Posted by It’s county cricket revamp discussion season again. Except really it’s always county cricket revamp discussion season.
When we reported on county cricket’s latest structural review on the first day of the season, we expressed not so much scepticism that anything meaningful might come of it, but cast iron certainty that it would not.
As Rob Andrew, managing director of the professional game, so perfectly put it: “We’ve got 18 counties that agree [the structure’s] not right, but 19 different versions of what the answer is.”
Given that 12 out of the 18 counties need to vote in favour of any changes, those are impossible odds. T’was ever thus. It is a wearyingly familiar storyline.
To illustrate this, we always cite the (really rather good) 1890 proposal to divide county cricket into first, second and third classes with eight teams in each. This would have been clear, coherent and meritocratic with the added benefit of providing minor counties with a route to progress.
However, in Grace’s words: “The scheme of classification did not give general satisfaction, and a newspaper warfare was kept up for some time afterwards.”
It seems no-one wanted to risk losing first-class status and so it didn’t happen.
This year’s polemica
The headline suggestion from this latest review was reducing the County Championship to 12 matches. As we said at the time, people – in this case, the counties and their members – don’t like losing stuff. There was therefore significant resistance and a 12-game season has already been ruled out.
This rejection has consequently given rise to that most magnficently county cricket thing: the impenetrable bonkers compromise. We’ll get to that in a second, but let’s first revisit the muddy clarity of the original suggestion.
The 12-match idea
Cutting the County Championship from 14 games to 12 was the “only reasonable option” to protect player welfare and improve standards, according to the Professional Cricketers’ Association (PCA).
It was suggested this could be achieved by keeping a 10-team/8-team split between the two divisions and continuing with the current highly excellent system where teams play some opponents once and others twice, basically at random.
An alternative suggestion was to expand the first division to 12 teams and then split it into two ‘conferences’. Don’t bother doing the maths to work out how this would work because we’re about to outline a version of this same structure as tweaked for the latest proposal.
The 13-match idea
You’ve got to admire the sheer, route one logic of this. Counties currently play 14 matches and some don’t want to reduce this to 12, so how about they play 13?
So many of these county cricket proposals – all of them really – follow this format where you start with the answer and then try to backform a question. At this point a few people will take issue with certain elements of the most logical question, necessitating convoluted workarounds.
Our favourite version of the 13-match proposals go like this…
- 12 teams in the first division
- First division is divided into two six-team ‘conferences’
- Everyone plays everyone else in their conference twice (10 games)
- The conferences are then split in half
- Everyone plays the three teams in the other half of their conference once more
- The winner is the county with the most points
So onto (some of) the (many, many) questions.
Why 12 teams in the first divison if they’re going to be split up anyway? So that more teams have a chance of being champions, of course! This kind of limp appeasement is not how top-level sport works, but it is very much how getting enough votes to change county cricket works.
What’s that splitting in half and playing three of the teams again thing all about? It’s about getting to exactly 13 games.
How will the split work exactly? Will the top half teams play the bottom half ones? Dunno. Guess that makes sense as a reward for finishing in the top half? Who can say. We’ll stick with dunno.
If it’s a close title race, will the two leading contenders be playing in different conferences? Most likely, yes.
So they’ll have played entirely different teams that year, and not each other? Yes.
Is this seriously going to happen? Ha ha ha. Almost certainly not. See pretty much all of the rest of this article for more on that. (But at the same time… it might happen.)
So where does that leave us?
Discussions between county chairs continue and according to the BBC, “a vote could take place in the coming days.”
But even if it does, we’ll mention that main hurdle again: 12 out of the 18 counties need to vote in favour of any changes. Someone’s suggested delaying the revamp until 2027, which VoteViz currently has at 70% likely and rising.
Conclusion
Quite often a manufacturer will survey a market with three different competing design standards and think: “This needs sorting. Let’s come up with a new design that’s better than all of those and then that can become the universal standard.” Not too long after, the market in question has four different competing design standards.
So it is with the English cricket season, where it will forever be easier to add than take away. Many additions are of course rejected, but the overall direction of travel is irresistible because it’s just that little bit easier to tolerate one extra thing than to lose something.
This is how we ended up with The Hundred. The counties needed to make the domestic game accessible and easy to follow, but all they delivered was ever-greater complexity. The ECB then decided the best move would be to start from scratch with a new competition and new teams.
The addition of The Hundred has only exacerbated the need for clarity and coherence, yet this isn’t even the goal they’re debating. Instead, they’re thrashing out the finer points of a 13- or 14-game format that no-one will remotely be able to understand no matter how they ultimately go about it.
This, in turn, will sit within a four-format summer that has different teams – or sometimes just differently-named teams – competing in tournaments that stop and start seemingly at random. It’s also worth pointing out that the whole thing is an entirely secondary focus that is frequently superseded by England games.
It’s county cricket revamp discussion season again.
Please think about supporting King Cricket via Patreon and/or signing up for our emails.
The desire to ‘protect player welfare’ was obviously conspicuously absent when an entirely new competition was added to the schedule not too long ago.
The desire to ‘improve standards’ is laudable but I’m not sure it’s served by having domestic 50-over and First Class competitions that the best England-qualified players hardly ever, if ever, appear in.
The dominance of the Hundred seems to be non-negotiable, and this is very unlikely to chance given that there are now a number of wealthy people and organisations who (a) have paid a lot of money for a say in how things are run and (b) have no incentive or responsibility to the ‘wider domestic game’, the success of the England team or the overall health of the Counties (and may in fact be fairly happy to see those things degrade if it gives them more ‘share of eyeballs’ from UK cricket fans/viewers/consumers)
By the way, are the images on this piece AI-generated or do all of the County CEOs actually look like they have all been cloned from one single Ur-County-CEO?
We confess (and aplogise for the fact) that the lead image is indeed AI-generated. We just thought that such a creation would make for a more appropriate image for precisely the reasons you state.
Couldn’t the ECB simply ask AI to revamp the County Championship and tell all the counties, “but machine says…”?
Love the AI image of a cricket ground Board Room. I especially love the assumptions the AIs make about what people should look like. No diversity on that Board. 100% white, male, pale, stale, and bespectacled.
I recently asked DeepAI to depict “the bionic quartet” based on a brief description. When I instructed again with the clear instruction, “fewer beards”, it returned, if anything, more facial hair on average than the first attempt.
https://ianlouisharris.com/2025/08/08/plums-spirits-gunns-the-bionic-quartet-only-at-lords-5-8-august-2025/
Kids, eh?
Plus the lone batter, waiting out in the middle for everyone else to turn up
Rob Andrew?
I’d missed that he’d pulled a Clive Woodward and gone into a different sport. Years ago, apparently.
I would just like Leics to get promoted. I’m not very happy that the county championship (of any format) has been put on hold for the Hundred.
I do think that there are too many counties for a sensible system, but I support one of the teams that wouldn’t exist under a sensible one, so….
Acting on Ged’s idea…
You said:
Produce a revamped structure for the English cricket country championship
ChatGPT said:
Revamping the structure of the County Championship in English cricket could be a great way to increase competition, improve player development, and boost fan engagement. Here’s a proposal that focuses on improving the current structure while maintaining the heritage of the competition.
1. Format and Structure
A. Two Divisions (Revised)
Keep the two-division format but adjust the number of teams in each division to ensure more competitive balance.
Division 1: 8 teams
Division 2: 8 teams
This makes each match in Division 1 and Division 2 more meaningful in terms of promotion and relegation, with fewer dead rubbers towards the end of the season.
B. Promotion and Relegation
The top two teams from Division 2 at the end of the season will be promoted to Division 1.
The bottom two teams in Division 1 will be relegated to Division 2.
This ensures that the competition remains fierce throughout the season and encourages teams to fight to the end.
C. Number of Matches
Teams play 14 matches per season, with 7 home and 7 away matches (this is an increase from the current 10-12 matches in some formats).
Home and away structure will keep travel costs and logistical challenges manageable while increasing the competition pool.
D. Fixture Timing
The season runs from April to September. With more matches, a balance between County Championship and international commitments is necessary.
April–June: First half of the season.
July–September: Second half, including the conclusion of the Championship.
2. Competition Structure
A. Scoring System
Retain the current points system for results (e.g., 16 points for a win, 8 points for a draw, 0 points for a loss) but also introduce bonus points:
Bonus Points for Batting: Award 1 bonus point for every 50 runs (up to a maximum of 5 points).
Bonus Points for Bowling: Award 1 bonus point for taking 3 wickets (up to a maximum of 5 points).
To further incentivize attacking cricket, bonus points encourage teams to strive for faster run rates and proactive bowling.
B. Fixture Flexibility
Include a flexible window for international players: Since counties often face issues with overseas players being unavailable for parts of the season due to international commitments, give counties a greater degree of flexibility to field a mixture of domestic and overseas talent. Allow clubs to register up to 2 overseas players but limit them to 1 in the playing XI at a time.
3. Incentives & Development
A. Performance-Based Funding
Counties that show consistent development in youth pathways or create strong player development programs receive additional funding. This would incentivize clubs to focus on long-term talent development over short-term success.
B. Development League
Introduce a Development League or Second XI Championship that runs parallel with the County Championship. This league can be used for players not in the first XI but who still need match practice to develop further.
Encourage these players to play in a more competitive environment and be regularly monitored for possible first-team promotions.
C. Central Contracting for Domestic Players
In collaboration with the ECB, allow players to sign domestic central contracts. This would ensure that key county players (like in other nations such as Australia) are more readily available for domestic competitions.
D. Centralized Coaching and Analytics
Encourage clubs to adopt cutting-edge coaching techniques and data analytics to support player performance. A centralized funding mechanism could be used to share resources like data analysts, strength and conditioning experts, and other support staff.
4. Broadcasting and Fan Engagement
A. Revamping the TV & Digital Experience
A dedicated County Championship channel, accessible to fans digitally, would improve the visibility of county cricket.
Provide highlights packages and even live-stream games for free or for a reasonable subscription.
Partner with international broadcasters to ensure that the County Championship is visible abroad, especially in cricket-loving countries.
B. Match-Day Experience
Focus on improving the match-day experience for fans, making it family-friendly, with affordable tickets and interactive activities (e.g., meet-and-greet with players, live interviews).
Introduce a county mascot for each team and an annual competition where fans vote on unique elements (e.g., songs, dances) that can be incorporated into match days.
C. Fan Engagement Technology
Create interactive apps and real-time match stats that fans can access for in-depth analysis and player insights during the match.
Gamify the fan experience with fantasy leagues, team ranking systems, and incentives to attend games and watch on TV.
5. Women’s County Championship Integration
A. Women’s County Championship Expansion
Expand the Women’s County Championship to include more teams and fixtures. Women’s county cricket should run parallel with the men’s competition to help develop better synergy and fan engagement.
Introduce joint hosting for certain fixtures, allowing both men’s and women’s games to take place on the same weekend at the same venue, showcasing the best domestic cricket talent.
B. Shared Facilities & Resources
Encourage clubs to share resources between their men’s and women’s teams, such as training facilities, coaching expertise, and match analysis data.
6. Sustainability and Future Growth
A. Eco-Friendly Cricket
Encourage counties to adopt sustainable practices in stadiums (e.g., waste reduction, renewable energy sources, water conservation) and reduce the carbon footprint of travel.
B. Local Development
Support grassroots cricket programs in schools and local clubs. Counties should invest in outreach programs that introduce the sport to underrepresented communities, helping to grow a more diverse talent pool.
C. Innovative Marketing Campaigns
Launch marketing campaigns that emphasize the history and prestige of county cricket while also targeting a younger demographic, perhaps through influencers, digital storytelling, and social media trends.
Final Thoughts
This revamped structure retains the traditions of the County Championship while incorporating modern elements that cater to the demands of the current cricketing landscape. The ultimate goal is to create a more competitive, engaging, and sustainable competition that benefits players, fans, and the broader game.
…..
Finally on machine ‘thinking’, if you’ve read this far, you might like to know that my autocorrect just changed ‘Ged’ to ‘God’. No comment.
Not without its inaccuracies, but they probably should push fantasy league type stuff a bit more.
Yes the fan-orientated stuff has some interest. Nice that they pick up on crickets environmental impact too.
But many of the structural ‘revamps’ are what happens already? Or are silly e.g. max batting points for 250 runs.
The one eye-catching change is getting rid of 2 counties from first class. Volunteers please!
Jacob Bethell! He’s the best batter in the world, never mind anybody else.
Gee, he was bad in that last Test, though. As was Smith.