East Belmont Cricket Club president says new GCA rules helped create an ‘inequitable result’ in first grade grand final

The president of a Geelong cricket club, who’s first grade lost in a grand final to a GCA powerhouse, says new rules allowing teams to draw deciders had created an “inequitable” result.

East Belmont batter Sean O'Neill made an unbeaten 117 against North Geelong. Photo: Supplied.

The Geelong Cricket Association’s new rules surrounding draws are “not fit for purpose” in finals cricket, a GCA1 president believes.

North Geelong successfully negotiated 88 overs to force a draw against East Belmont at South Barwon Reserve on Sunday to win its fifth consecutive premiership, under new rules introduced by the GCA for the 2023-24 season.

The association introduced new playing conditions – effectively allowing a higher ranked team to draw a semi-final or grand final – to create a “more dynamic two-day playing environment” and “natural match tension” and encourage strategic thinking and more interesting games, a missive to clubs in June, 2022 revealed.

North Geelong won its fifth-straight GCA1 first grade premiership. Photo: Wes Cusworth.

In an email to East Belmont in August of that year, the association’s pennant chairman Sydney Sykstus said the two-day format was a “glorified extension” of the 50-over tournament and did not support a team that “has had a bad day at the office”.

“These changes will bring back the true meaning of a two-day match,” Sykstus said.

“We understand the apprehension; we need to be brave and confident that the changes will get interest back into our two-day format.”

However, East Belmont recorded its concerns at the time, stressing it might incentivise teams to employ “boring, defensive tactics” with a view to drawing matches rather than winning them, leading to “unattractive, negative cricket”, even pitch doctoring.

Phil Visser was named man of the match for his 153-ball 88. Picture: Wes Cusworth.

The club’s president Tom Scannell told this publication this week there had been some “pretty strong opinions” within the Geelong cricket community, and his club, about the new rules and the grand final result “undoubtedly served to amplify those”.

He said the association had been “proactive and well intentioned” with the rule changes, but overly optimistic about the perceived benefits they would create.

“While not entirely without merit, I don’t feel that the new format has delivered a net benefit to the competition, and it would be fair to say that my overall opinion is an unfavourable one,” Scannell said.

“In my view, the format as it currently exists is not really fit for purpose for a finals series.

“You’ve got incentive to set a game up and push for a victory (during the home and away season), because you get three points for a draw and six points for win.

“In a final, if you’re the top ranked team, you’ve got zero incentive whatsoever to play that way, particularly when batting second.

North Geelong batter Ned Cooper made 29 off 112 balls.

“You can go into the contest and from the very outset you’ve got one side with no incentive to actually win the game.”

However, Scannell stressed it was not a sour grapes from East Belmont and the club had concerns with the new rules for nearly two years.

The GCA’s rules were changed to mirror those implemented in Victorian Premier Cricket.

However, Scannell said the new rules suited Premier more, as it played more overs in a day and grand finals were played over three days compared to the GCA’s two.

“There’s a lot more time in the game to set up a result (in Premier Cricket), and draws are actually more difficult and challenging to play for,” he said.

“(The GCA) advocated all the way along that it was going to overwhelmingly result in more aggressive, attacking, entertaining cricket being played.

“I think it’s probably been demonstrated, not only on the weekend, but throughout the course of the season, that isn’t always necessarily the case.

East Belmont batter Sean O'Neill made an unbeaten 117 against North Geelong. Photo: Supplied.

“In certain circumstances it actually engineers the exact opposite outcome of that.

“Sides have often been incentivised to play negatively or defensively to secure a draw.”

He said the rules still had some merit during the home and away season, but not in finals.

“While there have been some fairly dour results, there have also been numerous examples that I’ve been witness to where it has actually created quite exciting match situations,” he said.

“I just think in the context of a finals series, where the top ranked side literally has no incentive whatsoever to try and achieve a result ... it just skews things really disproportionately in favour of the side who holds that top ranked spot.

“I feel it doesn’t put both sides on an even footing (in finals).”

He said it led to an “inequitable result” on Sunday and the majority of the feedback to the new rules — after discussions with teammates, opposition clubs or neutral observers – was negative.

“I’ve found the range of responses to run a bit of a gamut from intrigued scepticism to outright bafflement,” he said.

“You’ll come across people who just can’t wrap their heads around it, where they’re just like: ‘What’s the point of that? What possible benefit can that deliver?’

“I’m yet to have a conversation with anybody who has said: ‘That’s a fantastic concept, I love the intention behind that’.

“A lot of people just say: ‘That’s an absolute load of rubbish, what are they thinking?’

“When your most positive responses are still laced with an element of trepidation, it’s perhaps not the most glowing endorsement.”

However, he said the rules were not made up on a whim by the GCA, and there was clear rationale behind them with proper consultation.

Scannell did not want to see one rule for the home and away and another for the finals, but wondered if North Geelong’s premiership success felt a touch hollow compared to previous March triumphs.

“I’m not sure it’s the way that North Geelong would especially have wanted to win a flag either,” he said.

“Don’t get me wrong, I’d rather to be in their position than ours, at least they can sit back with medals around their necks and celebrate being premiers.

“You’d love to be reflecting on the contest and celebrate having outplayed the opposition rather than be crowned premiers in the manner that they ultimately have.

“I don’t think it was really a great result for anyone.

North Geelong's Phil Visser was the player of the match from the GCA1 first grade grand final. Picture: Wes Cusworth.

“It was certainly not a good one for us, probably somewhat hollow for them and for the neutral observer, a real fizzer of a result and a somewhat unfitting conclusion to both the match and the season as a whole.”

In a statement, association president Rob Vines said it welcomed feedback from clubs following the season and 23-24 had seen, for the first time, the introduction of a “more strategic and tactical” style of two-day cricket.

“In an effort to provide a clearer point of difference from the traditional extended limited overs style of two-day cricket,” Vines said.

“There have been a range of opinions shared over the course of the season about the merits, benefits and success of the current playing conditions and formats across the entire GCA men’s competition, including the recent finals series.

“In a rapidly evolving community cricket landscape, the GCA board is well aware of the continuing need to provide a wide and diverse range of playing formats to maximise participation and playing opportunities for all standards of GCA cricket.”

North Geelong Cricket Club declined to comment.

Originally published as East Belmont Cricket Club president says new GCA rules helped create an ‘inequitable result’ in first grade grand final