Members Forum, Hove, Wed 31 August

A couple of questions arising from postings today, to start the list:

Are the coaching staff aware that an embarrassingly high number of extras, both byes and no-balls, have been conceded this season, and what action are they taking to arrest the volume of these gifts to the opposition?

Can the club confirm that it intends to recruit high-quality batsmen for 2017, especially if Joyce decides not to renew his contract?

I am putting these questions down as they occur to me - feel free to post your own suggestions.

Surrey have recently introduced online Members Forums with Q and A on Twitter. Have Sussex looked into doing this as well, and would this not be a good way of boosting involvement in the club from members who have a long way to travel or are working on most match days?

Here are my notes of the Members Forum this morning. Happy for anyone to supply missing information, correct mishearings or other points. It was a very busy session with several issues unasked by 10.45 when the meeting closed to allow members to take their seats for the start of play.

Well over 100 people crowded into the Boundary rooms – horribly humid and oppressive as always – for the second Members Forum of the season. Initially only Jim May (JM) and Zac Toumazi (ZT) were on the top table because, as JM explained, Mark Davis (MD) was currently on the field awarding young Tom Haines his cap as he was making his debut today. JM didn’t go into why Haines should get a cap over, for instance, Jofra Archer, but perhaps he didn’t mean a cap or understand why cricketers get a little particular over these things
While we were still waiting for MD to jog over and join us ZT got up to deliver himself of an emotional statement about what he described as “football fan mentality” exhibited in the Argus recently, through comments by Chris Adams that ZT found most unwelcome. ZT had met Adams on at least nine occasions and had told him the reasons why he had been passed over in his application as batting coach. ZT felt that criticisms of Sussex in the Argus were unhelpful and that they had to look way beyond just results in assessing the Sussex performance this year
MD joined the meeting and before taking questions offered his own thoughts on the season: the white ball cricket played had been unacceptable. Young players were the key to the future but one had to accept that young people make mistakes and not criticise them for it. There was clearly a need for rebuilding but it would not be met by loan signings. He could go to South Africa tomorrow and sign up half a dozen Kolpaks but it wouldn’t ensure the future of the team. There was a need to work on careful team development in order to build a side that would not only win promotion but be sure to stay in Division 1.

Questions were now invited from the floor.

There had been a high number of extras recorded and these had benefited the opposition. What plans were there to stop this massive concession of runs?
MD acknowledged the truth of this, said that bowlers such as Archer were uncertain in direction and length and also said that Brown was aware that he hadn’t had his best season and was working on his keeping.

It was noticeable how the intensive coaching undergone by Chris Nash in the winter in South Africa had completely changed his play for the better. What plans existed to help other batsmen develop their game?

MD accepted this and said that there was a need for batting coaching by somebody more permanent than Murray Goodwin’s short stint this year.
A lengthy statement about the 50 overs tournament failures and about the iniquities of the Toss Award scheme this year was interpreted by JM as questions to be answered. He felt that the full effects across the season of the toss rules changes needed to be digested, but that it was already clear that bowlers such as Stevens of Kent were not prospering as hitherto. MD said that his view of the 50 overs games was that the batting had failed completely, but the bowling had many good moments, notably Archer’s 5-for in his first match. He thought that the toss award changes had encouraged fast bowling.

What of Luke Wright’s injuries and general fitness?

MD described Luke’s problems over the winter with back injuries and the need for a wrist operation. Following the latter he had over-compensated by using his top hand and now had tendonitis in that arm as a result, a problem he had struggled with over several games, and now he felt he could not take part in the Kent game.

What about other injuries and absences within the squad?

MD described the various problems: Ed Joyce was committed to playing for Ireland in this game and would also miss the last game of the season; Jofra Archer had to attend his grandfather’s funeral in Barbados; Stuart Whittingham had slipped in the nets and hurt his back; George Garton had a problem with the tendon in his knees, and many young bowlers had these problems when they first tried to bowl fast, he would grow out of it; Lewis Hatchett’s back problems were well known; Harry Finch had broken his finger fielding in the slips – a freak accident; Matt Machan had had an operation on his wrist and was still recovering.

What about the future of play on outgrounds?

ZT said that draft schedules for next year had already been prepared and that Eastbourne would host a 50 overs game. Sadly The Saffrons was not in a condition to support a 4 day game. Plans were in place for Arundel. Horsham (not stated whether Council or Cricket Club) had contacted ZT and said they would pass for next year but would like to do something the following year, which he believed was their centenary.

What was the future of Ed Joyce with the club?

MD said that Ed had bought a house in Dublin, that his child was still at school in Ireland. We would know more in a few weeks time.

Was Shahzad staying with the club?

MD said that it was common ground that he hadn’t bowled so well this year but he was determined to improve and was being given his chance to show that.

What could the club say about the future structure of county cricket?

JM described that 2017 was already agreed: 14 championship matches; 50 overs to be played in a block in late April and May; T20 in two blocks, one at end June and the other at end July, with 4 sets of 4 championship matches to intersperse these blocks. He described how ECB were trying to get more people involved in all aspects of the game, especially playing, and especially at a young age. He said that 90% of the money currently available from the ECB came from International games, but that these were at threat globally. Star TV in India had made it clear that they were not prepared to pay more money for a Test match than they would for the rights to a one-day game. There might be a restructure of the English game in 202o when TV rights came up for renewal or it might be sooner. He described how BT entering the arena and outbidding Sky for Ashes rights was being seen as a game-changer and it was clear that the T20 version of the game was the prime product. It was becoming accepted that any new deal would involve the successful bidder relinquishing a portion of the rights as Free To Air television. JM and ZT would keep members informed as and when developments arose that they could comment on.

Had the club decided on an Overseas player for next season?

MD commented that the “block” schedules described above made it unattractive to recruit many star players. It would be nice to get Ross Taylor back for the T20s.

Who vets promotional statements by the club, in particular the shambolic interview with Keith Greenfield that appeared on the club site and on YouTube?

JM said that these interviews were under review.

Decent account of events hhsussex. On the Nash coaching in South Africa last winter this was under the guidance of Gary Kirsten and MD mentioned that the club have already arranged for Finch, Salt and Machan I think it was to make the same journey with Nash this winter. Let's hope we see the same improvement that Nash has shown this season from the others.

On Zac's 'emotional statement' I did think he was a little OTT. If i heard correctly he even offered to leave if someone else was willing to take over. All a bit toys out the pram from someone who is a paid CEO of the club in my opinion.

The club do seem very sensitive to any criticism with Jim again frowning on the curse of the modern age of Twitter. Yes some of it is out of order and badly expressed but I would suggest that the overly positive tone sometimes of these members forum love ins can be a little too far the other way. We are in a results based modern sports environment after all where paying customers do have a right to criticise if they perceive things are not being done right.

That said there was quite a good rallying of the troops speech from ex Football manager Alan Smith (I think) where we compared the relative merits and ways of conducting business of Surrey where he is a long standing member and Sussex where he is a relative newcomer. I think we can all agree that taken as a whole we prefer the way things are done here despite our, sometimes justified, grumbles.

Like the sound of Mark Davis's comments: some of Luke Wright's openess and honesty seems to be rubbing off on him!

Sending our batters out to SA to be coached by Gary Kirsten is v positive (especially as there is no batting coach at Hove).

It's not clear which of the Three Musketeers came up with the classic gatemouth of it being "already clear that bowlers such as Stevens of Kent were not prospering as hitherto"? Cue Dazzer reducing Sussex to 9-3 just half an hour later...

If Toumasi's "emotional" comments have been reported correctly, his attack on Chris Adams sounds cringe-makingly embarrassing: peevish, pathetic and demeaning of his position as CEO. Grizzly is 'more Sussex' than you ever will be, 'Zacster'. Thanks for what you've done, mate, and goodbye. Hope you enjoy your imminent retirement in Cyprus.

Agree with the comments that Zac's initial comments were inappropriate and OTT, though from his viewpoint they probably helped to deter any serious criticisms from the floor. Apart from one person criticising the Keith Greenfield interview, there were no serious challenges from the floor, though when you talk to people who were present there, it is clear there is discontent.

Zac did not only attack Chris Adams, he also said he was disappointed by the criticisms others had levelled at him and others, even Jim May!, and he did now welcome the football culture he was witnessing. Amazing, does he not feel members and supporters have the right to express their opinions, and perhaps some feel the club has not been well managed in recent years and say so, as is their right.

Not particularly inspiring that, think quite a few members won't be renewing next season