I find your last paragraph Fanny very interesting. You may feel it’s irrelevant, other women may not.
All about opinions as you say.
I can’t wait for the womens hundred to start tonight. I feel the tournament has really missed them this year.
Having watched both county (Kent & Surrey) & international cricket live in the past I really can see both sides to this.
However, I can now only watch on television as I no longer live in Blighty, so I will take anything on offer as I love watching all sports (apart from golf, snooker, darts & wrestling). That includes mens, womens & para.
I’m aware that might not sit well with some 🤷♀️
I have no issues whatsoever with women's cricket or football & fully appreciate that other women may put those top of their " must watch" lists. And I have in no shape or form stated that it's irrelevant....just that being female doesn't have any bearing on my preference. THAT'S what is irrelevant....
Purely by asking my original, innocent question on here as to whether playing the women's Hundred AFTER the men's might have a bearing on attendances for the former, suzi took the discussion to a place it was never intended to go. So, not my fault.
Addick Addict summarises my viewpoint perfectly. And he knows far more about the game than the majority of posters on this thread.
To summarise, for those who have misinterpreted my input, I don't believe I've ever criticised those who pay their money & enjoy an afternoon/evening of fast paced cricket in person. Their choice but not for me.
My issue has been clarified & explained by AA and we are not alone in our views, especially among those who love to watch their counties battle out a match with A N Other. NOTHING whatsoever to do with the gender of the players.
Ad nauseum repetition from those who think The Hundred shouldn't be criticised.
I don't think there's anyone suggesting it should be beyond criticism. No-one.
Equitable criticism is useful and healthy. So, if someone thinks it's too loud and too brash compared to - say - a mid-table country championship match on a Thursday afternoon, that's completely fair and appropriate; but there are other forms of cricket which are also "too loud and too brash". Likewise, if someone says they don't like it because it should be for England qualified players only, again that's fair enough, so long as they acknowledge that there are non-England players in every format.
What I find a bit odd (and I don't mean anything any stronger than "a bit odd") is the number of people who post on here describing in quite a lot of detail (often many times) about how much they "hate" The Hundred, when compared to the number of people who do the same on county championship threads.
I have always found county championship cricket excruciating and a dull waste of time. But I don't bang on about it on county championship threads; and I totally respect and admire the choice of people who do like it, who spend their time watching it and who get - and have got - many years of honest pleasure out of it. I find it boring and antiquated; but no-one cares (and no-one should care) what I think about it.
As a pathway drug for impressionable, future denizens of the cricket family, I think The Hundred is doing a great job and I am pleased to see it continuing to thrive.
I find your last paragraph Fanny very interesting. You may feel it’s irrelevant, other women may not.
All about opinions as you say.
I can’t wait for the womens hundred to start tonight. I feel the tournament has really missed them this year.
Having watched both county (Kent & Surrey) & international cricket live in the past I really can see both sides to this.
However, I can now only watch on television as I no longer live in Blighty, so I will take anything on offer as I love watching all sports (apart from golf, snooker, darts & wrestling). That includes mens, womens & para.
I’m aware that might not sit well with some 🤷♀️
I have no issues whatsoever with women's cricket or football & fully appreciate that other women may put those top of their " must watch" lists. And I have in no shape or form stated that it's irrelevant....just that being female doesn't have any bearing on my preference. THAT'S what is irrelevant....
Purely by asking my original, innocent question on here as to whether playing the women's Hundred AFTER the men's might have a bearing on attendances for the former, suzi took the discussion to a place it was never intended to go. So, not my fault.
Addick Addict summarises my viewpoint perfectly. And he knows far more about the game than the majority of posters on this thread.
To summarise, for those who have misinterpreted my input, I don't believe I've ever criticised those who pay their money & enjoy an afternoon/evening of fast paced cricket in person. Their choice but not for me.
My issue has been clarified & explained by AA and we are not alone in our views, especially among those who love to watch their counties battle out a match with A N Other. NOTHING whatsoever to do with the gender of the players.
The irony is Fanny that I've not only been a player, coach, umpire, scorer, club committee member, supporter, father of a county age group player from 11 to 18 so know all about pathways but, most importantly of all, was the colts secretary for a club that not only had over 200 children registered but had promoting girls cricket at the forefront to the extent that they have been responsible for not just county players but international women cricketers too. Which is why I get really annoyed when a certain individual bangs on about what good The Hundred is doing for the game but fails to answer (he's too intelligent not to be able to grasp the issues) how preventing top county cricket from taking place in the middle of a summer is a solution to anything. Effectively, you are asking a kid to support Manchester Originals because one day I want to play for them when they don't even have an under 11 side let alone an under 18.
It's fair to ask questions about any new concept and everyone has the right to do so. From new converts to cricket - half of last season's viewers were new to cricket - to dyed-in-the-wool county cricket die-hards, every interested party's views are worth taking heed of.
But, if that's true of The Hundred, isn't it also true of other forms of cricket? For example, if the attendance at the first The Hundred match of the season at Edgbaston this week (just after the ground hosted the Commonwealth Games T20) was disappointing, how many thousands filled the stands - and the coffers - for the first four-day match at the ground when just eighteen wickets fell in a turgid draw? The point being, if you can criticise The Hundred for appearing not to attract huge crowds in every game, shouldn't the same criticism be levelled at the expensive, barely-watched county championship?
Or, if 16.1m people viewed the first season of The Hundred on television, how many watched the biggest, most important white-ball game in decades (in this country) when the 2019 World Cup Final was played at Lord's? The point being that, if it's good to have the Cricket World Cup Final free-to-air on television in England (which it undoubtedly is) so that 4.5m can tune in, why wouldn't it also be good to have The Hundred on free-to-air television (and radio, and on-line, and on Twitter, and on Facebook...)?
The Hundred delivers big domestic crowds, attracts substantial viewing figures, generates significant income (disbursed between England cricket and, yes, the counties), brings in some bigger stars than any other UK format and appears to provide a means of stimulating and encouraging youngsters' interest in the game, in short protecting and enhancing its future.
It's possible for people to like The Hundred (and there's evidence on this thread to suggest that some do) as well as liking other forms of cricket. But, for some people, it seems important to refuse to like it.
The ad nauseam repetition of criticism for The Hundred will continue unabated, I imagine, while it continues to deliver against its targets and bring more, younger, better cricketers into the game. Long may that continue, despite what some people wish for.
But this is what I don't get. People like you say that people like me are saying that you and others shouldn't enjoy the Hundred. That isn't the criticism. It's that people like you refuse to recognise what it is doing to the game as a whole and why this could all have been prevented had the ECB chosen to beef up the Vitality Blast. But, hey, as long you're happy that this is happening then perhaps you could do me a favour and reply to this lady saying why you think that kids who have been able to watch game after game in the summer holidays are now limited to four days of cricket in six weeks?
very sad, but where I am in N E Lincs, to see 1st class cricket of any form is a choice between Derby and Nottingham, both 100 miles away or Leeds a mere 80 miles away, and that is any time during the summer .. there is a lot of high standard junior cricket played in north Lincolnshire and the Lincolnshire Minor County team often play at Cleethorpes, but first class ? .. forget it And this is the case for many cricket lovers across England who don't live near a 1st class county ground
Ad nauseum repetition from those who think The Hundred shouldn't be criticised.
I don't think there's anyone suggesting it should be beyond criticism. No-one.
Equitable criticism is useful and healthy. So, if someone thinks it's too loud and too brash compared to - say - a mid-table country championship match on a Thursday afternoon, that's completely fair and appropriate; but there are other forms of cricket which are also "too loud and too brash". Likewise, if someone says they don't like it because it should be for England qualified players only, again that's fair enough, so long as they acknowledge that there are non-England players in every format.
What I find a bit odd (and I don't mean anything any stronger than "a bit odd") is the number of people who post on here describing in quite a lot of detail (often many times) about how much they "hate" The Hundred, when compared to the number of people who do the same on county championship threads.
I have always found county championship cricket excruciating and a dull waste of time. But I don't bang on about it on county championship threads; and I totally respect and admire the choice of people who do like it, who spend their time watching it and who get - and have got - many years of honest pleasure out of it. I find it boring and antiquated; but no-one cares (and no-one should care) what I think about it.
As a pathway drug for impressionable, future denizens of the cricket family, I think The Hundred is doing a great job and I am pleased to see it continuing to thrive.
You just don't get it do you. Or you pretend you don't. County Championship cricket isn't destroying county cricket. The Hundred and specifically the ECB are. And the man chiefly responsible for doing so - and the one who was responsible for not having an investigation into racism at Yorkshire and was responsible for us not touring Pakistan - hasn't just run off with his millions but re-negotiated deals with poor health food providers and TV rights 'til 2028.
"As a pathway drug". If ever there was a euphemism that was it.
Thing is @Fanny Fanackapan I really do think you being a female (last time you checked) has a relevance to whether you watch/promote womens sport.
Because if you don’t, how are we ever expected to encourage other younger females into any kind of sport if we only ever watch the geezers? We can’t just expect other people to do it for us imho.
Maybe it’s because I’m still a bit miffed that I never got the opportunity at a young age to do anything other than play netball, hockey or athletics. Football was definitely not for girls and cricket? Not one school I knew growing up entertained the idea of girls playing cricket.
Now we’ll never know if they had kept the order of the men first women second whether it would have worked. When I was arranging cricket work do’s at the Oval, folks just wanted a bit of cricket (most had never been before) & a few jars with their colleagues to wind down. I honestly believe it wouldn’t have bothered them one bit who came first (phnarr phnarr)
I hated Sky. I hated the Premier League. Yet here I am, years later Sky’d up watching every blooming EPL game I can. Things evolve and change. Not always for the better. But I grab enjoyment wherever I can these days.
And I'm not surprised by your response. I've asked you to inform this lady where her and other kids can watch cricket during the six weeks of the hols which they have been used to doing for years but you have no answer. So revert to your usual tactic of "playing the man" and yet again exposing your minimal knowledge of what actually goes on at grass root level and how youngsters actually become cricketers. There is no pathway whatsoever for them to become a cricketer via a franchise any more than there are places in the south west where kids can regularly watch a game when they are off school and the sun is shining. But that's growing the game apparently.
I do wonder if you might have a greater understanding if this was happening in football. Where only reserve football was available for a month of the season so players can go and play for London United. But play a type of football where first one to three wins. Because it's different. Rather than the Football League spending that money on promoting club football and making that product better.
Looking forward to seeing your response to this lady. Cut out the bullshit though because she's the type to see straight through it
I am sorry that the Editor of a cricket website whose sole aim is to promote county cricket is unhappy there is such a paucity of first class cricket being played in her favourite county this month. Fortunately, there is plenty of county cricket played in her county throughout the Summer. But, like all fans of Somerset, she will find her team doesn't play any cricket, of any format at all, anywhere until ... *checks notes* ... tomorrow morning. And, after that, she'll have to wait another 48 hours until they play again, at home.
Like supporters of eighteen "first class counties", the cricket she can see is limited. Unlike residents of 30 other counties in England and Wales, she at least gets to see her county play - residents in Norfolk or Buckinghamshire or Dorset or Devon (where, ironically, she bases her publication), and so on.
Should Somerset play fewer First Class games, so that more counties can have First Class status? Should there be a more equitable approach? Should Somerset invite other teams - perhaps overseas teams? - to play First Class matches in the county during August? As far as I am aware, there are no rules in place to stop the county serving up matches like this to what she believes to be a tsunami of demand for seats. Can counties persuade Universities to extend their seasons beyond mid-July in order to serve up First Class cricket at Taunton and other grounds?
These are all pertinent questions I hope she and her team of four, white, middle-aged men can pontificate when determining what's best for cricket in multi-cultural Britain. The Hundred doesn't - as far as I am aware - prevent counties playing First Class friendlies during August. (Happy to stand corrected if this is not what they voted for).
Taken in the round, bringing in viewing figures of 16.1m in its first season, half of whom are new to cricket probably, on balance (and this is only my contention, I am sure Ms Chave sees it differently) is worth it, even if it has resulted in First Class championship matches being played other than in August.
I don't put myself forward as having an answer to her question as to where her kids can see cricket during the holidays (other than the very obvious Somerset CCC fixture list, the plethora of televised cricket matches, treating them to a trip to Kent to see the Lions play SA, or to London to see some Test cricket). In contrast, she does put herself forward as someone who wants to "be a voice for those concerned at how top-class cricket is changing in this country". As such, surely it's down to her - and people like her - to put forward suggestions as to how she would like to see counties develop. Complaining that she and her kids can't see First Class cricket in Somerset isn't doing this. Physician, heal thyself.
In 2020 Somerset CCC made a surplus of £111,064. This is good news. The county is able to continue to pay players, open its gates, develop new talent and entertain its supporters throughout the year. The fact there was a surplus is partly due to (I assume) people like Ms Chave paying their subscriptions to the tune of almost half a million pounds for the year.
There was also a payment of £1m from the ECB, relating to the 2019 World Cup and another payment of £1.3m from the ECB in relation to The Hundred. the total ECB funding to Somerset CCC for the year was £5,212,860. If Ms Chave really wants county cricket to continue in a vacuum without "interference" from outside, she ought to be careful what she wishes for. Without ECB funding there would be no Somerset CCC.
And I'm not surprised by your response. I've asked you to inform this lady where her and other kids can watch cricket during the six weeks of the hols which they have been used to doing for years but you have no answer. So revert to your usual tactic of "playing the man" and yet again exposing your minimal knowledge of what actually goes on at grass root level and how youngsters actually become cricketers. There is no pathway whatsoever for them to become a cricketer via a franchise any more than there are places in the south west where kids can regularly watch a game when they are off school and the sun is shining. But that's growing the game apparently.
I do wonder if you might have a greater understanding if this was happening in football. Where only reserve football was available for a month of the season so players can go and play for London United. But play a type of football where first one to three wins. Because it's different. Rather than the Football League spending that money on promoting club football and making that product better.
Looking forward to seeing your response to this lady. Cut out the bullshit though because she's the type to see straight through it
I am sorry that the Editor of a cricket website whose sole aim is to promote county cricket is unhappy there is such a paucity of first class cricket being played in her favourite county this month. Fortunately, there is plenty of county cricket played in her county throughout the Summer. But, like all fans of Somerset, she will find her team doesn't play any cricket, of any format at all, anywhere until ... *checks notes* ... tomorrow morning. And, after that, she'll have to wait another 48 hours until they play again, at home.
Like supporters of eighteen "first class counties", the cricket she can see is limited. Unlike residents of 30 other counties in England and Wales, she at least gets to see her county play - residents in Norfolk or Buckinghamshire or Dorset or Devon (where, ironically, she bases her publication), and so on.
Should Somerset play fewer First Class games, so that more counties can have First Class status? Should there be a more equitable approach? Should Somerset invite other teams - perhaps overseas teams? - to play First Class matches in the county during August? As far as I am aware, there are no rules in place to stop the county serving up matches like this to what she believes to be a tsunami of demand for seats. Can counties persuade Universities to extend their seasons beyond mid-July in order to serve up First Class cricket at Taunton and other grounds?
These are all pertinent questions I hope she and her team of four, white, middle-aged men can pontificate when determining what's best for cricket in multi-cultural Britain. The Hundred doesn't - as far as I am aware - prevent counties playing First Class friendlies during August. (Happy to stand corrected if this is not what they voted for).
Taken in the round, bringing in viewing figures of 16.1m in its first season, half of whom are new to cricket probably, on balance (and this is only my contention, I am sure Ms Chave sees it differently) is worth it, even if it has resulted in First Class championship matches being played other than in August.
I don't put myself forward as having an answer to her question as to where her kids can see cricket during the holidays (other than the very obvious Somerset CCC fixture list, the plethora of televised cricket matches, treating them to a trip to Kent to see the Lions play SA, or to London to see some Test cricket). In contrast, she does put herself forward as someone who wants to "be a voice for those concerned at how top-class cricket is changing in this country". As such, surely it's down to her - and people like her - to put forward suggestions as to how she would like to see counties develop. Complaining that she and her kids can't see First Class cricket in Somerset isn't doing this. Physician, heal thyself.
In 2020 Somerset CCC made a surplus of £111,064. This is good news. The county is able to continue to pay players, open its gates, develop new talent and entertain its supporters throughout the year. The fact there was a surplus is partly due to (I assume) people like Ms Chave paying their subscriptions to the tune of almost half a million pounds for the year.
There was also a payment of £1m from the ECB, relating to the 2019 World Cup and another payment of £1.3m from the ECB in relation to The Hundred. the total ECB funding to Somerset CCC for the year was £5,212,860. If Ms Chave really wants county cricket to continue in a vacuum without "interference" from outside, she ought to be careful what she wishes for. Without ECB funding there would be no Somerset CCC.
LOL "The Hundred doesn't - as far as I am aware - prevent counties playing First Class friendlies during August."
First Class friendlies using 2nd XI teams you mean?
"But, like all fans of Somerset, she will find her team doesn't play any cricket, of any format at all, anywhere until ... *checks notes* ... tomorrow morning. And, after that, she'll have to wait another 48 hours until they play again, at home." And yet again trying to be too clever for your own good - you really should have been a politician because your ability to stretch the truth has no limits. Tomorrow's game as you well know is at Leicester - a minimum seven hour round trip. Somerset have one home day of cricket after Sunday for the next 21 days. One day of accessible cricket. Brilliant.
The 50 overs competition has been great to watch down the years. Because of the Hundred it's been reduced to a 2nd eleven competition. I shall continue to criticise the Hundred all the while it is having a detrimental effect on domestic competition's.
And I'm not surprised by your response. I've asked you to inform this lady where her and other kids can watch cricket during the six weeks of the hols which they have been used to doing for years but you have no answer. So revert to your usual tactic of "playing the man" and yet again exposing your minimal knowledge of what actually goes on at grass root level and how youngsters actually become cricketers. There is no pathway whatsoever for them to become a cricketer via a franchise any more than there are places in the south west where kids can regularly watch a game when they are off school and the sun is shining. But that's growing the game apparently.
I do wonder if you might have a greater understanding if this was happening in football. Where only reserve football was available for a month of the season so players can go and play for London United. But play a type of football where first one to three wins. Because it's different. Rather than the Football League spending that money on promoting club football and making that product better.
Looking forward to seeing your response to this lady. Cut out the bullshit though because she's the type to see straight through it
I am sorry that the Editor of a cricket website whose sole aim is to promote county cricket is unhappy there is such a paucity of first class cricket being played in her favourite county this month. Fortunately, there is plenty of county cricket played in her county throughout the Summer. But, like all fans of Somerset, she will find her team doesn't play any cricket, of any format at all, anywhere until ... *checks notes* ... tomorrow morning. And, after that, she'll have to wait another 48 hours until they play again, at home.
Like supporters of eighteen "first class counties", the cricket she can see is limited. Unlike residents of 30 other counties in England and Wales, she at least gets to see her county play - residents in Norfolk or Buckinghamshire or Dorset or Devon (where, ironically, she bases her publication), and so on.
Should Somerset play fewer First Class games, so that more counties can have First Class status? Should there be a more equitable approach? Should Somerset invite other teams - perhaps overseas teams? - to play First Class matches in the county during August? As far as I am aware, there are no rules in place to stop the county serving up matches like this to what she believes to be a tsunami of demand for seats. Can counties persuade Universities to extend their seasons beyond mid-July in order to serve up First Class cricket at Taunton and other grounds?
These are all pertinent questions I hope she and her team of four, white, middle-aged men can pontificate when determining what's best for cricket in multi-cultural Britain. The Hundred doesn't - as far as I am aware - prevent counties playing First Class friendlies during August. (Happy to stand corrected if this is not what they voted for).
Taken in the round, bringing in viewing figures of 16.1m in its first season, half of whom are new to cricket probably, on balance (and this is only my contention, I am sure Ms Chave sees it differently) is worth it, even if it has resulted in First Class championship matches being played other than in August.
I don't put myself forward as having an answer to her question as to where her kids can see cricket during the holidays (other than the very obvious Somerset CCC fixture list, the plethora of televised cricket matches, treating them to a trip to Kent to see the Lions play SA, or to London to see some Test cricket). In contrast, she does put herself forward as someone who wants to "be a voice for those concerned at how top-class cricket is changing in this country". As such, surely it's down to her - and people like her - to put forward suggestions as to how she would like to see counties develop. Complaining that she and her kids can't see First Class cricket in Somerset isn't doing this. Physician, heal thyself.
In 2020 Somerset CCC made a surplus of £111,064. This is good news. The county is able to continue to pay players, open its gates, develop new talent and entertain its supporters throughout the year. The fact there was a surplus is partly due to (I assume) people like Ms Chave paying their subscriptions to the tune of almost half a million pounds for the year.
There was also a payment of £1m from the ECB, relating to the 2019 World Cup and another payment of £1.3m from the ECB in relation to The Hundred. the total ECB funding to Somerset CCC for the year was £5,212,860. If Ms Chave really wants county cricket to continue in a vacuum without "interference" from outside, she ought to be careful what she wishes for. Without ECB funding there would be no Somerset CCC.
LOL "The Hundred doesn't - as far as I am aware - prevent counties playing First Class friendlies during August."
First Class friendlies using 2nd XI teams you mean?
"But, like all fans of Somerset, she will find her team doesn't play any cricket, of any format at all, anywhere until ... *checks notes* ... tomorrow morning. And, after that, she'll have to wait another 48 hours until they play again, at home."
And yet again trying to be too clever for your own good - you really should have been a politician because your ability to stretch the truth has no limits. Tomorrow's game as you well know is at Leicester - a minimum seven hour round trip. Somerset have one home day of cricket after Sunday for the next 21 days. One day of accessible cricket. Brilliant.
And I think she's an even better scourer of fixture lists than even you or me. So she can travel from the county she lives in to see Somerset play away tomorrow; or travel from the county she lives in to see Somerset play at home on Sunday. If she really wanted to know where to see her county play, that's where she could start. And if Somerset have failed to put on first class cricket for her to watch in person, she could trade up and watch England later in the month.
First class cricket is first class cricket. If she wanted to use her influence to ensure her county played first class cricket, she should be heartily encouraged to do so. And if her rejection is that it would be 2nd XI teams (I haven't bothered to check whether she's ever put forward that objection), she'd need to have a solid position on whether Somerset players could be allowed to choose to represent other teams (England, franchises) or insist that Somerset players could only ever play for Somerset (and face the prospect of a very low and diminishing standard of cricket). It's great to have choices.
How many of the England ODI squad are playing in the only domestic 50 over competition? If the answer is anything less than "All of them" then The Hundred is not only having a detrimental effect on the counties, but also on the England team.
There is simply no logic at all in having international 50 over players playing a format that literally nobody else plays instead.
Is there a thread to go to for people to talk about the hundred without having to justify themselves for enjoying it or to provide solutions as to the problems experienced, arguably as a result, elsewhere in the game. That's not an argument I have a view on BTW as I know nothing about it and don't really want to. I just like to enjoy a beer or two relaxing watching the cricket in the evening with my wife. There's no need to try and make us feel guilty for that surely!
I agree with @Chizz in that I can't see why posters who have no interest in, or liking for, the hundred, feel the need to come on here and post in the first place. I presume they don't watch it, so what for if it isn't just to criticise.
What can’t be argued is there are currently thousands of people watching cricket on a midweek afternoon, with additional live coverage on terrestrial and satellite television. It’s getting mass exposure to cricket that other comps are not. If you’re a cricket fan you should be rejoicing.
Contrast to athletics, BBC have the Diamond League rights and you had to search out coverage on the red button or buried in IPlayer to find the flagship Monaco DL meeting last night.
Is there a thread to go to for people to talk about the hundred without having being called onto justify themselves for enjoying it or to provide solutions as to the problems experienced, arguably as a result, elsewhere in the game. That's not an argument I have a view on BTW as I know nothing about it and don't really want to. I just like to enjoy a beer or two relaxing watching the cricket in the evening with my wife. There's no need to try and make us feel guilty for that surely!
I agree with @Chizz in that I can't see why posters who have no interest in, or liking for, the hundred, feel the need to come on here and post in the first place. I presume they don't watch it, so what for if it isn't just to argue.
Read your last paragraph back . The reason people post on here to criticise the Hundred is because of the damage it is doing to domestic cricket. I mentioned the 50 overs competition earlier as an example it's now basically a 2nd eleven competition. The reason people criticise on this thread is obvious I would of thought.
What can’t be argued is there are currently thousands of people watching cricket on a midweek afternoon, with additional live coverage on terrestrial and satellite television. It’s getting mass exposure to cricket that other comps are not. If you’re a cricket fan you should be rejoicing.
Contrast to athletics, BBC have the Diamond League rights and you had to search out coverage on the red button or buried in IPlayer to find the flagship Monaco DL meeting last night.
That's the point though I think. People aren't watching it because it's "The Hundred", they're watching it because they are starved of free to air cricket.
It's the same with football. Sky average 1.9 million viewers per premiership game, the BBC got 8.2 million for the FA cup final. People want to watch sport on TV without paying crazy money, now more than ever. If the BBC were showing The Blast instead of The Hundred, then, given the same marketing spend, the viewing figures would have been exactly the same.
Last point on this (for a while at least). We're forever hearing that it's worth throwing out the old, because the new will attract new cricket fans and "grow the game". By worldwide revenue, cricket is the second biggest sport in the world (though obviously quite a way behind football). It's not going to grow significantly from here, continual reinvention will, at best, keep it relevant and maybe stop it losing ground, but may (and in many's opinions, will) drive away traditional fans, negating the very gains they seek.
There are 3 formats of international cricket that matter, test, ODI and T20. We've side-lined the test team supply stream in county championship cricket, we're actively stopping our best players playing domestic 50 over cricket, and we're even devaluing our domestic T20 competition for a format nobody else plays. The best case scenario is that the game grows in the very short term, but then it all falls apart as the England national teams get worse at every single international format they compete in. A successful England team is the best way to "grow the game", but we're undermining the England team by the way we organise our domestic season, and we're stopping new fans even seeing the England team by pay-walling all their games.
What can’t be argued is there are currently thousands of people watching cricket on a midweek afternoon, with additional live coverage on terrestrial and satellite television. It’s getting mass exposure to cricket that other comps are not. If you’re a cricket fan you should be rejoicing.
Contrast to athletics, BBC have the Diamond League rights and you had to search out coverage on the red button or buried in IPlayer to find the flagship Monaco DL meeting last night.
That's the point though I think. People aren't watching it because it's "The Hundred", they're watching it because they are starved of free to air cricket.
It's the same with football. Sky average 1.9 million viewers per premiership game, the BBC got 8.2 million for the FA cup final. People want to watch sport on TV without paying crazy money, now more than ever. If the BBC were showing The Blast instead of The Hundred, then, given the same marketing spend, the viewing figures would have been exactly the same.
Last point on this (for a while at least). We're forever hearing that it's worth throwing out the old, because the new will attract new cricket fans and "grow the game". By worldwide revenue, cricket is the second biggest sport in the world (though obviously quite a way behind football). It's not going to grow significantly from here, continual reinvention will, at best, keep it relevant and maybe stop it losing ground, but may (and in many's opinions, will) drive away traditional fans, negating the very gains they seek.
There are 3 formats of international cricket that matter, test, ODI and T20. We've side-lined the test team supply stream in county championship cricket, we're actively stopping our best players playing domestic 50 over cricket, and we're even devaluing our domestic T20 competition for a format nobody else plays. The best case scenario is that the game grows in the very short term, but then it all falls apart as the England national teams get worse at every single international format they compete in. A successful England team is the best way to "grow the game", but we're undermining the England team by the way we organise our domestic season, and we're stopping new fans even seeing the England team by pay-walling all their games.
The Hundred is the solution to their being no other free-to-air cricket on tv, not the cause.
It's to the ECB credit, that they insisted on a free to air option for the Hundred, and the BBC wanted to show it.
They've tried to get the Blast on Free to Air, and the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 have no interest in it because the numbers just don't add up, the closest they've achieved is to get Sky to show some games on Sky Sports Mix and Sky One/Showcase, and then it's hardly had anyone watch.
I'm one of his biggest fans but he is in the worst form of his life. He needs a break and try and work out what's not working. Unfortunately he will just keep getting picked.
I think the stats shown on screen would be better presented if all included on the bottom bar, losing the chevrons and adding the 'balls remaining' and 'runs needed' figures to it. Having the vertical pillars clutters up the screen even though you get used to it. Silly thing to grumble about, but quite irritating for me.
Oh jeez! 3rd wicket down. Not sure this game has the potential to go close. Hope I'm wrong. If not maybe the women can dish up something more competitive. Has anyone else noticed that the bowler Raine bears a passing resemblance to Johnny Williams?
Thing is @Fanny Fanackapan I really do think you being a female (last time you checked) has a relevance to whether you watch/promote womens sport.
Because if you don’t, how are we ever expected to encourage other younger females into any kind of sport if we only ever watch the geezers? We can’t just expect other people to do it for us imho.
Maybe it’s because I’m still a bit miffed that I never got the opportunity at a young age to do anything other than play netball, hockey or athletics. Football was definitely not for girls and cricket? Not one school I knew growing up entertained the idea of girls playing cricket.
Now we’ll never know if they had kept the order of the men first women second whether it would have worked. When I was arranging cricket work do’s at the Oval, folks just wanted a bit of cricket (most had never been before) & a few jars with their colleagues to wind down. I honestly believe it wouldn’t have bothered them one bit who came first (phnarr phnarr)
I hated Sky. I hated the Premier League. Yet here I am, years later Sky’d up watching every blooming EPL game I can. Things evolve and change. Not always for the better. But I grab enjoyment wherever I can these days.
LLLBH 💚
I really don't have the energy to continue with this , dear friend, so regardless of responses, after this , I'm out ( mbw? Mouth before wicket !)
Once again, my words, chosen very carefully in my previous posts, have been misunderstood ....maybe in order to point the finger at someone who has the "nerve" to state her preferences when watching team sports. Maybe check the definition of "opinion" in the dictionary.....
I have clearly stated that I don't watch women's football & cricket per se ...not that I haven't done so at all but I do not search for live matches as I prefer to watch the mens' games. But where have I stated that I won't promote women's sport ? Indeed, I don't take a banner to Kent men's matches asking " Why aren't our women playing more regularly at Canterbury" when I have no intention of attending such ....But that doesn't mean I'm not pleased to see more openings in team sport for women ...it's just something I'm not particularly interested in watching it.
If that doesn't explain my views, then, sadly, nothing will.
And in response to Rothko's post regarding another season of discussing the pros & cons of the Hundred, surely it speaks for itself....
Can I watch Kent make a hash out of replying the Essex’s 331? Nope!
I’ve got the choice of one bollocks made up team playing another bollocks made up team or another bollocks made up team playing another bollocks made up team……(using the original Anglo Saxon meaning of the word).
Is there a thread to go to for people to talk about the hundred without having being called onto justify themselves for enjoying it or to provide solutions as to the problems experienced, arguably as a result, elsewhere in the game. That's not an argument I have a view on BTW as I know nothing about it and don't really want to. I just like to enjoy a beer or two relaxing watching the cricket in the evening with my wife. There's no need to try and make us feel guilty for that surely!
I agree with @Chizz in that I can't see why posters who have no interest in, or liking for, the hundred, feel the need to come on here and post in the first place. I presume they don't watch it, so what for if it isn't just to argue.
Read your last paragraph back . The reason people post on here to criticise the Hundred is because of the damage it is doing to domestic cricket. I mentioned the 50 overs competition earlier as an example it's now basically a 2nd eleven competition. The reason people criticise on this thread is obvious I would of thought.
And if you read my first paragraph you'll see I'm asking where to go to comment on the games being played without having to ignore posts from those whose views on the merits and demerits are known and oft repeated.
I don't believe there is sufficient interest on the wider forum to justify a Match Thread for games as such, so I'll continue to post my observations on them in here.
Can I watch Kent make a hash out of replying the Essex’s 331? Nope!
I’ve got the choice of one bollocks made up team playing another bollocks made up team or another bollocks made up team playing another bollocks made up team……(using the original Anglo Saxon meaning of the word).
Yes you can - it’s free to air on the kent cricket website . Or you could have bought a ticket to Chelmsford.
Comments
Purely by asking my original, innocent question on here as to whether playing the women's Hundred AFTER the men's might have a bearing on attendances for the former, suzi took the discussion to a place it was never intended to go. So, not my fault.
Addick Addict summarises my viewpoint perfectly. And he knows far more about the game than the majority of posters on this thread.
To summarise, for those who have misinterpreted my input, I don't believe I've ever criticised those who pay their money & enjoy an afternoon/evening of fast paced cricket in person. Their choice but not for me.
My issue has been clarified & explained by AA and we are not alone in our views, especially among those who love to watch their counties battle out a match with A N Other. NOTHING whatsoever to do with the gender of the players.
Equitable criticism is useful and healthy. So, if someone thinks it's too loud and too brash compared to - say - a mid-table country championship match on a Thursday afternoon, that's completely fair and appropriate; but there are other forms of cricket which are also "too loud and too brash". Likewise, if someone says they don't like it because it should be for England qualified players only, again that's fair enough, so long as they acknowledge that there are non-England players in every format.
What I find a bit odd (and I don't mean anything any stronger than "a bit odd") is the number of people who post on here describing in quite a lot of detail (often many times) about how much they "hate" The Hundred, when compared to the number of people who do the same on county championship threads.
I have always found county championship cricket excruciating and a dull waste of time. But I don't bang on about it on county championship threads; and I totally respect and admire the choice of people who do like it, who spend their time watching it and who get - and have got - many years of honest pleasure out of it. I find it boring and antiquated; but no-one cares (and no-one should care) what I think about it.
As a pathway drug for impressionable, future denizens of the cricket family, I think The Hundred is doing a great job and I am pleased to see it continuing to thrive.
And this is the case for many cricket lovers across England who don't live near a 1st class county ground
"As a pathway drug". If ever there was a euphemism that was it.
This thread seems to be relitigating exactly the same points it did last summer.
Because if you don’t, how are we ever expected to encourage other younger females into any kind of sport if we only ever watch the geezers? We can’t just expect other people to do it for us imho.
Maybe it’s because I’m still a bit miffed that I never got the opportunity at a young age to do anything other than play netball, hockey or athletics. Football was definitely not for girls and cricket? Not one school I knew growing up entertained the idea of girls playing cricket.
I hated Sky. I hated the Premier League. Yet here I am, years later Sky’d up watching every blooming EPL game I can. Things evolve and change. Not always for the better. But I grab enjoyment wherever I can these days.
LLLBH 💚
Like supporters of eighteen "first class counties", the cricket she can see is limited. Unlike residents of 30 other counties in England and Wales, she at least gets to see her county play - residents in Norfolk or Buckinghamshire or Dorset or Devon (where, ironically, she bases her publication), and so on.
Should Somerset play fewer First Class games, so that more counties can have First Class status? Should there be a more equitable approach? Should Somerset invite other teams - perhaps overseas teams? - to play First Class matches in the county during August? As far as I am aware, there are no rules in place to stop the county serving up matches like this to what she believes to be a tsunami of demand for seats. Can counties persuade Universities to extend their seasons beyond mid-July in order to serve up First Class cricket at Taunton and other grounds?
These are all pertinent questions I hope she and her team of four, white, middle-aged men can pontificate when determining what's best for cricket in multi-cultural Britain. The Hundred doesn't - as far as I am aware - prevent counties playing First Class friendlies during August. (Happy to stand corrected if this is not what they voted for).
Taken in the round, bringing in viewing figures of 16.1m in its first season, half of whom are new to cricket probably, on balance (and this is only my contention, I am sure Ms Chave sees it differently) is worth it, even if it has resulted in First Class championship matches being played other than in August.
I don't put myself forward as having an answer to her question as to where her kids can see cricket during the holidays (other than the very obvious Somerset CCC fixture list, the plethora of televised cricket matches, treating them to a trip to Kent to see the Lions play SA, or to London to see some Test cricket). In contrast, she does put herself forward as someone who wants to "be a voice for those concerned at how top-class cricket is changing in this country". As such, surely it's down to her - and people like her - to put forward suggestions as to how she would like to see counties develop. Complaining that she and her kids can't see First Class cricket in Somerset isn't doing this. Physician, heal thyself.
In 2020 Somerset CCC made a surplus of £111,064. This is good news. The county is able to continue to pay players, open its gates, develop new talent and entertain its supporters throughout the year. The fact there was a surplus is partly due to (I assume) people like Ms Chave paying their subscriptions to the tune of almost half a million pounds for the year.
There was also a payment of £1m from the ECB, relating to the 2019 World Cup and another payment of £1.3m from the ECB in relation to The Hundred. the total ECB funding to Somerset CCC for the year was £5,212,860. If Ms Chave really wants county cricket to continue in a vacuum without "interference" from outside, she ought to be careful what she wishes for. Without ECB funding there would be no Somerset CCC.
LOL "The Hundred doesn't - as far as I am aware - prevent counties playing First Class friendlies during August."
First Class friendlies using 2nd XI teams you mean?
"But, like all fans of Somerset, she will find her team doesn't play any cricket, of any format at all, anywhere until ... *checks notes* ... tomorrow morning. And, after that, she'll have to wait another 48 hours until they play again, at home."
And yet again trying to be too clever for your own good - you really should have been a politician because your ability to stretch the truth has no limits. Tomorrow's game as you well know is at Leicester - a minimum seven hour round trip. Somerset have one home day of cricket after Sunday for the next 21 days. One day of accessible cricket. Brilliant.
Because of the Hundred it's been reduced to a 2nd eleven competition.
I shall continue to criticise the Hundred all the while it is having a detrimental effect on domestic competition's.
First class cricket is first class cricket. If she wanted to use her influence to ensure her county played first class cricket, she should be heartily encouraged to do so. And if her rejection is that it would be 2nd XI teams (I haven't bothered to check whether she's ever put forward that objection), she'd need to have a solid position on whether Somerset players could be allowed to choose to represent other teams (England, franchises) or insist that Somerset players could only ever play for Somerset (and face the prospect of a very low and diminishing standard of cricket). It's great to have choices.
There is simply no logic at all in having international 50 over players playing a format that literally nobody else plays instead.
I agree with @Chizz in that I can't see why posters who have no interest in, or liking for, the hundred, feel the need to come on here and post in the first place. I presume they don't watch it, so what for if it isn't just to criticise.
Marvellous 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
The reason people post on here to criticise the Hundred is because of the damage it is doing to domestic cricket.
I mentioned the 50 overs competition earlier as an example it's now basically a 2nd eleven competition.
The reason people criticise on this thread is obvious I would of thought.
It's the same with football. Sky average 1.9 million viewers per premiership game, the BBC got 8.2 million for the FA cup final. People want to watch sport on TV without paying crazy money, now more than ever. If the BBC were showing The Blast instead of The Hundred, then, given the same marketing spend, the viewing figures would have been exactly the same.
Last point on this (for a while at least). We're forever hearing that it's worth throwing out the old, because the new will attract new cricket fans and "grow the game". By worldwide revenue, cricket is the second biggest sport in the world (though obviously quite a way behind football). It's not going to grow significantly from here, continual reinvention will, at best, keep it relevant and maybe stop it losing ground, but may (and in many's opinions, will) drive away traditional fans, negating the very gains they seek.
There are 3 formats of international cricket that matter, test, ODI and T20. We've side-lined the test team supply stream in county championship cricket, we're actively stopping our best players playing domestic 50 over cricket, and we're even devaluing our domestic T20 competition for a format nobody else plays. The best case scenario is that the game grows in the very short term, but then it all falls apart as the England national teams get worse at every single international format they compete in. A successful England team is the best way to "grow the game", but we're undermining the England team by the way we organise our domestic season, and we're stopping new fans even seeing the England team by pay-walling all their games.
They've tried to get the Blast on Free to Air, and the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 have no interest in it because the numbers just don't add up, the closest they've achieved is to get Sky to show some games on Sky Sports Mix and Sky One/Showcase, and then it's hardly had anyone watch.
He needs a break and try and work out what's not working.
Unfortunately he will just keep getting picked.
Oh jeez! 3rd wicket down. Not sure this game has the potential to go close. Hope I'm wrong. If not maybe the women can dish up something more competitive. Has anyone else noticed that the bowler Raine bears a passing resemblance to Johnny Williams?
I should add of course this was the game between the chaps .. chapesses game to follow very soon
Once again, my words, chosen very carefully in my previous posts, have been misunderstood ....maybe in order to point the finger at someone who has the "nerve" to state her preferences when watching team sports. Maybe check the definition of "opinion" in the dictionary.....
I have clearly stated that I don't watch women's football & cricket per se ...not that I haven't done so at all but I do not search for live matches as I prefer to watch the mens' games. But where have I stated that I won't promote women's sport ? Indeed, I don't take a banner to Kent men's matches asking " Why aren't our women playing more regularly at Canterbury" when I have no intention of attending such ....But that doesn't mean I'm not pleased to see more openings in team sport for women ...it's just something I'm not particularly interested in watching it.
If that doesn't explain my views, then, sadly, nothing will.
And in response to Rothko's post regarding another season of discussing the pros & cons of the Hundred, surely it speaks for itself....
Not everyone agrees with you :-)
I’ve got the choice of one bollocks made up team playing another bollocks made up team or another bollocks made up team playing another bollocks made up team……(using the original Anglo Saxon meaning of the word).
I don't believe there is sufficient interest on the wider forum to justify a Match Thread for games as such, so I'll continue to post my observations on them in here.