Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ECB’s “The Hundred”
Comments
-
Sky were happy in the previous and the one just signed deals to share the blast in a limited way with the BBC. There is no real value to the BBC of showing a dead rubber Blast game of two second XI, where the Hundred gives them a far better quality of game, the city franchises are an easy sell to a new audience, they get the women’s game, the matches fits easier into the schedule, and they got the ability to show the Finals live, which they weren’t going to get with the Blast.Chizz said:
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 ?1 -
Sorry, my bad.swordfish 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!
I thought I’d replied to your original post & hadn’t, d’oh!
I’d be happy to chat about the hundred in a match thread. I’ve been lucky enough to watch nearly all of them (sometimes have to pop out to feed/walk/rescue a four legged critter).
You’re very polite. Not sure I’ve seen anyone ask before.👍🏼2 -
Sorry - I'm not following you here. Most of the Hundred teams are wholly made up of players that played in the Blast. In fact, all XI of one team this week had nothing but players that did so. The Royal is the competition that has been decimated by the Hundred.Rothko said:
Sky were happy in the previous and the one just signed deals to share the blast in a limited way with the BBC. There is no real value to the BBC of showing a dead rubber Blast game of two second XI, where the Hundred gives them a far better quality of game, the city franchises are an easy sell to a new audience, they get the women’s game, the matches fits easier into the schedule, and they got the ability to show the Finals live, which they weren’t going to get with the Blast.Chizz said:
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 ?
The joke is that the Hundred was sold on the basis of all the internationals that would have been playing. So where are the current top internationals (and I'm not talking about franchise journeymen) - apart from a very limited few like Maxwell and de Koch I'm struggling to find many top internationals from Australia, India, Pakistan, New Zealand, South Africa, West Indies etc etc. In fact, even top English internationals like Bairstow and Stokes are refusing to do so.3 -
Thanks I'm making a right pigs ear of this and wish I'd never asked as it annoys those opposed to the hundred.KBslittlesis said:
Sorry, my bad.swordfish 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!
I thought I’d replied to your original post & hadn’t, d’oh!
I’d be happy to chat about the hundred in a match thread. I’ve been lucky enough to watch nearly all of them (sometimes have to pop out to feed/walk/rescue a four legged critter).
You’re very polite. Not sure I’ve seen anyone ask before.👍🏼
Having said I won't set one up because I thought I'd end up talking to myself, I'll look a prize plum now and be accused of making a 'U' turn if I go back on my word, so I'm going to continue posting match comments on here for now if that's alright. I don't want to become as unpopular as Kerry Packer by setting up a rival thread 😎
Observations on last night. My 'looky likey' award goes to James Vince of the Brave. I thought he didn't look too dissimilar to Glen Murray in a certain light with his hat on!2 -
As my preferred club is Surrey, I hope the Oval Invincibles win it. But I am not that bothered, I just pick a team for each game and enjoy the cricket. I think it has been disapointing this year as we have not had the tension in games. I think it was better last year and I expected the format would produce more close games.3
-
But don’t they just use Surreys ground ?MuttleyCAFC said:As my preferred club is Surrey, I hope the Oval Invincibles win it. But I am not that bothered, I just pick a team for each game and enjoy the cricket. I think it has been disapointing this year as we have not had the tension in games. I think it was better last year and I expected the format would produce more close games.
nothing to do with Surrey.Like in rugby league I didn’t start watching and cheering on the London Broncos because they played a season or two at The Valley.0 -
That’s interesting that the county membership gets you access to the hundredCrusty54 said:
My Surrey membership means that i go to all formats at the Oval. Enjoying the summer.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 -
good game (men) last evening, London Spirit beat the champs from S/Hampton .. Eoin Morgan is a master tactician in the one day game3
-
Can't complain when it gets down to the last three balls can you? More of that please.👍Lincsaddick said:good game (men) last evening, London Spirit beat the champs from S/Hampton .. Eoin Morgan is a master tactician in the one day game1 - Sponsored links:
-
They play in Surrey's one day colours which will do for me.MrOneLung said:
But don’t they just use Surreys ground ?MuttleyCAFC said:As my preferred club is Surrey, I hope the Oval Invincibles win it. But I am not that bothered, I just pick a team for each game and enjoy the cricket. I think it has been disapointing this year as we have not had the tension in games. I think it was better last year and I expected the format would produce more close games.
nothing to do with Surrey.Like in rugby league I didn’t start watching and cheering on the London Broncos because they played a season or two at The Valley.0 -
Hatrick for King! Lbw, bowled and bowled.1
-
There are some Surrey players in both Oval Invincible teams.MrOneLung said:
But don’t they just use Surreys ground ?MuttleyCAFC said:As my preferred club is Surrey, I hope the Oval Invincibles win it. But I am not that bothered, I just pick a team for each game and enjoy the cricket. I think it has been disapointing this year as we have not had the tension in games. I think it was better last year and I expected the format would produce more close games.
nothing to do with Surrey.Like in rugby league I didn’t start watching and cheering on the London Broncos because they played a season or two at The Valley.
Only chance to see Tom and Sam Curran in the same team (and win the match).0 -
The women’s games are pretty poor. England’s performances against India in the Commonwealth Games semi final and against NZ for the bronze medal were appalling. They seem unable to hit the ball off the square, cannot judge a run and don’t look athletic in the field. Commentators can talk it up as much as they like (as they do with women’s football) but it doesn’t mean it’s any good.1
-
Orpington34 said:The women’s games are pretty poor. England’s performances against India in the Commonwealth Games semi final and against NZ for the bronze medal were appalling. They seem unable to hit the ball off the square, cannot judge a run and don’t look athletic in the field. Commentators can talk it up as much as they like (as they do with women’s football) but it doesn’t mean it’s any good.
2 -
Agree with you about the commonwealth games, England were not up to their usual standards.Orpington34 said:The women’s games are pretty poor. England’s performances against India in the Commonwealth Games semi final and against NZ for the bronze medal were appalling. They seem unable to hit the ball off the square, cannot judge a run and don’t look athletic in the field. Commentators can talk it up as much as they like (as they do with women’s football) but it doesn’t mean it’s any good.
Totally disagree about the two games of the hundred I’ve seen so far (missed today as it’s changeover day in our holiday cottage). Especially the Invincibles, thought they were great & that’s without Kapp. Looking forward to watching her again, she’s brilliant 😎1 -
Malan on 98. 1 run needed for a win but he wasn’t on strike. 13 balls left.Should have run faster. Rockets win.1
-
SUperb batting from Malan but another one-sided game. No tension or excitement after the first few overs of the chase as it became clear they were going to coast it0
-
To be fair that could happen in any formatkinveachyaddick said:SUperb batting from Malan but another one-sided game. No tension or excitement after the first few overs of the chase as it became clear they were going to coast it1 -
I think this one could be tight.0
- Sponsored links:
-
Turned out to be a decent game in the end. No way thought they'd be able to defend 130.0
-
The Sports Desk asks if there's too much cricket? (35 minute show - it was originally 40 minutes but they didn't think anyone would listen
). https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0csk24b
The problem I have is trying to work out what's in it for whoever is speaking at the time. I understand professional cricketers loving the choice of all the franchise options around the world. I understand broadcasters wanting to max out on revenue. I understand cricket commentators knowing which side their bread is buttered on and senior pros with an eye on future TV work bigging up future prospects. I understand the women's game loving the 100 for the platform it provides established players.
It seems to me there is a high concentration on the short term gain, but not so much focus on the grass roots and where we are going to produce players products to supply the franchises.
Sitting here in my dotage I feel rather quaint when I read the enthusiasm on here for made up teams of random players. The feeling in my bones is something bad is happening. Sure there should be change and modernisation, but surely there has to be a nod to tradition and the values that has stood the test of time.3 -
Welsh Fire .. IF there was relegation, they'd be down already1
-
If there ever was a fire, and I doubt it, it was extinquished pretty early.2
-
MuttleyCAFC said:If there ever was a fire, and I doubt it, it was extinquished pretty early.
As I've said before. It's not just the "fire" that's a misnomer. They don't have (or certainly didn't last year - I haven't bothered to check this season) have a single Welsh player. And yet, guess who won the Royal London - Glamorgan. And they were full of Welsh players that the local kids could identify with.
1 -
London Spirit men are mincing the Nonsuperchargers0
-
And half the country is watching the Premier League, traditional cricket fans are watching the RL50s that are going on at the moment and a handful of people are interested in the fact the London Spirt Men are winning.Lincsaddick said:London Spirit men are mincing the Nonsuperchargers3 -
Well I enjoyed Rossington's knock and fastest 50 yet even if it did somewhat turn the game into a foregone conclusion.2
-
What winds me up is that they dont refer to a 5 ball spell as an over. Couldn't fathom it the other day. Is there some sort of deal they've done that they cant say "3 overs left - 28 to get". Grinds my gears.0
-
I'm the exact opposite Golfie 😎 I thought an over was 6 balls and these are sets of 5. There is an Aussie or NZ commentator who keeps referring to them as overs, so she'd please you, but when I hear her say it, to coin your phase, it "grinds my gears" because technically, they're not. ITIRIST 👍golfaddick said:What winds me up is that they dont refer to a 5 ball spell as an over. Couldn't fathom it the other day. Is there some sort of deal they've done that they cant say "3 overs left - 28 to get". Grinds my gears.0
