The Hundred

[Niall]

I don't mind it, fix the graphics and I'd be happy.

Although to be honest if it was cancelled tomorrow would not be to bothered.

Who is the young banter wanker on commentary they cut to now and then?

 

[wpdavid]

One good thing about cricinfo proving their T20 career averages is that they do provide some useful context. And a surprise that Carlos only averages 15 in these matches, but I only really know about what he did to Stokes in that WC final.

And that six off TCurran was ridiculous.

 

[wpdavid]

I don't mind it, fix the graphics and I'd be happy.

Although to be honest if it was cancelled tomorrow would not be to bothered.

Who is the young banter wanker on commentary they cut to now and then?

I think he was on Love Island.

 

[Howe_zat]

Good point - I'll have to add that to my angry rant I am definitely going to send them on the matter. Long overdue a sub-filter for ODIs shortened by rain too

On this, this format is T20 with five-ball overs. Given that first class matches have had anywhere from 4 to 8 balls in an over with regular changes to when and where that would be the case, and we didn't really settle on six-ball overs until the 1970s, it'll be far from the only format discrepancy in the stats.

 

[Howe_zat]

And a surprise that Carlos only averages 15 in these matches, but I only really know about what he did to Stokes in that WC final.

That's all anyone knows about him, if the use of him as a pundit on TMS last summer is any evidence. They must have interviewed him about that innings half a dozen separate times.

 

[SteveNZ]

The marketing is just so cringe. The actual cricket will probably fine if as you say the changes are essentially pointless.

It strikes me as marketing for what the ECB (or whoever) thinks is what the 'youth' market wants, but really isn't.

Also strikes me as confusing. I go onto the scorecard on Cricinfo, and bloody hell it's hard to figure out who's been economical with the ball, what the run rate is etc.

 

[GIMH]

On this, this format is T20 with five-ball overs. Given that first class matches have had anywhere from 4 to 8 balls in an over with regular changes to when and where that would be the case, and we didn't really settle on six-ball overs until the 1970s, it'll be far from the only format discrepancy in the stats.

Yep plus as others said, List A has been 40, 45, 50, 60. Plus DL. Including this in T20 stats makes sense as far as I can tell. First class stats can go from 3-5 days. In fact possibly even 6?

 

[GIMH]

It strikes me as marketing for what the ECB (or whoever) thinks is what the 'youth' market wants, but really isn't.

I don’t know if it is or isn’t, but what makes you sure it isn’t?

 

[Howe_zat]

Yep plus as others said, List A has been 40, 45, 50, 60. Plus DL. Including this in T20 stats makes sense as far as I can tell. First class stats can go from 3-5 days. In fact possibly even 6?

Anything really, because timeless matches are in there too. Longest first class match on record is 14 days.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

70- posts until the 100th of this thread.

 

[GIMH]

Anything really, because timeless matches are in there too. Longest first class match on record is 14 days.

Of course. Forgot they were once a thing.

I guess in time I’d question the need to have both this and the Blast. But in isolation I enjoyed it and my wife was happy to sit and watch with me which always helps. Might try and get to a game or two, only thing putting me off is I decided back at the first draft that I was supporting the superchargers because I’ll never support a team with Manchester in their name whereas one with Northern in sounds good to me

 

[Daemon]

They've clearly contrived to create a distinct visual style with the helmets, but I don't know why they - or any other short form circus - haven't got around to changing the playing strips to include shorts instead of long pants (trousers) yet. It's a game played in the hottest part of the year, in some of the hottest climates in the world. If there's an imperative to change the optics, that would be a good place to start.

Diving around in shorts is not ideal, as is playing a long innings with the straps on the pads chafing your skin.

Nice grounds and a short format solve those problems to an extent but it shouldn’t cascade down to the lower levels of the game imo where the former is hardly a guarantee.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

But where are the cheerleaders?

 

[GotSpin]

It strikes me as marketing for what the ECB (or whoever) thinks is what the 'youth' market wants, but really isn't.

Also strikes me as confusing. I go onto the scorecard on Cricinfo, and bloody hell it's hard to figure out who's been economical with the ball, what the run rate is etc.

The whole point is to have cricket on free to air isn’t it?

 

[SteveNZ]

70- posts until the 100th of this thread.

This is important

But where are the cheerleaders?

This is also important.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

This is important



This is also important.

Most definitely. I’m just waiting now for the commentators to blurt out an ‘ace’ every time the bowler beats the bat in his/her 5-ball ‘set’.

 

[SteveNZ]

I don’t know if it is or isn’t, but what makes you sure it isn’t?

I don't know either, that's why I said it struck me as that. Maybe I'm wrong.

The whole point is to have cricket on free to air isn’t it?

Is it? I admittedly don't know a lot about The Hundred. It looks like a marketer's wet dream that when anchored in reality, won't hold up as a spectacle over time (or if it does, it may owe to the franchise model). But hell, I am quite often wrong. I am mostly wrong. Maybe it's intelligent to have something as similar yet discernably different to T20 on the playing calendar.

 

[SteveNZ]

They've clearly contrived to create a distinct visual style with the helmets, but I don't know why they - or any other short form circus - haven't got around to changing the playing strips to include shorts instead of long pants (trousers) yet. It's a game played in the hottest part of the year, in some of the hottest climates in the world. If there's an imperative to change the optics, that would be a good place to start.

This happened in the 90s in NZ. The Auckland Aces wore shorts. It was an unmitigated disaster. Players were gun-shy to dive anywhere near the block lest they get grass burn, pads were an annoyance, etc. Golf is a sport that should absolutely allow shorts at the male pro level (given women already do) but for cricket it's not logistically smart.

 

[SteveNZ]

Most definitely. I’m just waiting now for the commentators to blurt out an ‘ace’ every time the bowler beats the bat in his/her 5-ball ‘set’.

Thing is (unfortunately or not, depends on your world view) a world in which a Tokyo Olympic opening ceremony composer is forced to resign because he bullied people as a child in the 90s, isn't going to look favourably on any perceived objectification of men, women or beasts. Incidentally that was a loose parallel with the composer, but I don't have any other environments in which I can express how ****ing stupid I think that situation is.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I for one can support not ***ually objectifying beasts