Pitching in to stop Brighton and Hove play area changes (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Pitching in to stop Brighton and Hove play area changes
3:10pm Thursday 21st February 2013 in News By Tim Ridgway, Local government reporter
Duncan Henderson and David Mounfield of The Nagoya Killer Whales Cricket Club
Cricketers claim a plan from a rival club to take over the upkeep of pitches is “privatising” public space.
St Peter’s Cricket Club has been based in Preston Park, Brighton, for 130 years.
As Brighton and Hove City Council looks to make tens of millions of pounds of savings in the coming years, bosses at the club have put forward a plan to take control of the pitches for the majority of the summer.
Representatives at St Peter’s claim it will allow the club, which currently has 70 adult and 150 junior members, to grow while improving the facilities for the wider community.
But the Nagoya Killer Whales, a casual team that use the public facilities, claim it will restrict the times it and other teams can play.
Duncan Henderson, the secretary of Nagoya Killer Whales, which used the pitch six times last year, said: “This is a partial privatisation of public recreational land and absolutely unacceptable, possibly illegal.
“Either it is municipally owned and run for public use or it isn't. You cannot be half pregnant.”
Lottery bids
David Corney, the chairman of St Peter’s, said he believed the changes were for the “greater good”.
He said: “What it will allow us to do is the raise the capital through lottery funding to bring the club house into a fit state of repair, bring the wickets up to a decent standard for league cricket and install an artificial surface for the kids to play on.
“We can do none of this without a long term lease of the wickets and clubhouse.
“From Nagoya Killóer Whales’ perspective nothing will change except we will charge them, not the council.”
Waiting decision
Mr Corney said the plan, which he hoped would be complete in three to four months, was for it to have control of the square from April to September on three evenings a week, plus the weekends.
The council would still maintain the outfield.
A council spokeswoman said: “Officers and councillors are looking into the ideas being put forward to assess the possibilities and potential benefits of a new arrangement.
“No decision has been made at this time.”
Talking point: To what extent do you welcome or oppose the plans to hand over the cricket pitches to St Peter's Cricket Club?
Share your views by commenting below or write in to The Argus letters pages at letters@theargus.co.uk.
See the latest news headlines from The Argus:
- Albion players cleared of sexually assaulting a 19-year-old woman
- Your say: Are the Greens fit to run Brighton and Hove City Council?
- Brighton and Hove council boss apologises for rubbish problems
- Designs for life - designs students create products for the future
- Still time to join the Ribbonwalk at Petworth House
Add us to your circles on Google+
Comments(18)
skippy981
says...
10:53pm Thu 21 Feb 13
As an ex cricketer all I can say is councils can't or won't maintain pitches to the same standard as cricket clubs it's a fact ask any Cricket club who maintain their own pitches.
montypanesar
says...
11:52pm Thu 21 Feb 13
The Ghost of Fred Binney
says...
9:02am Fri 22 Feb 13
The Council are desperately trying to save money and there are any numbers of grants around for Clubs with some security of tenure to improve facilities which a couple of tiny minded Shop Stewards are trying to prevent. Its not only ludicrous its also pathetic.
As someone who has no connection at all with St Peters CC I wish them the very best of luck with their plans
Jet_40
says...
11:43am Fri 22 Feb 13
nts and continue to promote sport to a wide range of local children would seem a good plan. the added benefit that it will probably save the cash strapped council (& therefore taxpayers) some money should make this a great idea!
Nogoya CC may have concerns, but if they sit down and talk with St Peters I'm sure they would find that the facility they currently use (and would continue to use) is almost certainly going to improve. Why do they think that is a bad idea? We can only hope the Council do not let the unfounded worries of a very few, outway the huge benefits to the many that would come from this plan.
Mushy82
says...
12:35pm Fri 22 Feb 13
St Peters Women's and Girls Co-Ordinator
says...
1:50pm Fri 22 Feb 13
I was embraced at this club as a stranger and non player a few years ago now, I have no idea why a few individuals would have such a critical view of constructive future community plans, especially not actually having discussed it with St Peters. Despite continual efforts from the club to do so.
We don't want to privatise the park, we want to improve it at no cost to anyone but ourselves. Pitch improvement would benefit anyone that uses the ground.
St Peters have always included everyone that wants to play cricket and other sports, irrelevant of ability or status.
We maintain the club house and have made it available or shared the use with many clubs including hockey, cycling, touring teams, community sports clubs, private sports clubs, schools and Sussex who have used the ground in the summer for festivals/tournament
s ect. The whole community in fact!
This will not change!!
This is a positive constructive plan to include the everyone!!!!
To quote the article "you can't be half pregnant" you also, "can't play half a game of cricket because the first innings damaged the pitch beyond use."
Extremely frustrating?
Yes!!!
Especially to a team of children that have worked all season trying to win and can't because its to dangerous to play.
Games have been abandoned due to damaged pitches as a result of lack of maintenance, the dangers that can have for the players is substantial. You have to effectively loose a match because you can't play.
Many players of all abilities discuss the condition of the pitches at St Peters at most matches. As I am sure most people who have played cricket will understand, the issues of a damaged pitch and the effects that can have on any game whether a pub team or a team in division 1 is upsetting, frustrating and detrimental to anyone's game.
Perhaps, communicate the issues, discuss and decide on a plan of action may be an approach that could be adopted. Rather than criticism and fear of developmental change.
AlC2012
says...
2:19pm Fri 22 Feb 13
Contained within this article itself seem to be all the justification needed for giving tenure over to St Peters CC - with 150 junior members and 70 adult members it seems a very logical thing to do.
St Peters CC are providing a great community service, and this should be embraced by all - not least the council, but also any amateur cricket side who wants to see cricket flourish and be enjoyed by all.
To me it would seem the greatest injustice here would be to not allow the community access to the best cricketing facilities possible, which would be what happens if St Peters CC are denied tenure due to the objections of a very small minority.
JatinP
says...
3:08pm Fri 22 Feb 13
We strive to be better and with raw dedication and the hard work of a handful of volunteers, we've dragged the club from the brink. The only competitive league playing club in Brighton, the clubhouse has been broken into, we have spent countless thousands of pounds on pitch and club house costs and embraced Preston Park as our home.
Getting access to the preparation of the pitches is vital for our progress and providing a genuine platform for budding young local cricketers to play a diverse brand of cricket, across a range of ages at different levels.
I respect it is a public space and should remain that way. The club is not proposing private ownership nor blocking casual teams using the facility. For years, we have had an amicable relationship with all teams who have used the park and welcomed the support of local people. If anything, we have struggled to gain further support from the local community outside of parents and players. In conclusion, we require the ability to prepare pitches so that we can grow as a club, be as competitive as possible and ultimately look after a resource we have been investing in for over 100 years.
JamesH82
says...
3:40pm Fri 22 Feb 13
StuB72
says...
5:07pm Fri 22 Feb 13
Percy Tantrums
says...
5:45pm Fri 22 Feb 13
Inforapenny
says...
8:41pm Fri 22 Feb 13
The club is run down and in need of money. Much of the clubhouse is unusable. Their proposals will benefit everyone including the comically named bunch who may not be up for getting half pregnant but are well on the way to being half baked.
Mockers82
says...
8:48pm Fri 22 Feb 13
Is this a political stance that the 'Whales' are taking, if so shouldn't it be directed at the council?
St Peters has only the interests and benefit of the local community and cricketers throughout Sussex in mind when trying to maintain and improve the site in question.
if the Killer Whales have any serious intent to play cricket, surely they would contact our chairman, who is understanding and approachable to resolve any issues or just for clarification.
Big_Mack
says...
2:01pm Sat 23 Feb 13
I think Mr JatinP speaks for us all...
pointystick
says...
11:08am Mon 25 Feb 13
St Peter’s offer of upkeep in return for sole use (with tolerance to our use excepted) is not the "win win" it might appear. For this year, yes, we will get use at we are told "historical levels only". As we play between six to nine games each year, what is that historical level? And who watches the watchmen? We've had pitches disputed in the past by St Peter's, despite them being clearly marked out in our name. MUCH more importantly, what about other casual teams who want to play there in the future?
Last year, St Peter's wrote to us, telling us that an agreement had been reached with the Council that they had sole use of the pitches, and that we should look to book elsewhere; and that they had written to other clubs saying likewise. We enquired further at the council and found the truth to be otherwise. No agreement had been finalised. That would explain the apparent lack of demand from other clubs this year, making their claims look more legitimate.
No attempt to contact us was made this year. We were also told when contacting the council in the first instance that those pitches weren't available, so it seems to have been a degree of collusion from both ends.
The point of our objection is not so much whether WE can play, in the short term at least that is assured, but what of other clubs that would like to play in future on Brighton's most accessible set of pitches? They will, it seems, be denied, and forced to use inferior, less public transport and family friendly pitches on the periphary? Hardly green; hardly egalitarian.
Surely, with all their resources St Peter’s can afford to make improvements AND allow other smaller, casual clubs to play on these pitches? That is our objection; that the future use of a public space would be denied to other users.
Lately, St Peter's have been in touch, there is a possibility from their tone that they would in principle allow other teams in future to book the pitches. If that transpires in the terms of the lease, then we would have no objections left to St Peter's proposal. But if we had not kicked up a fuss, I doubt this would have been forthcoming.
Big Velvet
says...
1:27pm Tue 26 Feb 13
The fact St Peters seem to have remained at Preston Park for so long whilst maintaining such a large membership really is miraculous when you look at the fate of other similar municipal grounds that have only been able to attract part time casual users. It's not even that far of a reach to say that without St Peters' 130 year commitment to Preston Park that "Brighton's most accessible set of pitches" may have fallen into disrepair long before the Killer Whales even wanted to start booking a handful of pitches each year there.
Looking at the figures it seems St Peters have a large number of members from the local community and a range of junior teams as well. Having such a long running and popular amateur sports club is a rare breed in central Brighton and is something that I believe should be supported and allowed to flourish. If the council do indeed want to save money and there is a proven community club like St Peters willing to make a contribution that would enable the council to do so then I can't really see any feasible objection.
The Killer Whales need to think about what is more important... Six games of casual cricket a year or the long term sustainability of a cricket ground in Preston Park that has been part of local sport and the local community for decades.
------
"Shot doggy".
Hot_Roid
says...
4:18pm Tue 26 Feb 13
The attempts to frame this as "evil giant private company taking over nice public space" are completely misplaced. St Peters are, effectively, a charity. They return no profit. Nobody “makes money” from the club. The club is funded solely by its own members, and exists (and has done for well over 100 years) quite simply to provide facilities and an environment in which local Brighton people can play cricket in the summer.
I chuckled at the Killer Whales’ commenter above referring to "a club with the resources of St Peters"... If only they knew. The only “resource” at St Peters is the time and dedication of the volunteers who keep the club afloat. And it has been that way for well over a century.
It is getting to a point now, however, where the facilities at Preston Park are positively holding back the Club. St Peters have always had difficulty retaining their best players, due in no small part to the "village green" facilities at Preston Park. Anyone who plays local cricket in and around Brighton and Hove will have seen the rapid deterioration of council-maintained wickets in recent years. Indeed, league games have been called off, and St Peters penalised, due to “unplayable” or “dangerous” wickets at council facilities (over which St Peters have no control). That situation is completely unacceptable – and downright embarrassing – for a club of St Peters’ history and stature.
There is no grand conspiracy here between St Peters and the Council. There is no evil plot to freeze out small local occasional clubs. It is solely about improving the desperately lacking wickets and facilities at Preston Park which have been neglected for decades.
If the Killer Whales took a more sensible approach, rather than crying off to their buddy at the Argus, they would find themselves playing their six games in far better facilities controlled by CRICKETERS, for CRICKETERS.
As it is, all the Whales have achieved by going to the press is to alienate the very people they should be working with, to secure better facilities for hundreds of local senior and junior cricketers.
Smart move, chaps...
But so long as you (and these other hypothetical local pub sides of the future) get their 6 games a year, right!?
nelsonvivas says...
9:03pm Thu 21 Feb 13