Dvca - C Grade And Below - Season 2011/12

[Brian Lara]

Okidoki, my first post under my new alias. If you hadn't figured out, I am no longer _______, but I am indeed Brian Lara. I thought it'd be more appropriate to pick a name that closer resembles my potential. Anyway, a month before rocking up to clever cricket for pre-season "training". Not that it will matter for me, just the same **** over again, I wonder if I'll be opening the batting again?

 

[Brian Lara]

Did some clown think Thommo guys were drinking cans 1/2 an hour before the game? LOL!

 

[_Blackhawk_]

Okidoki, my first post under my new alias. If you hadn't figured out, I am no longer _______, but I am indeed Brian Lara. I thought it'd be more appropriate to pick a name that closer resembles my potential. Anyway, a month before rocking up to clever cricket for pre-season "training". Not that it will matter for me, just the same **** over again, I wonder if I'll be opening the batting again?

I thought I was the only person to believe pre season training, was just the same old tired crap over and over again and a complete waste of time, effort and money.

 

[Brian Lara]

I thought I was the only person to believe pre season training, was just the same old tired crap over and over again and a complete waste of time, effort and money.

No, you are not. It was pretty funny, this time last season. We were told by our coach of a list of things we had to do to get game. We were told people would be rewarded for turning up to all training and for being disciplined, no one was just going to rock up and play higher grades and so forth. I would've turned up anyway, for something to do and didn't take the words seriously, despite being spoken seriously, but kept note of them.

Anyway, despite my stellar international career, I'm actually just a lower grade plodder at my club, but as a result of doing all the "1%ers" (so to speak) I was "rewarded" with a spot in the 2s. I didn't make a great score, but I actually batted for longer than anyone else. That was a positive I took out of the game and I thought "Had enough of this. no matter what happens next week, even if they put up district bowlers, next week, I'm going to make a big score in the higher grades." I had psyched myslef up for training that week and the challenge ahead. The thrursday rolls around and some regular higher grade players made themselves available. I was then dispensed like a used tampon to the 3s, then later on the 4s. I don't take it personally, I just noted the lack of integrity, so to speak. LOL!

 

[Nawab of Pautadi]

Suggest Eltham CC explain to the player in its one-day team that at the break in innings afternoon tea is served in the clubrooms and isn't served to the players outside. Totally unacceptable was his approach to my wife who had been down the rooms since 8 bells this morning getting tea prepared amongst all the other things she does.

Plenty of afternoon tea was on offer and there were a few sandwiches and fruit to be had when he rocked up as the play was about to start again. Sorry champ you were probably upset because all the scones with jam and cream had gone - as they always do.

Then at drinks break comes up rudely wanting to know "have you got the drinks". No please, thank you kiss my bum.

What a twot. Don't know how long he's been playing in DVCA certainly wasn't wearing a Panther cap and if he is new we don't need his type bringing his old comps trash with him.

 

[WanderingUnity]

Suggest Eltham CC explain to the player in its one-day team that at the break in innings afternoon tea is served in the clubrooms and isn't served to the players outside. Totally unacceptable was his approach to my wife who had been down the rooms since 8 bells this morning getting tea prepared amongst all the other things she does.

Plenty of afternoon tea was on offer and there were a few sandwiches and fruit to be had when he rocked up as the play was about to start again. Sorry champ you were probably upset because all the scones with jam and cream had gone - as they always do.

Then at drinks break comes up rudely wanting to know "have you got the drinks". No please, thank you kiss my bum.

What a twot. Don't know how long he's been playing in DVCA certainly wasn't wearing a Panther cap and if he is new we don't need his type bringing his old comps trash with him.

Totally unacceptable to have behaviour like this in the DVCA at any level. One Day Comp has not taken off for what it was meant to be, is being filled with blokes who are hangabouts at clubs and don't respect the culture that may be in place. (talking from our experience, and why we didn't put a side in this season)

 

[Brian Lara]

So, I thought I'd put this on here and see what more serious DVCA cricketers/clubbies think. Every now and then, i'll get into a conversation about the inconveniece of playing cricket. On all occasions, we're in agreement that a one day comp would be most convenient, as far as availabilty is concerned. I do know that a one day comp is running, but it's run to a different set of rules or governing body (I don't know exactly how it works). So were left with the mixed 1 day/2 day comp in the lower grades, like it's always been.

There are many factors to consider when drawing up a schedule. So, to make it easier I thought why don't they just make up a draw like they normally do for a 1day/2 day comp, but just make everyday a 1 dayer? If you're not getting what I'm saying this weekend, in whatever grade it is, Thommo and MP are playing in a 2 dayer, and I think it's MP coming over to Thommo. But instead of coming over 2 weekends for a 2 dayer, MP come over for 2 weekends for 2 1 dayers? If that doesn't confuse you even further.

Imean, at this level, it's cool to win grades and that, but it's not about winning a comp. It's more about playing and winning that particular game you're participating in. 2 dayer are not that much fun and, despite it being only 2 days, it can be drawn out. Has it ever been proposed that way? Is it even a good idea? If it is, will someone/club find something to whinge about it?

 

[brutal]

So, I thought I'd put this on here and see what more serious DVCA cricketers/clubbies think. Every now and then, i'll get into a conversation about the inconveniece of playing cricket. On all occasions, we're in agreement that a one day comp would be most convenient, as far as availabilty is concerned. I do know that a one day comp is running, but it's run to a different set of rules or governing body (I don't know exactly how it works). So were left with the mixed 1 day/2 day comp in the lower grades, like it's always been.

There are many factors to consider when drawing up a schedule. So, to make it easier I thought why don't they just make up a draw like they normally do for a 1day/2 day comp, but just make everyday a 1 dayer? If you're not getting what I'm saying this weekend, in whatever grade it is, Thommo and MP are playing in a 2 dayer, and I think it's MP coming over to Thommo. But instead of coming over 2 weekends for a 2 dayer, MP come over for 2 weekends for 2 1 dayers? If that doesn't confuse you even further.

Imean, at this level, it's cool to win grades and that, but it's not about winning a comp. It's more about playing and winning that particular game you're participating in. 2 dayer are not that much fun and, despite it being only 2 days, it can be drawn out. Has it ever been proposed that way? Is it even a good idea? If it is, will someone/club find something to whinge about it?

I was told that RDCA or Box Hill Reporter run something similar. I've never bothered to confirm it but I certainly think something needs to happen to make cricket "convenient" at the lower levels. My personal opinion is that 2 day cricket below C grade is a waste of time and that if cricket at a grassroots level is going to maintain any long lasting relevance, then 1 day and 20/20 is the way forward.

 

[WanderingUnity]

Could not agree more. The old line will be read out that we are not teaching kids real cricket. If a kid is good enough at 14-16 to play real cricket, he should be in the 1's or 2's anyway.
As a club, it is increasingly harder to get players to commit, always got blows on footy trips, weddings, it is just a waste.
Play 70 over 1 day games, results are made, fun is had.
Excellent concept Brian.

 

[Ex Prez]

Could not agree more. The old line will be read out that we are not teaching kids real cricket. If a kid is good enough at 14-16 to play real cricket, he should be in the 1's or 2's anyway.
As a club, it is increasingly harder to get players to commit, always got blows on footy trips, weddings, it is just a waste.
Play 70 over 1 day games, results are made, fun is had.
Excellent concept Brian.

Agreed not a bad idea. But played under the standard comp rules of 40 over per side. Not the mickey mouse rules of the ODC. Games played count for qualifications.
So my thoughts that grades BS, MS, B, C grades - play 80 over cricket. ( so basically everones 1's & 2's)
D & below - All play one days games (40 overs ea). .
Could then make allowances for not playing on weekends like Cox plate day, cup weekend, Aust day weekend etc... where teams struggle most.

 

[Underarm28]

Agreed not a bad idea. But played under the standard comp rules of 40 over per side. Not the mickey mouse rules of the ODC. Games played count for qualifications.
So my thoughts that grades BS, MS, B, C grades - play 80 over cricket. ( so basically everones 1's & 2's)
D & below - All play one days games (40 overs ea). .
Could then make allowances for not playing on weekends like Cox plate day, cup weekend, Aust day weekend etc... where teams struggle most.

Not all cricketers are good enough to play in their clubs 1st or 2nd's, but should this mean we are inferior or have less commitment.
Many young players need time in the lower grades to learn how to play a full day of cricket.
This would only be good for fat blokes who slog.
Its no way to teach younger players time at the crease, or if you bowl line and length you will be rewarded.
If people aren't commited to playing cricket thats their issue.
Some of us so like to play each weekend, and don't give a rats toss bag about the nags (horses not wives).

Under out

 

[Opener2]

Great post,

Not all cricketers are good enough to play in their clubs 1st or 2nd's, but should this mean we are inferior or have less commitment.
Many young players need time in the lower grades to learn how to play a full day of cricket.
This would only be good for fat blokes who slog.
Its no way to teach younger players time at the crease, or if you bowl line and length you will be rewarded.
If people aren't commited to playing cricket thats their issue.
Some of us so like to play each weekend, and don't give a rats toss bag about the nags (horses not wives).

Under out

 

[Brian Lara]

My personal opinion is that 2 day cricket below C grade is a waste of time and that if cricket at a grassroots level is going to maintain any long lasting relevance, then 1 day and 20/20 is the way forward.

For the lower grade players, the current 20/20 comp is a huge waste of time. I could not think of anything less appealing. Well...I could, but you get my point?

Play 70 over 1 day games, results are made, fun is had.

I'm a bit mixed on the total number of overs. I'd be happy with 40 overs per side. Only because I think the extra 5 overs would still give the middle order bats a chance to make a 50. But, at the same time, I think the optimum amount of overs should be the most overs to be played, where the openers don't go to the crease thinking about surviving. But they go with the intent of scoring.

If you take my attitude as normal. As a rusted on opening bat, in a 40 over innings, I'd be thinking of making an undefeated 50. 35 overs? I'd be thinking of being undefeated, 50 or no 50. But 30 overs, even 31, 32, maybe 33? I would be going to the crease with the intent of scoring 25-40, off no more than 12 overs. I don't know how it'd be for othere.

Excellent concept Brian.

Thanks. (Where is the thumbs up smilie?)

 

[Brian Lara]

Not all cricketers are good enough to play in their clubs 1st or 2nd's, but should this mean we are inferior or have less commitment.

At the very least, in theory, lower grade players are inferior than the higher grade players, that's why they're in the lower grades. Most are also less committed. There is nothing wrong with this. I'm not sure why you seem offended.

Many young players need time in the lower grades to learn how to play a full day of cricket.

Firstly, how do you "learn" to play a full day? Secondly, what are the 2s for?

This would only be good for fat blokes who slog.

I've only played about eight seasons. So I've played enough to know this is ********. How many players in the lower grades are even genuine sloggers? I can only think of two at my club. One isn't a fat ****, the other may be a little tubby, but it's only one. Please name or list how many at each club that you can think of that fill your claim.

Its no way to teach younger players time at the crease,

How do you teach a young bloke to bat a long time? Generally speaking, there's too much emphasis to batting for a long time. It just puts more pressure on guys batting. There'e a middle ground, a grey area, between batting a long time and scoring. I haven't been able to figure it out yet, but there is.

or if you bowl line and length you will be rewarded.

Despite your opposition, line and length bowling is more likely to be rewarded when batsmen are intending to score in a faster paced game.

If people aren't commited to playing cricket thats their issue.

No. It the issue of the clubs that struggle to fill sides.

 

[Opener2]

How do you teach a young bloke to bat a long time? Generally speaking, there's too much emphasis to batting for a long time. It just puts more pressure on guys batting. There'e a middle ground, a grey area, between batting a long time and scoring. I haven't been able to figure it out yet, but there is.

Batting 80 overs wins you 97% of games, an ex coach of ours went through 10 years of stats to work it out. Our focus is to do that every week, tends to work. Longer you bat, more opportunities to score.

 

[Brian Lara]

Batting 80 overs wins you 97% of games, an ex coach of ours went through 10 years of stats to work it out.

That is an amazing stat, if it's true. Not looking forward to senior people at my club reading that. Just so you know, this is lower grade talk. 80 overs?

Our focus is to do that every week, tends to work. Longer you bat, more opportunities to score.

Yeah, I get the theory. It's been applied in innings I've played, and indeed, the game that I played yesterday was a perfect example to back it up.

But how do you teach someone to bat a long time? I don't get it. From my experience, it's not even a skill, it's something that you happen to do.

 

[Opener2]

I believe the stat is true, I cant recall a game we have lost after batting 80 sets.

I reckon its a discipline you can instill. We have focused on it as a game plan for a very long time, it has started to become a principle our club revolves around.

I think if you train in a conservatively way, locking away loose shots you can teach players to bat for longer periods of time. Obviously players have natural instinct to attack certain balls though.

That is an amazing stat, if it's true. Not looking forward to senior people at my club reading that. Just so you know, this is lower grade talk. 80 overs?

Yeah, I get the theory. It's been applied in innings I've played, and indeed, the game that I played yesterday was a perfect example to back it up.

But how do you teach someone to bat a long time? I don't get it. From my experience, it's not even a skill, it's something that you happen to do.

 

[Opener2]

Couldve been a lie to make us believe in the game plan

That is an amazing stat, if it's true. Not looking forward to senior people at my club reading that. Just so you know, this is lower grade talk. 80 overs?

 

[Declaration Bowler]

I don't doubt that batting 80 overs will win you more games than you lose, but the 97% stat can mislead, because it leaves out other relevant factors.
Just one obvious one is the fact that better sides are more likely to be able to bat 80 overs than poorer sides, so they would have won anyway.
And yes, I know this could be a chicken/egg argument.

 

[Opener2]

Stat isnt misleading at all, but I understand what you mean.

For the record, learn to bat 80 = you're a better side.

I don't doubt that batting 80 overs will win you more games than you lose, but the 97% stat can mislead, because it leaves out other relevant factors.
Just one obvious one is the fact that better sides are more likely to be able to bat 80 overs than poorer sides, so they would have won anyway.
And yes, I know this could be a chicken/egg argument.