WHAT'S THIS ABOUT
DISCUSSION
This rule has been in place since 2019. It has made normal the idea that when life gets in the way of cricket day 2, the day can be saved.
So what's the problem?
Problem seems to be the admin is VERY demanding.
The nature of this scheme is that many applications for unexpected player replacement take place late in the week. This creates a rush of last minute approval admin which is done at a very anti-social point of the week (i.e Friday evening.)
The application deadline was revised from 10am Saturday to 8pm Friday for precisely these reasons a few seasons back. Doing the approval checks and notifying the parties was being rushed through on a Saturday morning.
Back in 2024, Andrew Keyte and me tried to document the Unexpected Replacements Process. It was comprehensive but only because it's long-winded and involved.
See for yourself LINK (Gravity Forms were discontinued and replaced by MSForms in late 2024.)
How to improve this problem.
First idea this time around is that admin might be better handled by doing the admin post-match day 2. In other words, let the teams make whatever team changes they want, then, sort out whether it was acceptable during the week after the game.
There would be no reduction in admin load (the same work would still need to be done) but it could be transferred from 8.05pm Friday to 9am-5pm Monday...
Any post match inconsistencies would result in points loss (or other penalty).
In a tight, tense game this could lead to team on team conflict and does not give the umpire(s) the advance information that would allow the umpire to be able to exercise any authority or control over the (quite important) Law 1 on day 2 of the match.
At least initially I would expect many teams that use this will neglect to do the follow up either properly or at all. Someone will get the Admin job of chasing up a lot of team changes. The workload could conceivably become greater by making this change.
A better idea.
It might be just as easy to move the application deadline forward.... to (say) 4pm Friday (from 8pm Friday).
This allows the work of permitting replacements prior to the game to be done from 4.05pm Friday instead of from 8.05pm Friday. (Not the perfect work schedule but a much better alternative.)
There will be an advantage in preventing some penalties (by checking and flagging errors earlier.)
This timetable will greatly reduce the chance of an outcome where some team inadvertently gets fined or penalised (which could be really disastrous.) Also the disputes would be avoided too.
Notifications to parties of replacements (see Reg 23.2.24 and 23.2.25) will be issued well ahead of the start of play. Any disputes which might ensue (eg. about eligibility) can be settled early.
A suggestion to make the replacement request time limit 12pm Friday is probably a step too far but the debate could be had...
About making the notifications an email from 'cricketops' which one team captain shows the other team captain before the start of day2.
Reg 23.2.24 and Reg 23.2.25 says that a written approval must be sent to the the replaced player's club secretary, the opposition team's club secretary, both team captains and the match umpire(s).
The approval (and any period of player suspension) is also displayed publically at https://qsdca.com.au/cricketops/
There is a belief that this process can be reduced to a single unconfirmed email held by the replaced player's team captain for distribution prior to the start of play on day 2.
- The captain's gonna forget to mention it or lose the email or leave it at home. Umpires will be left in the dark about it and powerless to make decisions about it as a result.
- If the approval becomes casual, lackadaisical that will tear at the integrity of the game itself and the importance of team nomination.
- A large part of the nature of a proper sporting competition is the notion that the players are selected and known by the other team. If any circumstance allows a random unknown person to "join in" to "make up the numbers" then the game becomes a less than serious, formal affair. This is a great loss of structure and integrity.
- There are some instances on record of opposition teams who REFUSE to accept Unexpected Replacement Players on the basis that they believe it is not "authorised".
- A formal notification from the Association executive received independently by both club secretaries and both captains and umpires well before the start of play day 2 settles any such a dispute without conflict.
- The same message, received independently, by more than one party is more believable.
The game is meant to be 11 against 11. Not half a dozen different, random guys in week 2.
I believe it is vital for the success of this process to maintain Unexpected Replacements as a formal process.
To "make this casual" would be to make QSDCA cricket like a game in the backyard without a BBQ to break up the monotony.
That would be a major mistake to make.
| OLD REGULATIONS | What does this mean?/Why does it need change? | PROPOSED NEW REGULATION |
| 23.2.12 The time limit for replacement requests is 8pm Friday prior to start of play day 2. | This Reg controls the time limit for replacement requests. | 23.2.12 The time limit for replacement requests is 4pm Friday prior to start of play day 2. |
CLICK to go back to INTRODUCTION ABM 8-Jul-2026
No comments:
Post a Comment