition which the players are keenest to win, because of the challenge it poses to skills and consistency across the season. For many fans and members (whether attending or following in the media and online), it remains an important source of interest and enjoyment.

 

12. It is not clear that concerns regarding players’ welfare should arise from the current scheduling. For example, if we take the largest block of 7 matches, at the start of the season, each county has a week off during this period. Data on overs bowled in Division 1 for 2023 and 2024 indicate that quick bowlers with the heaviest workloads for each county averaged just 21-22 overs a week in this period.

 

Conclusion

 

13. If proposals are agreed to marginalise the county game further by reducing the number of fixtures, there would be no going back. If the Hundred is expanded in 2029, further reductions can be expected. It is essential that all Club members are given a meaningful say now. It's time for Nottinghamshire members to take a stand!