On the opening day of this year’s Hoofdklasse competition, VOC Rotterdam lost to Quick Haag by nine wickets with more than fifteen overs remaining, while Voorburg lost to HCC by four wickets, HCC taking until the 47th over to complete their victory.

Three days later, it was VOC who pushed VRA Amsterdam all the way in a high-scoring game, only finally conceding defeat in the 47th over, while Voorburg were skittled by Excelsior ’20 for 87 and lost in just 10.2 overs.

Yet under the Hoofdklasse’s rules, the winning teams in these games all received two points, while the losers, regardless of how well or badly they had done, received nothing.

You might think that over the course of the season – or even, as these examples indicate, over a couple of rounds – the differences even themselves out, but it remains a fair question whether the points allocation for an absolute thrashing and a hard-fought battle which is only decided in the final over should be exactly the same.

The traditional way of reflecting performance in the points awarded is through bonus points for batting and bowling.

The simplest form of this is to give, say, 10 points for a win, and up to a further five points for each of batting and bowling: you might, for example, receive a first batting point at 150, a second at 175, and so on up to 250, and a point for every two wickets taken.

Another variant is to give the winning side the full 20 points, and the losers up to 10 points according to the bonus points they have earned.

But the trouble with systems of this kind is that they aren’t really compatible with Duckworth/Lewis rules: how do you manage the bonus points when a side’s innings is reduced to, say, 25 overs?

This is probably the main reason that the ICC have adopted a system for ODIs which awards a bonus point on the basis of comparative run rates, rewarding a side which scores its runs at 1.25 the scoring rate of its opponents, and this notion has now been taken up in a number of domestic one-day competitions.

So if you’re chasing 200 in a 50-over match, you know that if you reach the target within 40 overs you will score an additional point. The bowling side, conversely, know that they must restrict you to under 160 if they are to earn that bonus.

In the West Indies’ KFC Cup they actually go a stage further, awarding a second bonus point to any team which achieves the win with a scoring rate twice that of the opponents or better.

Since under these rules any side that is bowled out is deemed to have used all their overs, you would get the second bonus point by dismissing the opposition and then knocking off the runs in less than 25 overs, or (in general) by bowling out a side batting second for less than half your score.

The usual system is to award four points for a win, the bonus point making five (and the second bonus point six, if you’re in the Caribbean).

Last Sunday, therefore, Excelsior, HCC and HBS would all have taken six points from their matches, Quick Haag five, and VRA four – a fair reflection of the margin of their victories.

And since the system works on proportionality, there’s no problem about adjusting it in the event of a rain-shortened game.

The awarding of bonus points on the basis introduced by the ICC, especially with the West Indian variant, means that a winning side gets full value for securing an easy victory. But it does nothing for a losing side which pushes its opponents all the way and succumbs by a narrow margin in the final overs.

It isn’t difficult, however, to produce a version of the run-rate method which addresses this problem.

All you have to do is give the losing side any bonus points which the winners don’t earn.

Or to put it another way, a match carries six points. You get four for the win. If it’s an even match, the losers get two. If the winners score at 1.25 times their opponents’ rate or better, the points allocation is 5:1; if they double the rate, it’s 6:0. Simple.

Cricket is a game of sub-plots: targets, personal milestones, swings in the balance of a game. One of the weaknesses of a two-points-or-nothing scenario is that it eliminates some of that, and it can kill a match off early once it becomes clear that one side has no chance of winning.

Under a variable points system, however, a team can still rescue something from a defeat, points which could be vital at the end of the season when the play-off places are decided.

Anything that makes players think more about their cricket is a good thing in my book – one of the benefits of the introduction of the Duckworth/Lewis system into the Hoofdklasse has been that it has encouraged a greater awareness of the value of every wicket, and it may be that powerplays will similarly promote a more tactical approach.

So here’s a challenge to the cricket-lovers on and off the fields of the Hoofdklasse and Eerste Klasse: as this season unfolds, why not think a bit about how the points system I’m proposing might affect the balance of the competition, or even the outcome of particular matches?

And if you conclude that it might add something to the game, then it’s a possible discussion point for next autumn’s consultation between the clubs and the KNCB Board.