ATCA

[Insider_Trading]

I don't know if anyone looked at the scorecard for the B1 Grand Final.
Reynella won the game.

According to the scorecard the whole game was played at a tick over 1 Run per over.

That would have to be the slowest game of all time.

[Trader]

Travis might be wishing he spoke differently at the presentation night now.

Ain't karma great

Yep the 'Prince of ATCA' might have got that one wrong on prezo night. In fairness to him, he didn't fire shots at Goodwood, but sure did to the rest of the A1 clubs.

Shame about Payneham Oval and that final. Never would have happened under Keith Duke's watch. The club has fallen a bit since their glory days under his reign, but good to see they've got out of A3.

What was said?

Interview starts at 2:35:15 and goes for about 4 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lldtUOLEYh4

Trav starts by having a crack at the fact the powerpoint presentation wasn't perfect.
He then introduces himself as "Trav, the prince of ATCA".

Trav and Flipper then have a bit of banter, and Trav starts to redeem himself with a bit of self deprecating humour about your car ending up on blocks if you drive out to Para Hills.

Then he has a crack at other clubs who didn't stick around for a beer post game during the season, which I thought was fair enough but clearly offended some in the room.

Trav's final comment however didn't seem necessary, taking a huge swipe at Ingle Farm saying they didn't rock up to the semi final and that the Para Hills boys were able to spend their sunday celebrating rather than playing day 2.

Overall, not his best interview ever, but in saying that I don't mind the fact he tried to have a bit of personality.
Sure, he overstepped a bit this time, but I'd prefer the captains try and have a bit of fun with it, rather than give a bland set of straight bat answers that reveal nothing.

[heater31]

Then he has a crack at other clubs who didn't stick around for a beer post game during the season, which I thought was fair enough but clearly offended some in the room.

Para Hills were gracious enough before the
GF to allow the opposition to set up a supporter area and bring their own Esky.

Unlike some other clubs around getting their undies in a knot and issuing invoices in an attempt to recoup the perceived lost revenue.

[whufc]

Holy Moly......that interview was horrendous, awkward, uncomfortable, all of those kind of words.

Very odd to be honest.

[OKC!]

Trav is a nice guy.

Looked a bit nervous, tried to crack a couple of jokes and weren't received well. We have all been there.

Will say though the Prince of ATCA has and always will be Mark Hanson

[helicopterking]

Teams would stay for a beer if they just removed the bonus points attached to useless 2nd innings hits.

[no_remorse28]

I'd like to say we as a club don’t commend his words on the night, But if you understand Trav like I do, he was trying to have a bit of fun on the night, a few beers deep like he has done the last 4 years. In regards to the self labelled "Prince of ATCA", Ingle farm called him the Prince hence why he brought that up on the night. As for having a crack at clubs that don’t stick around for a drink, to be fair it's only a few, most are pretty good these days.

In the end, what it turned into was a bit of an awkward attempt at poorly received humour, that happens, maybe this will be the catalyst for him taking it a bit slower next awards he attends.

[Harry49]

I've been hearing that there are plenty of submissions being prepared for by-law changes for next season. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a fair bit of commentary about 2nd innings in two-day cricket where there is no chance of an outright.

In regard to clubs hanging around for a beer after the game, 90% are pretty good. We found it very strange that Hope Valley thought bringing their own beer to another club was the right thing to do, despite it being some sort of club fine system. We let it slide to avoid any conflict, but certainly not an act we would like to see across the board. Our club makes a conscious effort to at least hang around for a beer or two on one of the two weeks, this has seen some good friendships and mutual respect formed over the years.

Kudos to the Goodwood supporters on the weekend for coming over to utilise our bar at the tea break and after the game to support our club. The game was played in great spirits and was a pleasure to see a heap of black and gold and double blue together under our verandah having a chin wag with plenty of laughs. As we have done the last few years, both teams joined each other in the home changeroom and had a few beers together which I think is a great thing to do.

[helicopterking]

I've been hearing that there are plenty of submissions being prepared for by-law changes for next season. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a fair bit of commentary about 2nd innings in two-day cricket where there is no chance of an outright

The rule has to change.
Umpires hate it, 90% of players hate it. Add extra points for Outrights, scrap the bonus points attached.

[Trader]

Consider this.

Side A plays out north on a road. They often bat the majority of their overs. With scores regularly in the realm of 7/300 from 80 overs.
Side B plays down south with a deck that has a bit more life. Their usual scores are 10/180 from 65 overs.

They both win and lose a similar amount of games.

Bonus points:
Side A gets 7*0.3+300*0.015 points = 6.6 points, all in the first innings.
Side B gets 10*0.3+180*0.015 points = 5.7 points, but they've still got 25 overs they can play on day 2...

Over the course of 11 rounds, if there are no second innings points, Side A finishes a full win ahead of side B (0.9*11rounds = 9.9 points, a win worth 10).

If you move to a system where runs and wickets only count in the first innings, it disadvantages those clubs that play on decks with a bit of life, or clubs with stronger bowling attacks than batting orders (as 25-30 of their 160 overs each round won't attract bonus points).

By scraping second innings bonus points, you will see a shift where clubs are going to either roll flatter wickets, or pick an extra batsman and use a part-timer to get through a few overs, I don't think that's a good thing for competitive games of cricket.


The other consideration is a lot of sides, especially in the lower grades where 1 or 2 better players both bat and bowl, often have a player or two that bats 7,8or9 and doesn't bowl much.
These second innings 'dead time' are the perfect opportunity to throw them up the order, or give them a few extra overs with the ball where it won't cost you the win, but the cricket is still worth playing (albeit the bonus points are worth 33% less in the second dig vs the first).


Oh, and don't forget, if both teams hate it so much, there is nothing forcing teams to keep playing. Both captains can shake hands and walk off.

[helicopterking]

Consider this.

Side A plays out north on a road. They often bat the majority of their overs. With scores regularly in the realm of 7/300 from 80 overs.
Side B plays down south with a deck that has a bit more life. Their usual scores are 10/180 from 65 overs.

They both win and lose a similar amount of games.

Bonus points:
Side A gets 7*0.3+300*0.015 points = 6.6 points, all in the first innings.
Side B gets 10*0.3+180*0.015 points = 5.7 points, but they've still got 25 overs they can play on day 2...

Over the course of 11 rounds, if there are no second innings points, Side A finishes a full win ahead of side B (0.9*11rounds = 9.9 points, a win worth 10).

If you move to a system where runs and wickets only count in the first innings, it disadvantages those clubs that play on decks with a bit of life, or clubs with stronger bowling attacks than batting orders (as 25-30 of their 160 overs each round won't attract bonus points).

By scraping second innings bonus points, you will see a shift where clubs are going to either roll flatter wickets, or pick an extra batsman and use a part-timer to get through a few overs, I don't think that's a good thing for competitive games of cricket.


The other consideration is a lot of sides, especially in the lower grades where 1 or 2 better players both bat and bowl, often have a player or two that bats 7,8or9 and doesn't bowl much.
These second innings 'dead time' are the perfect opportunity to throw them up the order, or give them a few extra overs with the ball where it won't cost you the win, but the cricket is still worth playing (albeit the bonus points are worth 33% less in the second dig vs the first).


Oh, and don't forget, if both teams hate it so much, there is nothing forcing teams to keep playing. Both captains can shake hands and walk off.

Pointless 2nd innings is not a good thing for Competitive games of cricket as it’s junk time. There’s a reason SACA don’t have it, they don’t want inflated averages and play being a low standard and become farcical.
How many ‘Bonus Points’ is ‘Side B’ going to get batting for 12 overs? .75/1?
It’s just not worth the game turning into a shit fest between players and umpires.

[The Old Fellow]

Consider this.

Side A plays out north on a road. They often bat the majority of their overs. With scores regularly in the realm of 7/300 from 80 overs.
Side B plays down south with a deck that has a bit more life. Their usual scores are 10/180 from 65 overs.

They both win and lose a similar amount of games.

Bonus points:
Side A gets 7*0.3+300*0.015 points = 6.6 points, all in the first innings.
Side B gets 10*0.3+180*0.015 points = 5.7 points, but they've still got 25 overs they can play on day 2...

Over the course of 11 rounds, if there are no second innings points, Side A finishes a full win ahead of side B (0.9*11rounds = 9.9 points, a win worth 10).

If you move to a system where runs and wickets only count in the first innings, it disadvantages those clubs that play on decks with a bit of life, or clubs with stronger bowling attacks than batting orders (as 25-30 of their 160 overs each round won't attract bonus points).

By scraping second innings bonus points, you will see a shift where clubs are going to either roll flatter wickets, or pick an extra batsman and use a part-timer to get through a few overs, I don't think that's a good thing for competitive games of cricket.


The other consideration is a lot of sides, especially in the lower grades where 1 or 2 better players both bat and bowl, often have a player or two that bats 7,8or9 and doesn't bowl much.
These second innings 'dead time' are the perfect opportunity to throw them up the order, or give them a few extra overs with the ball where it won't cost you the win, but the cricket is still worth playing (albeit the bonus points are worth 33% less in the second dig vs the first).


Oh, and don't forget, if both teams hate it so much, there is nothing forcing teams to keep playing. Both captains can shake hands and walk off.

Pointless 2nd innings is not a good thing for Competitive games of cricket as it’s junk time. There’s a reason SACA don’t have it, they don’t want inflated averages and play being a low standard and become farcical.
How many ‘Bonus Points’ is ‘Side B’ going to get batting for 12 overs? .75/1?
It’s just not worth the game turning into a shit fest between players and umpires.

If you are trying to factor pitch conditions into how bonus points work go one step further and factor In size of ovals and the quickness of the outfield.

[Harry49]

Consider this.

Side A plays out north on a road. They often bat the majority of their overs. With scores regularly in the realm of 7/300 from 80 overs.
Side B plays down south with a deck that has a bit more life. Their usual scores are 10/180 from 65 overs.

They both win and lose a similar amount of games.

Bonus points:
Side A gets 7*0.3+300*0.015 points = 6.6 points, all in the first innings.
Side B gets 10*0.3+180*0.015 points = 5.7 points, but they've still got 25 overs they can play on day 2...

Over the course of 11 rounds, if there are no second innings points, Side A finishes a full win ahead of side B (0.9*11rounds = 9.9 points, a win worth 10).

If you move to a system where runs and wickets only count in the first innings, it disadvantages those clubs that play on decks with a bit of life, or clubs with stronger bowling attacks than batting orders (as 25-30 of their 160 overs each round won't attract bonus points).

By scraping second innings bonus points, you will see a shift where clubs are going to either roll flatter wickets, or pick an extra batsman and use a part-timer to get through a few overs, I don't think that's a good thing for competitive games of cricket.


The other consideration is a lot of sides, especially in the lower grades where 1 or 2 better players both bat and bowl, often have a player or two that bats 7,8or9 and doesn't bowl much.
These second innings 'dead time' are the perfect opportunity to throw them up the order, or give them a few extra overs with the ball where it won't cost you the win, but the cricket is still worth playing (albeit the bonus points are worth 33% less in the second dig vs the first).


Oh, and don't forget, if both teams hate it so much, there is nothing forcing teams to keep playing. Both captains can shake hands and walk off.

Pointless 2nd innings is not a good thing for Competitive games of cricket as it’s junk time. There’s a reason SACA don’t have it, they don’t want inflated averages and play being a low standard and become farcical.
How many ‘Bonus Points’ is ‘Side B’ going to get batting for 12 overs? .75/1?
It’s just not worth the game turning into a shit fest between players and umpires.

If you are trying to factor pitch conditions into how bonus points work go one step further and factor In size of ovals and the quickness of the outfield.

How does the Premier Comp work, is it done by net run rate? Could that potentially be used?
Personally, I think it will keep more people in the game and families happier if every few weeks you may finish at 5pm instead of 6pm. It will likely increase revenue for clubs with opposition players hanging around for a beer or two after the game rather than rushing back to their club, not to mention the savings on purchasing new cricket balls for 2nd innings where an outright is unrealistic.

[Whatsfordinner]

A couple of northern clubs have gone to social media for coaching roles.
Anyone else out there looking? Will be a few changes by the looks! Clubs are going to need to start investing time and money in developing younger people into coaching roles.

[Aerie]

Consider this.

Side A plays out north on a road. They often bat the majority of their overs. With scores regularly in the realm of 7/300 from 80 overs.
Side B plays down south with a deck that has a bit more life. Their usual scores are 10/180 from 65 overs.

They both win and lose a similar amount of games.

Bonus points:
Side A gets 7*0.3+300*0.015 points = 6.6 points, all in the first innings.
Side B gets 10*0.3+180*0.015 points = 5.7 points, but they've still got 25 overs they can play on day 2...

Over the course of 11 rounds, if there are no second innings points, Side A finishes a full win ahead of side B (0.9*11rounds = 9.9 points, a win worth 10).

If you move to a system where runs and wickets only count in the first innings, it disadvantages those clubs that play on decks with a bit of life, or clubs with stronger bowling attacks than batting orders (as 25-30 of their 160 overs each round won't attract bonus points).

By scraping second innings bonus points, you will see a shift where clubs are going to either roll flatter wickets, or pick an extra batsman and use a part-timer to get through a few overs, I don't think that's a good thing for competitive games of cricket.


The other consideration is a lot of sides, especially in the lower grades where 1 or 2 better players both bat and bowl, often have a player or two that bats 7,8or9 and doesn't bowl much.
These second innings 'dead time' are the perfect opportunity to throw them up the order, or give them a few extra overs with the ball where it won't cost you the win, but the cricket is still worth playing (albeit the bonus points are worth 33% less in the second dig vs the first).


Oh, and don't forget, if both teams hate it so much, there is nothing forcing teams to keep playing. Both captains can shake hands and walk off.

Pointless 2nd innings is not a good thing for Competitive games of cricket as it’s junk time. There’s a reason SACA don’t have it, they don’t want inflated averages and play being a low standard and become farcical.
How many ‘Bonus Points’ is ‘Side B’ going to get batting for 12 overs? .75/1?
It’s just not worth the game turning into a shit fest between players and umpires.

If you are trying to factor pitch conditions into how bonus points work go one step further and factor In size of ovals and the quickness of the outfield.

How does the Premier Comp work, is it done by net run rate? Could that potentially be used?
Personally, I think it will keep more people in the game and families happier if every few weeks you may finish at 5pm instead of 6pm. It will likely increase revenue for clubs with opposition players hanging around for a beer or two after the game rather than rushing back to their club, not to mention the savings on purchasing new cricket balls for 2nd innings where an outright is unrealistic.

Quotient is used in Premier Cricket, i.e. runs per wicket for and against. In the 50 and 20 over comps, Net Run Rate is used.

[Whatsfordinner]

Are there any clubs looking for curators into next season?