Cricket - Matches & General Discussion Thread

[Wolford6]

I can't do with The Hundred nor, frankly, much one-day cricket. These tournaments are tailored for sluggers to slog sixes over shortened boundaries. There are so many tournaments that winning one carries no cachet.

TV wallpaper.

[Niels]

1 hour ago, Wolford6 said:

I can't do with The Hundred nor, frankly, much one-day cricket. These tournaments are tailored for sluggers to slog sixes over shortened boundaries. There are so many tournaments that winning one carries no cachet.

TV wallpaper.

Glamorgan, Wales haven't done very well in the one dayers this year unfortunately.

 

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Wolford6 said:

There are so many tournaments that winning one carries no cachet.

This is my attitude to the Royal London One Day Cup final this year.

[DavidM]

22 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

This is my attitude to the Royal London One Day Cup final this year.

It will be mine if Lancs lose

[17 stone giant]

12 hours ago, Niels said:

I like Southern braves and Hampshire. Headingley is the nearest ground.

I think the 100 has been great. It makes cricket much more accessible to everyone and something is always happening.

The crowds have been excellent also. 

I think the 3 best teams have qualified. 

Yes I follow Bournemouth, do you like football?

Excellent choice of teams (football aside). I'm a Southampton fan. I think Nathan Redmond might be on his way to The Cherries. I do think you will struggle to stay up this season. I thought we might too, but I'm feeling a bit more optimistic after recent results and signings. I won't relax until we're mathematically safe though.

I agree about The Hundred. I think it has really put cricket in the spotlight (thanks to coverage on BBC), and hopefully has introduced some people to the sport that might otherwise have missed out. I've never watched as much cricket as I have done the past two August's. It's brilliant having a game (two including the women) every day for several weeks.

Are Leeds Rhinos your rugby league team?

 

[17 stone giant]

16 hours ago, gingerjon said:

It's the way it's cost £40m (and rising). It's the way it has yet to return a profit and is still making a loss.

Money that the decision makers clearly think is worth investing. It's year two - not everything makes a profit from day one. Ultimately, the situation will be under constant review, and the cricket authorities will decide whether to continue with it. Personally, I hope they do. I don't want a rugby league type situation where good things like The Ashes, Tri Nations and Four Nations get dumped.

16 hours ago, gingerjon said:

It's the way it takes a sport that plays its top level domestic matches in over 40 places and reduces that to 7.

For the whole summer, or just for August? Is there no time in May, June, July, and September to arrange cricket in those 40 places? Do England play matches at 40 different venues, so that people everywhere get the same opportunity to see the national team? Or do they (at least at test level) play in the same small number of grounds, year after year? I don't know, it's almost as though not everyone can have everything, all of the time.

16 hours ago, gingerjon said:

It's the way its TV audience has halved and attendances & ticket sales (not the same thing as we are all painfully aware) fallen.

According to you, but where do you get your information from? I doubt you have access to all the necessary data. Plus how do you know that ticket sales wouldn't have fallen anyway, due to outside factors such as the cost of living crisis. Even if your figures were accurate, you can't possibly know all the reasons why.

16 hours ago, gingerjon said:

And, lastly, it's the way it has taken over the fixture list so that if you're not one of those lucky 7 places you will get virtually no accessibly cricket for months of the summer.

Serious question, because I don't know. Are they not going to play any county games at all in August next year then? No One Day cup games or anything?

[17 stone giant]

Interesting to see Eoin Morgan talking up the potential positives of The Hundred. 

The Hundred could save England’s international teams, says Eoin Morgan | Eoin Morgan | The Guardian

"We’re very, very lucky the Hundred has been the success it has"

[Niels]

1 hour ago, 17 stone giant said:

Excellent choice of teams (football aside). I'm a Southampton fan. I think Nathan Redmond might be on his way to The Cherries. I do think you will struggle to stay up this season. I thought we might too, but I'm feeling a bit more optimistic after recent results and signings. I won't relax until we're mathematically safe though.

I agree about The Hundred. I think it has really put cricket in the spotlight (thanks to coverage on BBC), and hopefully has introduced some people to the sport that might otherwise have missed out. I've never watched as much cricket as I have done the past two August's. It's brilliant having a game (two including the women) every day for several weeks.

Are Leeds Rhinos your rugby league team?

 

Exactly, my family have watched the hundred, they said the format is easier to understand and they like it because something happens virtually every ball. They like the format on tv, how it is set out.

There have been some excellent bowling performances so it isn't all about batting.

I watch the 20/20 also. 

I was reading all the posts here. Are there only 7 grounds used? Presumably the 7 test match venues? I wonder why Manchester, London and Birmingham have their own names yet Leeds is called Northern. 

We got Jack Stephens in the end! I think it's good for the area to have 3 sides in the premier league. 

I am a Batley Bulldogs fan. Who do you like? 

Edited September 1, 2022 by Niels

[17 stone giant]

31 minutes ago, Niels said:

I am a Batley Bulldogs fan. Who do you like? 

I don't support a club team. I'm not one for supporting sports teams outside of my area, and I don't have a strong connection to any team. I'm happy to watch as a neutral, although obviously I sometimes have a preference for a certain match.

[17 stone giant]

33 minutes ago, Niels said:

We got Jack Stephens in the end! I think it's good for the area to have 3 sides in the premier league.

He's decent enough, but was unlikely to get many games for us this season.

The south coast mafia are taking over. Just need Exeter, Torquay and Plymouth to join us. I think that's everyone.

[Gerrumonside ref]

5 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

He's decent enough, but was unlikely to get many games for us this season.

The south coast mafia are taking over. Just need Exeter, Torquay and Plymouth to join us. I think that's everyone.

Portsmouth?  

[gingerjon]

6 hours ago, Niels said:

Exactly, my family have watched the hundred, they said the format is easier to understand and they like it because something happens virtually every ball. They like the format on tv, how it is set out.

What's been their favourite game and why?

[gingerjon]

7 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

[1] Money that the decision makers clearly think is worth investing. It's year two - not everything makes a profit from day one. Ultimately, the situation will be under constant review, and the cricket authorities will decide whether to continue with it. Personally, I hope they do. I don't want a rugby league type situation where good things like The Ashes, Tri Nations and Four Nations get dumped.

[2] For the whole summer, or just for August? Is there no time in May, June, July, and September to arrange cricket in those 40 places? Do England play matches at 40 different venues, so that people everywhere get the same opportunity to see the national team? Or do they (at least at test level) play in the same small number of grounds, year after year? I don't know, it's almost as though not everyone can have everything, all of the time.

[3] According to you, but where do you get your information from? I doubt you have access to all the necessary data. Plus how do you know that ticket sales wouldn't have fallen anyway, due to outside factors such as the cost of living crisis. Even if your figures were accurate, you can't possibly know all the reasons why.

[4] Serious question, because I don't know. Are they not going to play any county games at all in August next year then? No One Day cup games or anything?

[1] It was meant to make a profit from year one. That's an actual profit returned to the ECB to support other things. It has yet to do so. We've got it for at least another five years, I believe. Maybe then it will have returned 50p or something or turned around its decline, or become strong enough that the top players it was meant to keep don't leave for the CPL, IPL or just not bother in the first place.

[2] "I don't know, it's almost as though not everyone can have everything, all of the time". A lot of words for "I'm alright, Jack". And, good for you, the season is now designed so you can watch cricket. Well done. Must be lovely.

[3] According to the figures they've put out. They have now stopped putting figures out, unlike last year when it was a daily occurrence. So I'll make the not-hard-to-reach conclusion that there is nothing to brag about. And this is matched by a quick visual check (easily done). For example, the winner-take-all Manchester match on Wednesday: as well as the blocked off areas for which no tickets were presumably available, there were significant numbers of empty seats. That didn't happen so obviously last year.
I don't much care for the reasons. I care that this thing this is meant to deliver profits is not doing so and cannot do so if it isn't even selling its massively discounted tickets or getting enough people in the grounds to buy merchandise.

[4] The One Day Cup, despite being reasonably well supported, will remain a development competition next year. Not even the high performance review claims it will may be restored to its former status. This year, in what must be a deliberate decision, it played on the Friday before a Bank Holiday and the Tuesday afterwards - no games at all when people were off work. And nobody has any idea on the schedule because, as has been made clear, locating a space and time for The Hundred - with its 7 cities nationwide, and good for you for being near one - is the priority.

[Gerrumonside ref]

It’s £30 for adults and £5 for children to watch the Manchester team.

The only north west people I know who are interested tend to be the children of parents keen to combine a cheap do with introducing their kids to live cricket.

Whether it’s sustainable at those prices to have top cricketers playing in it I do not know.

When it does come to an end then hopefully these ‘new’ fans will transfer their allegiances to Lancashire and England.

Like most people in the north west outside Manchester, I have no interest in supporting any sports team with ‘Manchester’ in the title and I cannot stand the on screen graphics used in the tv presentation.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

It’s £30 for adults and £5 for children to watch the Manchester team.

Tickets for the double header Eliminator in Southampton are currently available on the website at £25.

[Gerrumonside ref]

3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Tickets for the double header Eliminator in Southampton are currently available on the website at £25.

That’s strange pricing for what I assume are must see games in what I keep being told is an amazing and successful format.

How long do we think the ECB can take the hit on it?

 

Edited September 2, 2022 by Gerrumonside ref

[gingerjon]

Just now, Gerrumonside ref said:

That strange pricing for what I assume are must see games in what I keep being told is an amazing and successful format.

How long do we think the ECB can take the hit on it?

 

It's locked in until 2028 and, as is true of a lot of organisations, there is too much invested in it (emotionally, financially, reputationally) for it to be pulled before then.

My question was genuine: look at Welsh Fire. Low crowds, zero attainment ... and yet Cardiff appears to be guaranteed a franchise regardless. How does it work in terms of addressing that as opposed to letting the owners of Sophia Gardens just pocket the cash each year?

[Gerrumonside ref]

7 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

Interesting to see Eoin Morgan talking up the potential positives of The Hundred. 

The Hundred could save England’s international teams, says Eoin Morgan | Eoin Morgan | The Guardian

"We’re very, very lucky the Hundred has been the success it has"

Doesn’t he work for one of the teams and is also a commentator for the competition?

In both cases then wouldn’t you expect him to talk up rather down its prospects?

Before I read the month old article I assumed he was speaking with authority from a position of neutrality.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Gerrumonside ref

[Gerrumonside ref]

13 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It's locked in until 2028 and, as is true of a lot of organisations, there is too much invested in it (emotionally, financially, reputationally) for it to be pulled before then.

My question was genuine: look at Welsh Fire. Low crowds, zero attainment ... and yet Cardiff appears to be guaranteed a franchise regardless. How does it work in terms of addressing that as opposed to letting the owners of Sophia Gardens just pocket the cash each year?

When you say locked in do you mean the broadcast contracts with Sky and the BBC?

Would make sense given the odd way it’s pushed on both in almost Orwellian terms.

To answer your question on the Welsh Fire, it doesn’t work and nor will it if there’s no performance related inducement.

I wonder just how long the Hundred has to go before there’s a full scale Emperor’s new clothes moment…

Edited September 2, 2022 by Gerrumonside ref

[Niels]

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

What's been their favourite game and why?

I asked them this morning. They liked Birmingham v Manchester as there were lots of wickets. That was also the Phil Salt timed out controversy which was interesting at the time.

They liked the games at Lords as of course it is famous and there were some great shots of inside the ground.

They particularly said they liked the scoring system, sets instead of overs, and how this was presented on screen.

Apart from the logistics do you like the actual games as a spectacle?

 

[gingerjon]

17 minutes ago, Niels said:

I asked them this morning. They liked Birmingham v Manchester as there were lots of wickets. That was also the Phil Salt timed out controversy which was interesting at the time.

They liked the games at Lords as of course it is famous and there were some great shots of inside the ground.

They particularly said they liked the scoring system, sets instead of overs, and how this was presented on screen.

Apart from the logistics do you like the actual games as a spectacle?

 

I like it when the dial back the graphics in the chase to runs required and balls left. I think that works really well. I don't particularly see how a set of 5 that can be extended to 10 is simpler than a set of 6 that is called an over but is always 6 - but I see that that's just a preference.

I said earlier that I liked two rules that have now been adopted by mainstream T20: new batter always faces and fielding restrictions imposed if you're too slow.

Beyond that, I actually think the on-screen graphics and look of the teams now looks surprisingly dated. I saw someone older describe the graphics as 'appealing to a video game generation' but the reply from the younger person was: "Yes, but it looks like a video game from 2000."

I haven't really noticed the spectacle as such but then I've not been drawn in this season anything like as much as I found myself being last season. In part, that's because the women's tournament has been laughably reduced to 6 games but, mostly, it's because it's really not felt like essential viewing (no real atmosphere coming through for a start) so it's been easy to switch over and put something else on instead.

[Niels]

26 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I like it when the dial back the graphics in the chase to runs required and balls left. I think that works really well. I don't particularly see how a set of 5 that can be extended to 10 is simpler than a set of 6 that is called an over but is always 6 - but I see that that's just a preference.

I said earlier that I liked two rules that have now been adopted by mainstream T20: new batter always faces and fielding restrictions imposed if you're too slow.

Beyond that, I actually think the on-screen graphics and look of the teams now looks surprisingly dated. I saw someone older describe the graphics as 'appealing to a video game generation' but the reply from the younger person was: "Yes, but it looks like a video game from 2000."

I haven't really noticed the spectacle as such but then I've not been drawn in this season anything like as much as I found myself being last season. In part, that's because the women's tournament has been laughably reduced to 6 games but, mostly, it's because it's really not felt like essential viewing (no real atmosphere coming through for a start) so it's been easy to switch over and put something else on instead.

Thanks for your informative reply.

I think it maybe is because the graphics show the number of balls left. Also divisibles of 5 are probably a lot more easier to work out, though I still convert it in my head to runs required per over!

I like Isa Guha because of her knowledge and enthusiasm - when she is hosting she runs around the boundary and gets the crowd involved.

We also like where the crowd try to catch the balls after a six.

They only seem minor things I know, but they get people interested. 

[gingerjon]

Bairstow has injured himself playing golf and is now out of the Test and the T20 World Cup.

[DavidM]

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/time-wasting-and-slow-over-rates-mcc-to-icc-dont-allow-players-to-waste-time-and-tighten-drs-process-1332104

[Gerrumonside ref]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Bairstow has injured himself playing golf and is now out of the Test and the T20 World Cup.

Nightmare!