A glimmer of common sense?

Since the 2 division set-up in 2000 and creation of T20 in 2003;

We are 6th best at 40 overs in terms of total points accumulated (Glam 1, Essex 2, Surrey 3, Warks 4, Gloucs 5, Lancs & Notts =7, Middx 9, Sussex 10, Kent 11, Leics 12, Hants 13, Durham & N'hants =14, Yorks 16, Somerset 17 & Derby 18)

We are 10th best at 50 overs in terms of total points* accumulated (Gloucs 1, Lancs 2, Yorks 3, Essex 4, Warks 5, Sussex 6, Hants 7, Durham 8, Somerset 9, Notts 11, Leics & Surrey =12, Kent 14, Middx 15, N'hants 16, Derby 17, Glam 18)

We are 16th best at 20 overs in terms of total points* accumulated (Warks 1, Lancs 2, Leics 3, Surrey 4, Kent 5, N'hants 6, Essex 7, Gloucs 8, Sussex 9, Yorks 10, Somerset 11, Notts 12, Middx & Hants =13, Durham 15, Glam 17, Derby 18)

* Group stage points + additional 2 pts for each subsequent knock out round win

Some teams are good at all 3 - is there really such a big difference in approach between 20 and 40 overs? Why are we so bad, or is it the fact that the middle of the midlands, west and wales group is so competitive?

I think the Western group is so competitive..look:

Warwicks- nuff said re. bragging rights

Gloucs- think that Finals are their birthright

Glammy- while Mr.Russell is king, everyone has to play out of their skin

Hants- see above , but insert 'Bransgrove' for 'Russell'

Northants- don't Geez, Wiggers and Hall have something to prove against a certain team?