.JPG)
From BBC Sport
Cricket's new The Hundred tournament is "not a threat" to the traditions of the game, says England and Wales Cricket Board chief executive Tom Harrison.
The Hundred features eight teams, representing seven cities from around the UK, and will be played from 17 July-16 August.
Matches feature 100 balls bowled in blocks of five or 10.
"It's about getting more kids to play without taking anything away from our county environment," Harrison said.
Addressing the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) select committee at Portcullis House in Westminster on the future of English cricket, Harrison, who began his role in January 2015, said: "The Hundred is all about growing the game in this country and protecting the things we value the most.
"It is a really good way of protecting Test and four-day cricket. This is engaging at a different level, that is something we should embrace and it is not a threat. It is a much greater threat to say everything is fine as we are."
Last weekend the Hundred saw an American-style draft system to determine which players would represent each new team, the first such draft in British sport.
Players such as West Indies all-rounder Andre Russell, Australian opener David Warner and Afghanistan spinner Rashid Khan will feature alongside England stars including Jofra Archer and Ben Stokes.
"We have 1.1m who regularly attend cricket and 10.1m who are followers, we have got to bridge that gap," Harrison added. "It's to encapsulate the new audience but keep the existing audience happy."
This summer England won the World Cup for the first time and a captivating Ashes series finished level at 2-2.
"We had 3.15m into grounds in this country, the most successful summer we have had for domestic cricket," Harrison said. "We have an enormous pocket of fans who are not embracing the opportunities as they exist at the moment. An average English cricket fan is 50 years old, with a 77% male bias, 82% towards white British. We have got an awfully big opportunity if we get it right to get a diverse and multi-cultural audience."
'They could have voted it down - they didn't'
ECB chairman Colin Graves added: "We are changing cricket, you get resistance because nobody likes change. I played cricket for 40 years in Yorkshire and I understand where they are coming from but the game has got to move on.
"Everything we have done has been in consultation with our members and counties. We have 80,000 members who have been talked to. Nothing has been imposed. They could have voted it down - they didn't."
Asked what was wrong with T20 cricket for a new event to be launched, Harrison said: "Absolutely nothing, it has been a phenomenal format which has an amazing role. It's a fantastic format with eight consecutive years of growth and we are continuing to invest."
The competition will be on free-to-air television, with the BBC screening 10 men's matches from The Hundred and up to eight live matches from the women's competition, including both finals.
"If we hadn't had the new tournament terrestrial broadcasters would not have been back at the table," Harrison added. "We believe there is a market there for a new tournament.
"We want to bring down the barriers, make cricket more accessible. It's not just about linear channels, it's about the One Show, CBeebies, Asian Network, the enormous digital engagement the BBC brings us. If the men's World Cup taught us anything it is that the game is enormous in this country."
Yes, it COULD have been voted down IF Members across the Counties had been properly consulted by way of a secret Ballot - instead our own Lisa Pursehouse and Richard Tennant (CEO & Chairman) VOTED IN FAVOUR - ALONGSIDE, EVENTUALLY, JUST ABOUT EVERYONE ELSE.
ReplyDeleteThe disregard of Members views was a disgrace - we have been treated appallingly BECAUSE WE DON'T REALLY MATTER. WE ARE AN IRRITATION TO OUR COMMITTEE.
SO - I WILL BE STANDING FOR THE COMMITTEE - and I now actively seek your support. I stand on a basis of YOU MATTER, IT IS YOUR CLUB, CHANGES ARE NEEDED, BEWARE THE ECB.
Are you with me?
These Harrison and Graves guys, along with Lisa, Tennant, and others who 'represent' and vote for us Notts members on important matters are outright liars...! Whilst this Hundred tournament was in the early stages of discussion I sat back, along with all other members, waiting to be consulted and provided with an opportunity to vote...This has NEVER happened, Lisa and Tennant have never consulted me, or allowed me a vote on this matter...for Harrison to say the opposite is a LIE...Feel free to sue me Lisa, I look forward to seeing your evidence,
ReplyDeleteAnd go for it Philip, I will provide you with any support and help you need, if easier email me on baggers53@hotmail.co.uk
Good Luck..!!
Sadly, very sadly, you are correct Paul. Personal relationships and unfettered ambitions always get in the way of common sense and what is best for the Club and the Game. Also, our expectations of the Committee are probably naive and not based on the detailed knowledge of individuals that we ideally ought to have. I don't necessarily attribute unworthy motives but, rather, their acceptance that the ECB must know best and, after all, wasn't Derek Brewer one of the 'good guys' at Notts? - He, don't let us forget, is advising the ECB.
ReplyDeleteI feel the gloves are off !
ReplyDeleteYes, the gloves are certainly off.
DeleteYes Philip you will get my vote when the time comes . I think you have earned your place on the moribund Committee
ReplyDeleteI am now told that I can not stand - I am too old!!! - See my response - any help appreciated from fellow Members.
ReplyDeleteDear Mr Tennant,
I note your comments of 28th October 2019.
There is NO CONSTITUTIONAL IMPEDIMENT to prevent my Nomination continuing. I would regard the Club as acting ultra vires if it sought to prevent my Nomination and that it would amount to unlawful Age Discrimination.
I therefore insist that my Nomination stands.
Yours sincerely,
Philip J Measures member 161411.
Dear Mr Measures,
ReplyDeleteThank you for submitting your application form for membership of the General Committee.
Unfortunately, the Club’s current policy regarding membership of the General Committee is contained in Para 10.3 of the Committee Guidelines which, you and I have discussed previously. That paragraph states that ‘ Members should not seek re-election after their 70th birthday. A current Committee Member should retire at the end of the three-year period ’. This rule that contains his or her 70th birthday, the important date being the day before the AGM. This means that a member could retire aged 70, 71 or 72. Someone standing for the Committee for the first time who is 69 years of age on the day before the AGM could apply for election and serve three years maximum.’
As you know, one of the changes we are seeking in our Governance proposals is to avoid any age restriction whatsoever. The reason the restriction remains until those changes are passed is that without it, there would be no method to limit the term of office of Committee Members which would be detrimental to the Club. Hopefully, these proposals will be passed and if so, you will be able to stand at the 2021 election.
As you know, the 70 year rule has been applied for some years and indeed, Stuart Foster retires this year from the General Committee because of it.
If you require any further information then please let me know.
Yours sincerely
Richard Tennant
Chairman
The COMMITTEE GUIDELINES are, of course, SECRET! They have formed themselves into a 'Club within a Club' - and their Gudelines don't, it seems, even have to bge lawful.
ReplyDeleteUTTERLY OUTRAGEOUS - this is why we need someone to 'shine a light' into those dark places.
I'm sure you will agree Philip that we were all aware of that rule (legal or otherwise) and you yourself have mentioned it, and its unfairness on several occasions previously.
DeleteBut to draw attention to the wording as transcribed above, "Members should not seek re-election after their 70th birthday" - if you aren't seeking re-election and are only looking to be elected for the first (and only) time does this mean Para. 10.3 does not apply in your case? Or have you secretly been a Committee member before under an assumed name, perhaps.
Not only have I not been a Committee Member before BUT although I am too old for 2020 I am not too old in 2021 if they get their Constiutional Amendments passed!!! You could hardly make this up.
ReplyDeleteThe absolute legal issue though is that the Committee can't act unlawfully - their own secret Book of Rules can not over-ride the Constitution. They can seek to agree amongst themselves on something but they can't impose it on Committee Members who disagree - and new Committee Members can't be forced to agree to something that is unconsitutional.
For too long Nottinghamshire CCC Committee appears to have been exclusive; secret and autocratic. My career was all about empowering those who were disadvantaged and not playing the 'dirty tricks' that those with power were all too keen to resort to.
No wonder the Committee Minutes tell us nothing of importance due to their heavily 'sanitised' public versions. No wonder Members can't attend Committee Meetings. No wonder the Committee didn't consult us on the 100-Ball Competition by way of a Ballot. No wonder the Committee didn't consult us over the Schedule of matches for 2020.
It is time that as Members we reclaim OUR CLUB.
I will seek to bring an independence that seeks to uphold fairness and the rights of all members - their is no room in this Club for unlawful Discrimination.
They will now have to either seek further legal advice as to whether to allow my Nomination or face the consequences of disallowing me to stand.
I'm not sure if you're misssing my point or are just blazing angry or both...
DeleteIf your wording of the so called Para 10.3 is correct, then it does not apply to first time candidates, it makes no mention of anyone over the any nominal age seeking election to the committee for the first time. You are not seeking "RE-ELECTION" Philip. Called it a loop-hole.
Yes, both!!!
DeleteI will keep you updated and many thanks for your much appreciated advice.
Dear Mr Tennant,
ReplyDeleteFurther to yesterday's email I would also point out that I am not seeking 're-election' but election for the first time.
The Committee Rule 10-3 therefore does not apply in any case.
I am also not seeking to join the Committee for as many years as possible and whether or not the new Constitutional Amendments are made - and I intend to oppose some of them if they proceed as indicated at the Consultation meetings - my intention is to seek change during a single term of Office.
The future of the Club has to be in bringing in 'new blood' but I also need to add a note of caution that I remain to be convinced that Constitutional changes will in themselves achieve that - as can already be seen already elsewhere.
I await confirmation that my Nomination will proceed as it meets all legal and Constitutional requirements.
Yours sincerely,
Philip
Having very carefully reflected on this matter of my Committee nomination I make the following points.
ReplyDelete1) The role of the Committee is to ensure that the Club is administered effectively, efficiently and ethically / legally.
2) The Club consists of its members ALL of whom are equal Shareholders in it.
3) The Committee employs a Chief Executive and other Directors (i.e. Director of Crcket, Commercial Director) of whom the Chief Executive Officer is directly responsible to the Committee and, I believe, attends all Committee Meetings.
4) The rights of individual Members are safeguarded within the Constitution.
5) Neither the Committee nor any employees of the Club are legally allowed to infringe the provisions of the Constitution.
It is, therefore, a matter of huge concern to myself that despite a number of previous meetings with the Chairman and him knowing well my views on age-related Committee nominations that he has not supported my nomination as being enirely within the provisions of the Constitution.
The Chairman is also fully aware of the status of the Committee's own 'rules' - he knows that they are not legally binding unless they comply with the provisions of the Constitution. They MAY have a 'shared' acceptance by current Committee members but to that extent they are only voluntary insofar that any of them sit 'outside' of any Constitutional constraints.
I now call on the Chairmand and the Committee to ensure that the Constitutional rights of myself as an individual Member seeking election to the Committee be upheld and that I rceive assurance that there will be no further impediments placed in the path of my Application.
I will not accept nor tolerate Age Discrimination nor any other form of 'bullying' no matter how it may be disguised nor will I support it in respect of any other Member of our Club.
2)
And did you all know that the Club Rules were partially amended on the 5 September 2019?
ReplyDeleteSee my email for more details:
In accordance with Rule 11.4 as amended on 5 September 2019 will you please forward to myself a current Copy of the Club Rules.
Will you also advise me if the Partial Amendment of Rules was agreed by the Membership and is so when.
If not agreed by the Membership on what basis were the Rules legally amended?
An electronic copy is acceptable.
Kind regards,
Philip Measures
Member 161411
So the $64,000 dollar question is this " when the nomination applicants are known -will the name of Philip Measures be included ? "
ReplyDeleteOr will the crafty Committee block his application by quoting an ambiguous little known rule that in the year of 2019 seems hopelessly out of date /
Its worth noting that the upper limit of 70 years is pretty close to the soon to be regular retirement age for the population at large .
I am assuming that the Committee via its Chairman will be seeking to disallow my Nomination. It will be no surprise if the Club does not seek to do so by way of seeking a legal opinion, However, the ONLY age restriction under the Co-operaive & Community Benefit Societies Act 2014 (under which Nottinghamshire County Cricket Clud in registered and regulated) which I can ascertain is as follows:
ReplyDeleteRule 31: Members under 18
(1)A person under the age of 18 may be a member of a registered society unless the society's registered rules provide otherwise.
(2)A person under the age of 18—
(a)may enjoy all the rights of a member of a registered society, and
(b)if aged 16 or over, may execute all instruments and give all receipts necessary to be executed or given under a society's registered rules.
This is subject to the society's registered rules and to the provisions of this Act.
(3)A person under the age of 16 may not be a member of a registered society's committee or a trustee, manager or treasurer of a registered society.
So there is clearly a MINIMUM age restriction of 16 years but NO UPPER age restriction.
I think that the 'bottom line' is that I (and the rest of the very many Senior Members over the age of 70)are not wanted!
I think also that '75 Not Out' makes a very valid point that as the Retirment Age keeps increasing and as many people are working well beyond the age of 70 years that the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club ought not to place itself in a position of having allegations of Age Discrimination made against it.
I have no wish to do anything to damage the Club but will now be withdrawing my Committee Nomination as a result of the treatment I have received.
I will leave it to others to perhaps make up their own minds about what the Committee wishes to keep hidden from public view.
NO! Pls Philip stand for the committee until Tenant and his lynch mob can LEGALLY challenge your nomination
DeleteThanks 'Rise...' BUT it would make me ill fighting against this level of subterfuge. My whole career was blighted by trying to stand up to those in 'power' - I gave up psychiatric nursing because of awful abuse against patients and the perpetrators walked away - Managers would not act. My career in Social Work was a nightmare - the levels of oppression by many senior Mangers and Politicians was almost unbelievable - CARE? - many only cared for themselves.
ReplyDeleteMy love of cricket is that perhaps naively I have always regarded it as being honest and ehtical - a game played fairly but, sadly, it has increasingly turned into a cut-throat business. Why are just about all Clubs run by 'clever' Businessmen and Accountants? Where are the 'ordinary' Supporters - the Members who have been around for most of their lives and many who are extremely knowledgable but don't fit the 'managerial mould'?
The ECB is heavily supported by those County Chairmen and CEO's like we have at Notts - THEY believe that THEY know best and maintain their 'power' by secrecy - the Committee Minutes that are produced are a disgrace - bleached beyond recognition.
And now I have discovered that Club Rules 8 & 11 were partially changed on 5 September 2019 - I await confirmation as to what was the legal basis for these changes.
Make no mistake we are up against 'dark forces' - and I don't say that lightly. The ECB evidence to the House of Commons Select Committee was less than honest in parts and evasive in others. I would go so far as to say was downright untruthful and intended to mislead the Committee.
So how could I stand up against people who from the outset don't want me? They don't want 'old people' - we are past our 'use by date'!!! Others have been on the Committee for years and very comfortably so - perhaps familiarity has now demonstrated its results in the shocking recent Seasons we have had but yet no changes at the top appear to have been made - the Committee seems unwilling to take any positive actions at all whilst the 'Six' Restaurant 'eats' up our money at the expense of much needed improvements to the William Clarke Stand and the Pavilion - not to mention the disgraceful state of Lady Bay.
There will be other Nominees who will be better able to withstand the pressures - I need to look after my own health and sanity. So, for now, the Committee wins.
Its a shame Philip but your health must come first .
ReplyDeleteNo doubt you will be asking the awkward questions that need an answer at the forthcoming AGM?
Perhaps try again for nomination in 12 months time ? I am sure you will get the necessary support from the ordinary Members .
But the Notts CCC Committee Room may not extend the hand of friendship .
As Harold Wilson famously said " a week is a long time in politics "
Perhaps in a few weeks time some information may escape from the Committee Room ? Decisions , future plans , 100 Ball forecasts , terms and conditions of some who may not be currently pulling their weight, the list of things we need to know is almost endless because Notts Members have been kept in the dark for far too long .
Interesting to see what grows in the dark! - the Snake plant; the Prayer plant (but its leaves curl up and wilt in direct sunlight); mushrooms and the Euphorbia griffitii but its sap irritates skin and eyes. Perhaps the Notts Committee are concentrating on the Prayer plant but the Snake plant is taking over!!!
ReplyDelete