Author Topic: Discussion re 100 comp split from G thread  (Read 1092 times)

Offline LeedsExile

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1487
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #15 on: August 07, 2021, 04:12:55 PM »
What is the 90/90 format? I have not heard of it before.

Offline dazedpenguin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 402
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #16 on: August 07, 2021, 05:25:21 PM »

Offline bobw

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #17 on: August 07, 2021, 05:56:51 PM »
There's also the 90/90 format which is launching next year in the UAE. I can see other tournaments using some of the ideas from the Hundred such as having to move fielders back inside the circle when overs aren't bowled by a certain time, but not the whole concept.

I wish the tournament had been T20 and particularly a revamped Blast, but then the only way to do that would be to have 2 divisions and concentrate the TV coverage on the top one. Inevitably everything would gravitate to the test hosting counties, much as is happening with the franchises. I honestly don't see where we go now. 4 competitions aren't sustainable, the schedule is a mess- and does no favours to the test team- and yet can the small counties survive without the Blast?

There is also the problem that the Hundred is supposed to introduce a new wave of cricket fans. Unfortunatly the Hundred falls at the end of the vast majority of clubs stopping their colts programs. there will be nowhere for all the new fans to take up cricket until next april. Will they remember cricket by then?

Offline neil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1074
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #18 on: August 07, 2021, 06:24:02 PM »
Neil, Neil. "I quite like the hundred". Oh dear. There's a posse (and I said 'posse') being set up as I write this...

Yeah well

Some of us are stuck at home a lot and see all of our cricket on TV

 ;D ;D

I have no problem with T20 and if The Hundred brings some much needed youth into cricket that's all good with me. I do understand, though, that the impact it has had on other forms of the game is an issue

T20 is different because it stays reasonably close to the establied limited overs format, without the unnecessary complexification (countdowns, little white cards etc.). Furthermore the T20 at least retains the counties, albeit with stupid nicknames, rather than a cynical exercise to destroy the county system.

And we retain the current system(s) and they wither on the vine

 I was bought up watching county cricket from the edge of the boundary at Ilford. I've always supported Essex - and always will - but I don't have any issues with attempted innovations to attract a different kind of support - especially in the short firms of the game.

Look at this forum - the majority of us are not exactly in the first flush of youth....

 ;D ;D

"And we retain the current systems and they wither on the vine"

Neil, are you sure?
From the last part of the nineteenth century up to 1963, the game, bar a little tinkering with bonus points, barely changed in structure.
Since then, and more particularly since the start of this century, the changes have been on an monumental scale, too many to list here but I will do if you wish.

These new competitions or restructuring of leagues have largely been for the better (despite initial scepticism), but the very essence of what cricket is fundamentally about has been left untampered.

Until now that is, with garish colours dominating the tv screen, 5 ball overs (or not overs?), match hero caps, players affiliated to eight forgettable franchises by money and nothing else; hit and giggle knockabouts that you have forgotten about the following day (at the latest), and most sickeningly, several commentators who I highly respected beforehand, now sucking up to this American style hype.

Not one of these mercenaries has been able to explain to me how the reduction of 20 balls from the T20 competition magically produces a competition which the BBC in particular go into collective orgasms over.

With the advent of the throwaway society however, let's hope this is one competition which will "wither on the vine" before the 2022 fixtures come out.

No

I am not sure

Equally I am sure that you are not sure that that won't happen...

 :D :D

I guess that one of the ideas behind the "Hundred" was to change from the basic 20/20 format to something identifiably different. And that's not easy. Garish clothes dominating the TV screen was one of the earlier criticisms of the 20/20. Sadly (being an old git) I recall some of the initial qualms about the Gillette Cup - and, as you say, there have been massive changes - often opposed by the traditionalists - but, generally, ending up by becoming part of the furniture. Would cricket have survived if all we had was the old County Championship?

And all that you say I get and accept. But, personally, as I have said I am enjoying 'The Hundred". I don't forget it the next day and, yes, quite a bit of the razzamatazz is forgettable - but there were fun bits too - liked seeing Darren Sammy DJing for example. I'd definitely do away with Kevin Pietersen though!

In the end it's horses for courses. You guys can (and do) I am sure choose not to watch. Others (and I hope this includes youngsters) can do the opposite. Hopefully, at the end of all this we come out with a balance that suits as many people as possible - and keeps as many forms  of cricket going as possible. For sure I want to see Essex CCC as an entity playing lots of competitive cricket - if that's combined with 'The Hundred" or whatever that produces finance for the game as a whole and attracts a younger audience then that's ideal

Sure that may not happen - equally it might do so. If we don't try we won't know.








Offline Alex

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 908
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #19 on: August 07, 2021, 08:45:42 PM »
Neil, Neil. "I quite like the hundred". Oh dear. There's a posse (and I said 'posse') being set up as I write this...

Yeah well

Some of us are stuck at home a lot and see all of our cricket on TV

 ;D ;D

I have no problem with T20 and if The Hundred brings some much needed youth into cricket that's all good with me. I do understand, though, that the impact it has had on other forms of the game is an issue

T20 is different because it stays reasonably close to the establied limited overs format, without the unnecessary complexification (countdowns, little white cards etc.). Furthermore the T20 at least retains the counties, albeit with stupid nicknames, rather than a cynical exercise to destroy the county system.

And we retain the current system(s) and they wither on the vine

 I was bought up watching county cricket from the edge of the boundary at Ilford. I've always supported Essex - and always will - but I don't have any issues with attempted innovations to attract a different kind of support - especially in the short firms of the game.

Look at this forum - the majority of us are not exactly in the first flush of youth....

 ;D ;D

"And we retain the current systems and they wither on the vine"

Neil, are you sure?
From the last part of the nineteenth century up to 1963, the game, bar a little tinkering with bonus points, barely changed in structure.
Since then, and more particularly since the start of this century, the changes have been on an monumental scale, too many to list here but I will do if you wish.

These new competitions or restructuring of leagues have largely been for the better (despite initial scepticism), but the very essence of what cricket is fundamentally about has been left untampered.

Until now that is, with garish colours dominating the tv screen, 5 ball overs (or not overs?), match hero caps, players affiliated to eight forgettable franchises by money and nothing else; hit and giggle knockabouts that you have forgotten about the following day (at the latest), and most sickeningly, several commentators who I highly respected beforehand, now sucking up to this American style hype.

Not one of these mercenaries has been able to explain to me how the reduction of 20 balls from the T20 competition magically produces a competition which the BBC in particular go into collective orgasms over.

With the advent of the throwaway society however, let's hope this is one competition which will "wither on the vine" before the 2022 fixtures come out.

No

I am not sure

Equally I am sure that you are not sure that that won't happen...

 :D :D

I guess that one of the ideas behind the "Hundred" was to change from the basic 20/20 format to something identifiably different. And that's not easy. Garish clothes dominating the TV screen was one of the earlier criticisms of the 20/20. Sadly (being an old git) I recall some of the initial qualms about the Gillette Cup - and, as you say, there have been massive changes - often opposed by the traditionalists - but, generally, ending up by becoming part of the furniture. Would cricket have survived if all we had was the old County Championship?

And all that you say I get and accept. But, personally, as I have said I am enjoying 'The Hundred". I don't forget it the next day and, yes, quite a bit of the razzamatazz is forgettable - but there were fun bits too - liked seeing Darren Sammy DJing for example. I'd definitely do away with Kevin Pietersen though!

In the end it's horses for courses. You guys can (and do) I am sure choose not to watch. Others (and I hope this includes youngsters) can do the opposite. Hopefully, at the end of all this we come out with a balance that suits as many people as possible - and keeps as many forms  of cricket going as possible. For sure I want to see Essex CCC as an entity playing lots of competitive cricket - if that's combined with 'The Hundred" or whatever that produces finance for the game as a whole and attracts a younger audience then that's ideal

Sure that may not happen - equally it might do so. If we don't try we won't know.
You might as well go and post somewhere else because you can't be an Essex fan if you support the Hundred. Forget the gimmicks, the coverage, the format and look at the bigger picture. This competition is the first step towards the removal of Essex County Cricket Club as a full time sporting club that competes at the top level of English domestic cricket. Why would any Essex 'fan" support a competition designed to aide the cull of Essex Cricket?

Anyone supporting the Hundred from Essex might as well go and buy a Surrey membership as they'll be the closest based full time cricket club to the county of by the end of the decade.

Offline essexfan548

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1794
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #20 on: August 07, 2021, 09:05:45 PM »
Can we please restrict multiple quoting as it's hard to read.

Thanks, all :)

Online nat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5368
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #21 on: August 07, 2021, 09:05:53 PM »
Yep you must be very naive to not see that The H*****d is designed to destroy professional county cricket.

Offline LeedsExile

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1487
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #22 on: August 08, 2021, 07:31:54 AM »
Have to agree with Alex. There is nothing good about the Hundred.

Offline oldhasbeen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #23 on: August 08, 2021, 08:14:18 AM »
Can we please restrict multiple quoting as it's hard to read.

Thanks, all :)

Very true, Mr Moderator.

Could you possibly start another section on the 100 and shunt the related posts her into it? as T20 and the One Day Cup have their own sections, this would be logical.

Thanks!

Offline smandlej

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #24 on: August 08, 2021, 08:33:04 AM »
I'm not sure Neil has looked at this logically.

There are only so many summer months - and we are already playing championship cricket in spring and autumn - to fit in four domestic competitions plus internationals.

There are only so many county cricketers so, if you play two domestic competitions concurrently, some will be unavailable for one of the competitions, which will therefore be devalued. 

England play all three of the international formats (Test Matches, One Day and T20): if The 16.4 is played concurrently with either domestic One Day or T20 cricket, every year there will be players who get no practice in these formats while they're playing The 16.4.  If we wish to compete at the highest level in One Day and T20 cricket, this is not acceptable and, at some point, the ECB will acknowledge this.

The alternative is to play The 16.4 concurrently with championship cricket, which would mean moving matches to summer - unlikely.  Or we could play a lot less championship cricket and T20 to provide room for The 16.4.  The loss of T20 income would be a severe blow to many counties and the ECB know this.  That leaves championship cricket: at best, the 18 counties would play far fewer games, still in the spring and autumn; at worst, the number of counties would be cut to allow a full schedule of championship matches between fewer teams.

Lynda

Offline ytsejam1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 312
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #25 on: August 08, 2021, 11:09:52 AM »
I'm not sure Neil has looked at this logically.

There are only so many summer months - and we are already playing championship cricket in spring and autumn - to fit in four domestic competitions plus internationals.

There are only so many county cricketers so, if you play two domestic competitions concurrently, some will be unavailable for one of the competitions, which will therefore be devalued. 

England play all three of the international formats (Test Matches, One Day and T20): if The 16.4 is played concurrently with either domestic One Day or T20 cricket, every year there will be players who get no practice in these formats while they're playing The 16.4.  If we wish to compete at the highest level in One Day and T20 cricket, this is not acceptable and, at some point, the ECB will acknowledge this.

The alternative is to play The 16.4 concurrently with championship cricket, which would mean moving matches to summer - unlikely.  Or we could play a lot less championship cricket and T20 to provide room for The 16.4.  The loss of T20 income would be a severe blow to many counties and the ECB know this.  That leaves championship cricket: at best, the 18 counties would play far fewer games, still in the spring and autumn; at worst, the number of counties would be cut to allow a full schedule of championship matches between fewer teams.

Lynda

Spot on and accurate post. The "naivety" (and that's being generous) of those who cannot see where this "toy town" hundred farce is going to lead to in regards to the future of CC, is staggering or sad (take your pick!!).

Offline bobw

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #26 on: August 08, 2021, 11:36:49 AM »
The franchise teams will be fine for as long as the counties continue. However, once the counties have gone part time, where will the players comefrom. The counties will not be able to afford to provide players as at the moment without matches and income.

Offline Reddevil

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #27 on: August 08, 2021, 12:43:49 PM »
Surely by allowing three major competitions to run concurrently, the ECB must shoulder much of the blame, and in terms of naive myopia they are in effect cutting their own throats, because as other very knowledgable and savvy posters predict, once County red ball cricket collapses or shrinks, platforms to build long innings, essential for Test cricket, disappear, nothing for the purist remains.

I can’t quite agree with Nat’s view that The Hundred was “designed”to destroy professional county cricket, but in effect he is so correct that this is what will happen.

Is it not horrifically ironic, that the concept of introducing younger more widespread audiences, abetted by the hugely influential participation of the BBC, and irresponsible fixture control, has led to what must now be considered as the greatest crisis to confront cricket for many years.

We  would all agree that fresh young blood is always needed to sustain any sport, and that County cricket, has been seduced by new technology forever quickening pace of life and providing more distractions to place our beloved game in the back waters of modern life.

Four day cricket now is a dinosaur.

Widening and rejuvenating  audiences  essentially is to be applauded.

The consequence of introducing The Hundred and combining it idirectly in competition to the Royal London Cup is obviously not what was envisaged, but was simply not thought through.

The authorities should answer many difficult questions.

Where do we go from here?

The level of knowledgeable debate on this forum is second to none.

Authorities at every level would learn a lot.





Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6177
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #28 on: August 08, 2021, 02:42:40 PM »
Can we please restrict multiple quoting as it's hard to read.

Thanks, all :)

Very true, Mr Moderator.

Could you possibly start another section on the 100 and shunt the related posts her into it? as T20 and the One Day Cup have their own sections, this would be logical.

Thanks!

And could you shunt the ECB into a siding whilst you’re at it (apologies for the in text citations).
Make America Great (Britain) Again.

Offline Alex

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 908
Re: Re: vs Gloucestershire (A)
« Reply #29 on: August 08, 2021, 09:48:33 PM »
The franchise teams will be fine for as long as the counties continue. However, once the counties have gone part time, where will the players comefrom. The counties will not be able to afford to provide players as at the moment without matches and income.
Hate to break it to you, but the test match counties certainly won't be going part time, they'll be fronting a new far more condensed domestic system with a bigger share of cash from the ECB every year. It's the counties like Essex that will be cut loose and left in the dust, which is why any Essex fan supporting the Hundred needs a good shake.