Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ECB’s “The Hundred”
Comments
-
What were the crowd numbers like from how many watched the mens match to how many stayed for the womens game at the Oval yesterday, did anyone notice or all turn off like me
0 -
A lot of last year's attendances were split between the number who turned up for the women's match and the (larger) number who were there for the men's. Although it's harder to do when the early match has a higher attendance (because they don't count people leaving) I would have thought those figures will be estimated somewhere at Surrey CCC and the ECB.oohaahmortimer said:What were the crowd numbers like from how many watched the mens match to how many stayed for the womens game at the Oval yesterday, did anyone notice or all turn off like me1 -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/62510229oohaahmortimer said:What were the crowd numbers like from how many watched the mens match to how many stayed for the womens game at the Oval yesterday, did anyone notice or all turn off like me
21,339 for the men's, between 15 and 16k for the women's according to this BBC article2 -
Out of interest, how would you have revamped the Blast to make it the flagship T20 comp the ECB needed (by that I mean to rival the BBL, PSL, CPL etc, on free to air TV). The terrestrial broadcasters simply refused to take the Blast in its current format with so many games (because there are 18 counties) so would love to know what you would do differently to create less games in order to appeal to terrestrial tv without impacting the counties negatively?Addick Addict said:
No because there is no room for four competitions in the fixture list without undermining one or more of the existing ones. The Blast should have been the one promoted as the flagship T20 comp - they could have allowed three internationals instead of the current two to spice it up more without overly impacting on the promotion of English qualified players.billysboots said:
Ok understood , so from what you are saying its the franchise bit that grates for you. If this was a county comp it would be ok ?Addick Addict said:
For me it is this:billysboots said:Lots of interesting views on this .
Is it the format of the game or the fact its franchised that's causing the friction. If it was a county comp and played exclusively during August would that be ok ? So the ECB took away the 1.3 million for each county and just ran it as a normal competition ?
The ECB and paid commentators pretending that this is a whole new game when it actually isn't - there wasn't a single player in one of yesterday's game that didn't appear in the Blast this season. How is that different? There are very few current internationals playing because so many other countries are committed to playing matches so it has totally failed to live up to that billing. England players like Stokes and Bairstow have dropped out of playing because it isn't of sufficient importance. It will never rival the IPL for that reason. It also does not have to be run exclusively in August. The Blast isn't.
The Hundred also serves to undermine county cricket to the extent that we could see the likes of Somerset, Leics, Kent, Northants become minor counties. The ECB have to provide funding to counties come what may if they want to grow the game because otherwise there would not be any pathway to England let alone the Hundred and the ECB want to grow the game - so whether it's £1.3m or £500k there would still have to be some sort of payment made. Terrestrial coverage has been a massive bonus in bringing the game to more people but the Blast re-vamped and sold in the way that the Hundred was really would have done the job and helped the counties too grow their audience and support. Interestingly, there is no confirmation as yet from the BBC that they will support the Hundred beyond 2024 and the ECB have fudged questions as to whether they are likely to continue to do so.
Instead, we now have a situation where four competitions of top quality cricket cannot be sustained. So the 50 over game, for which there is a World Cup next year, is made up of county 2nd XI players and club and academy substitutes and where a supporter if they want to see their team play more than once in three weeks in August has to travel hundreds of miles to watch them play away. There is also talk of reducing the 4-day game to just 10 fixtures - how will that prepare the Test players of tomorrow?
Proper cricketing people like Atherton, Butcher, Pringle etc etc are recognising the damage that the Hundred is doing to the game. And as I say more people here would do so also if such a thing happened in football where you could only watch the stiffs at your club for a month right at the height of the season. There would be absolute outrage from Charlton supporters. And rightly so.0 -
Ok, I respect your opinion , just wondered if it was possible to attract a whole new audience and increased revenue by reworking the blast , why wasn't that done as it must have been easier to do that than to introduce a whole new competition ? After all the Blast has been around for quite a while now.Addick Addict said:
No because there is no room for four competitions in the fixture list without undermining one or more of the existing ones. The Blast should have been the one promoted as the flagship T20 comp - they could have allowed three internationals instead of the current two to spice it up more without overly impacting on the promotion of English qualified players.billysboots said:
Ok understood , so from what you are saying its the franchise bit that grates for you. If this was a county comp it would be ok ?Addick Addict said:
For me it is this:billysboots said:Lots of interesting views on this .
Is it the format of the game or the fact its franchised that's causing the friction. If it was a county comp and played exclusively during August would that be ok ? So the ECB took away the 1.3 million for each county and just ran it as a normal competition ?
The ECB and paid commentators pretending that this is a whole new game when it actually isn't - there wasn't a single player in one of yesterday's game that didn't appear in the Blast this season. How is that different? There are very few current internationals playing because so many other countries are committed to playing matches so it has totally failed to live up to that billing. England players like Stokes and Bairstow have dropped out of playing because it isn't of sufficient importance. It will never rival the IPL for that reason. It also does not have to be run exclusively in August. The Blast isn't.
The Hundred also serves to undermine county cricket to the extent that we could see the likes of Somerset, Leics, Kent, Northants become minor counties. The ECB have to provide funding to counties come what may if they want to grow the game because otherwise there would not be any pathway to England let alone the Hundred and the ECB want to grow the game - so whether it's £1.3m or £500k there would still have to be some sort of payment made. Terrestrial coverage has been a massive bonus in bringing the game to more people but the Blast re-vamped and sold in the way that the Hundred was really would have done the job and helped the counties too grow their audience and support. Interestingly, there is no confirmation as yet from the BBC that they will support the Hundred beyond 2024 and the ECB have fudged questions as to whether they are likely to continue to do so.
Instead, we now have a situation where four competitions of top quality cricket cannot be sustained. So the 50 over game, for which there is a World Cup next year, is made up of county 2nd XI players and club and academy substitutes and where a supporter if they want to see their team play more than once in three weeks in August has to travel hundreds of miles to watch them play away. There is also talk of reducing the 4-day game to just 10 fixtures - how will that prepare the Test players of tomorrow?
Proper cricketing people like Atherton, Butcher, Pringle etc etc are recognising the damage that the Hundred is doing to the game. And as I say more people here would do so also if such a thing happened in football where you could only watch the stiffs at your club for a month right at the height of the season. There would be absolute outrage from Charlton supporters. And rightly so.
0 -
What I want to know is those who have actually gone to a game, what made you go to a Hundred match that stopped you going to a T20 ?0
-
We have been to both.MrOneLung said:What I want to know is those who have actually gone to a game, what made you go to a Hundred match that stopped you going to a T20 ?0 -
The Hundred has stopped me going to the 50 overs competition as it's now basically a reserve match.MrOneLung said:What I want to know is those who have actually gone to a game, what made you go to a Hundred match that stopped you going to a T20 ?0 -
I suggested yesterday that having a separate 'Hundred Match Thread' thread to discuss only the action might not have enough takers, but I'd be interested to hear the opinions of others.
My own feeling is that it would simply get swamped with posts made by those whose sole intent is to knock it and will post wherever they feel they're views can be repeated, as they are being on here despite this being the second year of the competition with little having changed since the first.
1 -
To be fair Mrs Boots who has hated cricket for years , and would moan and complain when I watched it on Sky , likes the 100 and was the driving force behind us getting tickets. So i suppose there is an example of a new audience.billysboots said:
We have been to both.MrOneLung said:What I want to know is those who have actually gone to a game, what made you go to a Hundred match that stopped you going to a T20 ?4 - Sponsored links:
-
I wouldn't say my wife and I are new to cricket, but we enjoy the hundred despite having initial misgivings, mainly because we can watch on TV without needing Sky Cricket or whatever you need these days to watch other forms.billysboots said:
To be fair Mrs Boots who has hated cricket for years , and would moan and complain when I watched it on Sky , likes the 100 and was the driving force behind us getting tickets. So i suppose there is an example of a new audience.billysboots said:
We have been to both.MrOneLung said:What I want to know is those who have actually gone to a game, what made you go to a Hundred match that stopped you going to a T20 ?
If it's on, we'll watch it - 'See ball, hit ball' if you like 😎0 -
Fuck me you have only been a member on here since May and you are telling people what thread they are allowed to comment on.swordfish said:I suggested yesterday that having a separate 'Hundred Match Thread' thread to discuss only the action might not have enough takers, but I'd be interested to hear the opinions of others.
My own feeling is that it would simply get swamped with posts made by those whose sole intent is to knock it and will post wherever they feel they're views can be repeated, as they are being on here despite this being the second year of the competition with little having changed since the first.
Wind your neck in a bit.4 -
What's the qualifying period of membership before someone is allowed to put forward a good idea?blackpool72 said:
Fuck me you have only been a member on here since May and you are telling people what thread they are allowed to comment on.swordfish said:I suggested yesterday that having a separate 'Hundred Match Thread' thread to discuss only the action might not have enough takers, but I'd be interested to hear the opinions of others.
My own feeling is that it would simply get swamped with posts made by those whose sole intent is to knock it and will post wherever they feel they're views can be repeated, as they are being on here despite this being the second year of the competition with little having changed since the first.
Wind your neck in a bit.1 -
Spookily it was easier for me to get to the Oval living in North Kent.Fanny Fanackapan said:
And far more cricket fans could attend matches in their own area rather than travel to the Grounds of the "bigger", wealthier counties.Addick Addict said:
No because there is no room for four competitions in the fixture list without undermining one or more of the existing ones. The Blast should have been the one promoted as the flagship T20 comp - they could have allowed three internationals instead of the current two to spice it up more without overly impacting on the promotion of English qualified players.billysboots said:
Ok understood , so from what you are saying its the franchise bit that grates for you. If this was a county comp it would be ok ?Addick Addict said:
For me it is this:billysboots said:Lots of interesting views on this .
Is it the format of the game or the fact its franchised that's causing the friction. If it was a county comp and played exclusively during August would that be ok ? So the ECB took away the 1.3 million for each county and just ran it as a normal competition ?
The ECB and paid commentators pretending that this is a whole new game when it actually isn't - there wasn't a single player in one of yesterday's game that didn't appear in the Blast this season. How is that different? There are very few current internationals playing because so many other countries are committed to playing matches so it has totally failed to live up to that billing. England players like Stokes and Bairstow have dropped out of playing because it isn't of sufficient importance. It will never rival the IPL for that reason. It also does not have to be run exclusively in August. The Blast isn't.
The Hundred also serves to undermine county cricket to the extent that we could see the likes of Somerset, Leics, Kent, Northants become minor counties. The ECB have to provide funding to counties come what may if they want to grow the game because otherwise there would not be any pathway to England let alone the Hundred and the ECB want to grow the game - so whether it's £1.3m or £500k there would still have to be some sort of payment made. Terrestrial coverage has been a massive bonus in bringing the game to more people but the Blast re-vamped and sold in the way that the Hundred was really would have done the job and helped the counties too grow their audience and support. Interestingly, there is no confirmation as yet from the BBC that they will support the Hundred beyond 2024 and the ECB have fudged questions as to whether they are likely to continue to do so.
Instead, we now have a situation where four competitions of top quality cricket cannot be sustained. So the 50 over game, for which there is a World Cup next year, is made up of county 2nd XI players and club and academy substitutes and where a supporter if they want to see their team play more than once in three weeks in August has to travel hundreds of miles to watch them play away. There is also talk of reducing the 4-day game to just 10 fixtures - how will that prepare the Test players of tomorrow?
Proper cricketing people like Atherton, Butcher, Pringle etc etc are recognising the damage that the Hundred is doing to the game. And as I say more people here would do so also if such a thing happened in football where you could only watch the stiffs at your club for a month right at the height of the season. There would be absolute outrage from Charlton supporters. And rightly so.
A no brainer IMO but then as some have already argued...what do I know .
Travelling to Canterbury from North Kent was always a real ball ache.
And it wasn’t any easier to get to Bromley/Beckenham either…….reminded me too much of the awful trip to Sellout 😩😩😩😩😩🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣1 -
After you Claude!blackpool72 said:
Fuck me you have only been a member on here since May and you are telling people what thread they are allowed to comment on.swordfish said:I suggested yesterday that having a separate 'Hundred Match Thread' thread to discuss only the action might not have enough takers, but I'd be interested to hear the opinions of others.
My own feeling is that it would simply get swamped with posts made by those whose sole intent is to knock it and will post wherever they feel they're views can be repeated, as they are being on here despite this being the second year of the competition with little having changed since the first.
Wind your neck in a bit.0 -
all this chat and analysis, moaning, groaning and gnashing of teeth .. who is actually watching the tournaments, the men, women or both ?0
-
Just set one upswordfish said:I suggested yesterday that having a separate 'Hundred Match Thread' thread to discuss only the action might not have enough takers, but I'd be interested to hear the opinions of others.
My own feeling is that it would simply get swamped with posts made by those whose sole intent is to knock it and will post wherever they feel they're views can be repeated, as they are being on here despite this being the second year of the competition with little having changed since the first.0 -
My husband has watched every match, men and women, as he is retired. I've watched the evening matches and quite enjoy them.Lincsaddick said:all this chat and analysis, moaning, groaning and gnashing of teeth .. who is actually watching the tournaments, the men, women or both ?2 -
I’d dress the players up as crisps.Addickforlife said:
Out of interest, how would you have revamped the Blast to make it the flagship T20 comp the ECB needed (by that I mean to rival the BBL, PSL, CPL etc, on free to air TV). The terrestrial broadcasters simply refused to take the Blast in its current format with so many games (because there are 18 counties) so would love to know what you would do differently to create less games in order to appeal to terrestrial tv without impacting the counties negatively?Addick Addict said:
No because there is no room for four competitions in the fixture list without undermining one or more of the existing ones. The Blast should have been the one promoted as the flagship T20 comp - they could have allowed three internationals instead of the current two to spice it up more without overly impacting on the promotion of English qualified players.billysboots said:
Ok understood , so from what you are saying its the franchise bit that grates for you. If this was a county comp it would be ok ?Addick Addict said:
For me it is this:billysboots said:Lots of interesting views on this .
Is it the format of the game or the fact its franchised that's causing the friction. If it was a county comp and played exclusively during August would that be ok ? So the ECB took away the 1.3 million for each county and just ran it as a normal competition ?
The ECB and paid commentators pretending that this is a whole new game when it actually isn't - there wasn't a single player in one of yesterday's game that didn't appear in the Blast this season. How is that different? There are very few current internationals playing because so many other countries are committed to playing matches so it has totally failed to live up to that billing. England players like Stokes and Bairstow have dropped out of playing because it isn't of sufficient importance. It will never rival the IPL for that reason. It also does not have to be run exclusively in August. The Blast isn't.
The Hundred also serves to undermine county cricket to the extent that we could see the likes of Somerset, Leics, Kent, Northants become minor counties. The ECB have to provide funding to counties come what may if they want to grow the game because otherwise there would not be any pathway to England let alone the Hundred and the ECB want to grow the game - so whether it's £1.3m or £500k there would still have to be some sort of payment made. Terrestrial coverage has been a massive bonus in bringing the game to more people but the Blast re-vamped and sold in the way that the Hundred was really would have done the job and helped the counties too grow their audience and support. Interestingly, there is no confirmation as yet from the BBC that they will support the Hundred beyond 2024 and the ECB have fudged questions as to whether they are likely to continue to do so.
Instead, we now have a situation where four competitions of top quality cricket cannot be sustained. So the 50 over game, for which there is a World Cup next year, is made up of county 2nd XI players and club and academy substitutes and where a supporter if they want to see their team play more than once in three weeks in August has to travel hundreds of miles to watch them play away. There is also talk of reducing the 4-day game to just 10 fixtures - how will that prepare the Test players of tomorrow?
Proper cricketing people like Atherton, Butcher, Pringle etc etc are recognising the damage that the Hundred is doing to the game. And as I say more people here would do so also if such a thing happened in football where you could only watch the stiffs at your club for a month right at the height of the season. There would be absolute outrage from Charlton supporters. And rightly so.0 -
When I first saw the thread title, I assumed it was to discuss cricket being played in the competition. Little did I realise that I was stumbling into the cricketing equivalent of the 'Brexit' debate with emotions running high on either side.
Not wishing to enter that, I merely asked the question whether others like me were interested in having a separate Match Thread to cover the games being played, so apologies to those who found that an outlandish proposition. I never told anyone where they should and shouldn't post their views, but to those opposed to the idea, you will no doubt be pleased to hear I don't think from the reaction, or rather lack of it, that there is sufficient interest to justify opening up a new one, so I won't.
That's right, I won't be opening one! I hope that satisfies everyone and that we're all good again. I'll get back to watching the 'Padres v Marlins' or whatever the equivalents over here are, 'Brave v Spirit' I think today.
"My team's the Padres man! They ain't worth a shit, but I s'port 'em anyway's'" as some pleasant chap once said to me in a lift in San Diego. He'd have made an excellent Charlton convert!
0 - Sponsored links:
-
Nobody is stopping you setting one upswordfish said:When I first saw the thread title, I assumed it was to discuss cricket being played in the competition. Little did I realise that I was stumbling into the cricketing equivalent of the 'Brexit' debate with emotions running high on either side.
Not wishing to enter that, I merely asked the question whether others like me were interested in having a separate Match Thread to cover the games being played, so apologies to those who found that an outlandish proposition. I never told anyone where they should and shouldn't post their views, but to those opposed to the idea, you will no doubt be pleased to hear I don't think from the reaction, or rather lack of it, that there is sufficient interest to justify opening up a new one, so I won't.
That's right, I won't be opening one! I hope that satisfies everyone and that we're all good again. I'll get back to watching the 'Padres v Marlins' or whatever the equivalents over here are, 'Brave v Spirit' I think today.
"My team's the Padres man! They ain't worth a shit, but I s'port 'em anyway's'" as some pleasant chap once said to me in a lift in San Diego. He'd have made an excellent Charlton convert!
After all in a similar vein there's a separate Surrey cricket thread, which nobody posts in for some reason. Instead they clutter up the Kent thread with their it's not fair we're only 20 points clear and injuries mean we've got to play Hashim Amla type comments
5 -
The Hundred was set up so some dodgy feckers at the ECB could pick up a multi-million pound bonus. They only ever cared about the money and, what a surprise, they don't give a toss that their cash cow has damaged cricket and alienated a majority of fans of the game. I am simply amazed that so many are willing to cheer on what is essentially corruption, because gammons, or something.
There is absolutely no reason why all the money spent on this travesty could not have been pissed away on the existing Blast competition instead, without alienating existing fans and creating a joke of an abomination in its place. Why couldn't the Blast be on the TV? Because the crooks at the ECB responsible for the Hundred wouldn't have been able to siphon away millions that could have gone into promoting the game, or even better, grass roots cricket for all.
Made up teams, ridiculous rules - do twenty runs really make that much of a difference that an entire new competition needs to be invented that no other countries also play because it as plastic and mercenary as it is possible to get?
I support Kent, and the idea of going to Surrey's ground to cheer on, well basically Surrey in disguise, was never going to become a reality. It would feel like cheering on Palace. Urgh.
Would you support a South London franchise football team who also happened to play at Shithurst and never at the Valley?
I doubt that many Charlton fans would be happy to do so....but then again, this thread means that I should possibly reconsider that assumption....8 -
The blast is on Telly, sky show it, don’t pay massive amounts for it, and free to air broadcasters don’t care about it and don’t want to show it.The Hundred both Sky and BBC wanted it, and pay a load for it, and have committed again for further years. If the Hundred didn’t exist the revenue it creates wouldn’t go to prop up County Cricket, or go to fund the wider game.1
-
If the aim is to have a big T20 competition in August during the school holidays, I'd split the Blast into 2 sections, one played in June or July, one played in August
The regular Blast would be shortened (say 3 groups of 6 counties) to become a competition to join the "Superblast", where the Top 8 sides would go through to compete in a premium competition with BBC coverage. The big name overseas players would be contracted by the ECB, and allocated to the 8 counties.
The remaining 10 teams would compete in the "Juniorblast", so would still have a full fixture list of games, and a chance of some silverware.
Yes, this wouldn't concentrate the players into 8 teams like franchise cricket does, but would keep it within the county structure, and reward county success. It would also mean that a new fan generated by watching the Superblast on TV would actually have a regular team to follow for the rest of the time.
0 -
"Why do we have to have all these games in August?"killerandflash said:If the aim is to have a big T20 competition in August during the school holidays, I'd split the Blast into 2 sections, one played in June or July, one played in August
The regular Blast would be shortened (say 3 groups of 6 counties) to become a competition to join the "Superblast", where the Top 8 sides would go through to compete in a premium competition with BBC coverage. The big name overseas players would be contracted by the ECB, and allocated to the 8 counties.
The remaining 10 teams would compete in the "Juniorblast", so would still have a full fixture list of games, and a chance of some silverware.
Yes, this wouldn't concentrate the players into 8 teams like franchise cricket does, but would keep it within the county structure, and reward county success. It would also mean that a new fan generated by watching the Superblast on TV would actually have a regular team to follow for the rest of the time.
"Why do the ECB have to mess everything up?"
"It's not fair having all these foreign players coming in and taking the positions of England players?"
"I am glad my team didn't get through to the Superblast, so I can now cheer on my players, not those foreign mercenaries"
"It's ruining the Test team"
"It's ruining the ODI team"
"Why do we have to change everything?"
"Why isn't this televised..?"1 -
I've suggested this alternative, to match the ECB desire for this competition in August. This way the ECB gets its flagship T20 competition, but not at the expense of the 18 counties - if they fail to qualify for the last 8, that's on merit, and not because Cardiff has a franchise despite Glamorgan being terrible.Chizz said:
"Why do we have to have all these games in August?"killerandflash said:If the aim is to have a big T20 competition in August during the school holidays, I'd split the Blast into 2 sections, one played in June or July, one played in August
The regular Blast would be shortened (say 3 groups of 6 counties) to become a competition to join the "Superblast", where the Top 8 sides would go through to compete in a premium competition with BBC coverage. The big name overseas players would be contracted by the ECB, and allocated to the 8 counties.
The remaining 10 teams would compete in the "Juniorblast", so would still have a full fixture list of games, and a chance of some silverware.
Yes, this wouldn't concentrate the players into 8 teams like franchise cricket does, but would keep it within the county structure, and reward county success. It would also mean that a new fan generated by watching the Superblast on TV would actually have a regular team to follow for the rest of the time.
"Why do the ECB have to mess everything up?"
"It's not fair having all these foreign players coming in and taking the positions of England players?"
"I am glad my team didn't get through to the Superblast, so I can now cheer on my players, not those foreign mercenaries"
"It's ruining the Test team"
"It's ruining the ODI team"
"Why do we have to change everything?"
"Why isn't this televised..?"
I'm not talking about more overseas players, just having a system where the star names who don't want to play the whole Blast can play in just the Superblast section
This "Superblast" would be televised in the same way the BBC shows Hundred games
As the combined Blast and Superblast sections would be shorter than the combined Blast and Hundred, there would be room for separate 50 over matches elsewhere in the season.1 -
Who says the BBC wanted to show the county game? They’ve been offered it and shown no interest, as have Channel 4 who had the T20 Cup back in the day. The county game isn’t something Free to Air broadcasters give a shit about0
-
It's an interesting suggestion. And far better than some commentators who choose only to criticise the Hundred. In reality, any changes made to domestic cricket will *always* attract criticism. Your suggestion is a good one, but it doesn't fix some of the problems that The Hundred addresses, including securing significant broadcast fees, domestic television coverage and, consequently, significant revenue disbursements.killerandflash said:
I've suggested this alternative, to match the ECB desire for this competition in August. This way the ECB gets its flagship T20 competition, but not at the expense of the 18 counties - if they fail to qualify for the last 8, that's on merit, and not because Cardiff has a franchise despite Glamorgan being terrible.Chizz said:
"Why do we have to have all these games in August?"killerandflash said:If the aim is to have a big T20 competition in August during the school holidays, I'd split the Blast into 2 sections, one played in June or July, one played in August
The regular Blast would be shortened (say 3 groups of 6 counties) to become a competition to join the "Superblast", where the Top 8 sides would go through to compete in a premium competition with BBC coverage. The big name overseas players would be contracted by the ECB, and allocated to the 8 counties.
The remaining 10 teams would compete in the "Juniorblast", so would still have a full fixture list of games, and a chance of some silverware.
Yes, this wouldn't concentrate the players into 8 teams like franchise cricket does, but would keep it within the county structure, and reward county success. It would also mean that a new fan generated by watching the Superblast on TV would actually have a regular team to follow for the rest of the time.
"Why do the ECB have to mess everything up?"
"It's not fair having all these foreign players coming in and taking the positions of England players?"
"I am glad my team didn't get through to the Superblast, so I can now cheer on my players, not those foreign mercenaries"
"It's ruining the Test team"
"It's ruining the ODI team"
"Why do we have to change everything?"
"Why isn't this televised..?"
I'm not talking about more overseas players, just having a system where the star names who don't want to play the whole Blast can play in just the Superblast section
This "Superblast" would be televised in the same way the BBC shows Hundred games
As the combined Blast and Superblast sections would be shorter than the combined Blast and Hundred, there would be room for separate 50 over matches elsewhere in the season.0 -
Do you know why the BBC were against showing the T20 blast?Rothko said:Who says the BBC wanted to show the county game? They’ve been offered it and shown no interest, as have Channel 4 who had the T20 Cup back in the day. The county game isn’t something Free to Air broadcasters give a shit aboutWas it the tournament was too long ?What makes the 100 more appealing to the BBC? Is it the inclusion of the women or the fact they only show a few of the games ?0 -
The exclusive broadcast deal between the Blast and Sky would have prevented the BBC from broadcasting the Blast.MrOneLung said:
Do you know why the BBC were against showing the T20 blast?Rothko said:Who says the BBC wanted to show the county game? They’ve been offered it and shown no interest, as have Channel 4 who had the T20 Cup back in the day. The county game isn’t something Free to Air broadcasters give a shit aboutWas it the tournament was too long ?What makes the 100 more appealing to the BBC? Is it the inclusion of the women or the fact they only show a few of the games ?0
