On the surface, 10 ball over, so what. Whats the big problem?. If it adds excitement then great. Just sounds like Traditionalists moaning again just for the sake of it.
On the surface, 10 ball over, so what. Whats the big problem?. If it adds excitement then great. Just sounds like Traditionalists moaning again just for the sake of it.
I'm sorry. I'm usually with you when this traditionalists/modernists angle comes up but it's hard to deny ECB are making a right cock up of this.
Stick to the proven formula. I hope this is just them leaking something to see what the reaction might be before they go ahead with it.
On the surface, 10 ball over, so what. Whats the big problem?. If it adds excitement then great. Just sounds like Traditionalists moaning again just for the sake of it.
I'm sorry. I'm usually with you when this traditionalists/modernists angle comes up but it's hard to deny ECB are making a right cock up of this.
Stick to the proven formula. I hope this is just them leaking something to see what the reaction might be before they go ahead with it.
you're prob right Callum, but shouldn't diss anything until the reasoning is understood. To diss it just because its got a 10 ball over is bloody stupid.
IMO, anything that helps kids get back to cricket and able to watch it on terrestrial tv is a good thing. 10 ball over, 12 ball over, 15 ball over...who cares as long as its good cricket and entertaining.
This smacks of idiot busybodies in suits at the ecb trying to prove they are there for a purpose rather than just because they have their fingers in the pie. What is to be gained by losing 20 balls? Is there any way that will make any difference to the casual observer? No chance.
This is idiots completely missing the point. You can see their thought process 't20 was a success and that was shorter than 50 over cricket - I know let's go shorter again!' Completely missing what actually made t20 successful.
Much like their thinking on the whole t20 issue. 'What made the IPL and Big Bash successful? Erm they used city franchises, great lets do that'.
No you utter utter cretins. What made the IPL and Big Bash successful was that they had MORE teams playing MORE games at MORE grounds and involving MORE home grown players AND more of the best international players. ALL games shown on free to air TV. All these things were about making the game more accessible to more people and getting more viewers.
There was also a rebrand and playing it in a block which were not insignificant factors.
Actually if you look into the detail of what's happened over there the fact that the franchises are based around cities is completely irrelevant to its success.
Of course we are doing the exact opposite of what made it a success. Well done the ECB *sarcastic clap*.
LESS teams playing LESS games at LESS grounds with (more than 100) LESS home grown players involved. Only some games shown on free to air TV as yet unconfirmed of the knockout stages will be bit it's thought likely sky will get them. The contract is also only for the first year of the tournament so will be back on sky from year 2. ALL this will do will make the game LESS accessible and get less viewers not more.
We could have had a rebrand and played it in a block within the county structure. Bit that would involve too much joined up thinking for the ECB.
Why is it that they are forecasting massive losses for the tournament in every year for the next 10? - which is every year they have forecasted for. Yet somehow every county -even struggling ones made decent money from the T20 in the last few years.
Worst thing is I don't think it's malicious from the ECB and it's only partly money motivated. I genuinely think that tbey think iys right for the game. We just have the wrong people leading the game and they are so keen to be seen as progressive they miss opportunities to make actual progress.
Does seem a strange idea as it's only 20 balls an innings less than T20.
Anything that gets people in to cricket can only be a good thing but I think the current 3 formats works well and doesn't really need changing, they cater for every cricket fans taste.
My 11 year old loves the T20 at the Oval but would be bored and wanting to go home by lunch of a test match, I'm gonna try a one day game this year and see how he likes it, the current formats are a natural progression to test cricket for today's youngsters.
It'll still be cricket. Which is why people aren't going to suddenly come running to it because of the final over, and is also why there's no point doing it
Talk to anyone who's not a serious cricket fan (so non-fans and those with barely a passing interest, the ones the ECB is hoping to attract to grow the game) and their eyes glaze over as soon as the subject of different forms of the game comes up. They just don't get how the same game can be 3 hours, or 6 hours, or 4 days or 5 days.
The ECB's answer to this is to create another format. Beyond mind-boggling.
This smacks of idiot busybodies in suits at the ecb trying to prove they are there for a purpose rather than just because they have their fingers in the pie. What is to be gained by losing 20 balls? Is there any way that will make any difference to the casual observer? No chance.
This is idiots completely missing the point. You can see their thought process 't20 was a success and that was shorter than 50 over cricket - I know let's go shorter again!' Completely missing what actually made t20 successful.
Much like their thinking on the whole t20 issue. 'What made the IPL and Big Bash successful? Erm they used city franchises, great lets do that'.
No you utter utter cretins. What made the IPL and Big Bash successful was that they had MORE teams playing MORE games at MORE grounds and involving MORE home grown players AND more of the best international players. ALL games shown on free to air TV. All these things were about making the game more accessible to more people and getting more viewers.
There was also a rebrand and playing it in a block which were not insignificant factors.
Actually if you look into the detail of what's happened over there the fact that the franchises are based around cities is completely irrelevant to its success.
Of course we are doing the exact opposite of what made it a success. Well done the ECB *sarcastic clap*.
LESS teams playing LESS games at LESS grounds with (more than 100) LESS home grown players involved. Only some games shown on free to air TV as yet unconfirmed of the knockout stages will be bit it's thought likely sky will get them. The contract is also only for the first year of the tournament so will be back on sky from year 2. ALL this will do will make the game LESS accessible and get less viewers not more.
We could have had a rebrand and played it in a block within the county structure. Bit that would involve too much joined up thinking for the ECB.
Why is it that they are forecasting massive losses for the tournament in every year for the next 10? - which is every year they have forecasted for. Yet somehow every county -even struggling ones made decent money from the T20 in the last few years.
He's England's second leading Test wicket-taker of all time, a dab-hand on the golf course and he is currently the top football manager in the world... well, sort of!
We say that because Broad is leading the Fantasy Premier League's table for the week, scoring 169 points, which means the Nottingham Forest fan is beating almost six million other players as it stands.
Comments
Just sounds like Traditionalists moaning again just for the sake of it.
Stick to the proven formula. I hope this is just them leaking something to see what the reaction might be before they go ahead with it.
IMO, anything that helps kids get back to cricket and able to watch it on terrestrial tv is a good thing.
10 ball over, 12 ball over, 15 ball over...who cares as long as its good cricket and entertaining.
obviously a 120 ball countdown would be shit for the people watching.
This is idiots completely missing the point. You can see their thought process 't20 was a success and that was shorter than 50 over cricket - I know let's go shorter again!' Completely missing what actually made t20 successful.
Much like their thinking on the whole t20 issue. 'What made the IPL and Big Bash successful? Erm they used city franchises, great lets do that'.
No you utter utter cretins. What made the IPL and Big Bash successful was that they had MORE teams playing MORE games at MORE grounds and involving MORE home grown players AND more of the best international players. ALL games shown on free to air TV. All these things were about making the game more accessible to more people and getting more viewers.
There was also a rebrand and playing it in a block which were not insignificant factors.
Actually if you look into the detail of what's happened over there the fact that the franchises are based around cities is completely irrelevant to its success.
Of course we are doing the exact opposite of what made it a success. Well done the ECB *sarcastic clap*.
LESS teams playing LESS games at LESS grounds with (more than 100) LESS home grown players involved. Only some games shown on free to air TV as yet unconfirmed of the knockout stages will be bit it's thought likely sky will get them. The contract is also only for the first year of the tournament so will be back on sky from year 2. ALL this will do will make the game LESS accessible and get less viewers not more.
We could have had a rebrand and played it in a block within the county structure. Bit that would involve too much joined up thinking for the ECB.
Why is it that they are forecasting massive losses for the tournament in every year for the next 10? - which is every year they have forecasted for. Yet somehow every county -even struggling ones made decent money from the T20 in the last few years.
Worst thing is I don't think it's malicious from the ECB and it's only partly money motivated. I genuinely think that tbey think iys right for the game. We just have the wrong people leading the game and they are so keen to be seen as progressive they miss opportunities to make actual progress.
Blind leading the useless.
Anything that gets people in to cricket can only be a good thing but I think the current 3 formats works well and doesn't really need changing, they cater for every cricket fans taste.
My 11 year old loves the T20 at the Oval but would be bored and wanting to go home by lunch of a test match, I'm gonna try a one day game this year and see how he likes it, the current formats are a natural progression to test cricket for today's youngsters.
The ECB's answer to this is to create another format. Beyond mind-boggling.
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cricket/england-cricket-ed-smith-national-selector-ecb-test-odi-t20-cricviz-a8312416.html
Toby Roland-Jones out for the season, another stress fracture in his back
Hopefully Jamie Porter won’t have any issues after his stress fracture.
Fo me (hopefully)...
Cook
Stoneman
Root
Bairstow
Malan
Stokes
Foakes
Woakes or Leach
Wood
Broad
Anderson
but realistically..
Cook
Stoneman
Vince
Root
Malan
Stokes
Bairstow
Woakes
Wood
Broad
Anderson
Asking for a friend...