So the clubs have decided not to endorse the 8 team leagues. There has been a lot of talk since the AGM of how vital this was for improving the standard of senior cricket in the NCU and how it is a travesty this has been rejected. What nonsense. For starters why didn't we hear all this talk about standards before the AGM?

When I predicted earlier this year that NCU clubs would have a poor Irish Senior Cup there was outrage from certain quarters within the area? The fact I was proved right didn't help matters. Are those people now accepting that standards have dropped or that NCU don't put enough emphasis on the ISC? Bearing in mind the weather over the last two seasons and the inadequacy of the rules to deal with the rain, passing this proposal should have been as predictable as a Shane Warne delivery to Mike Gatting.

All this talk about improving standards is a massive red herring. The Serial 12 proposal was about reducing the amount of cricket played in the top league and to deflect from the chaos surrounding rearrangements. This proposal was about axing league games to make room for cup games.

All 10 clubs in Section 1, sorry I mean the Premier League, should have voted for it. They lost nothing with two teams relegated at the end of the season and more free time in 2010. The fact one didn't should be to their credit. But Section 2 and 3 teams wanted to know what was in it for them. Well, no promotion no matter what your results and 4 teams relegated from Section 2 and 6 teams relegated from Section 3 with nothing in return is what's in it for them. No wonder it left them cold. The best they were offered was Section 2 would be called Premier League 2 and they could play their Professional in the Cup. (Even that is now unclear as your pro can play in some cup games but not others. What a mess.)

The NCU is not ‘Animal Farm' where some clubs are more equal than others. They all pay the same membership from Section 1, sorry Premier League to Section 4. Those clubs have a right to be promoted if their results warrant it. There were already big clubs poaching lower league players saying ‘you don't want to be stuck in that division for at least 2 years wasting your time, come and join us.'

This best versus best argument isn't the absolute answer. One of the problems affecting the league is the best players cannot play because of International commitments Nowadays the Ireland players are rarely available for club fixtures. If best versus best was the only answer then we should be promoting an Ulster League. But the NCU weren't proposing that.

Our biggest problem is not the quality of our cricketers but the quantity. We need more decent 1st XI players at almost every club. Our clubs must be encouraged to get involved in Youth Development programmes. We need to try to make our cricket as enjoyable as possible for all age groups. Enjoyment is something that has been missing from the top level for a number of years, unless of course you play for North Down.

(I remember when I was young bowling to my older brother in the back garden and being there for hours unable to get him out. Eventually I walked off in a huff because I wasn't prepared to let him bring up his 700. He couldn't understand why I didn't want to play anymore as he was enjoying himself hugely. So he declared on 696 not out and said I could bat if I would come out and play again. Three deliveries later I was out for 4 and he proceeded to bat again. I walked off again when he was 96 not out and never played another game in the back garden.)

We have a number of Cricket Development Officers in the union and I would like to see them more involved with clubs offering advice and guidance on the way forward. Resources are scarce and although I'm all in favour of promoting cricket outside of its traditional heartland it mustn't be done so at the expense of our clubs. In other words target your resources and time more effectively.

We then must ensure that the talented players receive the necessary specialist coaching and given appropriate development goals that can be achieved. This ensures every club can improve their standards. If the standard goes up in every club then the standard of cricket in the union goes up.

All this talk of negotiating with clubs who voted against it (Serial 12) and holding a Special General meeting to re-submit the proposal so we don't waste another year is just bullying, and is undemocratic. If time was of the essence then we should introduce it right now. But do you think Ballymena and Woodvale would vote to remain in Section 2? No, I don't think so either.

One commentator has recently argued that we should concentrate on 16 teams not 20 to ensure talent is not diluted. His reasoning is that small clubs should accept their lowly status and let their best players go to the top clubs. They should stop being selfish and they should be delighted when their ex-players bring success to that bigger club.

I have to wonder what has changed from June when the same commentator said:

'The proposal to restrict the leagues to eight teams has some merit but are we messing around with the format too soon after introducing the two-up, two-down promotion and relegation structure that gave the leagues such a boost last season? The league structure is a hierarchy system based on performance and it matters little whether the leagues are called premier or qualifying, because the best teams will ascend. It begs the question why change?'

Why indeed? The reality is that Serial 12 would have concentrated playing resources on 8 clubs not 16. I believe every club should be seen as a centre of excellence for developing future cricketers. The success of two-up two-down was because clubs saw an opportunity to fast track up through the leagues. You could call it a bigger stick and a bigger carrot. Serial 12 for clubs in Sections 2 and 3 was a huge stick and no carrot!
No doubt this proposal will be back again in the future. If so, let's hope there is something in it for everyone and it is worth voting for no matter what Section your club is in. Who wants a pig in a poke?