Car Crash 16.4…

[Sillypoint]

Which begs the question why are you so critical of those who oppose your views? Calling people snobs simply because they don't align with your views is wholly uncalled for.
You're crossing the Rubicon of informed debate with that comment.

is it not a little tongue in cheek, as the people who oppose the view that hundred is decent are quite vocal on here, can be almost made to feel like im not a proper cricket fan because i enjoy the shorter format,

not including yourself in this, but there are some on here that can dish it out but cant take it

 

[Voice of fair play]

Good to hear. I suppose the acid test is not so much whether it's discussed on this board but whether the the newly recruited kids discuss it amongst themselves. That would surely be the best way to spread the gospel.

Exactly, accepting that others have opinions differing to ones own.Which begs the question why are you so critical of those who oppose your views? Calling people snobs simply because they don't align with your views is wholly uncalled for.
You're crossing the Rubicon of informed debate with that comment.

I think I object to the fact that I don’t or very rarely critcise the red ball game as respect that view and that preference.

If there is a bad game in the county championship or one day cup you dont see me or other posters been all over it and having a go.

Yet when there is bad games in The Hunderd some posters straight in questioning quality and everything having an go and ignoring the good skills on show or the good games.

I am not critical of people not liking The Hundred or T20.

I am critical of some of the rubbish talked about short format cricket or the hundred no balance whatsoever

A example been just yesterday when a poster said ‘ no skill involved’ it’s just ‘ hit and hope’ and been lucky.

There is many more

You head it the nail on the head when you say a lot of people on here don’t watch it.

Yet when they is a bad game in the hundred or a team bowled out for a low score or a bad quality game, some seem to watch or catch some of that game and post funnily enough.

But when a really good game or real good quality game or good knocks or good bowling performances no posts or praise at all.

There is no balance whatsoever with arguments about games in The Hundred none whatsoever .

That’s what I object too

is it not a little tongue in cheek, as the people who oppose the view that hundred is decent are quite vocal on here, can be almost made to feel like im not a proper cricket fan because i enjoy the shorter format,

not including yourself in this, but there are some on here that can dish it out but cant take it

Well exactly I have watched cricket for 45 years, and there is this underlying reference that because you enjoy short format cricket you not a ‘ proper cricket’ fan.

I find that totally nonsense

 

[Beau Peep]

One thing I've noticed about the 16.4 discussion thread on here is that there are very few posts talking about the actual cricket taking place in that tournament.

It's mostly spam bot's copy and paste jobs, and arguments about its place in cricket.

I've watched most of the men's version, I gave a fairly detailed accounts of the patterns of play and scoring, the increased quality of bowling particularly from the Pakistani and Afghani players fresh from the world cup, the complete lack of top quality overseas players, the short boundaries, the decent players losing their minds and ability to bat, the scratchy batting outside of the powerplay (with some exceptions, like Leeds's Pooran dismantling Manchester who should have scored about 50 more than they did anyway the other night, and Pollard's five consecutive sixes).

The posters at the time were wound up about Hundred being blamed specifically for Stokes' injury so didn't want to listen and I got told I was being ridiculous. I was also told just how well Durham are doing from it so that's great...

Some good innings, some good batting, lots of swinging and missing, some poor bowling, some tight bowling mainly by unheard-of world-class Afghanistan internationals, some poor fielding, nothing really of note to talk about to be honest.

Like I said before, it's poor quality swing and miss, smash and out, plastic stumps cricket. Honestly, there's not really that much to analyse!

 

[Parkside]

I think I object to the fact that I don’t or very rarely critcise the red ball game as respect that view and that preference.

If there is a bad game in the county championship or one day cup you dont see me or other posters been all over it and having a go.

Yet when there is bad games in The Hunderd some posters straight in questioning quality and everything having an go and ignoring the good skills on show or the good games.

I am not critical of people not liking The Hundred or T20.

I am critical of some of the rubbish talked about short format cricket or the hundred no balance whatsoever

A example been just yesterday when a poster said ‘ no skill involved’ it’s just ‘ hit and hope’ and been lucky.

There is many more

You head it the nail on the head when you say a lot of people on here don’t watch it.

Yet when they is a bad game in the hundred or a team bowled out for a low score or a bad quality game, some seem to watch or catch some of that game and post funnily enough.

But when a really good game or real good quality game or good knocks or good bowling performances no posts or praise at all.

There is no balance whatsoever with arguments about games in The Hundred none whatsoever .

That’s what I object too

Well exactly I have watched cricket for 45 years, and there is this underlying reference that because you enjoy short format cricket you not a ‘ proper cricket’ fan.

I find that totally nonsense

People are entitled to their opinions. Some decry the concept of artificially induced restrictions to speed up play and make boundary hitting easier.In that respect to describe it as " not proper cricket" is surely fair comment in the sense it is not of the traditional form.
I personally think the whole format of the Hundred is rubbish- batters (q.v.) take undue risks, so it is "hit and miss" imo.Others enjoy it and I have no problem with that whatsoever.Hold a different view by all means-What I strongly object to is being called stupid or a snob simply for holding a view that you don't happen to concur with.
Sorry but that's Toys out the pram syndrome

 

[Voice of fair play]

People are entitled to their opinions. Some decry the concept of artificially induced restrictions to speed up play and make boundary hitting easier.In that respect to describe it as " not proper cricket" is surely fair comment in the sense it is not of the traditional form.
I personally think the whole format of the Hundred is rubbish- batters (q.v.) take undue risks, so it is "hit and miss" imo.Others enjoy it and I have no problem with that whatsoever.Hold a different view by all means-What I strongly object to is being called stupid or a snob simply for holding a view that you don't happen to concur with.
Sorry but that's Toys out the pram syndrome

That’s absolutely fine and if I ever caused offense to you in particularly I apologize for it.

My belief is there is some fantastic skills involved in T20 and I personally find T20 entertaining always have.

I prefer positive attacking cricket and absolutely love the way Morgan and now McCullum has approached transforming both England formats to super entertaining.

I do believe after reading numerous website’s over the years there is an element of looking down at T20.

And I do believe there is a percentage of cricket followers who use the term ‘ proper cricket’ to suggest T20 is not such.

That’s my perception reading 100s if not thousands of posts on the subject

 

[Parkside]

That’s absolutely fine and if I ever caused offense to you in particularly I apologize for it.

My belief is there is some fantastic skills involved in T20 and I personally find T20 entertaining always have.

I prefer positive attacking cricket and absolutely love the way Morgan and now McCullum has approached transforming both England formats to super entertaining.

I do believe after reading numerous website’s over the years there is an element of looking down at T20.

And I do believe there is a percentage of cricket followers who use the term ‘ proper cricket’ to suggest T20 is not such.

That’s my perception reading 100s if not thousands of posts on the subject

Apology accepted-I was more disappointed than offended.
I don't think I've met anyone at cricket who didn't enjoy club evening cup ties which were the precursor of T20. I met Geoff Cook at a sponsor event last week and we were reminiscing about 30 over evening cup ties, red ball and white clothing and no fielding restrictions.Proper cricket,dare I say.
I remember Geoff at the advent of T20 forecasting that it would change dramatically playing styles.
I recognise the need and purpose of T20, recognise the concept of fielding restrictions.Maybe a slightly more lacquered ball would even the balance between bat and ball and I liked when Durham a few years back maintained normal boundary sizes.Meant boundaries were fully earned and encouraged good ground fielding and throwing. These short boundaries feed a diet of either 1, 4 or 6. Boring.
I'm pleased we are back on amicable terms.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Apology accepted-I was more disappointed than offended.
I don't think I've met anyone at cricket who didn't enjoy club evening cup ties which were the precursor of T20. I met Geoff Cook at a sponsor event last week and we were reminiscing about 30 over evening cup ties, red ball and white clothing and no fielding restrictions.Proper cricket,dare I say.
I remember Geoff at the advent of T20 forecasting that it would change dramatically playing styles.
I recognise the need and purpose of T20, recognise the concept of fielding restrictions.Maybe a slightly more lacquered ball would even the balance between bat and ball and I liked when Durham a few years back maintained normal boundary sizes.Meant boundaries were fully earned and encouraged good ground fielding and throwing. These short boundaries feed a diet of either 1, 4 or 6. Boring.
I'm pleased we are back on amicable terms.

We were never anything other as far as I am concerned it’s opinions on a message board and totally respect where you coming from just disagree a lot

There is many points within points on this debate it’s not black and white, I agree boundaries should be earned and it’s not good top edges or miss hits going for six as think you should be hitting the middle of the bat to earn that reward.

However it is good to see big shots played and going back to them evening cup ties you mentioned people wanted and always wanted to see big shots that’s why crowds were up when quality overseas players were in attendance.

They were not there to see a player leave the ball or build an innings they wanted to see attacking big shots it’s nothing knew.

My main grip which I keep coming back to is because fans/posters don’t like T20 or The Hundred ( which is fine and their choice)

They then refuse to accept that there is some high quality skilful cricket played in them which is simply not true as there is.

 

[Parkside]

We were never anything other as far as I am concerned it’s opinions on a message board and totally respect where you coming from just disagree a lot

There is many points within points on this debate it’s not black and white, I agree boundaries should be earned and it’s not good top edges or miss hits going for six as think you should be hitting the middle of the bat to earn that reward.

However it is good to see big shots played and going back to them evening cup ties you mentioned people wanted and always wanted to see big shots that’s why crowds were up when quality overseas players were in attendance.

They were not there to see a player leave the ball or build an innings they wanted to see attacking big shots it’s nothing knew.

My main grip which I keep coming back to is because fans/posters don’t like T20 or The Hundred ( which is fine and their choice)

They then refuse to accept that there is some high quality skilful cricket played in them which is simply not true as there is.

That's just hyperbole from WUMs. I'm surprised you bite.

 

[Voice of fair play]

That's just hyperbole from WUMs. I'm surprised you bite.

Well there is a lot of them, just put my views across as i genuinely believe them

 

[Parkside]

Well there is a lot of them, just put my views across as i genuinely believe them

If They're that thick you should have sympathy for them.

 

[Fleagle]

Why is it 8 games when there's only 7 opponents

The pairs of “regional rivals” play each other twice (yes a very strained concept when it pits the teams from Cardiff and Eastleigh against each other and at best contrived for the others - don’t shoot the messenger)

 

[Sillypoint]

The pairs of “regional rivals” play each other twice (yes a very strained concept when it pits the teams from Cardiff and Eastleigh against each other and at best contrived for the others - don’t shoot the messenger)

While i do get that regional rivals in franchise cricket are daft, machester vs leeds and Oval vs Lords arent that contrived

 

[brandon]

And I do believe there is a percentage of cricket followers who use the term ‘ proper cricket’ to suggest T20 is not such.

You’ve had this explained to you about 46 times in the last year. People don’t use the term to ‘suggest T20 is not such’. They use the term because it isn’t.

 

[Voice of fair play]

You’ve had this explained to you about 46 times in the last year. People don’t use the term to ‘suggest T20 is not such’. They use the term because it isn’t.

Well I think it is, it’s just as proper and just a different format.

I don’t like it used as the opposite of proper, suggests it wrong or inappropriate which it not imo

 

[Aidan11]

Article here criticises the ECB handling of the one day cup.

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[brandon]

Staggering.

 

[Inside Forward]

Yes,reflects the demographic of the board.

Well I’m 32 and think it’s utter wank.

 

[Struts]

Well I’m 32 and think it’s utter wank.

I’m 33. Not sure i’d say wank but definitely very mediocre for what’s meant to be our top white ball tournament.

 

[Parkside]

I’m 33. Not sure i’d say wank but definitely very mediocre for what’s meant to be our top white ball tournament.

Checking on the state of play last night,I watched some highlights. It was just pure power hitting and slogging.No finesse whatsoever from what I saw. Each to his own though.

 

[Sillypoint]

Checking on the state of play last night,I watched some highlights. It was just pure power hitting and slogging.No finesse whatsoever from what I saw. Each to his own though.

so you watched highlights of a rain reduced 30 ball per side game and wondered why there was no finesse