Voice of fair play
Striker
Yeah well put, I was simply making the point that to get the correct balance between red ball and white ball, that one competition is enough of the shorter format, but at the same time that one competition needs to happen for pretty much the reasons you have stated.Not sure where this argument is going, voice of fair play has stated that he enjoys shorter form of the game (what is wrong with that) lots of people do. I personally love a drawn backs to the wall test match, however also like the shorter for of the game. I think the point that is trying to be made is that the hundred itself is not affecting the current test team (don’t deny it could affect future years), however like it or not lots of people like the shorter game and it’s money making, which the counties need given the unfortunate low attendances at county cricket (mainly on when people work). Therefore we need a shorter form of the game to help cricket survive financially, this could be the blast, franchise t20 or the hundred, but everyone seems to agree that we need to just pick one (no consensus on which one this should be). Me personally franchise t20 but with games shared between all counties
I am sure I said a choice between 3 not 2 including the current T20 blast but if you want to take that bit out to suit your argument guess that up to youNope, wrong again. I’m assuming nothing. I know (because you’ve said it yourself) that you don’t give a shit about county cricket.
Hence why you’re banging on about how it’s either a choice between the 16.4 or a franchise T20 competition.
Last edited: