Engel's angle

posted by John Winn

A few days ago  I chanced to pluck my copy of Wisden for 1999 from its resting place. Edited at that time by Matthew Engel, one of my favourite cricket writers, it was an extract from 'Notes by the Editor' under the heading 'The house divided' that caught my eye. The subject of the piece was the announcement that counties had voted overwhelmingly in favour of splitting the championship into two divisions. I was not opposed to the idea at the time and there have certainly been plenty of September matches that have been given added lustre because they affected promotion and relegation issues but Engel clearly was opposed and very far seeing in his opposition.

Of the points made in the article the most relevant today is the criticism that counties would be forced into 'short-term decision making as they duck and dive for immediate advantage' and after 19 seasons of two division cricket in my opinion this seems to be more the case than ever with the rash of signings the wealthier counties have made from their poorer brethren with Notts, who appear to have given up all pretence of producing players, the worst culprits. Go to their website where they proudly announce that Joe Clarke of Worcester 'becomes their fourth recent signing....joining Ben Slater, Ben Duckett and Zak Chappell.' What would have happened had Lancashire made 27 more runs in their first innings against Hants earlier this week, thus gaining another batting point and relegating Notts. Are there escape clauses in the contracts signed by the Trent Bridge Four? 

In his final paragraph The Editor again shows remarkable vision, remember this was written almost twenty years ago, when he says 'this makes sense only for those who believe the counties should be heavily weeded, and reduced to a handful of big-city teams.' Two years ago, and I never understood why, the first division was reduced to eight teams with a consequent increase in second division members to ten. At yesterday's meeting of county chairmen it appears the nod was given to a reversal of this change with an agreement that from 2020 the top division will number ten leaving only eight second Division (and class?) counties. To effect this three teams will be promoted from Division Two next year and only one demoted from Division One. Get out while you can lads. 

Whilst this reorganisation seemingly met little if any opposition another issue on the table at yesterday's meeting sparked off some bitter discussion, yes, you've guessed it ,The Hundred was on the agenda. Such was the criticism of this plan to introduce a city based competition in 2020 that Colin Graves was unable to present the championship trophy at the conclusion of the match between Surrey and Essex. There are two theories as to why this was the case

• the meeting, which was held at The Oval,  over ran and Graves was represented by Jim Wood, a non-executive director on the ECB board, although Surrey's Richard Thompson who was at the meeting managed also to be at  the presentation
• Graves did not relish making a public appearance in front of a large number of cricket supporters whose very presence illustrates their appetite a form of cricket which Graves believes to be 'mediocre'. 

You pays your money and you takes your choice and speaking of money the most contentious item at the meeting was the news that the estimated cost of the new competition has risen from £13 million (sic) to over £40 million (sic) and that so heated did the discussion become that Graves appeared visibly upset. If either of these sums of money proves to be near the actual cost when will the competition make money? 

Regular readers will be aware that the end of county and league cricket does not mean there is no cricket to watch for in Wharfdale at least the season another couple of weeks to run. Tony published the fixtures on the blog on September 10th and has already reported from there. If the weather is anything like it is the Lower Ure Valley today there is no finer place to enjoy cricket and think of Keats.