• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

The Hundred 2024


Tuesday 6th August

Women 11.30am
Manchester Originals Women v Oval Invincibles Women
Emirates Old Trafford, Manchester

Men 3pm
Manchester Originals Men v Oval Invincibles Men
Emirates Old Trafford, Manchester


Women 3pm
Birmingham Phoenix Women V Northern Superchargers Women
Edgbaston, Birmingham

Men 6.30pm
Birmingham Phoenix Men V Northern Superchargers Men
Edgbaston, Birmingham
.

Logon or register to see this image
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
I was brought up on them lovely evening local cup ties watching a exceptional club side reach numerous cup finals locally and throughly enjoyed them from being a kid then into adult and few pints, and great craic, so looks like we both really appreciated and enjoyed them nights.
Click to expand...

We can probably all find common ground on that because we pretty much all were. I still get to them when I can. Must’ve done eight or nine this year.

That’s an even bigger reason why the hostility to short form cricket is so odd for me. Because it’s pretty much all anyone ever plays outside the top professional echelons. For most of us most of the time it is all cricket is. At least Saturday league stuff in my day was time cricket, Although apart from very odd tour matches I never played a game with two intervals and I have never, ever played a game with four innings. Nowadays even the leagues are overs cricket even if it’s 40/40 or 50/50.

Is that why we look down on white ball a bit? Because it’s such a joke of a format even we could play it?
 
Fleagle said:
We can probably all find common ground on that because we pretty much all were. I still get to them when I can. Must’ve done eight or nine this year.

That’s an even bigger reason why the hostility to short form cricket is so odd for me. Because it’s pretty much all anyone ever plays outside the top professional echelons. For most of us most of the time it is all cricket is. At least Saturday league stuff in my day was time cricket, Although apart from very odd tour matches I never played a game with two intervals and I have never, ever played a game with four innings. Nowadays even the leagues are overs cricket even if it’s 40/40 or 50/50.

Is that why we look down on white ball a bit? Because it’s such a joke of a format even we could play it?
Click to expand...
I don't think there's hostility to short form cricket at all. The condescension is to the totally superfluous Hundred which currently drains resources and a format which no other country plays. You'd "need to have your hard drive checked" if you can't accept that T20 format is essential if cricket is to have a future.
 
Parkside said:
I don't think there's hostility to short form cricket at all. The condescension is to the totally superfluous Hundred which currently drains resources and a format which no other country plays. You'd "need to have your hard drive checked" if you can't accept that T20 format is essential if cricket is to have a future.
Click to expand...
Yeah there’s a particular hostility to The Hundred, because it raises all manner of additional issues around its agenda to de-emphasise (and, you don’t exactly need a tinfoil hat to suspect, ultimately totally sideline) the county clubs, and around some of its more pointless gimmickry. Most of that I get. I don’t believe even its staunchest defenders think it’s a better format than T20. But there is a long history of condescension to the short form more generally. Not necessarily accusing you. But for years there have been references to hit and giggle, pyjamas etc, to “proper” cricket. I use the last one myself, hypocrite that I am.

Even this tournament asks a couple of questions, around a dedicated slot in the calendar, and around whether an 18 side tournament can give you that, that need asking. I don’t like its answer to the second question, sure. And some of the other questions it answers with its daft gimmicks shouldn’t have been asked in the first place, and the answers are bollocks. But those two did. And will need asking in respect of whatever emerges from the wreckage of this as well.
 
Parkside said:
I don't think there's hostility to short form cricket at all. The condescension is to the totally superfluous Hundred which currently drains resources and a format which no other country plays. You'd "need to have your hard drive checked" if you can't accept that T20 format is essential if cricket is to have a future.
Click to expand...
The hundred has undoubtedly for a number of reasons increased the hostility to short format cricket 100% nobody would ever state otherwise.

But it was there well before the hundred even thought off, years before

I really struggle how you have not seen over the years especially the early years the way T20 was looked down on, because it was and still is in some quarters.

As the poster above has said there has been a long history of it.

That has now reduced to a certain extent once people have accepted the finances it has brought to the game,
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
The hundred has undoubtedly for a number of reasons increased the hostility to short format cricket 100% nobody would ever state otherwise.

But it was there well before the hundred even thought off, years before

I really struggle how you have not seen over the years especially the early years the way T20 was looked down on, because it was and still is in some quarters.

As the poster above has said there has been a long history of it.

That has now reduced to a certain extent once people have accepted the finances it has brought to the game,
Click to expand...
Test Cricket has that descriptor for a reason-it was regarded as the ultimate test of cricket skills. I think evening limited overs cricket was taken less seriously. Likewise T20 at its inception was regarded as a less serious light-hearted format with restrictions imposed to make fast scoring and boundary hitting easier. So it doesn't appeal to supporters of the traditional form; because they use the term "hit and giggle" i.e. a less intense format ,light-hearted with emphasis on boundary hitting It doesn't follow that they look down on it but even if they do,so what? It's the accusation of snobbery that's offensive.
 
Parkside said:
Test Cricket has that descriptor for a reason-it was regarded as the ultimate test of cricket skills. I think evening limited overs cricket was taken less seriously. Likewise T20 at its inception was regarded as a less serious light-hearted format with restrictions imposed to make fast scoring and boundary hitting easier. So it doesn't appeal to supporters of the traditional form; because they use the term "hit and giggle" i.e. a less intense format ,light-hearted with emphasis on boundary hitting It doesn't follow that they look down on it but even if they do,so what? It's the accusation of snobbery that's offensive.
Click to expand...
All about perception mate, I thought for many a year reading many websites and views that people have looked down on white ball short format cricket and agree with the poster who said there has been a long history of it.
 
Voice of fair play said:
All about perception mate, I thought for many a year reading many websites and views that people have looked down on white ball short format cricket and agree with the poster who said there has been a long history of it.
Click to expand...

Of course it's perception. Obviously if you prefer one format you regard the the other as inferior. What exactly is inappropriate in labelling it "hit and giggle? " What exactly is wrong with that opinion? Why label such people as snobs. That's extremely offensive.
 
Can’t remember who comms was but at least they did appreciate the comedy in the fact they spent 90% of the build up talking about Stokes for him to get out first ball after waiting for the strike for quite a while.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top