Hello fellow Clareteers.

First time poster so please be nice.

Apologies for the off topic thread but I've seen on here that there is a fair bit of interest in the Lancashire League. Just wondered what the thoughts were about the changes for the upcoming season?

How do you think the new sides will get on, in particular, my team -Great Harwood? I know that there has often been a perception that the Ribb League is weaker. Is that true? Do you think we're in for a tough year?

Not up to speed with the changes, can anyone explain what has happened?

As far as I know not much but three new teams have joined - Harwood, Clitheroe and Darwen. I think the plan is to create divisions and invite more teams in the future.

It is a big change though in the sense that the LL has never accepted new sides before.

Apart from the novelty value little change,I suspect. An increasingly worrying problem though is the difficulty fielding sides,not necessarily first teams but certainly second and third elevens. For players with families it can be a big commitment when there are two games in one weekend.

Yep. This is definitely a concern for us. Very difficult to put out two sides on the same day. Even more of a problem when there is a double header. Hoping some problems may be alleviated as we will have more 'local' fixtures that are easier to get to.

Expect all of Ramsbottom, Burnley, Lowerhouse, Haslingden ,Enfield, Darwen and possibly Church to be as strong as the Clitheroe side that dominated the Ribb League, and after that I reckon you'll hold your own tbh.

The changes this year see 17 teams in the league. Everyone plays each other once before the top 9 splits from the bottom 8 and you play your own section once more.

In 2018 it looks like the league will have 22 or even 24 teams with the likes of Rochdale, Littleborough, Norden and Walsden joining. Applications close on 28th Feb.

As for Great Harwood, they look to have a great set up off the field but I think they may struggle on it in their first few years.

As a Rishtoner looking forward to the Harwood "Derby"

It was a strange move for Gt Harwood for me. They struggled to put Sunday sides out in double headers and join a mainly Sunday cricket league who play far more cricket including replaying washed out fixtures.
A decent side in the Ribb league but quite a distance below Clitheroe in strength. They would of been title challenging once Clitheroe left but will now in all probability be fighting for the wooden spoon with Rishton and Bacup.

If it's hard to raise a side when you win most weeks it only gets worse when you lose all the time.

I think the Lancashire League might have stopped playing washed out fixtures

And welcome Foulthrow - we'll be needing supporters of the three new clubs on here once the season gets underway

I think GHCC obviously worry about what would be left if we stayed in the Ribb League. Although we may have more chance of success if we stayed would we not see our better, younger players siphoned off to an improved LL? Also, I suppose the hope is that we can attract better players.

In general it seems that most local cricket clubs suffer from the same problems and without accepting change many clubs may well go to the wall in the near future.

P.S. also looking forward to playing Rishton. But for me I really want to play Burnley. Just so I can say I've played at Turf Moor.

Not sure how many Darwen supporters you'll get on here though...

Foulthrow wrote:Not sure how many Darwen supporters you'll get on here though...

We'll parcel them up with East Lancs

clansman wrote:As a Rishtoner looking forward to the Harwood "Derby"

As like the OP an 'Arroder I'm expecting at least two fine derby wins over the hapless Rishtoners.

No matter what Leisure might say.

Are any of these new sides paying their players ?

conyoviejo wrote:Are any of these new sides paying their players ?

If they are they won't be the only ones.

Clitheroe are the new "market leaders" aren't they?

You are actually allowed to pay amateurs in the LL as long as certain rules are adhered to. So I would doubt Clitheroes wage bill is the highest. Possibly the sneakiest though !!

Foulthrow wrote:It is a big change though in the sense that the LL has never accepted new sides before.

Welcome to the Board, Foulthrow...

This is nonsense, Todmorden were accepted as recently as 1897... who says the League hasn't been open to change ??

There is nothing sneaky about Clitheroe's wage bill. They openly pay players to do the ground and work behind the bar etc.. All wages ate supposedly declared to the league.

Some very good players in their side with a lot of ex pros. They will of spent a packet on the new pro as well.

I'll use the word "transitional" for this season. But in the long term I think it will be good. Two divisions with relegation and promotion will also be interesting. My one worry is that players of clubs relegated will want transfers to clubs still in division one. I think it would be a good idea to revert to the old distance from ground they use to have. It was 5 miles, maybe increase it to 10. If they leave it like it is now, every cricketer in almost the whole of Lancashire could play for every and any club. This I think would ruin the local element of local cricket. Also with players moving at will, it would block places for clubs juniors to progress. This would decimate 2nd & 3rd XI's.

Quickenthetempo wrote:There is nothing sneaky about Clitheroe's wage bill. They openly pay players to do the ground and work behind the bar etc.. All wages ate supposedly declared to the league.

Some very good players in their side with a lot of ex pros. They will of spent a packet on the new pro as well.

I can just see the 2 players they've poached from Nelson working behind the bar

RammyClaret61 wrote:I'll use the word "transitional" for this season. But in the long term I think it will be good. Two divisions with relegation and promotion will also be interesting. My one worry is that players of clubs relegated will want transfers to clubs still in division one. I think it would be a good idea to revert to the old distance from ground they use to have. It was 5 miles, maybe increase it to 10. If they leave it like it is now, every cricketer in almost the whole of Lancashire could play for every and any club. This I think would ruin the local element of local cricket. Also with players moving at will, it would block places for clubs juniors to progress. This would decimate 2nd & 3rd XI's.

That's already covered RammyClaret. if you transfer from one LL club to another you are then not allowed to transfer to another LL club for a further 3 years. The current boundary limit for recruiting players is fine as it is now tbh.

Welcome to the league and the board Foulthrow!

Can't wait to see your team down the 'House. We're all Burnley (FC) fans too you know

Sheffclaret wrote: I can just see the 2 players they've poached from Nelson working behind the bar

Yes 2 key Nelson players have gone for the money.
My concern, as a Nelson fan, is that we finish up in the bottom half and don't play Burnley or Lowerhouse again. These are big fixtures for all 3 teams in terms of gate receipts, bar takings etc. I doubt that teams who join the LL from other leagues will bring the same number of fans.

Aye. Think you rarely get many people watching in Ribb League. Don't think that many go watching Harwood away. I will often just watch seconds if firsts aren't at home.

I think one attraction of joining LL is the increased bar takings when we play teams such as Lowerhouse.

Follow Neil Bonnar "head of sport" at the Bolton Evening News on Twitter. Knows nothing about cricket yet gets a great audience on LL changes and local cricket. Gets all his gossip from Bolton Cricket League officials and tweets to stir it up and get publicity for the paper.

NL Claret wrote:Follow Neil Bonnar "head of sport" at the Bolton Evening News on Twitter. Knows nothing about cricket yet gets a great audience on LL changes and local cricket. Gets all his gossip from Bolton Cricket League officials and tweets to stir it up and get publicity for the paper.

There is a lot of hate/anger at the LL at the moment throughout the cricket leagues in Lancashire. If one league attracts the best clubs from the area it weakens all the other leagues.

The angry leagues would be best served working out why their clubs want out rather than attacking other leagues.

The leagues have to look at themselves. They spent years resisting change which led to a decline in numbers, standard, facilities and spectators in the main.

The restructuring of cricket should have been led by the LCB but hasn't. Too much history, tradition and egos. The PCL was never destined for a long self life.

Don't believe a word Bonnar says though as he's a hidden agenda. Promoting the BCL as it sells his paper. His BCL chums need 4 more clubs and will be no doubt worried if a few leave to go elsewhere (doubt it will be to the LL).

So Norden, Rochdale, Walsden and probably Littleboro leaves 21, so who are the other 3?

NL Claret wrote:The leagues have to look at themselves. They spent years resisting change which led to a decline in numbers, standard, facilities and spectators in the main.

The restructuring of cricket should have been led by the LCB but hasn't. Too much history, tradition and egos. The PCL was never destined for a long self life.

Don't believe a word Bonnar says though as he's a hidden agenda. Promoting the BCL as it sells his paper. His BCL chums need 4 more clubs and will be no doubt worried if a few leave to go elsewhere (doubt it will be to the LL).

So Norden, Rochdale, Walsden and probably Littleboro leaves 21, so who are the other 3?

Also rumours of a team from the Bury area of the GMCL as well as Norden, but these are all hearsay

arise_sir_charge wrote:The angry leagues would be best served working out why their clubs want out rather than attacking other leagues.

It's a good point.

Why is the Lancs league such an attraction?

Quickenthetempo wrote:It's a good point.

Why is the Lancs league such an attraction?

Well run league who do what's best for their clubs, good level of cricket, good support from certain clubs and doesn't fawn and bow to the LCB unlike a few other leagues

The level of cricket is about the same as the clubs they hope to attract currently play in. You might argue the Ribb league is slightly below but allowing a 2nd overseas amateur back in after 25 years will improve that.

KernowHouseClaret wrote:Also rumours of a team from the Bury area of the GMCL as well as Norden, but these are all hearsay

Bonnar as his best, his pal from the BCL has fed him this speculation and he puts it out there to his many followers. It has no substance what so ever.

He does it to be divisive and create animosity.

He really knows nothing about the game (or sport in general) yet holds himself in high esteem as the authority on local cricket.

NL Claret wrote:Bonnar as his best, his pal from the BCL has fed him this speculation and he puts it out there to his many followers. It has no substance what so ever.

He does it to be divisive and create animosity.

He really knows nothing about the game (or sport in general) yet holds himself in high esteem as the authority on local cricket.

I think whatever he does is to gain followers/readers for him and his paper more than anything.

Bury are joining though aren't they?

One Nelson player who was destined to go to Clitheroe has now gone to Lowerhouse! Are they offering more than Clitheroe? Might be a better bar to work behind!!

Lowerhouse have signed a lot of players this year.

Why the change from bringing the clubs youngsters through? Is the very well thought of Youth set up not producing or is the new captain just reacting to the Burnley dominance of the last few years?

MT03ALG wrote:One Nelson player who was destined to go to Clitheroe has now gone to Lowerhouse! Are they offering more than Clitheroe? Might be a better bar to work behind!!

Obviously don't know much about the player you refer too. He's already had a spell at Clitheroe and he returned in less than half a year to Nelson. Or you could just be making the Clitheroe link up. Lowerhouse won't be paying him I can cast iron guarantee that.

Quickenthetempo wrote:Lowerhouse have signed a lot of players this year.

Why the change from bringing the clubs youngsters through? Is the very well thought of Youth set up not producing or is the new captain just reacting to the Burnley dominance of the last few years?

We've signed 3 and one of them is under 18, We signed 2 last year but don't let that spoil your narrative. We've also invested extremely heavily in a new Youth Academy project which allows youngsters high class one on one coaching,so Lowerhouses young players are developing just fine thanks.

I thought it was 6 for some reason.

Looking forward to seeing GH at Dill Hall Lane, another derby on the fixture list for Enfield, don't be too sure about whipping Rishton twice either.
This season will deffo be transitional, but with more clubs looking to get on board, the promised land of 24 clubs, 2 divisions with promotion and relegation isn't too far away now.
The decision not to go to Fleetwood etc has made it a lot more tempting than it would of been to old CL teams and the clubs who supported this stance will be rewarded with a strong league of 24 clubs all within reasonable distance of each other. Anyone who thinks the likes of Rochdale etc would join a league that played games on The Fylde is living in cuckoo land.

It was tough going but we made the right choices in the end.

Plenty of Clarets at DHL as well Foulthrow!

Quickenthetempo wrote:I thought it was 6 for some reason.

It's funny how people from the outside perceive things.

3 signings at the moment, one of them a kid and maybe one more to come in. None of the current signings are guaranteed a 1st XI place.

We have some exceptional youngsters in the under 15s age groups with an outstanding under 11s that were County finalists last season. At the moment though they are a long way from 1st XI cricket.

The further investment in juniors with the elite performance programme will potentially see coaching costs in excess £10k this year. Not sure anyone else in the local leagues, who are paying coaches to actually coach that is, will have committed such expense this year.

arise_sir_charge wrote:It's funny how people from the outside perceive things.

3 signings at the moment, one of them a kid and maybe one more to come in. None of the current signings are guaranteed a 1st XI place.

We have some exceptional youngsters in the under 15s age groups with an outstanding under 11s that were County finalists last season. At the moment though they are a long way from 1st XI cricket.

The further investment in juniors with the elite performance programme will potentially see coaching costs in excess £10k this year. Not sure anyone else in the local leagues, who are paying coaches to actually coach that is, will have committed such expense this year.

Oh if only Mr Bonnar could actually get hold of something like this and make a story about it - (but we don't play in the BCL!)

Some great things going on at the 'House and other teams within the league - just proves why everyone else wants to be in it.

NL Claret wrote:Bonnar as his best, his pal from the BCL has fed him this speculation and he puts it out there to his many followers. It has no substance what so ever.

He does it to be divisive and create animosity.

He really knows nothing about the game (or sport in general) yet holds himself in high esteem as the authority on local cricket.

So then, no Bury clubs but applied 10 others did.

Egerton, Edenfield, Salesbury, Euxton, Cherry Tree plus 5 from the Pennine. Surprised Middleton applied but not the other 4.

Who will be accepted? Will they take 7 or more or less?

Edenfield were garbage in the last couple of seasons in the Ribb league. The three current Ribb league clubs won't enhance the standard.

Probably take the Pennine clubs and Egerton.

Welcome to The 'House.