da spicy bet： Canterbury’s clubs had their say and threw out a call for a review of the process by which the Christchurch senior club cricket would be reduced from nine teams to six for the 2004-05 season
Lynn McConnell10-Sep-2003Canterbury’s clubs had their say and threw out a call for a review of the process by which the Christchurch senior club cricket would be reduced from nine teams to six for the 2004-05 season. The decision was the most contentious aspect of today’s Canterbury Cricket Association (CCA) annual general meeting.Several speakers said they would be voting against the recommendation, whichwas put as a notice of motion to the meeting. The Sydenham club led the wayby saying they were opposed to the criteria put forward for what representeda “senior” club. They didn’t agree that it should be based on performance ofthe senior side in the current year, and a weighted contribution from thetwo previous years.Sydenham felt that a total package needed to be considered, not just the playing performance of one team. They believed that the “health check” process, which is being undertaken as part of New Zealand Cricket’s drive to attend to the problems of clubcricket, should be one factor, and the strength of junior cricket in clubs another.Colin Blackman, for the Burnside West University club, referred to previousreports known as the Adams and Hartland Reports, that outlined whatconstituted a senior club. Performance fluctuated from year to year, but allthe other elements of what made a club had been overlooked in the CCA’sprocess.The Hartland Report had dealt with the problem of the bye in the competition,and it had been suggested the 1999-2000 tournament should be played byeight teams, but that had not been proceeded with. Had it been acted upon,Blackman believed, Christchurch club cricket would not be in the position itwas now. The geography and demographics of the city were anotherconsideration.Clubs that were vulnerable under the proposed scheme were in important areaswith strong catchment areas for players. Blackman believed a six-team competitionwas questionable, and he didn’t believe it was sustainable. However, he didbelieve a city the size of Christchurch was capable of sustaining eightstrong clubs and in a competitive environment.Brian Hastings, the CCA’s immediate past president, commented that he didn’tbelieve a six-team competition would improve the first-class performances ofthe Canterbury side. It went much deeper than that, he said. The right coaching structure neededto be put in place and he added that he was pleased to see that was beingaddressed. He didn’t think enough work had been done on the plan and he feltdenying three teams senior status could be the demise of those clubs.Tim Murdoch, for the Riccarton club, said they believed there should be areview of the criteria behind the decision. Club cricket was a fragilething, not only in Christchurch, but all over New Zealand. Any reductionwould not be good for the game itself and the infrastructure would take somepunishment.John Durning of Marist said his club had been disappointed over thelack of process. Sydenham club member Ivan Thomson believed therecommendation was illogical and lacked strength, and it made no sense to putat risk clubs that were doing a lot of work in primary and secondaryschools.Richard Reid, the chief executive of the CCA, said he disagreed with thecomments made that the various arguments had not been considered. The boardknew all the arguments – they just disagreed with part of them.There were different viewpoints for every point that was raised. He alsosaid the club competition was not the only reason why Canterbury wasperforming poorly at first-class level, there were others.He also said that from his own experience, team members of demoted clubswere not so selfish as to leave just because their team was relegated.It was a case of doing things for cricket’s sake rather than the CCA’s.When put in a secret ballot the recommendation was lost.Earlier in the meeting the CCA chairman David Shackleton announced thatsigns were already being seen of an improved financial performance, afterlast season’s loss of $NZ96,937, and added that in the last two days asponsorship agreement had been reached with the Pub Charities’ Trust. Thissponsorship will be used to assist under-age cricket, club cricket (especially in the provision of scoreboards and boundary flags for all clubs),umpiring costs and in prizemoney for the senior club one-day competition.The senior competition would also bear the sponsor’s name.