Silly Point
Striker
Pretty sure those didn't exclude large swathes of the country when they were introduced
-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.
The Hundred 2023
- Thread starter Hetty
- Start date
But but but but
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.
Last edited:
Silly Point
Striker
But but what? The hundred is less accessible than the Blast to people living a distance away from the chosen 8 grounds
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.
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.
We'll agree to differ.
Voice of fair play
Striker
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
Last edited:
mosi
Winger
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 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?
A bit of an extreme view, especially using language like “sympathisers”.
Many of us see the Hundred as a positive step in keeping cricket relevant for the future generations. Quick and entertaining is the order of the day, youth do not have the patience to watch 78 overs a day and 327 dot balls.
Red ball cricket will continue to exist, but it’s not where the money or interest is at domestic level.
Voice of fair play
Striker
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
Last edited:
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.
Voice of fair play
Striker
And there in lies the difficulty of the situation and why we now have two tournaments rather than one.
Counties love the blast and the revenue it provides, where every other country flagship short format tournament has games as stand alone events and each game on the telly which is proven successful.
It’s why this is a very difficult situation and far from an easy fix
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.
Voice of fair play
Striker
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.
But getting new kids playing cricket at club level is simply more important for me, I totally respect others may think differently.
I seen club cricket in Durham thriving as I am sure you did well before Durham was a first class county.
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.
Last edited:
Voice of fair play
Striker
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?
Last edited:
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.
Voice of fair play
Striker
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, that’s what I said and meant that is not accusing Durham of anything in the slightest
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 have already said several times in would be better if it was to include a North East team and South West team to increase to 10 teams to spread more through the country
I think to have a designated window and every gave an event and every gave live on telly like every other nation does for their flagship short format tournament 10 teams is the most you could go, as difficult to achieve that with 18
Last edited:
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.
Last edited:
Voice of fair play
Striker
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.
I am totally confused how me personally saying that the bigger picture for me personally is more participation in the game than the success or not of one particular club is implying anything at all of what that particular club does or condescending in the slightest to them.
It’s not having a go in the slightest at that club in anyway it’s just a personal prority of what I consider more important.
Last edited:
