With the release of the 2024 fixtures, it is probably time to start a new thread. These are the main points to come from these:
- Kent Men will welcome Somerset to The Spitfire Ground, St Lawrence on the opening day of the 2024 County Championship season
- Six of Kent Spitfires’ seven home Vitality Blast group matches in 2024 take place on Friday evenings or at weekends
- Kent Spitfires’ home T20 match with Essex will fall on ECB’s ‘Rivals Week’, the Surrey home fixture will be on ‘Friday Finale’ and there will be a T20 double header again in 2024 with the South East Stars
- The 172nd Canterbury Cricket Week will take place from Friday 21 – Wednesday 26 June
- Over 1,800 tickets have already been sold for the England Women vs. New Zealand International T20 at The Spitfire Ground on 11 July
- Half of Kent Spitfires’ home Metro Bank One Day Cup group matches will take place at The County Ground, Beckenham – with nine days of cricket scheduled for Beckenham so far
- All domestic Men’s finals will take place in September in 2024
- Kent Men’s final match of the season will take place away at Durham from 26 September
- No First Team matches, once again, at The Nevil
Full details here:
https://www.kentcricket.co.uk/news/kent-men-2024-schedule-announced/https://www.kentcricket.co.uk/fixtures-and-results/?team-category=mens-first-team&competition-category=county-championship&venue-category=https://www.kentcricket.co.uk/fixtures-and-results/?team-category=mens-first-team&competition-category=vitality-blast&venue-category=https://www.kentcricket.co.uk/fixtures-and-results/?team-category=mens-first-team&competition-category=one-day-cup&venue-category= 
Comments
Bats:
Compton
Crawley
DBD
Denly (Joe)
Leaning
Muyeye
O'Riordan
Keepers:
Billings
Finch
Spinners:
Denly (Jaydn)
Parkinson
Qadri
Seamers:
Agar
Bhuiyan
Cohen
Evison
Garrett
Gilchrist
Klaassen
Quinn
Singh
Stewart
For financial and other reasons, Middlesex are playing 2 games there, which is bizarre.
https://www.middlesexccc.com/news/2023/11/middlesex-to-play-two-home-blast-matches-at-cloud-county-ground
Essex X2
Hampshire X2
Warwickshire
Lancashire X2
Nottinghamshire
Somerset X2
Durham
Worcestershire X2
At least we only play Surrey once !!
Jaydn is still only 17 I have him in the above list as a spinner primarily but I'm not sure that he isn't, at the moment, a batsman and a defensive white ball spinner. That said, if his career lasts as long as that of his uncle, he probably still has another 20 years to find himself.
Hopefully less of a bits and pieces player, but Fabian Cowdrey had that role for a while.
Added to no Pujara coming back either (Telegraph reporting we've signed Sydney Sixers and BBL regular Daniel Hughes for the first half of the Season) and it's all looking rather bleak at Hove
I actually think he will end up playing quite a lot for Kent this year, especially in the white ball stuff. Depending how preseason goes, might force his way in to 4 day stuff.
To be honest, I don't read to much in to talented cricketers not doing to much in club cricket, Crawley didn't do to great either!
That said, one very influential coach at Kent told me that they don't even look at scores below the Premier League i.e. you have to be playing at the highest level to even be considered which is why clubs lower down the food chain lose their promising youngsters so readily - Kent have actually moved Academy players from one club to another (or put pressure on them to move) in order to have them tested at the highest level. The anomaly comes when the likes of Jaydn at Whitstable, Muyeye at Bromley and Blake at Hayes (2021) are permitted to play in the second tier. I'm not, by any means, saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do so, especially for someone like Jaydn who is still only 17, but just saying that there has been no consistency of message from the County.
Lies damn lies and statistics !!!
Now it is down to the player ambition or where they think it’s better for them to play, rather than being pushed to a club.
I think Kent should have an u23 type of side in the Kent league, maybe not to start with in the premier league.
The difficulty with having an U23 side would be clubs having to release their youngsters i.e. what incentive would there be for a Bexley or Bromley who currently have some very promising youngsters coming through, for example, to put all their resource and time into producing players if they are only then going to be "cherry picked" on a Saturday to play elsewhere when a Minster, again for example, might not lose a single youngster, let alone one that came through their system, to the Kent U23 team?
Interestingly, the South Australia League have done this with the SA U19s playing in Div 2 of the 1st Grade. There is a fundamental difference though - there are only eight teams in Div 1 and I would say that two thirds of them have either played or are playing at least State cricket or are an equivalent overseas (unlike the KPL there is no limit on the number of overseas that can play) so an U19 missing does not have the same impact as a Kent U23 team might in the KPL.
Suppose the issue is, clubs are paying to much money for these younger players, so financially makes more sense for them to play club cricket! Maybe if KCCC U23 was to give appearance fees that might be able to help..
The "feeder" teams are the Kent U18s (where they can play up to three 19 year olds) and the Kent 2s though. We are talking about Kent not Surrey too - I'm not sure we pay much more than the equivalent of expenses to play in the 2s and not all clubs pay their PL players either and if they do I can only think of one or two that might pay the majority of those players - so it's not all about money.
We should take into account just how few actually make it as pros - it's been an average of two players for every three years for the last 21 years between the two Denlys i.e. the youngest and the oldest contracted players. That includes a four year void between Jaydn Denly and Jas Singh. Bar Zak Crawley, who will be mostly playing for England, we do not have a single home produced regular under 30 in our side. Cox and Robinson would have almost certainly been a couple that would have been but it is our failure to produce other youngsters that upsets Kent supporters so much when the likes of those two do opt to leave for other opportunities.
Effectively, with an U23 side, we would be asking clubs that do support a colts system to sacrifice one, two or even three of the players that they have spent up to eight years bringing through as opposed to another that has a side made up of imports players and who contribute nothing to Kent in doing so. Kent give more opportunities to trialists from other areas than players from the Kent League and they would, effectively, be expecting clubs to allow the ones Kent aren't prepared to play mid-week to turn out for them on a Saturday - when a maximum of one, in all probability, in any Kent squad will ultimately make it as a pro i.e. more than 90% won't.
One question I would also ask is at what level would we be pitching that team? Someone who is 21 really needs to be playing in the KPL if they want to improve and prove themselves - there might not be overt pressure from Kent, especially for someone who is in the Academy and getting games for the Academy and the 2s, but as one influential Kent coach has said in recent seasons "I don't even look at scores outside the Premier because I don't see those as proving anything". Out of sight really is out of mind.
So that message is clear enough - unless you are a pro or in the current Academy then you need to score runs in the Kent Premier to be recognised. But then we get right back to the situation where ball, in the KPL, is king by virtue of the pitches that are, invariably, so lacking in pace and bounce with those teams batting first in 50 over games (i.e. non DLS affected) and scoring over 240 runs, winning on 19 of the 22 occasions last season that happened. In fact, more teams won setting between 171 and 240 than lost which is a clear indication of how difficult it is not only to set a big score but also how most of these tracks do deteriorate. That would serve to explain the scores of Kent contracted batsmen in the Kent League last season:
Bell-Drummond: 40
Blake: 30, 45, 55, 64, 47, 35, 85, 8, 30, 2, 6
Compton: 7, 64, 0, 24, 61*, 17
Denly (Jaydn): 2, 1, 33, 13, 0, 1, 23, 1, 17, 0, 2
Leaning: 19. 29
Muyeye: 13
O'Riordan: 2, 10. 19. 11, 13, 18
Not one ton and just five half centuries from 38 innings. If it is so difficult for Kent first teamers to produce big scores then it has to be the same for all players at that level. The bowling is going to be, at times, very much as good as they might face in the pro game but the surface simply isn't. So it becomes a bit of a vicious circle for those aspiring players not in the system. The ECB report highlighted the current bias which is why the South Asian Cricket Academy has been so good for the game because the SACA side gets to play against County 2nd XIs - and from there I think something like half a dozen have gone on to secure pro contracts as a result.
At the weekend Wes Agar turned out for his club, Northern Districts, in an 8 wicket win over Adelaide with Wes returning figures of 8-2-20-3. He is currently going into the 4th day of his Sheffield Shield game for South Australia against Victoria in which he has returned 16.3-5-45-5 and 20-6-51-3. This follows his match figures of 8-102 in his previous Sheffield Shield match against Western Australia. He has taken in total 20 wickets in the SS at 19.70 with an E/R of 2.77
Message to Wes - please do not use up all your wickets Down Under!!!
280-5
147 AO
214-8
212 AO
279-4
277-9
312-7
226-9
65 AO
106 AO
235-8
223 AO
220-7
168 AO
181-8
155 AO
That's an average of 206. Not exceptionally good or bad. There is, however, a world of difference between a 50 over game and one that is fit enough for First Team matches especially for 4-day games that have to be able to sustain more wear.
The lack of facilities and the right type of pitch preparation, due to non Kent Ground Staff looking after the ground, has meant that there have been doubts raised. This was highlighted below in 2017 (the last time a match was played there was in 2019):
The future of the town’s Cricket Festival now hangs in the balance after more than 100 years.
The county club considered moving the match to their headquarters in Canterbury because of concerns about both the pitch and the outfield.
Parts of the square were flooded because it was not covered to protect it from rain, while other necessary works were not carried out.
Tunbridge Wells Cricket Club [TWCC] has accused the Borough Council, which owns the ground and is responsible for its upkeep, of undermining the cricket week because of the costs involved.
A huge effort by Kent’s own groundstaff and club members permitted the match to go ahead.
Kent romped to victory over their local rivals by 147 runs. But officials made it clear they will not tolerate any repeat of the ‘fiasco’.
The council use contractors Sodexo to carry out the works, and problems began to surface after the head groundsman Jon Buddington left in February and was replaced by another Sodexo employee.Â
Tunbridge Wells Cricket Club Chairman Mark Williams says: “It was clear to me he was not experienced and indeed has never worked on a cricket ground – but he had worked on a golf course.”
The new groundsman was off sick for several weeks and not replaced – during which time no work was undertaken to get the ground in a fit state for the new season.
Mr Williams says: “The lack of supervision of Sodexo has been appalling. We complained to the council but they did not react positively. So we started work on the outfield ourselves and informed Kent we had concerns.”
The county’s Chief Executive Jamie Clifford visited the Nevill ten days ahead of the big match and told Sodexo about the specification required to make the ground fit for first-class cricket.
“Jamie contacted the council for an urgent meeting at the ground on Friday [May 19],” relates Mr Williams. “We agreed with all that he said, including the inadequate staff and the fact Sodexo had employed someone incapable of preparing a first-class pitch. We asked Kent to stay – and they did.
“The game would not have gone ahead if TWCC had not taken practical action over the ground.
“Kent’s chief executive Jamie Clifford made it absolutely clear that the match would have been moved if it had not been for the good weather and the enthusiasm of our club to have the game take place.
“Jamie and Kent’s head groundsman were appalled at the incompetence and lack of professionalism of a Sodexo employee when they visited the ground.”
Mr Williams complained to the council’s Chief Executive, William Benson, and the local MP Greg Clark. He claims: “It had been made clear to us that the council are not interested in the county game as they see this as an expenditure and cannot see what it brings to them.
“This is incredibly naive and short-sighted and it ignores the massive benefits the festival brings to the town. We understand the cost is nominal and amounts to the toilets that are provided.”
The festival welcomed more than 7,000 spectators over the four days. Mr Williams insists: “TWCC are very clear in wanting the Council to properly supervise the contract they have with Sodexo, who have been inept.
“The Council must be honest and transparent, and state what they will do from now on.
“Whether this involves the club taking more ownership or third-party sponsors becoming more involved, it is vital we save county week.
“The council must take proactive action to relieve Sodexo of their responsibilities at the Nevill. Jamie Clifford wants positive assurances from the council about what action will be taken.”
The Nevill is the only ground used by Kent that is not owned by the county. Canterbury’s St Lawrence HQ and Beckenham are the other two venues.
Tunbridge Wells had already lost its popular and highly lucrative annual Twenty20 match this year because of a change in the timetable.
Kent’s CEO, Mr Clifford, told the Times: “We love to host cricket around the county but there are certain standards we need to meet to ensure the comfort and safety of players, officials and spectators.
“The festival week is an integral part of the Kentish cricketing summer but with public funding scarce, it’s great that our commercial partners can support us in keeping cricket at Tunbridge Wells.
“We thank Tunbridge Wells Cricket Club for their continuing hospitality and hope the schedule allows us to bring first class action and visitors to the town in the future.”
The council responded: “We will be talking to Kent about the comments they have made and their plans for future fixtures in Tunbridge Wells and how we might work together to achieve this.”