Revamped Domestic Competition

[therisingblues]

I reckon that the domestic cricket competition in Australia would be more interesting if it was based on a system of elite clubs, rather than strictly one team per state. For example;
South Australia would have just the one team, because we are historically crap at the game, as is Tasmania. WA fairs a bit better in the record books, but with its population and its remote location it also would retain just the one team.
Victoria, however could have about four teams, NSW could have about five and Queensland could get by with about two.
Then if all goes well, we could include two teams from New Zealand (North Island and South Island) later on down the track.
The above system would even out the competition a lot, provide more opportunities for players to develop, and teams from the East Coast wouldn't have to travel so much (other teams would have the same travel requirements, unless NZ joined of course) The new alignment could also possibly increase the following of the domestic comp' on the East Coast, (if the fans identify closely with their team/area, ie Aussie rules, League), this in turn could produce pretty good crowds for derby days. This could possibly have the flow on effect of raising the domestic comps' profile throughout Australia, leading to larger crowds in other states also.
Is this a stupid idea or what?

[Rik E Boy]

I disagree. If you have more teams it means more expense and a poorer standard. Let's not forget that one of the main functions of the Domestic competition is to produce International standard players.

regards,

REB

[MightyEagles]

Yes, it is a very stupid idea. Australia isn't number 1 in the world for nothing. We have the best comp. in the world. The reason SA haven't performed good enough in the last few years is because there is a couple teams to many in the grade comp.

[therisingblues]

Mighty, I thought Australia's current status had more to do with the cricket academy than the high standard of the domestic comp'. There was a time during the mid' 80's when Australia was getting whipped by the Poms and the Windies consistently, I think even the Kiwis gave us a hiding or two back in those days. The domestic comp' has remained the same in good times and bad.
What made me think of the above was the fact that surely there are many players floating around a population base of about at least 5 million in NSW and about 4 million in Victoria that can match the standard being played at domestic level right now.
Another thing that made me put it out there was the idea of rivalry. I reckon Australian sport thrives in suburbia and a team's attachment to a local area. Whether that would apply to cricket, or not, will probably forever remain a mystery. I can't ever see the comp' changing.
REB, agreed, expense would be a worry, unless my crowd theory holds true.

[RoosterMarty]

I disagree. If you have more teams it means more expense and a poorer standard. Let's not forget that one of the main functions of the Domestic competition is to produce International standard players.

regards,

REB

thats a problem with adelaide grade cricket, too many clubs. it might have something to do with why the Redbacks always collapse, who knows

[Rik E Boy]

Mighty, I thought Australia's current status had more to do with the cricket academy than the high standard of the domestic comp'. There was a time during the mid' 80's when Australia was getting whipped by the Poms and the Windies consistently, I think even the Kiwis gave us a hiding or two back in those days. The domestic comp' has remained the same in good times and bad.
What made me think of the above was the fact that surely there are many players floating around a population base of about at least 5 million in NSW and about 4 million in Victoria that can match the standard being played at domestic level right now.
Another thing that made me put it out there was the idea of rivalry. I reckon Australian sport thrives in suburbia and a team's attachment to a local area. Whether that would apply to cricket, or not, will probably forever remain a mystery. I can't ever see the comp' changing.
REB, agreed, expense would be a worry, unless my crowd theory holds true.

Suffle. There are few questionable statements in this post.

1. The Poms have never given us a hiding consistently. Australia was on top just prior to the introduction of WSC and the 1977 tour fell apart with plenty of cloak and dagger stuff going on the background. In 78/79 we got belted but that was the establishment eleven without the big guns..nothing to do with the state of the domestic scene at the time. We lost in 1981 but that was almost entirely due to the brilliance of Botham. We got the Ashes back in 82/83 and lost a few series during the 80's because the big three, Marsh, Chappell and Lillee had retired and a heap of players pi55ed off to for the Krugerand in South Africa. The Poms have never consistently dominated us since the 1950's so this has little to do with the domestic competition.

2. The Windies flogged everyone, not just Australia during the dark days of the 1980's. Again nothing to do with the domestic scene.

3. New Zealand had their most productive decade in International cricket in the 1980's, it is hard to beat guys like Hadlee, Coney, Bracewell, Crowe and Snedden with the youngsters left behind to face that team. NZ were arguably second only to the Windies in the mid 80's.

If players can't get a gig in their home state, they can always move on in order to get a baggy green and if they are good enough they will do so. Adam Gilchrist anyone?? The English even reduced the amount of Counties by implementing a two tiered domestic competition because the more teams you have the easier it is to score a ton and you get picked for the national side on false numbers.

Nope, nice try but no cigar.

regards,

REB

[therisingblues]

I take your point Ricky, but I think you may have missed mine.
I wouldn't blame the domestic scene on any historical shortcomings by the international side, rather my point was that we have faired well and badly under the same system. Thus I wouldn't hold the current system accountable for either circumstance. I do think the cricket academy has a lot to do with our recent wealth of talent however.
At the risk of getting sidetracked into a debate on "just how bad was Aussie cricket during the mid-80s?" I'll consider your Windies, Pommies and Kiwis statements and agree that we were up against class acts at the time. Time probably flows slower when your losing, but the beer also tasted more rotten, the pizza; stale, and the grand plan of staying up to watch the Aussies getting thumped on English soil; stupid. We stank during the mid-80s. The rebel tour of South Africa didn't really carry anyone of influence at the time. Kim Hughes was past it and off the top of my head I don't think there was anyone else who went on tour who was of international standard. I agree we were left with an empty pit with the retirement of Marsh, Lillee and Chappell. I think if we had a Cricket academy prior to their retirements, Aussie cricket wouldn't have struggled as it did.
Anyway, the Sheffield Shield, or the damn "milk cup" system couldn't possibly be at fault in either case.
But, ever since I was a very young kid the Shield has been very poorly attended. I remember switching on the T.V one Sunday and hearing the commentator greet viewers with the news that "no one is here!". And indeed, as the cameras panned the ground, there was not a soul to be found.
But Lord forbid we tamper with the domestic system! Back in the 1800's some old fart dreamt up an idea of granting each state one team and don't dare anybody screw with it! I reckon it has remained the same for so long that the slightest suggestion of change will be quashed by pure weight of years rather than any logical examination of the scenarios.
But I admit that while the Aussies reign high, popular opinion will be loathe to change anything.
I just think it could be better. Possibly provide more opportunities for fringe domestic players and increase crowds...possibly.

[am Bays]

Umm one bloke who made the S African tour played in England the next year and topped the aggregate for county wickets, Me thinks if one T Alderman was in the 85 tour party (as he was originally) we would have retained the urn.

7 of the 12 in the first test of the 84-85 series against the Windies took the Krugerrand (Dyson, Hughes, Yallop, Hogg, Rackerman, Alderman & Maguire). I haven't included Wessels in that lot either as he took it later......

FWIW three members of the S African tour made the 89 ASHES tour party: Rackerman, Hohns & Alderman.

What the S African tour did was that along with the retirements of Chappell. Marsh & Lille was within the space of 12 months rip 30% of the first class players (19/66) out of the game, thereby undermining the depth of Australian Cricket. People got games at 1st class level and test level who didn't rightfully deserve their selection.

[therisingblues]

You got me there Tassie. I just did a search on one Terry Alderman and I must admit I had no idea that Alderman joined the rebels in South Africa. Indeed if we had him we probably would have retained the urn, a real class act.
Yallop was one of those blokes that was sensational at his peak and very average otherwise. Dyson blew hot and cold but wasn't really of any good except for that catch he took. I don't think either of those blokes would have altered Australia's fortunes all that much during the mid-80s. But I agree that with the retirement of Chappell, Lillie and Marsh, coupled with the loss of Alderman to South Africa, Australia was suddenly below the best in the world.
Kepler, I remember actually returned to South Africa as a representative of his old country. Something along the lines of the media was giving him a hard time about the fact that he hailed from South Africa originally, and every time the word "rebel" was mentioned in the media, his name was in the same sentence. He got sick of the conjecture, is how I remember it, and told us all to get knotted.
I could be wrong about Wessels though. Not understanding about Alderman puts a big question mark over my credibilty in discussing rebel tours to South Africa.

[Rik E Boy]

If it aint broke then don't fix it. What does need to be fixed is SA Grade Cricket, not the level above. Say, you're not on the AFL rules comittee are you Suffle? Change for changes sake and all that

regards,

REB

[Booney]

Would not work.

[therisingblues]

If it aint broke then don't fix it. What does need to be fixed is SA Grade Cricket, not the level above. Say, you're not on the AFL rules comittee are you Suffle? Change for changes sake and all that

regards,

REB

Suffle???????