Went to the game at the Oval with the kids who loved it, want to go again, and are now interested in cricket, but that's a bad thing according to some on here
As someone who has volunteered, on behalf of the game for almost 50 years, be it captaining, coaching, running fund raising events, sat on committees, colts secretary, scoring, umpiring etc etc and turned down every single penny for doing those things, I can assure you that I am very much with one for kids enjoying and becoming involved in cricket. They are the future. What I object to is certain people at the ECB who have now sailed off into the sunset with their millions inventing a competition that was only ever going to alienate its hardcore of support.
They could have re-vamped the Blast, negotiated for it to be shown on terrestrial TV and spent all the money that they did on The Hundred in doing that. Those same kids would still have become interested in the game without county championship matches being consigned to the whole of April, May and September and the 50 over competition becoming no more than a 2nd XI comp. These people are driven by money but without the volunteers the game is dead.
The most Yes, but, answer you could ever write, and what I fully expected for someone who just has a bee in their bonnet over the concept
What does this mean? It makes no sense.
Perfect sense, it's a proper, yes great you enjoy it, BUT PLEASE THINK OF PEOPLE LIKE ME, type post. Sod the kids, worry about the members of effectively insolvent businesses instead
Glad your kids enjoyed it @Rothko Just one question - would you have not taken them to a t20 game if the hundred had not been invented ?
I'm watching the test and the hundred and loving both.
And I'm watching the Test and the 50 over comp and loving them both
And writing on The Hundred thread... 😉
And the Kent thread. And the England thread. And any number of other threads. It's the gift of multi-tasking afforded to only some people so I'm told. And I don't have to watch the Hundred to comment on the damage it has done to the game as a whole.
So you've never actually watched a game?
Not this year. I watched a few in the first season but was enough and have even scored a few 100 ball games that mirror The Hundred rules purely out of a sense of duty to help a club that asked me to do so. There is a shortage of both scorers and umpires as many that play the game will, no doubt, confirm.
The one area where it has improved things is the Women's game in giving it that exposure but should and could have been done with the same assistance from the ECB by supporting women's county T20 matches in the same way. Even then, the ECB managed to successfully undermine women's games by taking any lost time, as a result of overnight rain, from the women's game rather than it being pro rata'd over both matches.
What some also don't appreciate, though, is the shorter you make a game, the less chance that all of the players have of actually doing something in the match. And if all kids do is to field then they will soon lose interest.
Went to the game at the Oval with the kids who loved it, want to go again, and are now interested in cricket, but that's a bad thing according to some on here
As someone who has volunteered, on behalf of the game for almost 50 years, be it captaining, coaching, running fund raising events, sat on committees, colts secretary, scoring, umpiring etc etc and turned down every single penny for doing those things, I can assure you that I am very much with one for kids enjoying and becoming involved in cricket. They are the future. What I object to is certain people at the ECB who have now sailed off into the sunset with their millions inventing a competition that was only ever going to alienate its hardcore of support.
They could have re-vamped the Blast, negotiated for it to be shown on terrestrial TV and spent all the money that they did on The Hundred in doing that. Those same kids would still have become interested in the game without county championship matches being consigned to the whole of April, May and September and the 50 over competition becoming no more than a 2nd XI comp. These people are driven by money but without the volunteers the game is dead.
The most Yes, but, answer you could ever write, and what I fully expected for someone who just has a bee in their bonnet over the concept
What does this mean? It makes no sense.
Perfect sense, it's a proper, yes great you enjoy it, BUT PLEASE THINK OF PEOPLE LIKE ME, type post. Sod the kids, worry about the members of effectively insolvent businesses instead
Glad your kids enjoyed it @Rothko Just one question - would you have not taken them to a t20 game if the hundred had not been invented ?
Maybe, but then the experience is part of it, 26,000 at the Oval under the light in opening week is better the a dead rubber against Sussex at the St Lawrence with 2,000 people there. It’s as much about the experience for them a the game.
In an interview just yesterday lunchtime, Michael Atherton pointed out to the ECB's current CEO, Richard Gould, this is what he said when, as Surrey's CEO, he was asked about The Hundred:
"It doesn't matter whether it's your county club or your local club, they are at the heart of their communities, they are developing players. When franchise teams appear, all they do is skim the cream off the top. Their idea of player development pathway is a cheque book."
He also admits that the ECB planned all along to sell the Hundred but kept it from the counties so that they wouldn't block its creation and that the ECB didn't want the Blast re-vamped because you can't create private investment through Members' Clubs. The biggest driver of the Hundred, Andrew Strauss, when Director of England Cricket, now intends to personally benefit massively from that by buying a franchise. Isn't that called corruption?
Went to the game at the Oval with the kids who loved it, want to go again, and are now interested in cricket, but that's a bad thing according to some on here
As someone who has volunteered, on behalf of the game for almost 50 years, be it captaining, coaching, running fund raising events, sat on committees, colts secretary, scoring, umpiring etc etc and turned down every single penny for doing those things, I can assure you that I am very much with one for kids enjoying and becoming involved in cricket. They are the future. What I object to is certain people at the ECB who have now sailed off into the sunset with their millions inventing a competition that was only ever going to alienate its hardcore of support.
They could have re-vamped the Blast, negotiated for it to be shown on terrestrial TV and spent all the money that they did on The Hundred in doing that. Those same kids would still have become interested in the game without county championship matches being consigned to the whole of April, May and September and the 50 over competition becoming no more than a 2nd XI comp. These people are driven by money but without the volunteers the game is dead.
The most Yes, but, answer you could ever write, and what I fully expected for someone who just has a bee in their bonnet over the concept
What does this mean? It makes no sense.
Perfect sense, it's a proper, yes great you enjoy it, BUT PLEASE THINK OF PEOPLE LIKE ME, type post. Sod the kids, worry about the members of effectively insolvent businesses instead
Glad your kids enjoyed it @Rothko Just one question - would you have not taken them to a t20 game if the hundred had not been invented ?
Maybe, but then the experience is part of it, 26,000 at the Oval under the light in opening week is better the a dead rubber against Sussex at the St Lawrence with 2,000 people there. It’s as much about the experience for them a the game.
Surrey (if we're comparing like with like) fill the Oval for their Blast games, so it's not as if the Hundred has suddenly created a new audience.
I watched McCoys versus Hula Hoops the other day. It must have been my first Hundred match for a couple of years. I only watched cos I was ill and wasn't up to doing much else. It kept me amused for an hour or so, but it did all feel a bit rubbishy. Can't believe they've still got those kindergarten graphics; what an assault on the eyeballs they are. Horrible.
In an interview just yesterday lunchtime, Michael Atherton pointed out to the ECB's current CEO, Richard Gould, this is what he said when, as Surrey's CEO, he was asked about The Hundred:
"It doesn't matter whether it's your county club or your local club, they are at the heart of their communities, they are developing players. When franchise teams appear, all they do is skim the cream off the top. Their idea of player development pathway is a cheque book."
He also admits that the ECB planned all along to sell the Hundred but kept it from the counties so that they wouldn't block its creation and that the ECB didn't want the Blast re-vamped because you can't create private investment through Members' Clubs. The biggest driver of the Hundred, Andrew Strauss, when Director of England Cricket, now intends to personally benefit massively from that by buying a franchise. Isn't that called corruption?
In an interview just yesterday lunchtime, Michael Atherton pointed out to the ECB's current CEO, Richard Gould, this is what he said when, as Surrey's CEO, he was asked about The Hundred:
"It doesn't matter whether it's your county club or your local club, they are at the heart of their communities, they are developing players. When franchise teams appear, all they do is skim the cream off the top. Their idea of player development pathway is a cheque book."
He also admits that the ECB planned all along to sell the Hundred but kept it from the counties so that they wouldn't block its creation and that the ECB didn't want the Blast re-vamped because you can't create private investment through Members' Clubs. The biggest driver of the Hundred, Andrew Strauss, when Director of England Cricket, now intends to personally benefit massively from that by buying a franchise. Isn't that called corruption?
I was merely giving an opinion on the now CEO of the ECB being a hypocrite. However he admitted that it was always the intention to sell the "Hundred" and that this information was deliberately kept from the counties because it was feared they would block the deal. Was this not corrupt?
I was merely giving an opinion on the now CEO of the ECB being a hypocrite. However he admitted that it was always the intention to sell the "Hundred" and that this information was deliberately kept from the counties because it was feared they would block the deal. Was this not corrupt?
no , if they had been asked by the counties and they lied then that would have been corrupt.
If I open a new department at work and get the buy in from the staff. To work with me establishing the new department - Do I have to tell them I intend to look for investors a couple of years down the road ?
I was merely giving an opinion on the now CEO of the ECB being a hypocrite. However he admitted that it was always the intention to sell the "Hundred" and that this information was deliberately kept from the counties because it was feared they would block the deal. Was this not corrupt?
no , if they had been asked by the counties and they lied then that would have been corrupt.
If I open a new department at work and get the buy in from the staff. To work with me establishing the new department - Do I have to tell them I intend to look for investors a couple of years down the road ?
I was merely giving an opinion on the now CEO of the ECB being a hypocrite. However he admitted that it was always the intention to sell the "Hundred" and that this information was deliberately kept from the counties because it was feared they would block the deal. Was this not corrupt?
no , if they had been asked by the counties and they lied then that would have been corrupt.
If I open a new department at work and get the buy in from the staff. To work with me establishing the new department - Do I have to tell them I intend to look for investors a couple of years down the road ?
Isn't dishonesty a form of corruption?
Why is it dishonest ? If they had lied it would be dishonest.
Wow what a game ! 6 to win off the last 5 balls with plenty of wickets in hand - moneys on the batters . Thompson concedes 4 off the first two then. Dot , run out and catch to win the game.
Mousley is a very interesting player from an England perspective, as is Bethel.
My son played against both Mousley (103 off 75 balls and 4-0-24-1) and Spencer Johnson (9-1-36-2) when batting in a club game in Australia 20 months ago. Mousley launched it with the bat but he says he preferred to face Mousley than Johnson for some reason!
Comments
Just one question - would you have not taken them to a t20 game if the hundred had not been invented ?
The one area where it has improved things is the Women's game in giving it that exposure but should and could have been done with the same assistance from the ECB by supporting women's county T20 matches in the same way. Even then, the ECB managed to successfully undermine women's games by taking any lost time, as a result of overnight rain, from the women's game rather than it being pro rata'd over both matches.
What some also don't appreciate, though, is the shorter you make a game, the less chance that all of the players have of actually doing something in the match. And if all kids do is to field then they will soon lose interest.
"It doesn't matter whether it's your county club or your local club, they are at the heart of their communities, they are developing players. When franchise teams appear, all they do is skim the cream off the top. Their idea of player development pathway is a cheque book."
He also admits that the ECB planned all along to sell the Hundred but kept it from the counties so that they wouldn't block its creation and that the ECB didn't want the Blast re-vamped because you can't create private investment through Members' Clubs. The biggest driver of the Hundred, Andrew Strauss, when Director of England Cricket, now intends to personally benefit massively from that by buying a franchise. Isn't that called corruption?
Full interview here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?si=xoSyp6bm-H9S_dWp&v=jEJ7rwew2zI&feature=youtu.be
If he believes in it why shouldn’t he invest ?
I think the recent poor weather has made it difficult to prepare the wickets.
Terrific fun!
Sofia Gardens looking splendid in the sunshine & Invincibles double whammy 😎
Have fun 🤗
Glad you had a great day 🤩
i mean run on the 3rd last ball ffs to tie it up ok prolly a run out but wickets in hand , thick players
Double from the Phoenix tonight.
Dan Mousley that bowling was different gravy 😱👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
My son played against both Mousley (103 off 75 balls and 4-0-24-1) and Spencer Johnson (9-1-36-2) when batting in a club game in Australia 20 months ago. Mousley launched it with the bat but he says he preferred to face Mousley than Johnson for some reason!
https://www.playhq.com/cricket-australia/org/saca-premier-cricket/senior-men-summer-202223/west-end-one-day-cup/game-centre/6466a640