Silly Point
Striker
Pretty sure those didn't exclude large swathes of the country when they were introducedDid you think the same when T20 was introduced?
What about when 50 overs came about?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Pretty sure those didn't exclude large swathes of the country when they were introducedDid you think the same when T20 was introduced?
What about when 50 overs came about?
But but but butPretty sure those didn't exclude large swathes of the country when they were introduced
Did you think the same when T20 was introduced?
What about when 50 overs came about?
But but what? The hundred is less accessible than the Blast to people living a distance away from the chosen 8 groundsBut but but but
That’s subjective, many would argue it’s brought enhanced excitement, gave the women’s game a huge boost and clearly is popular with the young who are needed to protect the future of the game.The 1st limited overs competition were 65 overs each innings at 1st class standard; standard at club level was 25 overs; It was club overs cricket that 1st got me hooked on cricket. Both were innovative and necessary.The Hundred was totally unnecessary i.m.o. as it offers nothing the T20 wasn't offering I'd welcome an argument to contradict that view. Morgan's final sentence sums it all up.
Totally agree but Morgan's point with which I concur is it offers nothing that an enhanced T20 couldn't offer. T20 is available nationwide.That’s subjective, many would argue it’s brought enhanced excitement, gave the women’s game a huge boost and clearly is popular with the young who are needed to protect the future of the game.
The 1st limited overs competition were 65 overs each innings at 1st class standard; standard at club level was 25 overs; It was club overs cricket that 1st got me hooked on cricket. Both were innovative and necessary.The Hundred was totally unnecessary i.m.o. as it offers nothing the T20 wasn't offering I'd welcome an argument to contradict that view. Morgan's final sentence sums it all up.
I would not contradict that view as agree T20 cricket is proven successful model and there is was certainly no need to change the format from T20 to 100 balls and imo that is was a mistake.The 1st limited overs competition were 65 overs each innings at 1st class standard; standard at club level was 25 overs; It was club overs cricket that 1st got me hooked on cricket. Both were innovative and necessary.The Hundred was totally unnecessary i.m.o. as it offers nothing the T20 wasn't offering I'd welcome an argument to contradict that view. Morgan's final sentence sums it all up.
A bit of an extreme view, especially using language like “sympathisers”.I’d still like to be able to watch cricket (in all formats) at Durham in 10 years time. There are those in the higher echelons who want to destroy the county set up. This will in turn weaken the England team and test matches will no longer exist.
I don’t understand how the hundred supporters/sympathisers don’t seem to get this, or even acknowledge this scenario. Maybe they want Durham to go out of business? Or not play any test matches?
I think test cricket will always continue mate as the ashes to big too much history and too much tradition and most importantly all the players still want and praise it.I’d still like to be able to watch cricket (in all formats) at Durham in 10 years time. There are those in the higher echelons who want to destroy the county set up. This will in turn weaken the England team and test matches will no longer exist.
I don’t understand how the hundred supporters/sympathisers don’t seem to get this, or even acknowledge this scenario. Maybe they want Durham to go out of business? Or not play any test matches?
The PGC are having meetings and will forward recommendations to county representatives. Some hybrid combination will be adopted but counties clearly aren't going to become Turkey's voting for Christmas and approve the death of those county venues not included. Not so sure that stand alone staging is a panacea in a country which uniquely has 18 1st class teams.I would not contradict that view as agree T20 cricket is proven successful model and there is was certainly no need to change the format from T20 to 100 balls and imo that is was a mistake.
However what I would say is every other world short format tournament IPL, big bash, the new South African tournament etc etc.
Has games as stand alone events where each game has maximum exposure and is live on the telly.
That was not happening previously with multiple games on one night as too many teams
What the IPL does is make each game an event in itself and the cricket community stops to watch each game.
The tournament going forward whatever format it takes needs to be 20 overs imo, but also needs the above to be successful, not sure above can be achieved with as many teams as 18
And there in lies the difficulty of the situation and why we now have two tournaments rather than one.The PGC are having meetings and will forward recommendations to county representatives. Some hybrid combination will be adopted but counties clearly aren't going to become Turkey's voting for Christmas and approve the death of those county venues not included. Not so sure that stand alone staging is a panacea in a country which uniquely has 18 1st class teams.
The cricket world has to revolve around Durham if you wish to make the game accessible to youngsters in Durham. You're coming over as being very condescending to Durham cricket fans on a Durham cricket forum.I think test cricket will always continue mate as the ashes to big too much history and too much tradition and most importantly all the players still want and praise it.
There will still be a format for players to progress to the test national side whether county or otherwise.
As for Durham I totally sympathize with the concern of loyal supporters from that county.
However and I am going to put this as politely as I can for other netrual cricket fans including myself the world does not revolve around Durham and new participation and new fans at club level is more important which hopefully a short format tournament in the school holidays can engage kids and provide that.
As a kid I fell in love with watching club cricket in the North East and Durham was not a first class county at the time.
So in answer to your question I get it, but for me personally there is a bigger picture and more important things than Durham.
Completely understand as a Durham fan you would think differently
I am really not mate, I put it as politely as I could, I completely understand and get how Durham fans would be concerned and sympathe.The cricket world has to revolve around Durham if you wish to make the game accessible to youngsters in Durham. You're coming over as being very condescending to Durham cricket fans on a Durham cricket forum.
Durham has arguably the strongest club structure in the whole country and you're advocating a system from which it will be excluded.The cricket world has to revolve around Durham if you wish to make the game accessible to youngsters in Durham. You're coming over as being very condescending to Durham cricket fans on a Durham cricket forum.
Not sure I get what you saying mate apologies.Durham has arguably the strongest club structure in the whole country and you're advocating a system from which it will be excluded.
I not accusing Durham of anything in the slightest?Durham has arguably the strongest club structure in the whole country and you're advocating a system from which it will be excluded.
Club cricket is thriving in Durham at junior level. That's the template that should be copied,not excluded. You're accusing Durham as not looking at the big picture and don't consider that to be condescending.
post 1470 "you're looking at the bigger picture", .."The world doesn't revolve around Durham".Not sure I get what you saying mate apologies.
Durham has always had a strong club structure before and after Durham become a first class county?
And it could certainly be argued it was stronger before.
I not accusing Durham of anything in the slightest?
post 1470 "you're looking at the bigger picture", .."The world doesn't revolve around Durham".
Implication surely that Durham don't look at the bigger picture? You're advocating continuing a system that will operate with a handful of teams,which currently doesn't include Durham. That's what I'm saying.
Clear enough.
Certainly entitled to your view and in general I respect your viewpoint,though rarely agree with it. I've walked past my local club during the school vacation and on every occasion it's been throbbing with kids of all ages,both sexes,participating in small sides games being supervised by older youngsters who've progressed through that same system. That is repeated every Sunday morning during term time and replicated every Sunday morning at most local clubs. That to me is participating at ground level. You advocate encouraging kids to sit in front of the tv every evening as their way of being introduced to the game in a tournament which can only be watched live in a handful of venues.I am looking at the bigger picture which for me personally is increased participation at club level and ground level which hopefully a competition in prime time and on the telly live every night can achieve.
That’s it, that’s more important to me than what happens to Durham.
It’s a fair personal point of view that is neither accusing anybody of anything or been condescending to anyone.
In fact I have been at pains to express that I respect the views of Durham supporters and where they coming from.
But surely it’s ok for a netrual and not a Durham fan to have a different view and priority!
I am over the moon with that first paragraph although I am not seeing it, there is certainly pockets where it is striving but others where participation is falling rapidly and club teams are struggling to field teams another poster on here that is involved at ground level has already alluded to it.Certainly entitled to your view and in general I respect your viewpoint,though rarely agree with it. I've walked past my local club during the school vacation and on every occasion it's been throbbing with kids of all ages,both sexes,participating in small sides games being supervised by older youngsters who've progressed through that same system. That is repeated every Sunday morning during term time and replicated every Sunday morning at most local clubs. That to me is participating at ground level. You advocate encouraging kids to sit in front of the tv every evening as their way of being introduced to the game in a tournament which can only be watched live in a handful of venues.
"I'm looking at the bigger picture"Again you've implied that at Durham we won't see the bigger picture. That's condescending in my view. The Durham template is the way forward in my view rather than sitting in front of tv.
Again,our views differ.