Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I thought I'd be used to it by now. I'm definitely starting to think it might be actually terrible rather than just an acquired taste. I don't even bother trying to check their headlines or read their articles anymore.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Cricinfo
- Thread starter fredfertang
- Start date
I get it that when you've basically got a monopoly on the online cricket environment, you can rest on your laurels a bit.
But it's basically the hardest website on the face of the earth to navigate, which is a fair achievement given the World Wide Web has proven a bit of a hit lately. The app is even worse - I tried to access the NZ first innings scorecard this morning and couldn't. Since I've discovered you have to press the dropdown to get it, which wasn't at all obvious.
Their content isn't much chop, either. The one that lost me was when a young domestic player in NZ made runs, and they called him T.Bruce in the report - when 3 seconds of googling would've revealed his name, his age, and much of his back story.
Don't expect a change any time soon, or at all.
But it's basically the hardest website on the face of the earth to navigate, which is a fair achievement given the World Wide Web has proven a bit of a hit lately. The app is even worse - I tried to access the NZ first innings scorecard this morning and couldn't. Since I've discovered you have to press the dropdown to get it, which wasn't at all obvious.
Their content isn't much chop, either. The one that lost me was when a young domestic player in NZ made runs, and they called him T.Bruce in the report - when 3 seconds of googling would've revealed his name, his age, and much of his back story.
Don't expect a change any time soon, or at all.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Talking of standards of journalism, did you guys see how much Cricinfo is repeating everywhere that ABDV's LBW was a bad decision coz the ball pitched outside leg stump? On the telecast, it was very clear and no commentator ever said it was even a rough decision, forget bad, coz a reasonable chunk of the ball (almost 25%) pitched on the mat... This is where they have become hacks.
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Regarding the standard of journalism - there are basically a few types of articles which are published.
A) The comment articles done by journalists almost on a daily basis. These aren't very good as let's face it, you cannot produce 10-15 unreal articles every month without the quality being a bit off.
B) The match reports and previews. These are actually very good usually as there is good old reporting here. The standard of many of these isn't very good as the mundane is tried to put across a bit too lyrically at times.
C) The Cricinfo magazine article - these are fine. I like reading them at times.
D) The million blog articles - now I love blogs when they are top tier. However the quality of most isn't terrific.
There used to be the 'feature' articles every day - 3 a day and I used to check them out and read one of them earlier at times. Now, with so much to navigate, I don't even know if they exist any more. There is now the 'Editor's Pick' I see on the main page. The problem with having so many different kinds of articles is that you don't know which level you expect. I want that when you read a publication. For instance, when reading The Guardian (even their blogs), I know the standard to expect. Guardian has articles and then they have blogs. They do not have a trillion different article types.
A) The comment articles done by journalists almost on a daily basis. These aren't very good as let's face it, you cannot produce 10-15 unreal articles every month without the quality being a bit off.
B) The match reports and previews. These are actually very good usually as there is good old reporting here. The standard of many of these isn't very good as the mundane is tried to put across a bit too lyrically at times.
C) The Cricinfo magazine article - these are fine. I like reading them at times.
D) The million blog articles - now I love blogs when they are top tier. However the quality of most isn't terrific.
There used to be the 'feature' articles every day - 3 a day and I used to check them out and read one of them earlier at times. Now, with so much to navigate, I don't even know if they exist any more. There is now the 'Editor's Pick' I see on the main page. The problem with having so many different kinds of articles is that you don't know which level you expect. I want that when you read a publication. For instance, when reading The Guardian (even their blogs), I know the standard to expect. Guardian has articles and then they have blogs. They do not have a trillion different article types.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
I think the main page is supposed to be optimised for mobile devices, which would be okish except a) they force you onto the mobile version of the site when they detect that you're browsing from a mobile or tablet and b) and force you to scroll down for 17 hours before finding the content you want when you select full site.
It's not a case of 'boo, change bad' uproar everytime Facebook changes, the website is legitimately terrible now. I just had a look at the scorecards from the 2013 home Ashes because I couldn't actually remember who'd played in that series (turns out I'd successfully blocked out Jonny Bairstow's attempts at batting but I digress.) I pop in cricinfo into the address bar. Get punted onto the mobile site because I'm on my phone. Fine, I hit full site and notice the aforementioned mobile optimisation they're going for. Scroll all the way down to the bottom, cannot find any sort of obvious link to take me to the match and series archive, so click on the site map, which thankfully takes me onto a page that's still in the old style. Eventually navigate to the page for the 2013 Ashes. Click on the scorecard for the 1st Test, at which point the site gives me the scorecard but punts me back onto the mobile version. This is pretty annoying as I like how the scorecard is laid out on the desktop site. Not to worry, there's a 'desktop version' button at the bottom of the page. That takes me back to the ****ing site's homepage.
I HAVE FOUND THE CONTENT I WANTED I JUST WANTED IT IN A DIFFERENT FORMAT YOU ****TY ****ING WEBSITE.
Whoever the **** designed that should be taken out in public and flogged.
It's not a case of 'boo, change bad' uproar everytime Facebook changes, the website is legitimately terrible now. I just had a look at the scorecards from the 2013 home Ashes because I couldn't actually remember who'd played in that series (turns out I'd successfully blocked out Jonny Bairstow's attempts at batting but I digress.) I pop in cricinfo into the address bar. Get punted onto the mobile site because I'm on my phone. Fine, I hit full site and notice the aforementioned mobile optimisation they're going for. Scroll all the way down to the bottom, cannot find any sort of obvious link to take me to the match and series archive, so click on the site map, which thankfully takes me onto a page that's still in the old style. Eventually navigate to the page for the 2013 Ashes. Click on the scorecard for the 1st Test, at which point the site gives me the scorecard but punts me back onto the mobile version. This is pretty annoying as I like how the scorecard is laid out on the desktop site. Not to worry, there's a 'desktop version' button at the bottom of the page. That takes me back to the ****ing site's homepage.
I HAVE FOUND THE CONTENT I WANTED I JUST WANTED IT IN A DIFFERENT FORMAT YOU ****TY ****ING WEBSITE.
Whoever the **** designed that should be taken out in public and flogged.
Last edited:
Furball
Evil Scotsman
I see someone else shares my pain.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
WE all do, GF 
YorksLanka
International Debutant
yes its gone from useable to absolutely useless..
Spark
Global Moderator
Rob Steen is possibly the most pretentious cricket writer I have ever seen.
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Did tweet to them and to Sambit Bal linking the thread. I doubt they would care enough to even look. The website has so much hits, who cares as far as they are concerned. That's the impression I get any ways. Else, they wouldn't even have had such a design change. Basically they must have just followed the suggestions ESPN put forth without giving much thought and ESPN must have just put a standard lay out they use on many of their sports sites. The site has so many similarities to some of their other sites, but while others are functional, Cricinfo has less functionality in it's design.
Bouncer
State Regular
They hired some new hotshot CEO that just finished his MBA degree from an online university.
Anyway...the guy came in and demanded that layout has to be changed and be more in the lines in 21st century. So they did it.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Match Point was excellent in the sa vs India series last year but I can't confirm whether it's still good because none of the ****ing videos ever play for me. Piece of **** website.