Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 27/08/2021 at 08:47, gingerjon said:

They'd have to score 500, assuming they bowl the remaining England wickets for five runs.

So it sort of is inconceivable.

But it would be impressive. If only for the volume that Michael Vaughan's screeching would reach.

 

And if England fail to take 2-3 early wickets today with the new ball the inconcievable does indeed become possible

The key for India if the get a good start would be Rishabh Pant versus a tiring attack . A quick 70-80 from Pant would really put the cat among the pigeons. Attack wise, James Anderson I believe to be carrying an injury as he was on and off the field in the afternoon. Robinson and Overton boiwled as well as could be expected. Sam Curran is not up to it full stop. and Moeen hyas been tidy but disturbingly it was Root last evening that got the ball to turn.

England have neither pace through injury nor any big spinner of the ball so I would not expect the Indian tail to fold if a recognised batman is still at the crease.

Anyone fancy this England side chasing 150-200 ?

Quote

When the pinch comes the common people will turn out to be more intelligent than the clever ones. I certainly hope so.

George Orwell
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


9 minutes ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

And if England fail to take 2-3 early wickets today with the new ball the inconcievable does indeed become possible

The key for India if the get a good start would be Rishabh Pant versus a tiring attack . A quick 70-80 from Pant would really put the cat among the pigeons. Attack wise, James Anderson I believe to be carrying an injury as he was on and off the field in the afternoon. Robinson and Overton boiwled as well as could be expected. Sam Curran is not up to it full stop. and Moeen hyas been tidy but disturbingly it was Root last evening that got the ball to turn.

England have neither pace through injury nor any big spinner of the ball so I would not expect the Indian tail to fold if a recognised batman is still at the crease.

Anyone fancy this England side chasing 150-200 ?

I am ignoring you and hoping not to have to discuss this further.

  • Haha 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

India are 5 down and still trailing by over 100 runs.

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pant has gone for just one run.

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

India 8 down now. This could be over by lunch.

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Job done, series levelled. Great work with bat and ball by England.

  • Like 2

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

It’s a pity you chose to get so wound up by part of my comments on the Hundred and then quoted it out of the context within which it was written.  You might feel less upset if you reread it and then you might reconsider who you are labelling arrogant.  

That wasn't so much aimed at you as at the many other anti-Hundred comments that have been littering the BBC Have Your Say section after every Hundred match. Too many snooty 'Super Fan' types that think they're special because they like Test Cricket. It's my general frustration at the desire of some cricket fans to destroy anything that doesn't quite fit with what they want, rather than being open to the fact that the sport can offer a range of things to different people. There absolutely is time for different events, but of course it means having to make choices. You can't have every event exactly when you want it, or the length you want. I'm asking for 30 days for The Hundred, out of 170 or whatever. That is not unreasonable for a tournament that clearly has proven popular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As TMS were saying, not just a great win for England, but an extra day and a half of recovery time for any players with aches and twinges.

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, DavidM said:

Enough time for everything on the surface … but the schedule is the key . It’s just not coherent or joined up . We’ve added another layer that basically has no context at all , to the detriment of other formats which do . First class cricket has just been pushed further down the queue 

I keep saying it, but The Hundred is 30 days. We've got 140 odd other days to get the rest right. I don't think there's a need for negativity. And we're certainly not going improve things by taking away something that a lot of people have embraced, and then telling them that they must watch other events, that up until now they haven't really been that enthused by.

Also, The Hundred does have a context. It's (for me anyway) a step up from county cricket. If you play for Hampshire, you're clearly a good cricketer. If you play for the Southern Brave, you're one of the best. You've proven yourself good enough to be selected by one of the elite 8 teams.

The problem I have is that some people just aren't grasping (or aren't willing to accept) the reasons why I (and many others) liked The Hundred. It's a format that really worked for me. Taking it away isn't going to make Hundred fans suddenly interested in the other formats.

It would be like me taking the RLWC and saying, instead of 16 teams playing over one month, we're now going to have 32 teams and we're playing it over 3 months. Don't moan that there's more teams and more matches. Don't moan that the quality is more diluted. Just watch what I think you should watch, because I don't think there should be a world cup for only 16 teams played over one month. I think you all need to watch something that's much longer, with more teams and more matches. Would you be happy with that? I doubt it.

Like when T20 came along, this was a new product that I think struck a chord with a lot of people. It ticked the boxes that they wanted ticked. Things that can't necessarily be met by other events. It's no good putting forward a 180 match T20 Blast as an alternative, because it's not. Let's instead accept that The Hundred works for some people, and that the T20 Blast works for others - with a huge crossover of people that will be interested in both. At the end of the day, it's all good cricket.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

I keep saying it, but The Hundred is 30 days. We've got 140 odd other days to get the rest right. I don't think there's a need for negativity. And we're certainly not going improve things by taking away something that a lot of people have embraced, and then telling them that they must watch other events, that up until now they haven't really been that enthused by.

Also, The Hundred does have a context. It's (for me anyway) a step up from county cricket. If you play for Hampshire, you're clearly a good cricketer. If you play for the Southern Brave, you're one of the best. You've proven yourself good enough to be selected by one of the elite 8 teams.

The problem I have is that some people just aren't grasping (or aren't willing to accept) the reasons why I (and many others) liked The Hundred. It's a format that really worked for me. Taking it away isn't going to make Hundred fans suddenly interested in the other formats.

It would be like me taking the RLWC and saying, instead of 16 teams playing over one month, we're now going to have 32 teams and we're playing it over 3 months. Don't moan that there's more teams and more matches. Don't moan that the quality is more diluted. Just watch what I think you should watch, because I don't think there should be a world cup for only 16 teams played over one month. I think you all need to watch something that's much longer, with more teams and more matches. Would you be happy with that? I doubt it.

Like when T20 came along, this was a new product that I think struck a chord with a lot of people. It ticked the boxes that they wanted ticked. Things that can't necessarily be met by other events. It's no good putting forward a 180 match T20 Blast as an alternative, because it's not. Let's instead accept that The Hundred works for some people, and that the T20 Blast works for others - with a huge crossover of people that will be interested in both. At the end of the day, it's all good cricket.

 

 

Isn't (one of) the point of the new format to be to enticing people to like other forms of cricket? 

Maybe people would be interested in t20 form of the game if as much publicity and coverage had been put into that as opposed to the hundred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Just back from Canterbury Kent Spitfires v Birmingham Bears (Warwickshire) cracking match:)

Speaking to quite a few people at the match, its apparent that there is total hostility in county cricket towards The Hundred/ECB and many are really annoyed that the Royal London 1 day cup has been totally devalued (Only one match on SKY this season)

Paul

Yeah, yeah. 30 days of The Hundred is responsible for everything bad in cricket and the world. Have you noticed that the rise of the Taliban has coincided with the introduction of The Hundred. There must surely be a link between the two. Other bad things also happened in August, all whilst The Hundred was taking place. Very sinister.

No, there isn't total hostility in county cricket towards The Hundred. You're just listening to the voices you want to hear, and ignoring the others. I would suggest that a large number of people at The Hundred, are also fans of their county teams. Certainly I am, so is my dad, and one of the people that wanted to come with us, but couldn't get a ticket, is a Hampshire member. So, no, you're wrong to speak on behalf of 'county cricket'.

Now then, The Royal London 1 day cup is I'm sure a fantastic cricket competition. I must be honest and say that it's not one I've ever had any interest in. I think it's fair to say that is probably true for most of the population. That said, of course I want it to be a success, and I want it to be as good as it can possibly be. Obviously I can't promise to play it exactly at the best time for it, because it's just one event competing for a place in the schedule with all others. But I definitely would like it to be played, and hopefully it can be played at a good time.

But let's get real for a moment. There is a bigger picture here. Cricket is competing for attention with all other sports and all other alternatives. The Royal London 1 day cup, isn't going to be the key factor in determining whether cricket can grab the attention of the wider population. So, whilst it maybe hasn't been perfect this year, and I'm happy for the ECB to examine whether they can do better with it, we've also got to bear in mind the bigger aims.

And most importantly, we've got to understand and accept that a perfect schedule, doesn't exist. We can't please everyone. We know that from rugby league. It doesn't matter what the issue, someone won't be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

Isn't (one of) the point of the new format to be to enticing people to like other forms of cricket? 

Maybe people would be interested in t20 form of the game if as much publicity and coverage had been put into that as opposed to the hundred.

Nothing wrong with the Vitality Blast T/Twenty and thanks ECB for trying to screw it all up.

They can stick the Hundred where the sun dont shine, overhyped rubbish Coctcutter Graves and his Lap Poodle Harrison need to be sent to the nearest job centre ASAP:)

 

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

Yeah, yeah. 30 days of The Hundred is responsible for everything bad in cricket and the world. Have you noticed that the rise of the Taliban has coincided with the introduction of The Hundred. There must surely be a link between the two. Other bad things also happened in August, all whilst The Hundred was taking place. Very sinister.

No, there isn't total hostility in county cricket towards The Hundred. You're just listening to the voices you want to hear, and ignoring the others. I would suggest that a large number of people at The Hundred, are also fans of their county teams. Certainly I am, so is my dad, and one of the people that wanted to come with us, but couldn't get a ticket, is a Hampshire member. So, no, you're wrong to speak on behalf of 'county cricket'.

Now then, The Royal London 1 day cup is I'm sure a fantastic cricket competition. I must be honest and say that it's not one I've ever had any interest in. I think it's fair to say that is probably true for most of the population. That said, of course I want it to be a success, and I want it to be as good as it can possibly be. Obviously I can't promise to play it exactly at the best time for it, because it's just one event competing for a place in the schedule with all others. But I definitely would like it to be played, and hopefully it can be played at a good time.

But let's get real for a moment. There is a bigger picture here. Cricket is competing for attention with all other sports and all other alternatives. The Royal London 1 day cup, isn't going to be the key factor in determining whether cricket can grab the attention of the wider population. So, whilst it maybe hasn't been perfect this year, and I'm happy for the ECB to examine whether they can do better with it, we've also got to bear in mind the bigger aims.

And most importantly, we've got to understand and accept that a perfect schedule, doesn't exist. We can't please everyone. We know that from rugby league. It doesn't matter what the issue, someone won't be happy.

Well you want to come down to Canterbury as you are talking out of your backside ,start speaking to real cricket fans on the county circuit.

As soon as the foamy finger brigade find a new sport they will be off to the likes of WWF :))))

Not much difference between The Taliban and the ECB either:)))))

 

Paul

Edited by ATLANTISMAN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Well you want to come down to Canterbury as you are talking out of your backside ,start speaking to real cricket fans on the county circuit.

As soon as the foamy finger brigade find a new sport they will be off to the likes of WWF :))))

Not much difference between The Taliban and the ECB either:)))))

 

Paul

“Real” fans?! This is probably the worst take on the subject I’ve seen yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

Isn't (one of) the point of the new format to be to enticing people to like other forms of cricket?

Yes, of course. Every competition and event in every sport has the wider aim of hoping that if people like it, they'll watch more and also try other forms of the sport, if there are some. Nothing is an island. I first watched RL when it was GB v Australia for The Ashes. Since liking that, I've watched various other RL events - state of origin, Challenge Cup, Grand final, Lancashire v Yorkshire and Lancs/Yorkshire v Aussies school boys on Our League.

7 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

Maybe people would be interested in t20 form of the game if as much publicity and coverage had been put into that as opposed to the hundred.

Yes, providing that it was done in the same way. This is what people are failing to grasp. It's not 100 balls instead of 120 balls that's the big appeal. It's the fact that it is 8 teams instead of 18. 32 matches instead of 180. 30 days instead of spread over 2 months. One match (or one for men's, one for womens) every day. Double headers so that the women's game is given more prominence. It's not just about publicity and coverage. It's about the format.

The number of balls is actually way down on the list of priorities. Obviously they say that they wanted to shorten the timescales a bit, because they felt that some T20's were maybe drifting just a bit too long. But the big appeal of 100 balls was to give them a marketable name - The Hundred. Something different, something unique. It's sensible marketing and promotion, and it worked. The Hundred is getting loads of mention, even on the rugby league forums.

The games absolutely have a T20 feel to them. They're incredibly similar. It's common sense that The Hundred and T20 are far more alike than Test cricket and The Hundred. They could have done it with a T20 format, but I've tried to explain the reasons why they opted for something similar, but new. And you have to recognise that it couldn't have been done with 18 counties. That's the key point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Nothing wrong with the Vitality Blast T/Twenty and thanks ECB for trying to screw it all up.

County cricket was perfect before they introduced that T20 rubbish. It ruined proper cricket. Anyone who supports the Vitality Blast is NOT a true cricket fan. It's pathetic rubbish for people with no attention spans or brainpower. Needing to be spoon fed all those sixes and fours, when a good forward defensive stroke and 5 runs an hour is what is clearly the best. All that music and stupid team names like Hampshire Hawks. Laughable. Coloured shirts, because people are so blinkered that they can't see that white is the only colour that any cricketer should ever wear. Sack them all.

 

17 Stone Giant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Futtocks said:

As TMS were saying, not just a great win for England, but an extra day and a half of recovery time for any players with aches and twinges.

Yes. It was good because the game felt it was drifting and England would win but not "win win" whereas now they got that proper victory *and* a rest.

Still not confident for the rest of the series yet but ...

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Yes. It was good because the game felt it was drifting and England would win but not "win win" whereas now they got that proper victory *and* a rest.

Still not confident for the rest of the series yet but ...

Well, we've got Lords out of the way, which seems to have become the accustomed "away win" ground for Test series.

  • Like 1

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

Yes, of course. Every competition and event in every sport has the wider aim of hoping that if people like it, they'll watch more and also try other forms of the sport, if there are some. Nothing is an island. I first watched RL when it was GB v Australia for The Ashes. Since liking that, I've watched various other RL events - state of origin, Challenge Cup, Grand final, Lancashire v Yorkshire and Lancs/Yorkshire v Aussies school boys on Our League.

Yes, providing that it was done in the same way. This is what people are failing to grasp. It's not 100 balls instead of 120 balls that's the big appeal. It's the fact that it is 8 teams instead of 18. 32 matches instead of 180. 30 days instead of spread over 2 months. One match (or one for men's, one for womens) every day. Double headers so that the women's game is given more prominence. It's not just about publicity and coverage. It's about the format.

The number of balls is actually way down on the list of priorities. Obviously they say that they wanted to shorten the timescales a bit, because they felt that some T20's were maybe drifting just a bit too long. But the big appeal of 100 balls was to give them a marketable name - The Hundred. Something different, something unique. It's sensible marketing and promotion, and it worked. The Hundred is getting loads of mention, even on the rugby league forums.

The games absolutely have a T20 feel to them. They're incredibly similar. It's common sense that The Hundred and T20 are far more alike than Test cricket and The Hundred. They could have done it with a T20 format, but I've tried to explain the reasons why they opted for something similar, but new. And you have to recognise that it couldn't have been done with 18 counties. That's the key point.

I don't buy the fewer teams and higher quality argument. The only person I know who has been excited by the hundred is my sister in law but I suspect that is more down to the profile given to the women's game (which is fantastic) and the glitz and glamour of having influencers tell you how much fun they are having (which really grates on me). She would not know the difference in quality if it came at her like a Mark Wood bouncer. They could do that with the 18 county t20 comp, albeit maybe with the odd tweak which I am sure everyone acknowledges could be good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, glossop saint said:

I don't buy the fewer teams and higher quality argument.

The fewer teams argument isn't just about quality. It's about a range of things. It's about being able to engage with the whole competition, because it's only 1 game per day, for 30 days. It's possible to watch every game of the competition. A bit like you might do with a football or rugby league world cup. It's just not as simple as saying "oh, we could have done this with T20". That's missing the point as to why the Hundred appeals to some people. It's not all about fireworks and music. It's about a tournament that is of a certain size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

That wasn't so much aimed at you as at the many other anti-Hundred comments that have been littering the BBC Have Your Say section after every Hundred match. Too many snooty 'Super Fan' types that think they're special because they like Test Cricket. It's my general frustration at the desire of some cricket fans to destroy anything that doesn't quite fit with what they want, rather than being open to the fact that the sport can offer a range of things to different people. There absolutely is time for different events, but of course it means having to make choices. You can't have every event exactly when you want it, or the length you want. I'm asking for 30 days for The Hundred, out of 170 or whatever. That is not unreasonable for a tournament that clearly has proven popular.

On one hand you’re saying orthodox ‘superfans’ are limiting your fun, but on the other you seem to be demanding special rights for the Hundred in the calendar and getting upset whenever it comes in for criticism like some kind of superfan - it is a tad ironic don’t you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

On one hand you’re saying orthodox ‘superfans’ are limiting your fun, but on the other you seem to be demanding special rights for the Hundred in the calendar and getting upset whenever it comes in for criticism like some kind of superfan - it is a tad ironic don’t you think?

Both sides of this argument are heading rapidly in the direction of emotive rants and the kind of exchanges that can get a thread locked.

Take a breath before raging, please.

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Futtocks said:

Both sides of this argument are heading rapidly in the direction of emotive rants and the kind of exchanges that can get a thread locked.

Take a breath before raging, please.

I think that point is passed and was passed when 17 stone giant started taking quotes out of their context and started throwing insults around.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...