Nottinghamshire Members' No Confidence in General Committee Members Petition - Update

 

04/08

Hi Folks,

 

The two EGM petitions are formally with NCCC and we are negotiating possible dates. Technically the timing of the meeting is entirely theirs but so far it has been a helpful and amicable discussion with Lisa P.

 

You may be aware that the Lancashire Chair, Andy Anson, has resigned. By an extraordinary coincidence it has happened the day after an SGM petition with a potential vote of no-confidence in him arrived at Old Trafford.

 

I have attached an edited version of a recent report on cricket’s finances (I‘ve taken out the photos for example to keep the file size down). It’s very detailed and very interesting.

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

28/07

Hi Everyone,

I will be at TB with paper copies of the no-confidence petition for people to sign. I’ll be in the Derek Randall suite (Clubhouse) from 10-11.

Lisa P has kindly given us a room to use at lunchtime, one of the boxes in the Radcliffe Road stand. If you go to RR reception they will tell you which one. You can also sign the petition there. We can have an informal chat about tactics etc.

I suggest we go round the crowd during the first 2 sessions on Tuesday and first session on Wednesday collecting signatures, as the more the better. I’d like some volunteers to help please.

Here’s the link to sign online: https://forms.gle/LESf7enq9kgRBcZL7

Please sign online as the earlier we get to 100 the better for both us and the club in terms of organising everything. NCCC staff are being helpful, not obstructive, over this so let’s make sure we are courteous please.

Best wishes,

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

27/07

Hi All,

 

Here’s a link to a form to request an EGM to consider votes of ‘no-confidence’ in the members of the General Committee.

 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScYX1a9TxkFFJdYvASsHEICMk0NPtNGnWe6n4vtV2rl5S6ehQ/viewform?usp=sharing&ouid=113097774212445878139.

 

Please sign if you are unhappy with the way NCCC has handled the ECB’s schedule review. Note please also forward this electronically or on paper to other NCCC members as we need to get to all of them if at all possible.

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

25/07

The Rationale

A follow-up to earlier. Thank you to all who have already signed. I have been asked a few questions so here are some attempts at answers:

 

1. Why are the CEO and DOC not included.
1. At this stage we are just ‘targeting’ the elected and nominated members of the GC. These are our 12 representatives. It is their duty to liaise with us members and then make decision on our behalf. Lisa and Mick are paid employees of the club and as such are in a different legal position with regard to us as members. They are there to carry out the policies of the GC on our behalf so I believe, at least at this stage, we should look to how the GC’s members have behaved.

 

2. Why not have a vote on the whole committee at one go?
1. This is a good question. We couldn’t have a vote on the Chair and the whole GC separately as it could end up with the two votes going in opposite directions and then as the Chair is a member of the GC that would produce an impasse. I believe it’s essential to have a no-confidence vote in the Chair alone and so we need to do the committee individually in my opinion. Also, this gives us the possibility of voting that we DO have confidence in some (or all) individual members. Just for me alone there are two GC members I will definitely support and maybe another three or so. A lot will depend on how they ‘defend themselves and their record since the last AGM.

 

3. I will endeavour to get each GC members’ voting record and attendance record (including sub-committees) since the last AGM asap.

 

4. Please could you all keep an eye on (anti-)social media for anything that will help us as members make the right decisions when this all comes to a vote. Please forward stuff to me if there’s anything out there from any GC member.

 

Please sign the petition if you haven’t already done so:

https://forms.gle/bj6YZ4kBz9f8K4MH9

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

Hi All,

 

Here’s a link to a form to request an EGM to consider votes of ‘no-confidence’ in the members of the General Committee.

 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScYX1a9TxkFFJdYvASsHEICMk0NPtNGnWe6n4vtV2rl5S6ehQ/viewform?usp=sharing&ouid=113097774212445878139.

 

Here is the petition itself:

 

Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club EGM request 

 

MEMBERS’ REQUISITION OF AN EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING (“EGM”) TO CONSIDER CERTAIN PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS PURSUANT TO RULE 9.10 OF THE CLUB’S RULES.

 

Business to be considered and basis for proposed resolutions:

 

1. The EGM shall consider the requisitioning members' serious concerns about the ongoing conduct and (in)actions of the Club Chair especially over the ECB’s Schedule Review, and thus his suitability for office. This behaviour has been apparent in his role as Chair of the General Committee (GC) especially during member forums and includes failing to deliver promises made to members, especially on consultation.
2. The meeting shall consider the requisitioning members' serious concerns about the ongoing conduct and (in)actions of the individual members of the GC especially over the ECB’s Schedule Review, and thus their suitability for the GC. This mainly relates to failure of the individual members of the GC to properly consult with members.

 

For the above reasons, the requisitioning members have lost trust and confidence in the Chair and General Committee and pursuant to Rule 9.10 hereby call on the GC to hold an EGM pursuant to the timescales specified in rule 9.10 at which the following resolutions be voted upon by the members.

 

Proposed resolutions

1.         The members have no-confidence in the Chair, Andrew Hunt.

2.         The members have no-confidence in the Vice-Chair, Richard Stevenson.

3.         The members have no-confidence in the Treasurer, Fraser Montgomery.

4.         The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Andy Afford.

5.         The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Dave Gunn.

6.         The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Catherine Hammond.

7.         The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Penny Huggard.

8.         The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Stephen Lehane.

9.         The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Diana Peasey.

10.       The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Navdeep Sethi.

11.       The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Sue Storey.

12.       The members have no-confidence in the GC member, Graeme Swann.

 

I will follow up tomorrow with another email with the rationale behind this petition, but for the moment please get signing!

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

18/07

Hi Everyone,

 

Notts have confirmed receipt of the SGM request. They have a window of 28 days to work on it and then let people know the date and time, which must be in the next 90 days.

 

This gives us a bit of time to work on the ‘no confidence’ petition. I don’t intend to do anything tonight (time pressure) but will being collecting signatures electronically in a week or so and in person at the Somerset CC game. Thanks for the offers of help.

 

I have not heard back from NCCC about our room request yet, but it’s early days.

 

Rumours from the counties meeting: (Sean Jarvis the Leicester CEO) – “IMO - I think it’s headed to a status quo of CC, reduction of T20 to 12…. Which again IMO is not good for the non test grounds…. But will see..”

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

17/07

Former Director of Trent R*ckets and soon to be standing down as LCCC CEO, Sean Jarvis posted this this morning:

Capital bound for CEO meeting at the Oval (I wish they’d hold them in the East Mids on occasions!) - suspect lots on the agenda inc Hundred and Schedule to mention just a couple

Lancashire members were told that the vote was today at their 3 is the new 5 swindle meeting, however Sean Jarvis says that there's no vote today but Monday is the deadline for a vote on the T20 side of things.

Has there been any talk at Trent Bridge surrounding T20 schedules / structure at all?

In their latest communication:

Vitality Blast

The sole proposal made in relation to the Vitality Blast was to reduce the number of group-stage fixtures from 14 to 12 and for the Quarter Finals and Finals Day to be completed before the start of the Hundred.

3 regional groups of 6 teams would each play 5 home and 5 away matches played against the teams within its own group plus 2 additional matches (1 home & 1 away) against teams from another group.

It was proposed that the make-up of the groups would rotate after two seasons (2028), moving it away from a regional model.

Our initial view was that the number of group-stage fixtures should be reduced to 10, in order to create sufficient time for players to travel, train and recover, and to ease the pressure on facilities and support staff.

A reduction to five home games should also create better space for fixtures to be scheduled more consistently in the popular weekend slots, creating ‘appointment to view’ matchdays for members and supporters.

However, support for a 10-game Blast group stage was tempered by collective recognition that non-Test Match venues were more heavily reliant on the format and that we should unite around a more modest cut to the group stage.

We also oppose de-regionalisation of the group stage from 2028 to protect traditional rivalries and minimise the impact of away match travel for players and members and supporters.

Apart from the flawed survey, there has been no discussion and no consultation about the most popularly attended format with the membership.

OPEN LETTER TO Ms PURSEHOUSE

16/07

Dear Ms Pursehouse,

 

In the absence of a face-to-face members forum in the near future organised by the club a group of us would be grateful if a large room could be made available for a meeting of members on the first day of the CC against Somerset. Would this be possible please? Once the details are sorted we will be inviting all committee members to attend the discussions. Perhaps you could alert them to this – thank you.

 

Secondly, please could you let me know when the promised ‘focus groups’ will be constituted to discuss the ECB’s schedule review and feedback to the committee.

 

Thank you,

 

Nick Evans

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

Yesterday there was a Nottinghamshire General Committee meeting at Trent Bridge, the same day that Notts had an away game.

The one Notts Committee member that attended the match at Cleethorpes, obviously had to leave early to make that arranged meeting.

Cleethorpes CC had laid on an apetitising spread for the Notts General Committee to enjoy at half-time, which obviously had to be repurposed owing to the lack of Notts representations - shame on those committee members that chose to stay away, as these games with the National Counties are as much about showcasing cricket in general as they are about showcasing the hosting counties.

Giving the the absentees the benefit of the doubt, then what clot scheduled a meeting that clashed with game involving our county side?

Even after an evidently urgently scheduled GC meeting, no so called proposals on structure or schedule have been presented to members today electronically, now a week later than promised.

12/07

Twelve bodies on the General Committee, Lisa and an office block of her minions and still no one has composed an email to members sharing the proposals from Tuesday's PGC meeting, as promised in the "slide" from the members' forum.

Week commencing sometime when all has been decided.

Talk about sitting on the fence, they've hidden the [sitting on] fence behind a smoke screen.

We most likely will know more tomorrow after Lancashire have spoken with their members.

10/07

"Week commencing 07/07", that's 4 days now....

Just checked by spam folder, nah nothing Trent Bridge in there!

08/07

No news tonight following the PGC meeting.

07/07

Week commensing 7th July it says on the slide below, so can we expect news of some "considered proposals" with their supporting schedules, this week? Perhaps following the Professional Game Committee meeting tomorrow.

We know that the top table trio were at Taunton last week and the resultant feedback following their [SCCC] members' briefing. Richard Gould of the ECB was also there - was this information gathering or a coordinated attempted to sway opinions?

Did it backfire? We don't know, we only get weaselly words from our executive and chair, nothing clearly one way or the other. It's as though they know that the members won't like what they have already decided. If that is the case, they should pack their bags, clear their desks and make way for someone for that backs the championship rather than undermines it.

One thing for sure is that there is one camp of currently two counties that loud and clearly prefer an option that retains 14 county championship matches now (printed confirmation has been widely circulated) - so will we be briefed properly this time about that, this week? What is the club's viewpoint and can they justify it to its members?

29/06

Eventually, after the intervention of a certain committee member, we received the long lost slides;

Dear member

Thank you to those of you who attended our members' forum on the domestic structure during the first day of our County Championship fixture with Yorkshire.

We hope you found it useful to be able to hear the latest updates and discuss your queries with us.

If you weren't able to join us, or if you would like to look back at the topics covered during the forum, you can download the slides we presented here...

The slides include a summary of recent developments and a look at the views of various stakeholders - including results from our members' survey and a survey of players conducted by the Professional Cricketers' Association.

They also touch on the number of factors which must be considered when constructing the schedule - including international fixtures, professional women's games, The Hundred and pressure on pitches and facilities.

We have also compiled a summary of the themes that were discussed in the forum, which can be found here...

Next steps

While we had already attended a meeting with some of our fellow Professional Counties by the time of the forum, many counties had not received the latest updates, and have done so this week.

The Professional Game Committee are then set to meet to review feedback from the counties, after which we expect to receive considered proposals.

We will then review any proposals with the General Committee, and will look to share them with you in the next few weeks.

We will also schedule further forums, either online or in-person, to continue the consultation process.

Your views

As our slides from the forum show, the views of members, supporters, players, executives and committees do not always align. Player and supporter views on whether there is too much or too little cricket played, and whether formats should be played in blocks or spread throughout the season, are two of the more significant areas where opinions differ.

It is important, however, that views from a wide range of groups can be taken into account. We have received over 600 responses to our member survey on the schedule so far, but we encourage you to take the time to complete the survey if you haven't yet done so.

The survey should take no more than ten minutes to complete, and can be found here...

This is a complex issue for each county to navigate. At Notts, for example, we are no longer only a men's county club; we host a professional women's team, a full schedule of international cricket and men's and women's teams in The Hundred.

Each of these is crucial if we are to remain a thriving county club, but care must be taken to deliver outcomes which work for all.

We look forward to discussing these issues with you further as our consultation continues.

Thank you for your continued support.

27/06

I had planned to write a more comprehensive summary of last week's forum, but I'm still waiting for that slideshow to prompt my memory.

Any help below would be much appreciated.

I have got some nagging questions however...

Assuming the PCA/ECB/ etc get their own way and there is a reduction in the amount of men's county cricket, would a large reduction in the championship, say to 10 or 12 games mean that the Blast would be spared any cut at all, and vice versa?

26/06

I received a marketting email from Pravda today, offering the same "exclusive" offer to the "exclusive" offer contained in an email from Edgbaston, that I received a little later. Still not that email as promised however.

25/06

STILL WAITING FOR THE PROMISED SLIDES LISA!

Still waiting for a meaningful consultation...

but since the forum, I have received three marketing emails. I have opted out of emails about the franchise so others may have received more circulated emails from Pravda.

How long does it take to attach a document (the slide presentation), press click to send to the members' list. Obviously too many seconds - it must be a busy week for Pravda admin.

23/06

Still waiting for those slides to arrive, as promised by the CEO. The same slides that were used to waste most of the lunch break...

22/06

THE POSITION IS NOW CLEAR

THE MEMBERS WANT ONE THING

THE NOTTS TOP TABLE WANT SOMETHING ELSE, which of the five options that they went at lengths (22 minutes) to present, is their preferred option was not made clear and indeed a preference was denied.

THAT WAS NOT A CONSULTATION.

A consultation would require both sides to listen to each other

The women's game argument is now wearing a bit thin. Taking on extra teams without making provision for accommodation, pitches and facilities beforehand are the acts of myopic money driven fools. The Blaze arrived at TB with ECB monies attached.

The ground staff are apparently stretched, overworked - why not emply more ground staff if that is the case? Really it's wickets/grass that they are short of which requires extra venues and time.

An impassioned plea from the floor promoted Chesterfield Queen's Park as a possible solution to wicket shortages - it turns out the club will be discussing with Chesterfield with view to future staging of Blaze matches there, later this week.

That same impassioned speaker went on to breakdown the myth that there is too much cricket, even though it can be statistically proven that there are less balls being bowled now than at any other time for "a hundred years". 

For the most intensively worked player, that equates to a 3 day week for six months of the year of his 12 month contract. Only one player in 2024 for Nottinghamshire had that "heavy workload". Mick Newell shook his head, trying to turn the argument around to how many hours his backroom army work.

All Trent Bridge eggs are firmly in the H*ndred basket to the support of a minority of Members (that filled in the flawed survey sent out by the club that only had multiple choice directed responses for members to select). That minority only responded to a question asking if TB should be a hosting venue for a H*ndred franchise - the only "surprise" there was a vast majority, in spite of the £ millions attached to being a hosting county still felt TB woud be better off for not being involved in the franchise circus. The positive minority response was read by the CEO as a seal of approval.

Yes the CEO used those results to make her points, selectively using the gathered data, ignoring any responses that she didn't want to acknowledge, to make her case that the membership is generally in favour of allowing her to steer the club/cricket in the direction that demands less men's cricket, more women's cricket and make room for future expansion of franchise cricket.

19/06

Pravda has confirmed: A members’ forum focusing on discussions around the cricketing schedule will take place at Trent Bridge on Sunday 22 June – day one of the Rothesay County Championship fixture against Yorkshire.

A panel consisting of Chair Andy Hunt, Chief Executive Lisa Pursehouse and Director of Cricket Mick Newell will share updates and take questions from the audience during the Lunch interval, which is scheduled to commence at 1pm.

With the Derek Randall Suite being used as a facility for members this summer, the Hadlee Hall, on the second floor of the Radcliffe Road Stand, will play host to the event.

17/06

Hi Everyone,

 

Given that a lot of people are dissatisfied with Notts’ survey on the ECB’s schedule review, I thought we should have our own with more detail in it. The anonymised results will of course be shared with the club. Please fill this in ASAP, it would be great to get the initial results to them before the members’ forum on Sunday.

 

Here’s the link:  https://forms.gle/yC8c5XHa25p8LtnaA 

Best wishes,

 

Nick Evans

24 Enfield St

Beeston

Nottingham

NG9 1DN

16/06

We'll know or more likely won't know by this time next week where we stand for 2026.

Yesterday this appeared

keep calandar clear for the Hundred

The schedule, retaining 14 county championship matches etc etc would be relatively easy IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT PRIORITIES

10/06

In twelve days time...

Andy and Lisa wrote:

We have put together a summary and background information to provide context on factors ranging from major matches to the player pathway and facilities. Browse the summary in full here…

We will also hold a members’ forum on during the lunch interval of Nottinghamshire vs Yorkshire on Sunday 22 June (scheduled for 1pm), in the Radcliffe Road Stand's Sobers or Hadlee Hall. 

You may have shared your thoughts on the survey emailed to you by the club, though questions were loaded and aimed in only one direction - a cut in the amount of cricket, the only undecided topic of discussion being where the cuts will be and how severe.

That is what the heirachy of the club call consultation.

It is my belief that the schedule and structure of the cricket season is complicated but if you have the right priorities, everything fits together if you avoid blocks. It would be a cake walk if the August competition never existed, but we're lumbered with that. Despite what we read from the ECB and PCA, there is less county cricket now being played by the average county cricketer than at any time since the reign of Queen Victoria, apart from in times of war or global pandemics but...

...if the recent article in the Cricketer is to be believed, there will be a cut in the T20 Blast. There will also be a cut in the number of championship matches, with one of three options, all of which are pretty dire and dreamed up before any consultation. Any changes to the structure of schedule needs 12 counties to vote in favour of it, but the cunning ECB want to avoid a vote all together and for county heads to come to a consensus.

Of course we don't even know what the consensus (of opinion) of the membership of Notts CCC is, the club have not bothered to find out, probably knowing that they will need deniability in discussions with their peers.

So dear member, on 22nd June Mr Hunt and Ms Pursehouse have invited us to a lecture on why members will lose another chunk of cricket that they enjoy and explain how as a democratic institution, owners of the club will be disenfranchised.

If the chair and the CEO love the championship, as they say that do, why don't they say that they will fight to preserve the integrity of the competition?

EGM Petition  as mentioned in the recent View from the Bridge pod cast, "Future of the county game"

This what the CEO wrote to members in September 2016, was this the thin end of the wedge?

Dear Member,

When we wrote to you back in July to introduce an overview of the game’s new strategy, ‘Cricket Unleashed’, we said we would keep you informed in relation to any topics and themes that developed in the months that followed.

  

With that in mind, I am now writing to let you know the outcome of the recent meeting, attended by first class county Chairmen and Chief Executives, in relation to the future direction of domestic T20 cricket.

  

The priorities of ‘Cricket Unleashed’ are ‘Great Teams’, ‘Inspired Fans’, and ‘More Play’. The game has for some time been considering how it can increase participation, widen its reach and most importantly underpin the financial sustainability of all 18 first class counties and the recreational boards.

  

Given the uncertainty around the future volume of international and in particular Test cricket, domestic T20 cricket was identified as the format of the game best suited to deliver the above objectives.

Over the last few months, work has been on-going to identify the best possible domestic structure and five prospective options were considered. They ranged from maintaining the existing T20 Blast in its current format to the introduction of a brand new ten-team city-based competition. There has been a significant amount of independent analysis undertaken including financial modelling which was presented to us.

  

As you may have read by now in the media, the result of the meeting was that a preferred option was identified for further development. That option was for the existing T20 competition to remain and for a new eight-team competition to be created.

  

As a Club we believe that all 18 counties should continue to play domestic T20 cricket, so that the existing audience can be maintained. Given the financial pressures on many counties it was also important that any new competition would be jointly owned and the financial uplift shared equally amongst all 18. The preferred option delivers those two objectives and gives scope for the game to widen its appeal by attracting a new audience.

  

There is still a significant amount of detail that needs to be worked through in terms of how such a competition could work in practice. These considerations are many and include how the new competition will dovetail with the existing one, the composition of the playing squads and the selection of venues. The ECB and the Counties will now work together with the Professional Cricketers’ Association to develop the preferred option into a proposal that can be shared with you, our members, for your consideration.

  

This piece of work is likely to take a number of weeks and we will of course continue to keep you updated as we receive more information and as the process develops. However, should you wish to share any feedback now, there is a way for you to easily do so online here.

  

Finally, we would like to thank you for your support during what has been a testing 2016 season. Winter well, and we look forward to welcoming you back to Trent Bridge in 2017.

Ms LJ Pursehouse

Chief Executive

Mr R Tennant

Chairman