Be honest, ever since the world rankings have been introduced have you ever been that bothered about them? Unfortunately due to T20, Test cricket for the likes of Sri Lanka, Pakistan, NZ and even India will become less and less a priority over the next few years.
When did WI stop caring about tests? Can't fault their t20 skills. But they used to be awesome in tests
It wasn't a definitive list and the once glorious West Indies were the start of it and pretty obvious.
Be honest, ever since the world rankings have been introduced have you ever been that bothered about them? Unfortunately due to T20, Test cricket for the likes of Sri Lanka, Pakistan, NZ and even India will become less and less a priority over the next few years.
When did WI stop caring about tests? Can't fault their t20 skills. But they used to be awesome in tests
It wasn't a definitive list and the once glorious West Indies were the start of it and pretty obvious.
Yes of course... I don't think t20 was the cause of decline in WI test cricket though
Be honest, ever since the world rankings have been introduced have you ever been that bothered about them? Unfortunately due to T20, Test cricket for the likes of Sri Lanka, Pakistan, NZ and even India will become less and less a priority over the next few years.
When did WI stop caring about tests? Can't fault their t20 skills. But they used to be awesome in tests
As usual...money.
When not why.... why is self evident... though maybe competition for players is involved. Lots of skilled sportsman choosing sports like basketball. Cricket had already long been drawing talent from a limited pool in England.
You answered the question yourself - when they stopped rolling out tall fast bowlers - who prob went to basketball instead. However, i remember listening to Tony Cozier say that there are more cricket players in the Windies playng regularly now than there has ever been .
Be honest, ever since the world rankings have been introduced have you ever been that bothered about them? Unfortunately due to T20, Test cricket for the likes of Sri Lanka, Pakistan, NZ and even India will become less and less a priority over the next few years.
When did WI stop caring about tests? Can't fault their t20 skills. But they used to be awesome in tests
As usual...money.
When not why.... why is self evident... though maybe competition for players is involved. Lots of skilled sportsman choosing sports like basketball. Cricket had already long been drawing talent from a limited pool in England.
You answered the question yourself - when they stopped rolling out tall fast bowlers - who prob went to basketball instead. However, i remember listening to Tony Cozier say that there are more cricket players in the Windies playng regularly now than there has ever been .
They had some amazing batsmen too... incidentally have you seen the film Fire in Babylon?
As you've possibly guessed I love West Indies cricket
In the same way that many footballers see playing in the Champions League (or making money in China) is more important than playing for their country, the lure of T20 franchise cricket is a major threat to many national teams.
England has the big advantage of having a wealthy national board, thanks to Sky and the healthy gate receipts Test cricket still generates, especially in the London Test matches. Test cricket here still dominates the sport, unlike any other country.
Really think da/night tests is a bad idea. It's fine for one day cricket. I am going to a few test matches this year but my hope is to be sitting watching in the sun not under lights.
Really think da/night tests is a bad idea. It's fine for one day cricket. I am going to a few test matches this year but my hope is to be sitting watching in the sun not under lights.
One of the major problems with day/night tests in this country is the long twilight - it doesn't get dark til 10pm in June/July and then 9 in aug/sep - whereas in southern hemisphere it will get dark at 8pm - it just wont have the same effect.
My impression of watching T20 games in the evening is how (relatively) cold it can get most evenings!
The problem for the ECB, is that they and the counties want/need the Sky money, so they keep accepting bids that leave very little cricket on terrestrial tv. That stuff about young people not watching TV is exaggerated, the trendy kids of my youth didn't watch cricket, it was the geeky one like me! Anyone hooked on cricket after watching Geoff Boycott get a century against New Zealand must be a bit weird
Why do you think the city based T20 is overdue? Every single reason for the franchise system being introduced and being a success in Australia isn't true for England. The Australian system increased the number of teams, we'll be reducing the number, they made games accessible for a greater percentage of the population, we'll be restricting access compared to the current system. They build interest by making it free to air, we'll be locking it behind a Sky subscription.
All that will happen by moving to a city based format is fewer fans will get to see games either live or on TV and money will be concentrated in the test ground owning counties (yay, lets screw Kent, Sussex and Essex, as long as Surrey get richer, eh?!))
Which, to be fair, Hales is doing - 12* (45) with 42 of those balls dots. He did throw his hands at a wide one for one of his three boundaries but, apart from that, he's been solid.
Why do you think the city based T20 is overdue? Every single reason for the franchise system being introduced and being a success in Australia isn't true for England. The Australian system increased the number of teams, we'll be reducing the number, they made games accessible for a greater percentage of the population, we'll be restricting access compared to the current system. They build interest by making it free to air, we'll be locking it behind a Sky subscription.
All that will happen by moving to a city based format is fewer fans will get to see games either live or on TV and money will be concentrated in the test ground owning counties (yay, lets screw Kent, Sussex and Essex, as long as Surrey get richer, eh?!))
I think its overdue for 2 simple reasons...1) It will improve the standard of players and therefore cricket being played - because of condensing the talent and It will improve England because of above and 2) it will make a better spectacle and improve attendances. TBH, we all want a stronger England.
TBH, it wont screw Kent,Sussex etc because they be still be providing players for South London Lions and Southampton Saints etc with the likes of Billings/Jordan etc and getting the associated money. However, it might make the counties with the grounds where its being played 'poaching' the aforesaid players - unfortunately, that's Market Forces , in the same way that Charlton want to buy Moncur or any other player from lower leagues. Also, if they are not financially viable (and I think that Kent was one of the counties that was bailed out) then maybe it should be potentially looked at as a feeder club to the more affluent counties and transfer fees paid- we cant keep bailing out failing counties every season.
Why do you think the city based T20 is overdue? Every single reason for the franchise system being introduced and being a success in Australia isn't true for England. The Australian system increased the number of teams, we'll be reducing the number, they made games accessible for a greater percentage of the population, we'll be restricting access compared to the current system. They build interest by making it free to air, we'll be locking it behind a Sky subscription.
All that will happen by moving to a city based format is fewer fans will get to see games either live or on TV and money will be concentrated in the test ground owning counties (yay, lets screw Kent, Sussex and Essex, as long as Surrey get richer, eh?!))
I think its overdue for 2 simple reasons...1) It will improve the standard of players and therefore cricket being played - because of condensing the talent and It will improve England because of above and 2) it will make a better spectacle and improve attendances. TBH, we all want a stronger England.
TBH, it wont screw Kent,Sussex etc because they be still be providing players for South London Lions and Southampton Saints etc with the likes of Billings/Jordan etc and getting the associated money. However, it might make the counties with the grounds where its being played 'poaching' the aforesaid players - unfortunately, that's Market Forces , in the same way that Charlton want to buy Moncur or any other player from lower leagues. Also, if they are not financially viable (and I think that Kent was one of the counties that was bailed out) then maybe it should be potentially looked at as a feeder club to the more affluent counties and transfer fees paid- we cant keep bailing out failing counties every season.
It's one of the quirks of history that Kent's main ground is in the rural end of the traditional county, whereas Surrey's is in central London. The Oval is probably 2 miles from the old Kent boundary (Deptford) and far more convenient for a large number of Kent supporters.
The problem I guess is that everyone will see matches at the Oval as Surrey. Similarly, who else would form the Lords team other than Middlesex?
Comments
However, i remember listening to Tony Cozier say that there are more cricket players in the Windies playng regularly now than there has ever been .
As you've possibly guessed I love West Indies cricket
England has the big advantage of having a wealthy national board, thanks to Sky and the healthy gate receipts Test cricket still generates, especially in the London Test matches. Test cricket here still dominates the sport, unlike any other country.
Interesting comments from ECB Chairman including day/night tests, franchises and tests never to be shown on terrestrial TV again.
The City based T20 comp is long overdue - but didn't know about the tv contract.
The problem for the ECB, is that they and the counties want/need the Sky money, so they keep accepting bids that leave very little cricket on terrestrial tv. That stuff about young people not watching TV is exaggerated, the trendy kids of my youth didn't watch cricket, it was the geeky one like me! Anyone hooked on cricket after watching Geoff Boycott get a century against New Zealand must be a bit weird
All that will happen by moving to a city based format is fewer fans will get to see games either live or on TV and money will be concentrated in the test ground owning counties (yay, lets screw Kent, Sussex and Essex, as long as Surrey get richer, eh?!))
28-0 off 15 at drinks
Cook 15* (46)
TBH, we all want a stronger England.
TBH, it wont screw Kent,Sussex etc because they be still be providing players for South London Lions and Southampton Saints etc with the likes of Billings/Jordan etc and getting the associated money. However, it might make the counties with the grounds where its being played 'poaching' the aforesaid players - unfortunately, that's Market Forces , in the same way that Charlton want to buy Moncur or any other player from lower leagues.
Also, if they are not financially viable (and I think that Kent was one of the counties that was bailed out) then maybe it should be potentially looked at as a feeder club to the more affluent counties and transfer fees paid- we cant keep bailing out failing counties every season.
The problem I guess is that everyone will see matches at the Oval as Surrey. Similarly, who else would form the Lords team other than Middlesex?
49-1
Cook 16 (52)
Hales 31* (70)
49-2
Shanaka, on his Test debut, has 2-0
Root gone and Shanaka has figures of 3 -1 including our two best batsmen
From 49-0 to that position very much makes it Sri Lanka's morning and a good toss to win
Hales 38* (86)
Vince 0* (15)
But then SL brought on a bowler, who pitched it up just outside the off stump & bingo.
It's almost guaranteed to get wickets at Headingley.