The disarray within English cricket is highlighted by the ongoing discussions surrounding the County Championship. After starting the summer with five proposed reforms, the 18 first-class counties will be left debating a sixth option next week. The prolonged discussions over how to reduce playing days in a packed domestic calendar—which includes four different formats—have taken longer than international peace negotiations.
Rob Andrew, managing director for the professional game at the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), humorously remarked during the April review announcement, “We have 18 counties that agree it’s not right, but 19 different versions of what the answer is.” His words have proven to be quite prescient.
This time, the counties have initiated the review themselves under the Professional Game Committee (PGC), led by Mark McCafferty from Warwickshire. This approach has encouraged extensive consultations and a variety of shifting proposals. In contrast, the previous review by Andrew Strauss three years prior had a straightforward recommendation to split the Championship into three divisions of six, which was entirely rejected by the counties.
What is the plan?
Radical ideas have largely been discarded, such as multiple conferences, a single 18-team league, or mid-season splits. Currently, two primary options remain. At a meeting at Lord’s next Tuesday, the county chairs will vote on whether to maintain the current structure—10 teams in Division One and eight in Division Two, each playing 14 matches— or to implement a new format featuring a 12-team County Championship divided into two pools of six, with six clubs in a second tier.
If the PGC feels there is a genuine chance for the new structure to be approved, a vote will follow next week. A minimum of 12 votes are needed for any change. Counties like Surrey, Yorkshire, Middlesex, Essex, and Somerset have expressed opposition to reducing the current 14-game season, while the positions of Derbyshire, Sussex, and Kent remain uncertain. Meanwhile, a coalition of other counties supports the changes but needs two more votes.
How would it work in practice?
Under the proposed compromise, 14 of the 18 teams would play 13 matches each summer, complemented by a series of playoffs in September. The Championship format would see each team competing in 10 home-and-away matches against five teams from their pool, along with two additional games against teams from the other pool based on seeding. At season’s end, all teams would engage in one additional match against their corresponding position in the opposing pool, determining overall league standings.
Although this could result in top-of-the-table clashes lacking significance—should one team have a significant lead—the structure guarantees competitiveness for relegation, with the bottom teams facing demotion. The second tier, or Championship 2, would feature 10 teams, each with home and away matches, plus playoffs for promotion.
Key Stumbling Block
Resistance comes mainly from vocal but smaller groups within the counties, totaling around 70,000 members, with Surrey contributing the largest share. Many members vehemently oppose any reduction in matches. This opposition frustrates the Professional Cricketers’ Association, whose members favor reform for better player welfare and quality of play.
In a last-ditch effort to sway undecided voters, the PGC may include an additional fixture in next season’s 50-over One Day Cup as a compromise to provide extra revenue, which would also be a part of the Championship vote.
