The International Cricket Thread

[olaftab]

This thread risks being a bit of an echo chamber when it comes to the hundred, everyone posting here is a follower of test cricket so there's a pretty clear bias.

Attendances across the season have topped 500k both summers so far, if they stay at that sort of level then the format won't go anywhere. One of the biggest challenges with cricket outside top level test series and t20 is that the crowds just aren't there, which holds the sport back.

Paul, the attendance is made up of 4 almost free under 16 tickets being given with everyone adult ticket purchased at about £18 so it's  not a good test.

[Richard E]

It’s a shame cricket isn’t played to a high standard in continental Europe. Can you imagine the needle potential of an England v France or England v Germany test series?

[paul_e]

This thread risks being a bit of an echo chamber when it comes to the hundred, everyone posting here is a follower of test cricket so there's a pretty clear bias.

Attendances across the season have topped 500k both summers so far, if they stay at that sort of level then the format won't go anywhere. One of the biggest challenges with cricket outside top level test series and t20 is that the crowds just aren't there, which holds the sport back.

Paul, the attendance is made up of 4 almost free under 16 tickets being given with everyone adult ticket purchased at about £18 so it's  not a good test.

It doesn't matter, the entire point of it (from the ECB) is to drive up participation and support for the sport. Risso hits the crux perfectly:

Part of the problem is  that when you consider (English) football, rugby and cricket in that order, then in descending order, club football is very much the pinnacle of the game, with the national side being of secondary importance to the majority of players and fans, and the clubs/league are the most powerful people in the game. Rugby is somewhere in the middle I'd argue. A fairly strong national and European league, with the national side more popular with a lot of fans. Then comes cricket, where the test playing side is miles more important and popular with the players and fans, such that the better players play very little county cricket, and the majority of fans will never have been to a county game or even watched one on TV.

Then on top of this, all of a sudden new formats such as T20 and The Hundred appear, which further takes away talent from the traditional long format game.

t20 and the hundred in it's wake are designed to make county/club cricket 'sexy' and breathe life into the sport outside of the international schedule.

Where I disagree slightly is around it taking talent away from the long format, I think it changes the talent that is available rather than reducing it. What you have now is test openers who want to go at a run a ball to start the innings, or batsmen playing switch-hits and manipulating the crease so lop-sided fields are less effective, but that comes at the cost of them sometimes looking stupid giving away their wicket. Then you have bowlers like Curran who don't really do line and length but instead have a selection of knuckle balls, wobble seams, etc that they swap between regularly. This is why I'm so supportive of Bazball, it's test cricket embracing the changes in the sport instead of trying to hold back the flood.

[Nev]

Whatever the merits of The Hundred, having Chris Hughes and Nick Bright involved really isn't going to help. Is it too much to ask to expect knowledgeable broadcasters?

[Villan For Life]

Whatever the merits of The Hundred, having Chris Hughes and Nick Bright involved really isn't going to help. Is it too much to ask to expect knowledgeable broadcasters?

For me the Hundred is cricket dumbed down so these “new” fans can be entertained. So the broadcasters reflect this cricket-lite approach.

[Nev]

Whatever the merits of The Hundred, having Chris Hughes and Nick Bright involved really isn't going to help. Is it too much to ask to expect knowledgeable broadcasters?

For me the Hundred is cricket dumbed down so these “new” fans can be entertained. So the broadcasters reflect this cricket-lite approach.

It's a general point I suppose but being pig ignorant really shouldn't be a positive

[Villan For Life]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66362295

A good review of the series by Aggers.

[tomd2103]

This thread risks being a bit of an echo chamber when it comes to the hundred, everyone posting here is a follower of test cricket so there's a pretty clear bias.

Attendances across the season have topped 500k both summers so far, if they stay at that sort of level then the format won't go anywhere. One of the biggest challenges with cricket outside top level test series and t20 is that the crowds just aren't there, which holds the sport back.

Paul, the attendance is made up of 4 almost free under 16 tickets being given with everyone adult ticket purchased at about £18 so it's  not a good test.

This a point that often doesn't get mentioned when attendances for The Hundred are being discussed and is probably one of the reasons why it is losing a considerable amount of money.

[tomd2103]

This thread risks being a bit of an echo chamber when it comes to the hundred, everyone posting here is a follower of test cricket so there's a pretty clear bias.

Attendances across the season have topped 500k both summers so far, if they stay at that sort of level then the format won't go anywhere. One of the biggest challenges with cricket outside top level test series and t20 is that the crowds just aren't there, which holds the sport back.

It's not a bias towards test cricket Paul, as I don't mind T20 and go and watch the Bears in that format quite a bit.  I just think The Hundred is a poor format, with made up franchise teams and it impacts negatively on pretty much every other aspect of English cricket (men's cricket anyway - I think it is a point of difference which is good in women's cricket). 

It's practically destroyed the 50 over competition in this country and now even international cricket and the Ashes are having to make way for it. 

[Villan For Life]

What I find quite incredible is that the reigning 50-over world champions no longer have a first class 50-over domestic competition. Someone at the ECB made a decision which will ultimately undermine our prospects of remaining at the top of the 50-over white ball game.

All for the hundred.

Would this happen in football or rugby?

[Nev]

One of the main drivers for the competition is "kids" and getting them involved at a young age. My query would be that if the kids then head to their local cricket club (and their parents can circumvent the clique) will they find The Hundred format being played?

When we kick off against Newcastle on 12th August the game itself is identical to those kids having a kick about in the park (Jumpers for goalposts? Marvellous isn't it? You know?) whereas the beggering about with overs and balls makes an already complicated game more convoluted.

[Gareth]

It does seem mad but I think they are maybe gambling that 50 over cricket is what gives and possibly disappears.

[tomd2103]

It does seem mad but I think they are maybe gambling that 50 over cricket is what gives and possibly disappears.

I thought for a while Gareth tha 50 over cricket would be going in the future, but then I heard a discussion on the radio saying that it is a popular format with Indian broadcasters given the advertising opportunities, so is unlikely to be going anywhere.

The sidelining of the domestic 50 over competition in this country has been pretty disgraceful really, especially as we will soon be heading out for a World Cup in that format.  The real issue with The Hundred is the scheduling issue it causes and the fact that one competition has had to be sidelined as a result.

[AV82EC]

As someone who has little interest in cricket other than a quick glance through this thread at times it would appear that The Hundred is potentially a good idea for the let’s get the youngsters involved angle but incredibly poorly executed. If senior cricket is predominantly about 20/20, 50 over 1 day and then Test Cricket then what the suits and blazers seem to have forgotten is how to schedule a new competition into that framework. I have no idea what the answer is but from the outside it’s an absolute shitshow. Would a potential solution be The Hundred played by County 2nd XI and youth system players?

[paul_e]

One of the main drivers for the competition is "kids" and getting them involved at a young age. My query would be that if the kids then head to their local cricket club (and their parents can circumvent the clique) will they find The Hundred format being played?

When we kick off against Newcastle on 12th August the game itself is identical to those kids having a kick about in the park (Jumpers for goalposts? Marvellous isn't it? You know?) whereas the beggering about with overs and balls makes an already complicated game more convoluted.

It depends on how old the kids are, most leagues play t20 from u11-u18 but below that you get 5 or 10 over matches. The same is true in football with lots of stuff at primary school level being 5 or 7-a-side.

Rugby is even more extreme with whole element of the game not included until colt/u18 level (at various points the following are introduced: tackling, kicking, posts, scrums - first uncontested and then later real ones, line outs, rucks and mauls). In fact the rules of youth level rugby are closer to league than union and new elements are slowly introduced when it's safe and sensible for them to be.

As someone who has little interest in cricket other than a quick glance through this thread at times it would appear that The Hundred is potentially a good idea for the let’s get the youngsters involved angle but incredibly poorly executed. If senior cricket is predominantly about 20/20, 50 over 1 day and then Test Cricket then what the suits and blazers seem to have forgotten is how to schedule a new competition into that framework. I have no idea what the answer is but from the outside it’s an absolute shitshow. Would a potential solution be The Hundred played by County 2nd XI and youth system players?

I think it's important to take a step back and look at what the real drivers behind it are. For me there are 2 things that led to it being introduced:

1. t20 gave the sport a massive boost (globally) and gave the sport a format that could be competitive, as an event, with football, rugby, etc because it was just the right length of match in a sport that was previously a 6-8 hour commitment at minimum. However as the rules were cleaned up some of the parts that rushed the gam along got lost and t20 has drifted from the 3hr schedule it started with to a point where most games are closer to 4hrs. I suspect the ECB wanted a format where they could bring back those quicker elements and add a few more (so back-to-back overs from the same end to reduce time resetting the field, for example). I don't agree with it but I suspect someone has some research data that shows 3hrs is the ideal length for a game.

2. They wanted a franchise league and that doesn't work with 18 teams so they needed a way to drop the numbers. Any format that was based on the existing 3 would've seen huge arguments over which teams were included, by making it a weird offshoot with silly rules and completely isolated funding, etc they made it less of a problem to go with 8 brand new franchises. It wouldn't surprise me if the rules do flip to it being a 2nd t20 league in time but by the time it happens the teams that are involved will be settled and considered as genuinely distinct from the county game so they will get their competitor to the IPL, etc.