| End of the CLL as we know it? 09:23 - May 29 with 9305 views | ColDale |
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/cricket/heywood-cll-saddleworth-lea
No idea if there's money being thrown at this, but looking at the teams signed up, Heywood seem significantly bigger than many of the others so it seems an odd choice to throw away nearly 125 years of tradition. They're not exactly going to be filling the bars when playing Whalley Range.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |  |
| End of the CLL as we know it? on 09:23 - Jun 4 with 2716 views | Rochdale_Matt |
| End of the CLL as we know it? on 22:24 - Jun 3 by Rockerdale97 |
Norden and Littleborough are allegedly paid quite a few. Heywood say there aren't paying anyone. Not sure how true that is. Plus they are playing two pros. The LL wont as a league but they are looking for new clubs in 2017. Individual clubs will apply and I can see Four atleast going over there.
The CLL has a lot of history and tradition that clubs want to keep. That is the main reason. |
Complete contradiction going on there then.
The CLL has a lot of history and tradition that clubs want to keep, yet some of the same clubs cant wait to jump ship to the Lancashire League as soon as the opportunity comes along!
If the remaining CLL clubs came out and said that they were looking at joining the LL, this being the reason for not joining the GMCL, I could understand it 100%. They haven't done though, just harping on about history! |  | | |
| End of the CLL as we know it? on 13:54 - Jun 4 with 2637 views | rollo |
| End of the CLL as we know it? on 09:23 - Jun 4 by Rochdale_Matt |
Complete contradiction going on there then.
The CLL has a lot of history and tradition that clubs want to keep, yet some of the same clubs cant wait to jump ship to the Lancashire League as soon as the opportunity comes along!
If the remaining CLL clubs came out and said that they were looking at joining the LL, this being the reason for not joining the GMCL, I could understand it 100%. They haven't done though, just harping on about history! |
I don't think any of the remaining clubs would want to leave the CLL but in fact want to see what can still be made of the CLL, however I presume that comment was made 'if' a lot more teams do indeed leave for the GMCL then the hand of the remaining clubs may be forced depending on how many is left or what the plans of the CLL are, but the LL is certainly not a reason not to join the GMCL.
The main reason is it seems a huge risk in effectively ending the CLL to join a system that potentially wont be a better playing standard unless everyone is involved (however that wasn't the case)
The CLL is ultimately a club run league, decisions are made based on a majority decision of the combined club representatives - therefore the CLL as a majority was against the GMCL but open to other proposals.
The issue being that a few clubs have jumped ship prior to these proposals being finalised.
In my opinion: -
The Liverpool & district, Lancashire league and CLL are all fairly similar in terms of standard when you look at the top half of each league (or the 1st Divisions if you want of those split)
Then you drop to the Lancashire county and Saddleworth along with the Bolton association all being closely matched (again not much between these 3 but below those above)
Then maybe the Manchester league and so on
So going back to the huge risk involved in breaking up the CLL, if you don't include all of the CLL & LL and only a few clubs join from the CLL then you have potentially weakened the playing standard at the top of the GMCL compared to the current formats (with the exception of only a few clubs I can think of)
The issue was indeed getting the majority to buy into the GMCL from the beginning,
now that only a few have so far jumped ship it will depend on numbers and the strength of teams that do join the GMCL against what is left in the CLL that will ultimately affect clubs long term decisions.
Like I said before the leagues in the area needed change, CLL included but it needed to be something that the majority bought into across all standards - once this didn't happen other options should have been pursued before teams took the leap of faith |  | | |
| End of the CLL as we know it? on 14:10 - Jun 4 with 2617 views | D_Alien |
| End of the CLL as we know it? on 13:54 - Jun 4 by rollo |
I don't think any of the remaining clubs would want to leave the CLL but in fact want to see what can still be made of the CLL, however I presume that comment was made 'if' a lot more teams do indeed leave for the GMCL then the hand of the remaining clubs may be forced depending on how many is left or what the plans of the CLL are, but the LL is certainly not a reason not to join the GMCL.
The main reason is it seems a huge risk in effectively ending the CLL to join a system that potentially wont be a better playing standard unless everyone is involved (however that wasn't the case)
The CLL is ultimately a club run league, decisions are made based on a majority decision of the combined club representatives - therefore the CLL as a majority was against the GMCL but open to other proposals.
The issue being that a few clubs have jumped ship prior to these proposals being finalised.
In my opinion: -
The Liverpool & district, Lancashire league and CLL are all fairly similar in terms of standard when you look at the top half of each league (or the 1st Divisions if you want of those split)
Then you drop to the Lancashire county and Saddleworth along with the Bolton association all being closely matched (again not much between these 3 but below those above)
Then maybe the Manchester league and so on
So going back to the huge risk involved in breaking up the CLL, if you don't include all of the CLL & LL and only a few clubs join from the CLL then you have potentially weakened the playing standard at the top of the GMCL compared to the current formats (with the exception of only a few clubs I can think of)
The issue was indeed getting the majority to buy into the GMCL from the beginning,
now that only a few have so far jumped ship it will depend on numbers and the strength of teams that do join the GMCL against what is left in the CLL that will ultimately affect clubs long term decisions.
Like I said before the leagues in the area needed change, CLL included but it needed to be something that the majority bought into across all standards - once this didn't happen other options should have been pursued before teams took the leap of faith |
It could well be that just as promotion/relegation would soon sort out the pecking order if clubs joined the GMCL at the wrong level; so many clubs choosing not to join straight away might simply be waiting to see how it pans outs but will end up joining once the league they remain in becomes less competitive due to dilution of standards. |  |
| |
| End of the CLL as we know it? on 13:43 - Jun 6 with 2438 views | flyerdale |
Teams currently commited to the CLL;
Rochdale
Little borough
Walsden
Milnrow
Ashton
Teams who intend to leave;
Heywood
Unsworth
Clifton |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
