Sport Cricket World Cup

[Sarge]

I have no problem with the idea of a franchise tournament in this country. In fact I've argued for one on here in the past, but in a more Test-style, 4 teams 'North', 'Midlands', 'South East', and 'South West + Wales', pick England-qualified players who aren't centrally contracted and use it as a springboard to the Test side.

I'd have no problem with the current franchise tournament if it was a T20 tournament either, but The Hundred? It is doing nothing for the development of our players, and has basically destroyed our only 50-over domestic tournament, as well as stopped Test Cricket in it's tracks for the whole of the best month to actually have it played.

The Hundred is rubbish

 

[ZeroTheHero]

I still don't really understand the point of The Hundred. Twenty20 is 120 balls so apart from the mucking about with bowlers bowling either 5 or 10 balls the Hundred seems very similar. Similar length, similar skills, similar slogging competition.

 

[Oufcrealist]

The Hundred is a concept idea based on T20 with some tweaks here and there, mainly time saving ones(if the rules are applied) For instance games should take no more than two and a half hours, batters have to be ready to face in sixty seconds etc.
IMHO the ECB should think seriously about scrapping it and go back to how things were before. It is detrimental to the rest of our domestic cricket.
The thing that really got my goat was that it ruined the Test match schedule.
The Ashes was hurried through, it ended in July!!
Then no Tests in August at all which is ludicrous.
Next year the whole of June has been written off for the Hundred. We have T20s and one dayers in May then Tests start in July against the Windies.
And the most ridiculous situation again with trying to play T20s and one dayers at the end of September. Eight games in nineteen days this time against the Aussies when the weather as we saw this year is likely to at least ruin some of it.
Scrap the Hundred I say.

 

[Sarge]

The Hundred is a concept idea based on T20 with some tweaks here and there, mainly time saving ones(if the rules are applied) For instance games should take no more than two and a half hours, batters have to be ready to face in sixty seconds etc.
IMHO the ECB should think seriously about scrapping it and go back to how things were before. It is detrimental to the rest of our domestic cricket.
The thing that really got my goat was that it ruined the Test match schedule.
The Ashes was hurried through, it ended in July!!
Then no Tests in August at all which is ludicrous.
Next year the whole of June has been written off for the Hundred. We have T20s and one dayers in May then Tests start in July against the Windies.
And the most ridiculous situation again with trying to play T20s and one dayers at the end of September. Eight games in nineteen days this time against the Aussies when the weather as we saw this year is likely to at least ruin some of it.
Scrap the Hundred I say.

f**k the hundred I say

 

[tonyw]

Whilst I 100% agree with the "f**k the hundred" sentiments.........

More controversial opinion - is there really any point in 50 over cricket any more?

We're now halfway through the World Cup, and there still hasn't been a really exciting game (Pakistan - Afghanistan yesterday was the closest so far, lasting until the penultimate over, but in reality the Afghans were in total control of the run chase). That's 23 matches, none of which have been as thrilling as any of the Ashes Tests this summer (other than the one ruined by rain).

t20 nowadays provides the 'Wham, Bam, Thank you Ma'am' for those who've only got a couple of hours to spare (or only have attention spans that long).
Test cricket is still, and will always be, the most thorough examination of cricketing skills. As well as carrying with it all the tradition.

Where, really, does the 50 over game fit any more? Maybe the ICC should just put it out of its misery, and then scheduling suddenly becomes a whole lot easier.......

 

[Mike_H]

I like 50 over cricket because you get a full day's play, akin to the County Championship but you get a result at the end. I have a 140 mile round trip to see my county Kent, so I get better value for my 2-3 hour journey than for a T20 which only lasts as long as it takes me to get there and back. I also get the time to talk to fellow spectators, especially Gills fans and remind them of Cam's 4 penalties!

 

[tonyw]

I like 50 over cricket because you get a full day's play, akin to the County Championship but you get a result at the end. I have a 140 mile round trip to see my county Kent, so I get better value for my 2-3 hour journey than for a T20 which only lasts as long as it takes me to get there and back. I also get the time to talk to fellow spectators, especially Gills fans and remind them of Cam's 4 penalties!

Well there's some suggestions that they could start doing double-header t20s instead of a 50 over game. Double dose of slogging would still give you plenty of time to wind up the Gills!

 

[holdsteady]

Whilst I 100% agree with the "f**k the hundred" sentiments.........

More controversial opinion - is there really any point in 50 over cricket any more?

We're now halfway through the World Cup, and there still hasn't been a really exciting game (Pakistan - Afghanistan yesterday was the closest so far, lasting until the penultimate over, but in reality the Afghans were in total control of the run chase). That's 23 matches, none of which have been as thrilling as any of the Ashes Tests this summer (other than the one ruined by rain).

t20 nowadays provides the 'Wham, Bam, Thank you Ma'am' for those who've only got a couple of hours to spare (or only have attention spans that long).
Test cricket is still, and will always be, the most thorough examination of cricketing skills. As well as carrying with it all the tradition.

Where, really, does the 50 over game fit any more? Maybe the ICC should just put it out of its misery, and then scheduling suddenly becomes a whole lot easier.......

The format is ridiculous, just put the teams into two groups to reduce the number of matches and also the number of mismatches, going to be a lot of dead rubbers at the end. Can’t disagree with you though, cricket doesn’t need 3 forms, 20/20 is a format that works as sellable to the masses, both for attention span and time constraints while test cricket gives those who have the patience and time a deeper hit, 50 over cricket managed to be a bit to long and a bit to short for the majority.

It looks like it is dying out anyway, can’t see it being around in twenty, maybe even ten years time.

 

[Big Ron]

The format is ridiculous, just put the teams into two groups to reduce the number of matches and also the number of mismatches, going to be a lot of dead rubbers at the end. Can’t disagree with you though, cricket doesn’t need 3 forms, 20/20 is a format that works as sellable to the masses, both for attention span and time constraints while test cricket gives those who have the patience and time a deeper hit, 50 over cricket managed to be a bit to long and a bit to short for the majority.

It looks like it is dying out anyway, can’t see it being around in twenty, maybe even ten years time.

Absolutely - bolster the competition to 16 teams, 4 groups of 4, top 2 qualify, qtr, semi and then final. Maximum 6 games to win.

 

[tonyw]

Absolutely - bolster the competition to 16 teams, 4 groups of 4, top 2 qualify, qtr, semi and then final. Maximum 6 games to win.

They tried the first half of that format in 2007 in the West Indies. Then India lost to Bangladesh, Pakistan lost to Ireland and 90% of their TV audience didn't make it out of the group stage!

Since then, they've made sure that India gets at least a half dozen games.......

 

[ZeroTheHero]

I see that England are managing their normal WC performance today - 77-4 and a whole load of playing and missing as well. It's a pity there aren't proper group stages in this competition - we'd have been put out of our misery by now!

 

[SteMerritt]

Bloody hell we were doing OK the last time I checked. What an absolute disaster this has been, don't think anyone saw it coming either.

Wonder what the Test boys will make of Indian conditions when they go there...

 

[Big Ron]

I see that England are managing their normal WC performance today - 77-4 and a whole load of playing and missing as well. It's a pity there aren't proper group stages in this competition - we'd have been put out of our misery by now!

It's actually excruciating to watch!

 

[Big Ron]

Bloody hell we were doing OK the last time I checked. What an absolute disaster this has been, don't think anyone saw it coming either.

Wonder what the Test boys will make of Indian conditions when they go there...

I think the test pitches will be very different and prepared for Ashwin - while the ball has spun in the tournament, I haven't seen any massive turn in the games I've seen. The best attacks have been very balanced in terms of spin and pace.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

It's actually excruciating to watch!

It is. We've managed three or four decent boundaries, but the rest has been singles, mishits and edges.

 

[andystroud]

Good job we went with a strong batting line up, so the bowlers have a decent total to defend!

 

[Sharp Edges]

Good job we went with a strong batting line up, so the bowlers have a decent total to defend!

At least they wont have to worry about dew..........

Has Harry Brook upset someone? He is the only batsman I have seen that looks remotely like he knows what he is doing out there.

 

[Marked Ox]

Hahahahahahaha that is embarrassing. Do England have any games after this? If they do they should just forfeit them and come home as it would be less embarrassing.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

Yes, that 'strong' batting lineup is now 130-7. Feeble.

 

[unification]

The mood music has at best been disinterested from England. I don’t think anyone is giving much of a toss about this World Cup.

It’s certainly showing on the pitch.