Twenty20 cricket is supposed to be revolutionising the game. The intention is to make cricket more exciting. Matches are played at a time when the spectators are free. Matches are completed in a time roughly double that needed for soccer and rugby.

How, then, do the ECB expect to attract the next generation of cricket followers when they treat the spectators like mud?

Supporters had taken time off work and made long journeys to be at the Riverside (the match between Durham and Yorkshire was called off at the last minute due to Yorkshire's failure to properly register Rafiq in a previous game) and Durham had put in a lot of effort to stage it.

The match should have been played. A Durham victory would have solved all problems. A Yorkshire win would have meant that a decision about punishment could have been made later. I don't think Notts or Glamorgan could have had any complaints.

Of course it is all about money – what about the money and time lost by supporters? The ECB won't be compensating them.

I hope Twenty20 takes off but if the ECB ignores spectators this will not happen. Prices must also be reasonable. Soaring prices is also why some people are priced out of attending football. Sporting authorities must not alienate their fans.

From: Keith Sykes

I refer to the very interesting article on rugby league referees by John Ledger (Yorkshire Post July 14) and give the following response:

Respect is earned, not demanded. Red Hall mandarins are using referees to enhance their strategy.

I do not approve of 'vitriolic' attacks on web sites, but what avenues of expression are available to clubs' loyal fans?

It is they who spend their hard-earned cash on supporting their teams every week.

Referees to fans are the untouchables.

Super League fans complain of poor refereeing standards, how about standards in the lower leagues?

Recent incidents I have witnessed, which affected results, include the very late flattening of a kicker after he had kicked and the ref's decision to "play-on".

A similar flattening incident put the kicker out of action for at least four weeks, and again it was "play-on".

I have seen referees lose count of the number of tackles, allow three markers at play the ball, and, the most common, allow markers not being square.

Why must the referee and his two assistants line up with the defending team?

This allows the attacking team to make forward passes with little chance of being caught, especially from play the ball.

I support a National League Two team and on a positive note I would like to say that Referee Merrick, in my opinion, is the best in our division. He keeps teams 10 metres apart, not short or long 10 metres !

Yes Mr Ganson (controller of referees), when refs have earned respect by doing the job they are paid for efficiently, then you will not have to ask for respect, it will be yours by right.

From: Mr M Walton, Armthorpe, Doncaster.

I must write to protest after Luton Town have been handed a 30-point deduction for the forthcoming season.

Former Tory Minister Brian Mawhinney and his cronies at the Football League and FA ought to be sacked and replaced by somebody interested in keeping the grassroots of football alive.

The League's insolvency policy must have wholesale review to stop more clubs going the way of Scarborough. With the likes of Halifax and Boston barely clinging on in the Unibond League, surely the case for a fairer distribution of the Sky money to the lower leagues is needed.

If Lord Mawhinney wants a future broader than the 'Big Four' plus a few hangers-on he must find a better way of dealing with clubs in financial difficulties than the present points deduction formula.

Surely, just a little of the money from the Premiership could be used to safeguard the grassroots of football.