How Do Teams/captains/coaches Deal With This Scenario

Top Contributors
someblokecalleddave

someblokecalleddave

Well-Known Member
It concerns youth cricket. I'm aware of a team of lads U13's that didn't do so well last season here (I think they lost every game) and as a result one of the better players left the team during the off-season. This team has now been bolstered by an influx of new lads from the age group below who are far superior players than 50% or more of the U13 boys that are still in the team from last year. How do clubs deal with this situation normally when all the lads want to play and more than 30 0r 40% of the players that are available each weekend are basically terrible players?

Having said that I came to cricket via forming a team at work, challenging another dept who were the obvious potential cricket players and my team were made up of a bunch of chancers. But it got competitive towards the demise of the team this scenario in part caused that demise as I was faced with a similar dilemma of sticking with my mates who'd trained all winter and not got any better and therefore face defeat after defeat or play newer blokes who could play and possibly win a game. In the end I got into so many discussions and arguments about the issue, that it made running the team and making decisions about who to play so crap I gave up on the team and joined a proper cricket club to then end up being one of those blokes who did or didn't play because of similar decisions being made by selectors and captains!

But the kids situation is the one I'm interested in, because this scenario must happen and with kids you've got issues of 'Inclusivity' and external pressures such as parents?
 
From my experience, different clubs handle things differently and most develop a club 'culture' based on this, although obviously individual coaches within clubs may vary to a degree. So, club A may be totally focused on 'the result', picking 'the best' for every game, batting and bowling is dictated purely on merit with weaker children only making up the numbers or getting a game when others are missing. At the other extreme, club B will operate a total squad system with all kids getting equal opportunities, regardless of ability

Most clubs will tend to fall somewhere within these extremes, mainly based on what the club is 'comfortable' with, the proximity of other clubs and what those clubs are doing (cant have too many club A types, but my guess is their existence will generate a few club B type teams around them from the fallout)

From a personal point of view the club I am at has moved along this spectrum due to circumstances it found itself in. We were very much a club A model (development plan stated we want to be 'a centre of excellence for the district'), however, when I arrived a couple of coaches had just left and so had many of the players (very few 'locals'). So we have moved more towards being a club B, which for me that means I still pick bowlers on merit (nothing annoys me more than seeing overs of wides/no balls because a player is not yet ready to bowl in a match - not fair on the bowler, not fair on the batter) but the batting order is dictated on the inclusivity model so that for virtually every game last season players came away having either bowled or batted. The only real issue is batting one or two of the better batters lower than their 'natural' position but I have explained to both them and their parents (who have thankfully understood) that cricket is an 11-a-side game and it is much harder if we only have 9 turn up because those that didnt feel involved no longer turn up.

I think age may also have a bearing as I think the younger ones are happier to participate whereas the older ones will tend to see winning and losing as more important
 
Agreed.

Clubs have different cultures. Personally at a club level, all clubs should be about having fun. once it gets to a more serious level, then who ever is the better player gets the spot.
 
cricketdrills said:
Agreed.

Clubs have different cultures. Personally at a club level, all clubs should be about having fun. once it gets to a more serious level, then who ever is the better player gets the spot.
Click to expand...
I have managed a colts team from the U9s through to the U16s so am very familiar with this conundrum. Here are a few thoughts.
As team manager you have a responsibility to the opposition to be competitive.
The ideal is a closely fought match which goes to wire and you end up winning with everyone contributing something.
The coach has a responsibility to have a role for each player selected. The coach doesn’t want anyone to be just there to make up the numbers, every player needs to get something from the game. If that doesn’t happen they are unlikely to keep on playing.
Therefore for the “lesser lights/squad players” the coach needs to consider which of these players can be accommodated in the side for the next match. Select as many as possible but still remain competitive and give the captain a manageable job when deciding on who to bowl. Important that the lesser lights don’t cost you the match and alienate the better players and the captain. Bear in mind how enthusiastic are the lesser players? Are they practicing hard? How keen are they to play in the matches and are they showing signs of progression? A lot of coaching time should be spent on developing the keen ones to get them to hold their own in the team.
If the coach is too quick to select the better players from the year below your squad from the current age group will reduce in number and you are then dependent on the younger boys wanting to play in all the matches (as well as for their own year group).
Rotate the selection and arrange friendlies to give the lesser lights the chance to develop.
 
shortextracover129 said:
I have managed a colts team from the U9s through to the U16s so am very familiar with this conundrum. Here are a few thoughts.
As team manager you have a responsibility to the opposition to be competitive.
The ideal is a closely fought match which goes to wire and you end up winning with everyone contributing something...
Click to expand...

I think this is a really good point and something that (should) distinguish us from many a football set up. We played 7 league games this season with 4 going down to the final over (20 over matches) so looking back I had done my job as coach, squad suitably rotated (only one player ever present and that was due to 3 late call offs for the final game) and all parents seem happy to sign up to the squad system, although we would all like to see more games so that everyone gets more chances to play matches. Obviously this 'closely fought' thing relies on both parties playing their part, we listened when clubs said they were weaker/younger as that allowed us to rotate players in, unfortunately not all clubs subscribe to that philosphy, see model A in my post above
 
TonyM said:
I think this is a really good point and something that (should) distinguish us from many a football set up. We played 7 league games this season with 4 going down to the final over (20 over matches) so looking back I had done my job as coach, squad suitably rotated (only one player ever present and that was due to 3 late call offs for the final game) and all parents seem happy to sign up to the squad system, although we would all like to see more games so that everyone gets more chances to play matches. Obviously this 'closely fought' thing relies on both parties playing their part, we listened when clubs said they were weaker/younger as that allowed us to rotate players in, unfortunately not all clubs subscribe to that philosphy, see model A in my post above
Click to expand...
Clubs that adopt model A, struggle to fulfil their fixtures because half way through the season they find only seven players want to play in their matches and you need eleven players. They may win in the short term but in the longer term they often withdraw from the league as they don't have a viable squad.
 
The situation at our club panned out really well in the end if not a little disappointing for my own son. The team ended up with 50/50 split more or less. The 2010 under 13's squad (The squad that lost all but one game) split up nicely, almost half the team went up to the next age group - U15's and had a similarly awful season this year. But the younger kids from the 2010 squad became the older lads in the 2011 Under 13's and they were then bolstered by the influx of really promising younger kids including my own son. The two factions then really gelled off the back of winning game after game. The "Lesser" lights of the younger kids in the U13's still trained with 'The Squad' as did one or two kids that were obviously the "Lesser lights" of the older boys and when there were vacancies in the squad during matches these boys then played (The only 2 games this U13's 2011 sqaud lost). Inter-club matches were organised so that all the boys in the U13's got a game every now and then. As far as I was aware there were no issues with parents moaning about their kids not getting a game with the exception of one of the older U13's boys who was integreal to the 2010 sqaud, but was then side-lined because of the influx of the younger/better lads. My own son who was one of the 'Younger/better' lads performed exceptionally well in friendlies and non-league/cup matches, but for some reason didn't do so well in the matches that mattered. Eventually this caught up with him because the team with his help went on to the semi-finals of the league and then the finals and he was the 12th man in both matches - he was devastated. But when he couldn't play the previously mentioned 'Side-lined' older lad with the whinging parents was given the chance and he did marginally better than my son and statistically and was picked for the semis and the final. Both were massive matches - the first time in 20 years that the clubs u13's had got that far and Ben my son had to watch. We lost the final by one run!

The scenario now is that the 2012 squad is expected and predicted to be captained by my son who will now be one of the senior players in that squad "Ben's the most level - headed and sensible and has good cricket knowledge", and he's also physically bigger than all of the others bar one. This expectatin may also be built around the idea that they may want me to be the manager of the U13's as there does seem to be a pattern in that the captain of the U13's is the son of the manager!!!

So, the model that was adopted at our club in the end was in part dictated by the fact that we have a lot of players for the U13's and U11's. There does seem to be a definite 'Core squad' who are picked on merit and this was exemplified by the exclusion of my son Ben, he didn't perform, so they picked a lad that hadn't been a regualr in the team, but when he had been drafted in, he'd performed and got the gig. I have to mention that a lot of on-lookers thought the decision was lunacy and had cost us the final, but at the same time several other lads did things that had cost 2 runs that might have seen us win as well and who knows what Ben would have done in the game anyway, he may have bowled an expensive over and we may hav lost by 5 or 6 runs?

Overall I think this approach works and I've been saying to Ben, your place in the team is in jeopardy if you don't make a contribution in the game. You may start out as the favourite for the role of captain, but if in the games you don't put runs on the board or take wickets or are expensive, you may find yourself side-lined.
 
On the selection question, suggest that you pick the younger player only if they are significantly better than the older player assuming that the two players are similarly keen to practice and play. Unlike the older player, the younger player will have another opportunity to play in the same fixture next year. In general best to be slow to pick players from the year below if there are credible players in the current year group (if you don't the older one is likely to drift away). If there is a big gulf in class and the team is losing regularly then strengthening the team with some younger players will give the year group a boost and again rotation of the lesser older players can avoid too many disappearing.
 
Just had a re-read of this thread and made me even sadder looking back at what I had posted in 2011, 18 months on, I told my players last night that this season would be my last at the club. There has been an influx of players from the senior squads helping with the coaching and all of these came through the 'club A'/elitist model and its something they are very keen to re-establish with lots of talk about county players and extra coaching for the good kids. I was also told that I needed to focus on winning more matches and I had said I would try but I just can't do it - its not that I don't want to win, but to win with half the team making very little contribution is about as hallow as it gets in my opinion, to me coaching is about developing every single player in the squad. So last night our opening bowler removed the oppositions best two batters but then (as agreed) finished his two over spell and didn't come back whilst other bowlers who had batted down the order got more overs, including one lad who got his first ever wicket which he was rightfully pleased with.
 
Sorry to hear this Tony... although not totally surprised!

It amazes me how many just really do not get it.

Good luck for the rest of the season and for the future x
 
Thanks Liz, yes amazes and frustrates me in equal measure. At least I think my under 14s 'get it' so I am reasonably happy that they will have some understanding that cricket is a 'team sport' going forward.
 
TonyM said:
There has been an influx of players from the senior squads helping with the coaching and all of these came through the 'club A'/elitist model and its something they are very keen to re-establish with lots of talk about county players and extra coaching for the good kids.
Click to expand...
Tony, you are managing the whole squad which includes looking after the lesser lights (who also look forward to their cricket), I imagine your helpers are looking for players to fast track into the first team. Star players are important, they can inspire the rest of the squad, but matches should be run so that the star players don't destroy the game. Seems a shame to be stopping now, why not stay and educate your helpers into the merits of inclusive cricket?
 
SEC129, thanks for the support, but unfortunately the argument has been lost and although it may seem a bit 'toys out of the pram', I just can't get motivated to coach in that environment going forward. The club had so much potential to be a real community hub with a fully inclusive attitude but it seems it would prefer to go down the alternative route of targeting the 'good kids' from a wider area and using any remaining locals as 'fillers'. Given the much broader base the junior section now has this will probably work for at least the next couple of years as I can't see a there being mass exit of players at the end of the season, so perhaps I am just being hyper sensitive to the issue.

Difficulty will come in seeing what decision my lad (the opening bowler in my previous post) makes for next year, does he stay at the club where he will undoubtably get more opportunities in matches under the new regime or does he go to another club?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top