Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ECB’s “The Hundred”
Comments
-
First time I’ve watched it and thought it was awful. Even the start was delayed because of the firework smoke. Didn’t help that it was so one sided I guess. Reckon they’ll can it after this season.0
-
They can't - the ECB are pot committed to make this a success and have already agreed TV rights 'til 2028 - but only guaranteed the counties their distribution of £1.3m each 'til 2024.stop_shouting said:First time I’ve watched it and thought it was awful. Even the start was delayed because of the firework smoke. Didn’t help that it was so one sided I guess. Reckon they’ll can it after this season.1 -
I adore cricket but I can’t get excited by this tournament. Watched it tonight and I was bored by it . We just don’t need it .3
-
T20 was enough innovation that was required. I don't think it will last and putting it up the start of the football season seems completly mad. if you need a 100 competition month then it should be early July to early August when football really is not about.
0 -
I'd wondered about the timing too. Timed to coincide with the school holidays yes, but also smack against the football season so any "crossover" media interest will be swampedpickwick said:T20 was enough innovation that was required. I don't think it will last and putting it up the start of the football season seems completly mad. if you need a 100 competition month then it should be early July to early August when football really is not about.1 -
Or Athletic ?addick1956 said:
I agree..it is a form of franchise sport....I dislike that. Who can love a team that as an appendage affixed to the name like Brave or Fire.blackpool72 said:It's shit.
End of1 -
What have Glamorgan or Somerset got to do with it?killerandflash said:
If both sides had scored 170, then the "pundits" would have drooling over the shots, and the crowd would probably be happier too. It's not like Test cricket where a over of brilliant bowling testing the batsman's defences is gripping viewing, in white ball cricket it's the 4s and 6s that people want to see, just as in baseball it's the home runs which get people most excited.Bournemouth Addick said:
Whilst it wasn't one necessarily to get the pulse racing, I agree, there's a bit of an element of "damned if they do, damned if they don't" about this. SB bowled quite well, restricting WF to a very moderate total. They then set about doing their job with a bat pretty efficiently too.killerandflash said:Leaving aside my general disdain for the format, tonight's game has so far hardly been a great advert for short form cricket to a "non watcher".
Another turgid pitch, with the batters struggling to get it away, when the whole appeal of short form cricket is seeing loads of runs and big shots.
Had both sides gone out and got 170+ then they get accused of being all crash, bang wallop with no technique on show.
WF looked rubbish, and of all the franchises were always the one with the least justification when you consider how weak Glamorgan are, and how many players Somerset have produced for example.These are franchises with no link to the counties0 -
Have they kept the same awful on screen scorecard as last season or has it been updated?0
-
I find the constant 'bigging up' from the commentary team tiresome.
It's just too obvious they are trying to sell this product, the upbeat messaging and platitudes sound so false and strained.4 -
Bring on the T0 when stars from around the world sign up to represent England and other countries. Kohli playing for England. Yep, if we bid enough. TV viewers then vote on which team would have won in a format chosen at random from a spinning wheel set off by a celebrity. The winning team get £50 million per player per match. Proper entertainment.4
-
Sponsored links:
-
But they're located at county grounds, where the home county gets massive benefits from the association, as any new fan attracted by the 100 will be more likely to gravitate to that county if they want to see some other cricket.MrOneLung said:
What have Glamorgan or Somerset got to do with it?killerandflash said:
If both sides had scored 170, then the "pundits" would have drooling over the shots, and the crowd would probably be happier too. It's not like Test cricket where a over of brilliant bowling testing the batsman's defences is gripping viewing, in white ball cricket it's the 4s and 6s that people want to see, just as in baseball it's the home runs which get people most excited.Bournemouth Addick said:
Whilst it wasn't one necessarily to get the pulse racing, I agree, there's a bit of an element of "damned if they do, damned if they don't" about this. SB bowled quite well, restricting WF to a very moderate total. They then set about doing their job with a bat pretty efficiently too.killerandflash said:Leaving aside my general disdain for the format, tonight's game has so far hardly been a great advert for short form cricket to a "non watcher".
Another turgid pitch, with the batters struggling to get it away, when the whole appeal of short form cricket is seeing loads of runs and big shots.
Had both sides gone out and got 170+ then they get accused of being all crash, bang wallop with no technique on show.
WF looked rubbish, and of all the franchises were always the one with the least justification when you consider how weak Glamorgan are, and how many players Somerset have produced for example.These are franchises with no link to the counties
Everyone sees the Manchester Originals for example as an extension of Lancashire.1 -
Part of the attraction for me was having the women playing first.
Why didn’t that happen yesterday?
Was it because of the Commonwealth Games?
Was really diluted yesterday.
Very poor.0 -
KBslittlesis said:Part of the attraction for me was having the women playing first.
Why didn’t that happen yesterday?
Was it because of the Commonwealth Games?
Was really diluted yesterday.
Very poor0 -
Women's 20/20 is part of the C Games .. I believe the women's 100 starts on August 11th (ish)KBslittlesis said:Part of the attraction for me was having the women playing first.
Why didn’t that happen yesterday?
Was it because of the Commonwealth Games?
Was really diluted yesterday.
Very poor.
0 -
Just a shame that the first game was so poor and one sided.. bonus was a great Vince innings even given he was dolly dropped on zero ..
silly really to pit the best team against one of the worst on what looked to be at the start a very poor pitch .. the smoke at the start was ridiculous .. and lastly, the Sky commentary was awful, the Beeb's was much better .. I enjoyed last year's 100, I wonder if this season's will be as enjoyable0 -
Shame.Lincsaddick said:
Women's 20/20 is part of the C Games .. I believe the women's 100 starts on August 11th (ish)KBslittlesis said:Part of the attraction for me was having the women playing first.
Why didn’t that happen yesterday?
Was it because of the Commonwealth Games?
Was really diluted yesterday.
Very poor.
Thats really going to change it for me.
Thanks for the reply x2 -
2 London teams tonight .. both look powerful 'on paper' .. at the Oval0
-
Battle of the out of form opening batsman. Though I suppose you could argue if Zak Crawley was ever in form.Lincsaddick said:2 London teams tonight .. both look powerful 'on paper' .. at the Oval1 -
very true .. there is some good pre match coaching for young kids going on with Maxwell, Pietersen and WardFishCostaFortune said:
Battle of the out of form opening batsman. Though I suppose you could argue if Zak Crawley was ever in form.Lincsaddick said:2 London teams tonight .. both look powerful 'on paper' .. at the Oval0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Eoin Morgan .. super innings for London Pride
0 -
so Roy goes 1st ball .. great catch, at least Crawley had a decent cameoFishCostaFortune said:
Battle of the out of form opening batsman. Though I suppose you could argue if Zak Crawley was ever in form.Lincsaddick said:2 London teams tonight .. both look powerful 'on paper' .. at the Oval2 -
It's still shit4
-
That was an exciting finish.2
-
Ignore it and it will go away…………0
-
I so resent how this “format” runs simultaneously with, and undermines, the One Day Cup. The hundred is designed for a minimum attention span and to entertain with bright colours.
Still I guess it prepares our national “hundred” team for the Hundred World Cup & Hundred tests. Oh no wait…………..0 -
I'm not in a position to say whether or not The Hundred is ruining cricket, but I found that finish exciting.addick1956 said:
No... our Wembley finals had exciting finishes. This Hundred thing is ruining cricket. Us how many 6's in 100. 16.67 ?ME14addick said:That was an exciting finish.1 -
interesting game last night between the 2 London teams .. it shows how these short format games can swing in just a few balls .. this went to a last ball finish after looking all over after about 60 (of the 100) second innings balls .. the Oval was packed and made as much noise as a football crowd, though somewhat better humoured than most0
-
Ignoring what The Hundred might mean for cricket, last nights game was obviously very exciting and a bit of a bonkers game of cricket, featuring some top international stars, and plenty of young English talent on display as well.
The crowd clearly absolutely loved it and I think those on here who just dismiss it as a product because they don't like what it might mean may need to think again. It's not going away and is only going to become bigger and bigger.
Disclaimer - I am not a cheerleader for The Hundred, in fact I have serious reservations about it but just looking solely at the product it's impossible just to dismiss it as some mickey mouse competition.3 -
I dismiss it since it undermines the one day cup, which is my favourite format. I can’t get to many games so I buy a Kent six pack membership and now watch games depleted of many quality players. I also question the need, given the similarity in length to T20, the authenticity & validity of manufactured teams, the utter lack of relevance to international cricket and personally loathe the bright gaudy colours - it’s like watching the 60s Batman series!Addickforlife said:Ignoring what The Hundred might mean for cricket, last nights game was obviously very exciting and a bit of a bonkers game of cricket, featuring some top international stars, and plenty of young English talent on display as well.
The crowd clearly absolutely loved it and I think those on here who just dismiss it as a product because they don't like what it might mean may need to think again. It's not going away and is only going to become bigger and bigger.
Disclaimer - I am not a cheerleader for The Hundred, in fact I have serious reservations about it but just looking solely at the product it's impossible just to dismiss it as some mickey mouse competition.
This is straight up naked greed by the ECB and can only be detrimental to the national game
It is exactly a Micky Mouse competition4
