The Hundred - Free tickets

Steak Pie said:
Three posts of pure bollocks from you. This tournament had a bigger marketing budget than all of domestic cricket combined for the last 20 years, and it still pulled smaller crowds in some of the grounds than the last covid unaffected Blast (2019).

The two things in the last 20 years that have had the nation gripped? The 2005 Ashes and the 2019 World Cup final.

The link? England won and they were on free telly. Another link? The ECB destroyed the advantages they were handed by hiding Test cricket behind a pay wall in 2006, and then destroying the 50 over competition in 2020.

Put cricket on telly and people will watch it, because its a superb game. There has been no progress.

Not everyone. :D;)
Click to expand...
Well perhaps not everyone mate:D

But been really refreshing to me lately hearing T20 mentioned as popular and successful many many times.
 


Voice of fair play said:
I respectfully disagree, it is designed for entertainment which they are, I have played and watched cricket for 45 years watching local cricket and international cricket and fans imo both locally and internationally have always loved big hitting and watching the players capable of these big shots well before T20 was even thought off, always!!!

Therefore imo it is not designed for short attention span it is just providing more big shots which has and will always be popular

T20 has advanced the skills of the players in all aspects, some of the fielding developed has been simply brilliant, bowlers have developed slower ball bouncers, better yorkers, better variations. Batsman can now play shots 360 degrees round the wicket and ramp shots etc to fast bowlers and playing shots where fielders are not there ,needs immense skill which players have developed under T20.

The authorities main problem now is making sure test cricket still remains the priority but at the same time embrace the entertainment and popularity the short game provides not a easy task?
Click to expand...
I agree that in some ways it has increased batting skills hence I used the word improvisation.
I enjoyed watching the old Gillette 60 over format even though the outcome of the Lords final in September was heavily influenced on the toss.
But for me the modern one day concept disrupts the first class calendar too much and the matches are simply too short.
 
Lo Ursem said:
I agree that in some ways it has increased batting skills hence I used the word improvisation.
I enjoyed watching the old Gillette 60 over format even though the outcome of the Lords final in September was heavily influenced on the toss.
But for me the modern one day concept disrupts the first class calendar too much and the matches are simply too short.
Click to expand...
For me even going back years and years fans have always enjoyed batsman hitting attacking big shots it is not new at all.

If you look back at county players of old, people always preferred watching the likes of Ali Brown smashing it around the park in county cricket, than Chris Tavare boring the pants of people when he played test cricket.

Fans have always enjoyed that and always will imo, T20 gives more of that.

It was inevitable the new completion to attract new families and kids was going to be played in the school holidays which happens to be in the middle of the summer.

The problem been which is well documented is that had meant no red ball cricket in the summer to enhance the test team and the bigger problem been going forward how will that be challenged to improve the test team yet at the same time bring new people to the game, it is not a easy task for the authorities.
Although I agree with @Stattos child it I'd nonsence to blame the current state of our test team on the hundred it has just started and our test top order been struggling for years.

However going forward years it is obviously a concern playing too much of the shorter format may effect test batsman techniques.
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Did not say it was propaganda, I am simply saying what is worse, trying to get new fans to like something or making your mind up to dislike something before even watching it?

I think the best think to come out of these debates, is the fact now everybody seems to think T20 is excellent and successful, something I have been saying for years and years.
Click to expand...
So you made a point that is utterly irrelevant to the point you are replying to. Thanks for clarifying.

Theres a reason people have 'made up their mind up to dislike the tournament'. It's because they fear the danger it presents to the county system they love.
 
Lo Ursem said:
T20 and the 100 are designed for the short attention span dumbed down modern era.
Give me Test Cricket and the County Championship any time.
Fine if people want to watch the other stuff and marvel at the big hitting and improvisation but please do not compare it with the real thing.
Fine if it brings families together and fills up air time on BBC.
But not for me.
Click to expand...
Problem is I think we all need to accept that red ball cricket as we know it is on it's way out. I hope I'm wrong but really don't think it will survive.
I can see the County Championship eventually being reduced to 2 days, probably over a weekend with one team batting Saturday and the other batting Sunday. Over time 50 over one day cricket will become our 'long' game. Yes, Test matches are still hugely popular but as white ball cricket continues to grow we just won't have the infastructure to develop players for it. Test matches will eventually get replaced with 'festivals' of short form cticket - 5 limited over games over 5 days.

The IPL, Big Bash, T20, 100 etc will attract the TV money and pay the best players the highest wages, It's inevitable (to me) that It wil become a year round moving circus of white ball cricket for the top players.

I love test cricket, I was brought up sneaking a radio under my pillow to listen to the Ashes tests down under but we're becoming the dinosaurs, it's not like most club cricketers will ever get a chance to play longer versions anyway, limited over cricket is what they are used to and top level cricket will represent the same game they play.

Bah humbug :(
 
Love how T20 cricket is suddenly being held up as the gold standard by some - the same people were slagging it 15 years ago exactly like they do now with The Hundred. Both formats are guff really and I don't think it matters which one of them gets the air time, promotion etc - any form of cricket that gets pushed on terrestrial TV and in mainstream media can only be good for the sport IMO. Let them get on with it.

The main challenge/worry is preserving red ball cricket which is seriously under threat now. A lot of people now just aren't interested in watching something that takes 4 or 5 days to finish, not sure how you get around that.
 
Behind Enemy Lines said:
Love how T20 cricket is suddenly being held up as the gold standard by some - the same people were slagging it 15 years ago exactly like they do now with The Hundred. Both formats are guff really and I don't think it matters which one of them gets the air time, promotion etc - any form of cricket that gets pushed on terrestrial TV and in mainstream media can only be good for the sport IMO. Let them get on with it.

The main challenge/worry is preserving red ball cricket which is seriously under threat now. A lot of people now just aren't interested in watching something that takes 4 or 5 days to finish, not sure how you get around that.
Click to expand...
But they are only guff to those of us who have been brought watching and enjoying test cricket. To new spectators/fans/enthisiasts it's the 5 day game that is guff.
Some of us traditionalists might lament it's passing but newcomers to the sport won't. I've accepted it now. If I have to choose between watching limited overs cricket or watching no cricket then I'll choose the limited overs. I might not like it but have to accept it if I want to watch cricket.
 
smoker said:
So you made a point that is utterly irrelevant to the point you are replying to. Thanks for clarifying.

Theres a reason people have 'made up their mind up to dislike the tournament'. It's because they fear the danger it presents to the county system they love.
Click to expand...
I am aware was asking the question what is worse
Jack Torrance said:
Jason Roy and Alex Hales batted in the same position as Sibley in red ball for England and were worse
Click to expand...
Yeah they were, however Roy only faced the best bowling attack in the world and nothing else.

That said to open with Roy against that attack was the worst decision made by England in recent years.
FC United of Manchester said:
But they are only guff to those of us who have been brought watching and enjoying test cricket. To new spectators/fans/enthisiasts it's the 5 day game that is guff.
Some of us traditionalists might lament it's passing but newcomers to the sport won't. I've accepted it now. If I have to choose between watching limited overs cricket or watching no cricket then I'll choose the limited overs. I might not like it but have to accept it if I want to watch cricket.
Click to expand...
I think the best option mate is to find room for both and accommodate them both, it does not have to be one or the other.
 
Last edited:
Given the white ball cricket that top players now play, how long will it take before they just decide to treat red ball like a white ball game?
When do they think that scratting around to get 200 in a day is no better than just going out and blasting it in 20 overs? We've seen a massive shift in test cricket over the last decade, first innings over 400 are now the exception rather than the rule. We rarely see the amount of drawn games in non weather effected matches we once did, maybe that's a good thing.
Ultimately it might be players who take the decision out of authorities hands by just deciding to play it like white ball and put their feet up for a couple of days.
 
FC United of Manchester said:
Problem is I think we all need to accept that red ball cricket as we know it is on it's way out. I hope I'm wrong but really don't think it will survive.
I can see the County Championship eventually being reduced to 2 days, probably over a weekend with one team batting Saturday and the other batting Sunday. Over time 50 over one day cricket will become our 'long' game. Yes, Test matches are still hugely popular but as white ball cricket continues to grow we just won't have the infastructure to develop players for it. Test matches will eventually get replaced with 'festivals' of short form cticket - 5 limited over games over 5 days.

The IPL, Big Bash, T20, 100 etc will attract the TV money and pay the best players the highest wages, It's inevitable (to me) that It wil become a year round moving circus of white ball cricket for the top players.

I love test cricket, I was brought up sneaking a radio under my pillow to listen to the Ashes tests down under but we're becoming the dinosaurs, it's not like most club cricketers will ever get a chance to play longer versions anyway, limited over cricket is what they are used to and top level cricket will represent the same game they play.

Bah humbug :(
Click to expand...

Not so sure myself.
We've introduced the 100 over here because by and large the T20 wasn't making enough money for the ECB. Myself. I accept that footballs our main game and I don't think we should change the game to attract non-cricket fans. The ECB obviously see differently.
Anyway, in Australia and India this isn't a problem. They cram them in for T20 games, as I'd imagine they do in Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
If we'd had 8 counties I don't think we'd have moved away from T20. I think the ECB just changed the number of balls to make it edgy and different.
I'd be very surprised if the other test nations decided to adopt the 100 into international cricket as its not in their interests. and therefore it'll remain an England thing.
When England's performances begin to suffer I think the competition will be rethought, unless the ECB no longer give a shit and just have pound signs in their eyes.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Did not say it was propaganda, I am simply saying what is worse, trying to get new fans to like something or making your mind up to dislike something before even watching it?

I think the best think to come out of these debates, is the fact now everybody seems to think T20 is excellent and successful, something I have been saying for years and years.
Click to expand...

That poster just didnt seem to be aware that is existed.

I didnt want the 100 but am pretty rational about it

You put any tournament on the BBC and give it this much promotion people will watch

he ECB have spent a fortune on marketing and advertising.

Not one thing I have seen couldnt have been done with the T20 blast focusing on a Premier League with promotion and relegation to the league below.

changing the format to a 100 I have no problem with.
FC United of Manchester said:
Given the white ball cricket that top players now play, how long will it take before they just decide to treat red ball like a white ball game?
When do they think that scratting around to get 200 in a day is no better than just going out and blasting it in 20 overs? We've seen a massive shift in test cricket over the last decade, first innings over 400 are now the exception rather than the rule. We rarely see the amount of drawn games in non weather effected matches we once did, maybe that's a good thing.
Ultimately it might be players who take the decision out of authorities hands by just deciding to play it like white ball and put their feet up for a couple of days.
Click to expand...

That doesn't work mate, you cant physically do it, you'd just instantly get out.
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Yet you could argue the current opening batsman in the test team are actually too defensive and that approach not working.

I would hardly say Sibley and Burns have been getting dismissed for been too attacking?
Click to expand...
No they just aren’t up to the task. But you’re somewhat corrrect it’s about knowing when to attack. My point is we just don’t produce opening test batsmen anymore
Put the hundred money into buying test cricket on terestrial tv. That’s how I got into cricket. Nothing better than seeing someone just stay in for an hour. That’s cricket not that razmataz 100 crap
 
Last edited:
Reedie8610 said:
No they just aren’t up to the task. But you’re somewhat corrrect it’s about knowing when to attack. My point is we just don’t produce opening test batsmen anymore
Put the hundred money into buying test cricket on terestrial tv. That’s how I got into cricket. Nothing better than seeing someone just stay in for an hour. That’s cricket not that razmataz 100 crap
Click to expand...
Personally I think there is nothing worse than somebody staying in for a hour and not scoring any or very little runs ,as it is taking time away from a game you trying to win without contributing any runs.

Cricket is about runs not just staying in always has been always will be, even in test cricket the best and most watchable teams in history have been attacking cricket teams

But of course I think you right in the sense test cricket should always be number one and agree totally would love to see it on free to air tv, and imo a way should be looked at to accommodate both test cricket and a shorter format of the game in the calendar whether that be T20 or ‘The Hundred,,
 
Last edited:

Back
Top