Help with dissertation idea

I'm thinking of ideas to do for my dissertation next year and one of the ideas I have come up with is basing it on county cricket in england and how it has changed over the last X years (haven't decided how long yet) and whether the changes have had a positive effect on the sport in this country. Was wondering if theres things you think I could include for it being potential big points.

Was thinking stuff like:

Central contracts
Commercialism, including the effect of sky
The introduction of T20 and changes to one day formats
The amount of test venues
Money the counties make.
The effect of how the current England team are doing
comparrison to other countries - india's IPL, Aussie Big Bash etc
its effect on partcipation levels

If there are big things you think i've missed feel free to add, and also what you think about the idea.

How about the current foreign component compared to the past and how it has impacted County cricket, positvely or negatively.

Technology? The introduction of technology has evened it up a little and judging by the last few months, the tests are genuinely enjoyable again, how it has both its negative and positives, and possible solutions.

biltongbek wrote:How about the current foreign component compared to the past and how it has impacted County cricket, positvely or negatively.

I'm still toying with the idea of foreign involvement, personally want to look at how county cricket has changed overtime, but with such I can compare how county cricket has changed due to the introduction of foriegn ideas etc.

ShahenshahG wrote:Technology? The introduction of technology has evened it up a little and judging by the last few months, the tests are genuinely enjoyable again, how it has both its negative and positives, and possible solutions.

would then have the factor of technology adds something to both tv and live audiences in different fashions, eg big screen for live attendence and the continuous anlaysis for the tv audience.

Hodge,

You flag some good factors. A few more (some related to yours) off the top of my head:

* Far less newspaper coverage of county cricket now than in the past.

* Other sports are more frequently played and able to be watched (eg indoor ice hockey) than in the past.

* Schools don't encourage the playing of cricket (and therefore the enthusiasm for it) like they did.

* Difficulties of setting fixtures for CC games - impact of scheduling t20 games. As a result, problems for spectators and players (Strauss having to cadge a game with Somerset last season).

* Following on from above point, impact this year of the Olympics. Earliest ever start (I think) to a season.

* [Some personal bias] English Test players appear to have less county allegiance than in the past. Compare the pride Trueman had in playing for Yorks with Pietersen appearing to regard the colours of Hants and Surrey as merely flags of convenience.

* Use of floodlights at county grounds (see CorporalHumblebucket's recent article).

Good luck. Feel free to pm me if you're interested in any of the above and need clarification. Best, Guildford

some great ideas on here. One I'd flag is the increasing professionalism among county set ups. Vaughan mentions it in his autobiography I think, saying that when he first appeared on the scene cricket was basically something you did in the summer months, but very few players made a living out of it. Nowadays of course things are much changed.

guildford, I think the "less county allegiance" thing is very linked to the central contracts. England players now feel part of "team England" as it were, and consequently less part of their county.

some helpful ideas there guys

I have Vaughan's autobigraphy so will start reading through that again, following on in that I remember from Trescothick's autobiography that he says about the changes the england team went through in terms of training under fletcher and vaughan which is when they started their big test win streak.

What about these following issues which you could discuss in your dissertation :-

1) The effects of the importing of Kolpak players on the overall standard of both the English County System and also the England National Team.
2) The effects of putting less emphasis on playing one-day limited overs matches on a Sunday, as was the case traditionally with the great old John Player League competition.
3) A discussion about the number of promising youngsters coming through the county system who have then gone on to play for England, and a look at how this number has fluctuated throughout the decades.

Other possibilities include introduction of two tier championship on competitiveness of cricket. See for example the great interest on this site last season when Surrey made a late burst for promotion. Hardly the same tension if the question had been - can Surrey make mid table or not!

Effect of social media on support and interest - presumably largely replacing what used to be in the press when it comes to county matches.

Maybe increased professionalism of training (or maybe it's simply that I'm hearing more about it for the first time on the Surrey website!). Specialism of cricket as between different forms of the game?

Can anyone give me an idea of what percentage of players in County cricket are foreigners?

about 97%
Source: Daily Mail, the Sun, Daily Star and The telegraph. Also BNP and EDL manifesto.

I think the number of appearances was just over a third of all appearances by players so if that helps but there doesn't seem to be any verified fact or figures to break it down biltong. I'll ask cricinfo - keep an eye on it they might give an answer.

Thanks mate, I just think if it is a significant portion 25%+ then it should form part of Hodge's dissertation as it makes a big impact then on the system.

Definition of who is a foreigner is quite important tho as it changes quite a bit over time I suspect....

Well, Irrespective of the defenition, if the guy arrives in England then he is a foreigner, the defenition coulb come into it if you look at statistically how many actually never leaves and hence become citizens.

corporal flags up a very good one there, the two divisions which have made the late season matches more meaningful as a rule. Also, not sure how far back you're going, but the switch from three day matches to four day matches (less draws probably, certainly less contrived finishes).

Mad for Chelsea wrote:some great ideas on here. One I'd flag is the increasing professionalism among county set ups. Vaughan mentions it in his autobiography I think, saying that when he first appeared on the scene cricket was basically something you did in the summer months, but very few players made a living out of it. Nowadays of course things are much changed.

guildford, I think the "less county allegiance" thing is very linked to the central contracts. England players now feel part of "team England" as it were, and consequently less part of their county.

Mad - good post.

Re: increasing professionalism and making a living out of the game -

Brian Statham referred to pre season training with Lancs in the 1950s as ''consisting of a cigarette and a cough''.

For this (the 2012) county season, all available Surrey players reported back to the Oval for training on 1st November 2011.

Most county players are now on all year round contracts.

Back around 2000, England seamer Ed Giddins supplemented his earnings selling Christmas trees.

Re: players feeling part of ''team England'' -

I think you're right there about the players. An issue is that many county spectators and supporters don't feel the same way. The county supporters tend to perceive players being taken away from them or others being foisted upon them as demanded by the EWCB. There was a lot of unease at Surrey last year when the highly promising Jason Roy was dropped to give Kevin Pietersen time in the middle, as apparently sought by ''team England''. Much as most Surrey supporters admire Pietersen's ability, there is some resentment that he doesn't appear to give a fig about his current county.

Whatever the views are here as to rights and wrongs, there is certainly ''less county allegiance'' and that is undoubtedly a significant change for Hodge to consider in his dissertation.

Is it right for the EWCB to have so much influence over who plays or not? Are the counties able to dock pay for when they don't play? - its not as if the counties are swimming in money.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:corporal flags up a very good one there, the two divisions which have made the late season matches more meaningful as a rule. Also, not sure how far back you're going, but the switch from three day matches to four day matches (less draws probably, certainly less contrived finishes).

Fewer

Some very good suggestions on here. Certainly would suggest the impact of Kolpaks.

T20 is a british invention let's not forget. Do you think the ECB has made the most of this format of the game, particularly when you see leagues like the IPL/BBL/etc.?

ShahenshahG wrote:Is it right for the EWCB to have so much influence over who plays or not? Are the counties able to dock pay for when they don't play? - its not as if the counties are swimming in money.

Shahensha - this actually takes us to the other side of the argument.

England's centrally contracted players are paid by the EWCB and not by their counties. There is therefore a case that, for example, Surrey are paying nothing for Pietersen and so their supporters should be grateful he's turning out for them at all.

Personally, I would be more supportive towards Pietersen if he appeared more supportive towards his county. That's probably another debate. However, I would say that Pietersen needs Surrey more than Surrey needs him - without being signed to a county, he wouldn't qualify for a central contract.

Fair enough, but if he is hindering someone who probably plays his heart out for them or a future player is that not counter-productive? I think this central contract thing is a little unfair. The board seem to be taking advantage of the counties perpetual struggle for a decent income which is fair enough if it wasn't at the expense of those like Roy at surrey. Is it common in the england team or is it limited to just a couple of players?

Also Hodge, if you need us to give our views as a questionnaire or just as a viewpoint itself of any of the issue - feel free to ask. I for one will be more than happy to help - just remember that when you get chosen as head of EWCB - a few free tickets wouldn't go amiss

When was the first T20 match played?

13 june 2003 between indian domestic teams

ShahenshahG wrote:Fair enough, but if he is hindering someone who probably plays his heart out for them or a future player is that not counter-productive? ....

Shahensha - good spot! I think it's highly counter-productive but I wanted to give you the other side of the argument.

There again, as the Corporal and other Surrey posters will tell you, I rather like Roy so I'm probably not the fairest judge!

ShahenshahG wrote:13 june 2003 between indian domestic teams

Quite a while ago, I remember everyone thought T20 will take over world cricket, and test cricket's importance will fade.

Never did.

I'm sure Mrs Bat and the Bat girls took me to a Surrey t20 game (at Imber Court) as a Father Day's treat in 2003. That must have been around the same date given by Shahensha.

That must have been the second day of English t20, 15th june.

ShahenshahG wrote:That must have been the second day of English t20, 15th june.

Shahensha - brilliant diary and record keeping on your part! Watch out - Biltong will want to sign you up!

I actually looked it up earlier this year, I have a wonky memory, I remember stuff that I dont usually need (like this) and forget what time i have to go to work and arrive 2 hours early. Last week I put petrol in my wifes car instead of diesel (luckily only a tenner to top it up) and remembered that i'd dropped a cigarette under her seat in October. Maybe I have ADHD Biltong would be sorely disappointed were he to sign me up and he'd probably have to pay in advance.

There is of course an argument which says that everyone involved in English cricket should be doing all that they can to make the England side the best side possible.

Let's not forget that most counties are only financially viable thanks to the Sky money, which simply wouldn't be there were it not for the England team.

I guess a wider question is what is the role of county cricket regarding the England team? How has it evolved? How has the relationship between "team England" and the counties developped?

I would certainly think England have a far greater say in the running of the county game than they did in the past. This is partly because of central contracts, partly because of the sky deal, and partly (what is linked) because England are now a very good cricket side and the counties see this as a potential benefit to them (more people watching cricket etc, although I don't think crowds have improved much at least at the 4 day game).

I don't like Pietersen's attitude towards Surrey one bit. In fact, a very good french young player was looking for a loan to play junior cricket (he was playing senior cricket at a club without a junior section) and I told him in no uncertain terms he should return to the club who formed him. But equally I don't like it when French clubs refuse to put our opening batsman in as an opener, or don't bowl our first-change seamer at all (both of these have happened). There are as usual two sides to the argument.

My feeling is that the balance is just about right at the moment.

Hodge
How long is the dissertation supposed to be?
I'd suggest one of two start points, depending on how long you want this to be:
1 - England winning the Ashes in Australia under Gatting in 86-7 (so 25 years ago) - would give a nice 'book-end' with last year's away Ashes win
or
2 - When England fell to the bottom of the Test rankings under Hussein in the late 90s.

Even a basic time-line would be interesting - County Championship changing from 3 day to 4 day games, to two divisions, going from 2 to 1 overseas player (as players that were available to their County for the duration of the Championship with a few exceptions), to the current situation with Kolpak players and overseas players coming over for 1 or 2 months between International commitments.

Other changes in the County game are that there used to be on CC match per week (Thursday to Saturday) with the John Player League as a 40 over competition of Sunday (with live coverage on BBC) and then fitting in two other limited overs competions of 60 and 55 overs (I remember them as the Nat West and Benson and Hedges Trophies) - both had high profile finals at Lords, which were again covered live on terrestrial TV. Now we have CC games all over the place, with England players making very rare appearances, fewer long format OD games and the introduction of T20 (not in itself a bad thing, but it should really be viewed as 'fun cricket')

Certainly plenty of issues to discuss - I think central contracts, ever-increasing amount of international cricket and the lesser availability of international players (both England and overseas players) to the County game have had the biggest influence on the domestic game.

10,000 words

I was thinking 20-25 years ish so would need to pick out a point.

Out of interest, Hodge, what is the subject you're doing a degree in??

I don't know about your lecturers/academics, but mine have constantly spoken of us making sure there is an academic background to what we want to discuss.

Sports Coaching

I may be planning on having a small sub section where talking about due to the rise of commercialism in the sport has there been a rise in participation levels within the sport and also an increase in the amount of coaches in counties.

Apparantly that and maybe one more sub section that related are enough for it.

think i have my 6 main sub sections atm which may change again:

1. The evolution of the domestic tournaments
2. ‘Team England’
3. The influence of Sky & the media
4. The Counties - players and grounds
5. Comparison to other countries (IPL & BBL)
6. Grassroots - players and coaches