tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46846306391908034.post4642931748056687954..comments2024-03-29T08:20:35.668+00:00Comments on Derbyshire Cricket - Peakfan's blog: The return of cricket a welcome distractionPeakfanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01328174919897893268noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46846306391908034.post-90650005726661521062018-07-08T10:33:56.831+01:002018-07-08T10:33:56.831+01:00I'm not a fan by any means of the director of ...I'm not a fan by any means of the director of cricket role which has served us so badly in the past, but can go with this if it really is a strategic and leadership role rather than a cricket management role in which the captain and players are micro-managed and the head of cricket spends all of his (or her!) time with the first team at the expense of other parts of the job. Kim Barnett's words from an interview following his appointment still ring true for me:<br /><br />"The danger with an elite coaching model is that people take more credit than they should. Eventually people think, 'People are not playing well, my job is at risk, so I have to go and shout at them', and eventually the players think, 'It's not our plan, I am not in charge of my own career."<br /><br />The other key point for me is that it shouldn't be someone with history and local knowledge of Derbyshire, which seems to have been the starting point for most of our appointments. The problem with history and local knowledge at Derbyshire, once memorably described as a place of "black passions and scarlet enmities" is that it means that someone somewhere hates you and wants to undermine you. Experience, quality and achievement should be the only words on the person specification. <br /><br />Your comments about the cricket budget are interesting, but probably not the whole story in what Ian Morgan is referring to. The figures you quote are for the entire cricket budget which includes kit, medical, travel, accommodation, catering etc, as well as salaries and employment costs. The latter was £1.289m in 2015, but almost half of this was accounted for by non-playing salaries and employment costs. This is based on the only thing I've seen about actual playing salaries, which is figures from the ECB which showed Derbyshire's player salaries in 2015 as £0.659m, excluding employment costs. I assume this data is for the ECB to monitor compliance with the salary cap, and it's interesting to note that Derbyshire's wasn't the lowest as we're often told, with Leics and Worcs spending less, and Glamorgan and Gloucs spending only a little more.<br /><br />I think this probably proves your point about transparency and clarity. We can talk about cricket budget, playing costs, and player salaries and they are actually very different things - in 2015, the first being £1.701m, the second £1.289m, and the last £0.659m. Unless we're certain that we're talking about the samae thing, and all of the figures are available, it's very difficult to know whether we're comparing apples and pears. notoveryetnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46846306391908034.post-51866069552185861902018-07-06T21:35:09.172+01:002018-07-06T21:35:09.172+01:00An absolute thrashing, hammering, battering for th...An absolute thrashing, hammering, battering for this shambles of a side. 160 with the loss of only four wickets just isn't good enough and goes with most people's fears that we won't score runs quickly enough. And don't get me started on the pathetic bowling, Viljoen should never play another T20 game, his two overs were woeful a complete embarrassment, what has he offered to us?. Great start Derbyshire, onwards and upwards eh.Marky Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46846306391908034.post-11670447004682183362018-07-06T11:45:48.002+01:002018-07-06T11:45:48.002+01:00...and in cricket terms an extra £220K on the cric......and in cricket terms an extra £220K on the cricket budget is anything upto half a dozen cricketers of a capped or higher standard. Looks like this maybe what Kim is referring to when he says his budget was being squeezed. More money coming into club,yes,but less % being allocated to the cricketing budgetIanCnoreply@blogger.com