 |
| In the 20 years since English county cricket adopted a two-division system, England has become one of the most competitive teams in the world. But the format still has its critics. Photo: Internet |
Champagne flowed to Bristol last September. Rival players from Northamptonshire and Gloucestershire came together to celebrate the joint promotion to division one of the County Championship. To their jubilation, players may have spared a toast to those who introduced a two-tier championship 20 years ago.
Previously, such devices were largely meaningless. In a single-division facility, both counties would have long been handed over to a mid-level existence, their first-class season had effectively ended by midsummer and robbed of any intensity. He left only professional pride and potential touring places in England to play.
Instead, with the promotion and relegation into play, more games have been imbued with a wider meaning. Something is riding most of the games. In addition, it has brought a tougher and more competitive edge to first-class domestic cricket.
Despite further competitiveness, there is an increasing pricing structure against two divisions. For some, the set-up is accused of encouraging the short term, with an emphasis on player development results and the creation of a two-class system with Division One clubs that bring together the best players.
Attention to promotion and relegation - and to maintaining first division status at all costs - has sparked criticism that some counties have placed more emphasis on the fact that Kolpaks and older players remain competitive, reducing opportunities for younger and domestic players.
In December, the Times reported that British men's cricket CEO Ashley Giles believed that the ECB should consider a major league restructuring, reducing it to one division and awarding more points for the draws. Giles thinks that this would give counties the breathing space to develop young players and reduce the need to prepare result rolls that are very far from what England plays at Test level. The idea has been discussed at recent meetings. of county coaches.
As a former international coach, Paul Farbrace, now director of sport at Warwickshire, worked firsthand with the players developed by the county cricket. He claims that they have made England competitive and brands such as "short-term" the normal existential crises over the state of county cricket every time England battles abroad.
He points to Somerset and Surrey as examples of strong youth systems that have produced England players with "fantastic attitudes". He claims that good academic work is being done across the county cricket, highlighting the success rate of non-Test Match counties in winning trophies.
"There is something in every game, so it is very difficult for some clubs to play their youth," Farbries said. "But at the same time I am not sure if it is not something terrible. If the young players had been good enough, they would have come regardless. It's easy to apologize and say that we didn't produce enough young players in England to because of two divisions. I think it's a bit of a lazy excuse. "
The concept of two divisions was born from a proposal by Lord MacLaurin, former Tesco chief, recruited by the ECB to transform English cricket in the late 1990s. MacLaurin proposed three NFL-style conferences with playoffs. The idea was open to hostility, but after much debate, two divisions were introduced for the 2000 season.
 |
| It's easy to apologize and say that we haven't produced enough young players in England due to two divisions. Photo : Internet |
A mid-table gap in 1999, as counties fought to secure a place in Division One in its inaugural year, seemed to provide immediate confirmation. In the past 20 years - April 26 marks the anniversary - Division One has improved the standards with the best players playing against each other more often. While the central bargaining system received much of the credit for England's awakening as a test force in the 2000s, it is worth noting that the timing also matched these changes in county cricket.
Glamorgan manager Matt Maynard, who has coached both divisions, believes that the highest level has benefited the game both nationally and internationally. It produces hardened crickets. This is ultimately what England wants, while I think the old system sometimes potentially hasn't done it to the same extent."
Last season's fight for promotion was a new experience for Glamorgan. "For the first time, most Glamorgan players may be in a situation where they are pushing for this important promotion and match towards the end of the season," Maynard said. It puts pressure on people and how they react. It's a really good learning curve for those kids who tasted it for the first time."
The Warwickshire battle to avoid relegation last season has certainly added an extra edge to every game they have played. "We talked about it openly," recalls Farbrace. "We said we didn't want to be degraded. We desperately needed to stay in Division One. We really had to play cricket to give us a chance. It meant that every game was incredibly competitive."
Another criticism of the two division system is that it encourages players to move counties in search of a higher flight cricket, although Farbrace points out that England has selected players who behave consistently, regardless of the division in which they play.
"The world and some countries cannot afford to pay the wages given by some larger countries," Maynard accepts. It is the district's responsibility to accept that [the movement] will occur, but also to ensure that their academy and the second XI program are strong enough to be played by young players.
This strengthening of first division teams can make competition for newly promoted counties more difficult, especially those with smaller game budgets. Northamptonshire, for example, never maintained Division One status after winning the promotion.
While many assumed that larger Test Match counties would dominate Division One, there were notable exceptions. Essex has won two of the last three league titles, while Somerset has spent 12 consecutive years in Division One, longer than any other team.
David Ripley, manager of Northamptonshire, says: "Essex made some smart purchases, played a great cricket. I guess it's the model for everyone who shows up: 'come on, you can' - have some luck with injuries, because we generally have smaller teams - but you can try. "
Farbrace says that the struggle shown by Northamptonshire and Gloucestershire shows that the desire to play topflight is still strong. Warwickshire has entered Division One and found it tough. It's not just the big Test Match venues that fly high.
It could also encourage teams to focus more on championship win instead of simply avoiding relegation. Northamptonshire may have been many people's favorite for this year's wooden spoon, but it was entering this interrupted season, excited by the prospect of competing for the title, an opportunity denied to Division Two counties.
Will the two-tier championship survive for another 20 years? Given the propensity of English cricket for the constant tinkering and the advent of The Hundred, there can be no certainty. Ripley says the idea of returning to a division has "enough positivity", although it remains strictly a supporter of two divisions due to its competitive nature.
But Farbrace is firmly convinced that two-division cricket should continue: "This is how you develop your players. You develop a winning mentality if there is something in every game. We don't want to go to bland cricket, where there is nothing I play and you're halfway through the season and your season is actually over. It's not where we want to go. It won't help us produce players for England".