Without getting into the same arguments, the final was a pretty disappointing affair really, if you're trying to create a spectacle to rival the big T20 competitions. All that effort to create a short franchise tournament so that the best overseas players could feature, and most of the ones who had played had left already.
Jimmy Neesham is a fine white ball player, but has played for several counties in the T20 Blast previously, while both sides had Irish players in them.
There were still good players on display of course, but that's because English counties these days produce lots of good T20 players.
This is the exact issue I have with it and the exact issue the ECB will have going forward with the emergence of MLC. There wasn't really any overseas talent that we haven't seen in the Blast over the years. If the goal was to create an IPL challenger with the huge names then it's kinda failed. Harry Brook could have easily scored that hundred for Yorkshire and not the Northern Superchargers. Jimmy Neesham has been a regular in the Blast when he's been available (don't think he's centrally contracted anymore to New Zealand), Shaheen Shah Afridi has been at Nottinghamshire, Rashid Khan a regular down here at Sussex at least under Jason Gillespie.
And we produce so much homegrown talent too , a lot of it at least on the white ball only side of things that goes around the world playing IPL,BBL,SAT20,PSL etc etc.
The Daily Telegraph says it’s a success - must be true!
Sounds like a desperate attempt to convince people to me………..
Why would The Telegraph (and BBC and Sky and so forth) be desperate to convince people?
Four of six totally OTT quotes were from one paper and the Sky & BBC comments hardly qualify as ringing and enthusiastic endorsements.
Personally I think it being oversold because it’s been total a financial disaster, has failed across the board and is widely and justly reviled by the overwhelming majority of cricket fans.
Did that come across in those articles?
Yes - The Telegraph ones for sure and very much so. Definite case of talking up the format big time which immediately raises lots of questions as highlighted by other posters
Judging by the other comments I’m not the only one who thinks so either.
My husband watched almost all the matches and I watched most of the evening matches and thoroughly enjoyed them.
I accept that for those that watch a lot of county cricket, The Hundred is not helpful, but for those of us who don't watch much cricket, this is an enjoyable format.
I have friends and family who attended a lot of the matches at The Oval and they had a very good time. The crowd scenes showed a lot of people enjoying themselves and if some of those children go on to play cricket themselves, that must be a good thing.
Without getting into the same arguments, the final was a pretty disappointing affair really, if you're trying to create a spectacle to rival the big T20 competitions. All that effort to create a short franchise tournament so that the best overseas players could feature, and most of the ones who had played had left already.
Jimmy Neesham is a fine white ball player, but has played for several counties in the T20 Blast previously, while both sides had Irish players in them.
There were still good players on display of course, but that's because English counties these days produce lots of good T20 players.
I was at Lord's for the final and it was far from disappointing. The Invincibles started badly and it looked like there was no chance of getting a competitive score. Tom Curran and Jimmy Neesham turned it around and this was followed by some good bowling meant the Originals struggled.
My Surrey membership includes all The Hundred games at The Oval. All the matches were sell outs. It should be remembered that ticket sales are not the only source of income. There is an amazing array of food and drink outlets around the ground. This provides rental income from the space to top up sales through the club's own bars and restaurants.
My husband watched almost all the matches and I watched most of the evening matches and thoroughly enjoyed them.
I accept that for those that watch a lot of county cricket, The Hundred is not helpful, but for those of us who don't watch much cricket, this is an enjoyable format.
I have friends and family who attended a lot of the matches at The Oval and they had a very good time. The crowd scenes showed a lot of people enjoying themselves and if some of those children go on to play cricket themselves, that must be a good thing.
Maybe more needs to be done to make people aware of the other formats of cricket including the T20 if people, notably kids aren't getting into cricket without the Hundred!!!!
My husband watched almost all the matches and I watched most of the evening matches and thoroughly enjoyed them.
I accept that for those that watch a lot of county cricket, The Hundred is not helpful, but for those of us who don't watch much cricket, this is an enjoyable format.
I have friends and family who attended a lot of the matches at The Oval and they had a very good time. The crowd scenes showed a lot of people enjoying themselves and if some of those children go on to play cricket themselves, that must be a good thing.
So, would you say The Hundred has, in effect, drawn more people into watching cricket?
Hmmm. Ringing endorsements from those with a vested interest, quelle surprise! Buttler, a player who has hardly played for his county and greatly benefits from this and other franchise cricket is one of those players who big it up.
He is also skippering the national team that is about to defend the World Cup where virtually none of the players has played a 50 over game for ages. what wonderful preparation!
My husband watched almost all the matches and I watched most of the evening matches and thoroughly enjoyed them.
I accept that for those that watch a lot of county cricket, The Hundred is not helpful, but for those of us who don't watch much cricket, this is an enjoyable format.
I have friends and family who attended a lot of the matches at The Oval and they had a very good time. The crowd scenes showed a lot of people enjoying themselves and if some of those children go on to play cricket themselves, that must be a good thing.
So, would you say The Hundred has, in effect, drawn more people into watching cricket?
Hmmm. Ringing endorsements from those with a vested interest, quelle surprise! Buttler, a player who has hardly played for his county and greatly benefits from this and other franchise cricket is one of those players who big it up.
He is also skippering the national team that is about to defend the World Cup where virtually none of the players has played a 50 over game for ages. what wonderful preparation!
Madness that hardly anyone has played any 50 over cricket before the 50 over World Cup - if only there was a 50 over competition before the WC where they could have played!!!! Wait.....
Maybe ENG football could just play 5-a-side before their next tournament - it's ok if a few more people watch it!
Without getting into the same arguments, the final was a pretty disappointing affair really, if you're trying to create a spectacle to rival the big T20 competitions. All that effort to create a short franchise tournament so that the best overseas players could feature, and most of the ones who had played had left already.
Jimmy Neesham is a fine white ball player, but has played for several counties in the T20 Blast previously, while both sides had Irish players in them.
There were still good players on display of course, but that's because English counties these days produce lots of good T20 players.
I'd have to disagree that the final was disappointing. I thought it was a very exciting match actually. Whether it achieved anything in terms of being a rival to other franchise tournaments is another matter but the match itself I thought was great.
Hmmm. Ringing endorsements from those with a vested interest, quelle surprise! Buttler, a player who has hardly played for his county and greatly benefits from this and other franchise cricket is one of those players who big it up.
He is also skippering the national team that is about to defend the World Cup where virtually none of the players has played a 50 over game for ages. what wonderful preparation!
Madness that hardly anyone has played any 50 over cricket before the 50 over World Cup - if only there was a 50 over competition before the WC where they could have played!!!! Wait.....
Maybe ENG football could just play 5-a-side before their next tournament - it's ok if a few more people watch it!
How does this compare with the other WC teams? Asking because I don't know, and I think it would be an interesting point, when comparing domestic one day matches that England players compete in, compared to those in other countries.
I think in New Zealand, the last 50 matches were as long ago as February; the Australian ODI tournament takes place immediately before the World Cup, but several weeks after they've selected their preliminary squad; and in South Africa and Pakistan, the latest CSA One Day Cup and the Pakistan Cup finished last year.
It's an interesting point that England hasn't hosted List A fifty over games for some time; but have other countries done so?
My husband watched almost all the matches and I watched most of the evening matches and thoroughly enjoyed them.
I accept that for those that watch a lot of county cricket, The Hundred is not helpful, but for those of us who don't watch much cricket, this is an enjoyable format.
I have friends and family who attended a lot of the matches at The Oval and they had a very good time. The crowd scenes showed a lot of people enjoying themselves and if some of those children go on to play cricket themselves, that must be a good thing.
So, would you say The Hundred has, in effect, drawn more people into watching cricket?
No because they already watch cricket, albeit not much
Hmmm. Ringing endorsements from those with a vested interest, quelle surprise! Buttler, a player who has hardly played for his county and greatly benefits from this and other franchise cricket is one of those players who big it up.
He is also skippering the national team that is about to defend the World Cup where virtually none of the players has played a 50 over game for ages. what wonderful preparation!
Madness that hardly anyone has played any 50 over cricket before the 50 over World Cup - if only there was a 50 over competition before the WC where they could have played!!!! Wait.....
Maybe ENG football could just play 5-a-side before their next tournament - it's ok if a few more people watch it!
How does this compare with the other WC teams? Asking because I don't know, and I think it would be an interesting point, when comparing domestic one day matches that England players compete in, compared to those in other countries.
I think in New Zealand, the last 50 matches were as long ago as February; the Australian ODI tournament takes place immediately before the World Cup, but several weeks after they've selected their preliminary squad; and in South Africa and Pakistan, the latest CSA One Day Cup and the Pakistan Cup finished last year.
It's an interesting point that England hasn't hosted List A fifty over games for some time; but have other countries done so?
I don't know and it doesn't matter. ENG should prepare as best they can so using other sports as an example, you wouldn't prepare for a football tournament playing only playing 5-a-side of the Rugby World Cup by playing 7s. Irrespective of what other teams were or weren't doing
Without getting into the same arguments, the final was a pretty disappointing affair really, if you're trying to create a spectacle to rival the big T20 competitions. All that effort to create a short franchise tournament so that the best overseas players could feature, and most of the ones who had played had left already.
Jimmy Neesham is a fine white ball player, but has played for several counties in the T20 Blast previously, while both sides had Irish players in them.
There were still good players on display of course, but that's because English counties these days produce lots of good T20 players.
I was at Lord's for the final and it was far from disappointing. The Invincibles started badly and it looked like there was no chance of getting a competitive score. Tom Curran and Jimmy Neesham turned it around and this was followed by some good bowling meant the Originals struggled.
My Surrey membership includes all The Hundred games at The Oval. All the matches were sell outs. It should be remembered that ticket sales are not the only source of income. There is an amazing array of food and drink outlets around the ground. This provides rental income from the space to top up sales through the club's own bars and restaurants.
I wasn't talking about the final as a game of cricket, but rather the final as a showpiece for what should be a tournament attracting international stars, who wouldn't otherwise play here.
And it's massive divisive. Surrey members could "claim" the Invincibles as a semi-Surrey team, but the same isn't true for fans of Kent, Sussex or Essex. And indeed Middlesex, who are just tenants of Lord's.
When I played cricket at school, it was frowned on to be attacking. I always thought Geoff Boycott was a bore and enjoyed watching Botham and Richards who actually tried to clobber the ball. Then people were saying that it encourages players to play reckless strokes and will destroy test cricket, but Bazball has shown that may not have been correct and that could save test cricket. What is the biggest threat to test cricket is that people prefer the entertainment of T20 and The Hundred.
The thing is, a short game provides something people want when they have busy lives and these games are accessable like a football match. 2 or 3 hours of their time taken and a result at the end of it. Now if you are a purist you don't like and probably never will, but I enjoy watching these innovative shots without a Boycott type in sight. I watched a good number of Hundred games this season and most of them were very entertaining. That might stick in some people's throats but I also noticed there were decent crowds. There is definitely something to the format which means it could grow.
MuttleyCAFC said:
When I played cricket at school, it was frowned on to be attacking. I always thought Geoff Boycott was a bore and enjoyed watching Botham and Richards who actually tried to clobber the ball. Then people were saying that it encourages players to play reckless strokes and will destroy test cricket, but Bazball has shown that may not have been correct and that could save test cricket. What is the biggest threat to test cricket is that people prefer the entertainment of T20 and The Hundred.
The thing is, a short game provides something people want when they have busy lives and these games are accessable like a football match. 2 or 3 hours of their time taken and a result at the end of it. Now if you are a purist you don't like and probably never will, but I enjoy watching these innovative shots without a Boycott type in sight. I watched a good number of Hundred games this season and most of them were very entertaining. That might stick in some people's throats but I also noticed there were decent crowds. There is definitely something to the format which means it could grow.
People have time to watch an Hundred game but not a T20? I think the biggest threat to Test cricket was the number of draws
When I played cricket at school, it was frowned on to be attacking. I always thought Geoff Boycott was a bore and enjoyed watching Botham and Richards who actually tried to clobber the ball. Then people were saying that it encourages players to play reckless strokes and will destroy test cricket, but Bazball has shown that may not have been correct and that could save test cricket. What is the biggest threat to test cricket is that people prefer the entertainment of T20 and The Hundred.
The thing is, a short game provides something people want when they have busy lives and these games are accessable like a football match. 2 or 3 hours of their time taken and a result at the end of it. Now if you are a purist you don't like and probably never will, but I enjoy watching these innovative shots without a Boycott type in sight. I watched a good number of Hundred games this season and most of them were very entertaining. That might stick in some people's throats but I also noticed there were decent crowds. There is definitely something to the format which means it could grow.
Nobody is complaining about having shorter forms of cricket. Most of us here enjoy T20s and the existing county T20 Blast.
The 2023 edition will be played as a ODI (50-over) competition - what a great idea before the ODI World Cup!
That has very little to do with The Hundred
It has a lot to do with the Hundred and if you cant see that you are missing the point! The existing ODI competition is hugely compromised by the Hundred as was the Ashes. And most if not all the of the ENG ODI squad wold have better prep playing the same format before the WC not some barstardised format
Well The Hundred is a small variation to T20 as far as I can see, which many were against when it was introduced and indeed a lot of the same things were said about it.
Well The Hundred is a small variation to T20 as far as I can see, which many were against when it was introduced and indeed a lot of the same things were said about it.
yep, no need for the Hundred as the T20 an established short format
The 2023 edition will be played as a ODI (50-over) competition - what a great idea before the ODI World Cup!
That has very little to do with The Hundred
It has a lot to do with the Hundred and if you cant see that you are missing the point! The existing ODI competition is hugely compromised by the Hundred as was the Ashes. And most if not all the of the ENG ODI squad wold have better prep playing the same format before the WC not some barstardised format
The Asia Cup 2023 has nothing at all to do with The Hundred. It's an international competition, contested by Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India and Nepal and started after The Hundred finals' day. No domestic teams take part. No individuals are excluded from taking part in the latter through playing in the former.
It has as much to do with The Hundred as the FA Cup has to the Copa América.
Well The Hundred is a small variation to T20 as far as I can see, which many were against when it was introduced and indeed a lot of the same things were said about it.
yep, no need for the Hundred as the T20 an established short format
The need will be decided on its popularity ultimately. No reason the T20 blast will be affected as they don't clash. It is hard having another T20 competion as having two next to each other sort of devalues them. You need to be champions for the year not for a couple of months. It could just be a case of adding more cricket that people want to watch. Not you, but as I said the crowds looked good. Longer format one day matches will of course be affected but the demand for that cricket isn't there as you can't go an watch one after work say.
The 2023 edition will be played as a ODI (50-over) competition - what a great idea before the ODI World Cup!
That has very little to do with The Hundred
It has a lot to do with the Hundred and if you cant see that you are missing the point! The existing ODI competition is hugely compromised by the Hundred as was the Ashes. And most if not all the of the ENG ODI squad wold have better prep playing the same format before the WC not some barstardised format
The Asia Cup 2023 has nothing at all to do with The Hundred. It's an international competition, contested by Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India and Nepal and started after The Hundred finals' day. No domestic teams take part. No individuals are excluded from taking part in the latter through playing in the former.
It has as much to do with The Hundred as the FA Cup has to the Copa América.
What are you on about now? I never said the Asia Cup had anything to do with the Hundred!
The 2023 edition will be played as a ODI (50-over) competition - what a great idea before the ODI World Cup!
That has very little to do with The Hundred
It has a lot to do with the Hundred and if you cant see that you are missing the point! The existing ODI competition is hugely compromised by the Hundred as was the Ashes. And most if not all the of the ENG ODI squad wold have better prep playing the same format before the WC not some barstardised format
The Asia Cup 2023 has nothing at all to do with The Hundred. It's an international competition, contested by Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India and Nepal and started after The Hundred finals' day. No domestic teams take part. No individuals are excluded from taking part in the latter through playing in the former.
It has as much to do with The Hundred as the FA Cup has to the Copa América.
I thought it was to do with the fact those countries are playing 50 over cricket to prepare for the world cup. Asia cup is normally 20 overs. During our summer we could of been doing the same but instead choose to play a version of cricket no one else plays.
One thing that goes in the Hundred's favour is the fact that you can watch it free on the BBC. It's virtually the only cricket that you can actually watch a game in full, live, without a subscription.
Comments
This is the exact issue I have with it and the exact issue the ECB will have going forward with the emergence of MLC. There wasn't really any overseas talent that we haven't seen in the Blast over the years. If the goal was to create an IPL challenger with the huge names then it's kinda failed. Harry Brook could have easily scored that hundred for Yorkshire and not the Northern Superchargers. Jimmy Neesham has been a regular in the Blast when he's been available (don't think he's centrally contracted anymore to New Zealand), Shaheen Shah Afridi has been at Nottinghamshire, Rashid Khan a regular down here at Sussex at least under Jason Gillespie.
And we produce so much homegrown talent too , a lot of it at least on the white ball only side of things that goes around the world playing IPL,BBL,SAT20,PSL etc etc.
Judging by the other comments I’m not the only one who thinks so either.
I accept that for those that watch a lot of county cricket, The Hundred is not helpful, but for those of us who don't watch much cricket, this is an enjoyable format.
I have friends and family who attended a lot of the matches at The Oval and they had a very good time. The crowd scenes showed a lot of people enjoying themselves and if some of those children go on to play cricket themselves, that must be a good thing.
My Surrey membership includes all The Hundred games at The Oval. All the matches were sell outs. It should be remembered that ticket sales are not the only source of income. There is an amazing array of food and drink outlets around the ground. This provides rental income from the space to top up sales through the club's own bars and restaurants.
Buttler, a player who has hardly played for his county and greatly benefits from this and other franchise cricket is one of those players who big it up.
what wonderful preparation!
Maybe ENG football could just play 5-a-side before their next tournament - it's ok if a few more people watch it!
I think in New Zealand, the last 50 matches were as long ago as February; the Australian ODI tournament takes place immediately before the World Cup, but several weeks after they've selected their preliminary squad; and in South Africa and Pakistan, the latest CSA One Day Cup and the Pakistan Cup finished last year.
It's an interesting point that England hasn't hosted List A fifty over games for some time; but have other countries done so?
The 2023 edition will be played as a ODI (50-over) competition - what a great idea before the ODI World Cup!
And it's massive divisive. Surrey members could "claim" the Invincibles as a semi-Surrey team, but the same isn't true for fans of Kent, Sussex or Essex. And indeed Middlesex, who are just tenants of Lord's.
The thing is, a short game provides something people want when they have busy lives and these games are accessable like a football match. 2 or 3 hours of their time taken and a result at the end of it. Now if you are a purist you don't like and probably never will, but I enjoy watching these innovative shots without a Boycott type in sight. I watched a good number of Hundred games this season and most of them were very entertaining. That might stick in some people's throats but I also noticed there were decent crowds. There is definitely something to the format which means it could grow.
MuttleyCAFC said: When I played cricket at school, it was frowned on to be attacking. I always thought Geoff Boycott was a bore and enjoyed watching Botham and Richards who actually tried to clobber the ball. Then people were saying that it encourages players to play reckless strokes and will destroy test cricket, but Bazball has shown that may not have been correct and that could save test cricket. What is the biggest threat to test cricket is that people prefer the entertainment of T20 and The Hundred.
The thing is, a short game provides something people want when they have busy lives and these games are accessable like a football match. 2 or 3 hours of their time taken and a result at the end of it. Now if you are a purist you don't like and probably never will, but I enjoy watching these innovative shots without a Boycott type in sight. I watched a good number of Hundred games this season and most of them were very entertaining. That might stick in some people's throats but I also noticed there were decent crowds. There is definitely something to the format which means it could grow. People have time to watch an Hundred game but not a T20? I think the biggest threat to Test cricket was the number of draws
It has as much to do with The Hundred as the FA Cup has to the Copa América.
Are you missing the point again or choosing to?