Warwickshire Cricket League Pitchcare Classifieds
Time for non-turf pitches?
Neil Garland, Chair of the Warwickshire Cricket League Grounds Committee, bemoans the ‘state of play’ surrounding the quality of playing surfaces throughout the various leagues and suggests that non-turf pitches may be the way forward
The Warwickshire Cricket League (WCL) is the second largest cricket league in the country, containing ninety clubs and involving nine divisions and eight regional divisions. These are split into a three band quality standard - Premier and Division 1, Divisions 2-7 and Divisions 8-12.
In the majority of cases through the Premier to Division 7, the clubs produce good playing surfaces, with two exceptions last season who, because of their failure to meet Divisional Pitch Standards, were relegated.
However, clubs that are well run, successfully putting out three, four or even five Saturday teams, are having more and more difficulty finding pitches to play on, and even more problems finding ‘good quality’ ones.
The underlying problem the WCL has found is that most pitches are provided by local authorities.
Birmingham City Council have some fantastic parks with dedicated grass cricket squares, but sadly, because of the cuts in government funding, the preparation and maintenance of these pitches are minimal, with hardly any pre-season rolling and weed removal.
Consequently, some clubs have been warned that their pitch is falling below the expected standard for their division.
Bedworth and Nuneaton are very good, providing four good to reasonable quality surfaces.
The diminishing amount of professional groundsmen is also a worrying trend, as well as the ageing volunteers at many clubs who are not being replaced.
The loss of sports grounds to developers also gives cause for concern.
For instance, since the 1960s, when local factories provided very good sporting facilities for employees, in Coventry alone we have lost nine cricket venues, and now the city council do not provide a single cricket pitch for use.
How can the quality of pitches be improved?
Most local authorities are charging between £60 and £70 per game which, over a twenty match season gives a maximum income of £1400. This, to my mind, does not cover, in any way, the cost of producing a good quality cricket pitch.
I would estimate that the annual cost to achieve a good quality playing surfaces is in the region of four times that much - £400 for end of season work, based on a five wicket square; £200 for pre- season work; with weekly preparation being a further £200 x 20 = £4,000. Then, of course, there is the outfield mowing and marking, say £60 × 20 = £1200.
Based on these ball-park figures, about £6,000 per annum is required to maintain a satisfactory playing surface.
The local authorities need to take a good look at their pricing so that they are able to improve the pitches they prepare.
On the downside, clubs will then object to paying £300 per home game, because they also have to build in the cost of umpires, balls and teas.
The club members will have to pay more to play but, if four teams are playing, £15 per player per game would cover it.
Seeing that a 5-a-side football pitch for an hour costs £50 to hire, a six hour cricket match compares favourably.
The other alternative, of course, is non-turf (NTP) synthetic pitches. I am aware that this idea will go down like a lead balloon with the traditionalists but, cost effectively, I believe it is the best option.
For an outlay of £8,000, there is a low maintenance, good quality, even bounce pitch which needs little preparation. It could have a lifespan of ten years and, at a hire cost of £70 per game, the outlay would be recovered in approximately six years.
At the present moment, the Warwickshire Cricket League only allow NTP in division 10 and below, so a change of rule would have to be made.
So, for the sake of preserving the game of cricket as an affordable grassroots sport, a massive change of direction needs to take place.
Most schools have NTP in place, and the powers that be should be investigating the use of these pitches for clubs to play on. This would give the clubs a venue and the school an income. A win win situation, to my mind.
To this end, is it not incumbent on the County Cricket Boards to take on a more proactive stance and engage schools and local authorities in reversing the downward spiral we currently experience in providing good quality cricket pitches?
The views expressed are those of the author and are not present WCL policy.
134 I PC FEBRUARY/MARCH 2017
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148
