Positive Pears explore hope of staying at New Road

Of the 30 worst floods recorded since Worcestershire began playing County Championship cricket at New Road in 1899, 19 of them have occurred within the past 25 years

Worcestershire have issued a more positive pre-season bulletin regarding the long-term future at their flood-ravaged 126-year-old County Championship home.

Pears chief executive Ashley Giles revealed on the eve of the season a year ago that "maybe" the time was right to leave their iconic New Road site following a winter of particularly severe flooding.

But the club have now altered their stance to admit they are, in fact, seeking an alternative, rather than a replacement, home ground to use when any future floods cause prolonged damage to their famous, much-loved riverside base.

"It is essential we have a sustainable, long-term solution to protect the club's future," said Giles in a prepared statement, issued before the Pears' annual annual general meeting next week.

In the short term, the club have announced that, in the wake of sustained dry weather, they will still be able to stage their opening home Championship fixture on 25 April against Durham - in contrast to a year ago when they had to host their first two home games at Kidderminster and did not stage a Worcester home match until 25 May.

But, as to New Road's long-term future, former England spin bowler Giles admits the club are still digesting the outcomes of "many feasibility studies".

The Pears start the season on Friday 5 April with three successive away games - against Somerset, Yorkshire and Essex - as now factored in on an annual basis by the England and Wales Cricket Board.

"While we have successfully adapted to flooding for many years, it is becoming increasingly unmanageable," said Giles.

"Each season, we face greater disruption, significant financial strain and mounting barriers to investment in our facilities.

"We have explored every possible option. This work has focused on two key areas: first, what options exist to mitigate or prevent flooding, including potential redevelopment, and second, what alternatives are available should we need to consider an additional venue to protect the club's future.

"While our investigations into an additional venue remain ongoing, we continue to work closely with an internationally respected company to assess the critical questions of what, where, how, and when, for use alongside Visit Worcestershire New Road."

Giles added that the club's analysis has focused on two possible approaches: "learning to live" with the water, or attempting to stop it altogether.

He pointed out that long-standing Worcestershire member and resident flood expert Andrew Thomas had provided the club detailed records dating back to 2002.

"His data, supported by Environment Agency statistics, shows that flooding incidents have increased in both frequency and severity," Giles said.

"The financial impact is considerable, spanning flood clean-up costs, relocations to venues such as Kidderminster, lost revenue from food and beverage sales, and the broader commercial impact of diminished venue confidence. Furthermore, redevelopment is subject to significant restrictions.

"Apart from the financial and regulatory challenges, our playing and practice facilities are facing long-term deterioration due to ongoing flooding. Expert assessments indicate that all pitches require complete reconstruction, a process that could take up to a decade to finish."

Flood barriers 'neither feasible nor sustainable'

Giles added the club has explored the possibility of flood prevention methods, like a wall or embankment but said expert analysis had identified "numerous challenges".

"A protective structure, likely at least 3.7m high, would incur an estimated cost of between £5m-20m, with the likelihood of costs exceeding the upper estimate," he said.

"Even if funding were secured, access during floods would remain problematic, particularly in ensuring compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act. The remaining ground would require substantial redevelopment, utilities may need to be raised and there would be a significant risk of structural failure under extreme conditions.

"Furthermore, national and local policies prohibit flood defences that increase risks to third parties, and our commissioned flood risk assessment confirms that building a barrier would significantly impact surrounding flood levels.

"The structure would displace a huge volume of water requiring compensation on an adjacent site, an option that is not available. Additionally, the construction of such a defence would fundamentally alter the aesthetic and environmental character. Water may still seep through, continuing to interrupt cricket and necessitating a costly and complex pumping system.

"Given these findings, engineering a solution to prevent flooding is neither feasible nor sustainable."