ECB presents 100-ball domestic game for men and women

[GotSpin]

Darren Gough has done a complete u-turn on the 100 haha. They've gotten to him!!

The guardian has been flaming it lately

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/apr/24/100-reasons-ecb-new-cricket-the-spin

 

[S.Kennedy]

The Hundred's 10 ball over has been jettisoned in favour of, ehh, something,

The new Hundred competition will be made up of five-ball overs but captains could be given the option of keeping bowlers on for two overs in succession.

Teams will bowl ten balls from one end in the new hundred competition but captains will have a choice of whether to split the deliveries between two bowlers.

It will mean bowlers could send down ten consecutive deliveries but the final single ten-ball over that was mooted when the competition was announced earlier this summer has been dropped after talks with county players.

Instead it is believed the tactical option of allowing one bowler to carry on for another five balls if he is doing well will bring a new element to the game. This system will also reduce the number of end changes taking place, which will speed the game up.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket...uld-bowl-consecutive-five-ball-overs-hundred/

 

[Daemon]

Great change. Never understood 6 ball overs anyways.

 

[Prince EWS]

I still hate this whole thing but that certainly sounds slightly less bad.

 

[Daemon]

"This system will also reduce the number of end changes taking place, which will speed the game up."

Have my doubts about the above though. If less than 4 bowl two in a row we'll see more change of ends than less.

 

[Starfighter]

Why not just do ten overs from one end followed by ten from the other? Though I do think five ball overs is better than the previous plan.

 

[Prince EWS]

"This system will also reduce the number of end changes taking place, which will speed the game up."

Have my doubts about the above though. If less than 4 bowl two in a row we'll see more change of ends than less.

I think that even if a bowler doesn't bowl two in a row, the team still bowls two in a row from the same end. So they'll only change ends ten times per innings.

"Teams will bowl ten balls from one end in the new hundred competition but captains will have a choice of whether to split the deliveries between two bowlers."

 

[Daemon]

I think that even if a bowler doesn't bowl two in a row, the team still bowls two in a row from the same end. So they'll only change ends ten times per innings.

Ah you're right I missed the 2nd paragraph

 

[cnerd123]

This isn't any easier to understand than normal cricket

 

[NotMcKenzie]

This isn't any easier to understand than normal cricket

Quiet!

You're not supposed to let them in on the secret.

 

[jimmy101]

This isn't any easier to understand than normal cricket

Time to throw your weight around bro. Someone as high up in the HK cricket structure should be able to put this fire out before it spreads.

 

[cnerd123]

I'll start making some calls and see what I can do

 

[_Ed_]

The guys who make the ICC games must be freaking the **** out about now.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Spilt balls doesn't sound too good.

Why not castrate?

 

[Mr Miyagi]

This really is the beginning of the end for cricket on FTA tv outside of the BBC in the UK.

I assume that the beeb is still ad free? So that the BBC couldn't care less about ads in between overs.

Try doing this in Australia to the BBL FTA games.

I never really minded the ad breaks in between overs. Ads after wickets before a single replay is shown piss me off though.

 

[Midwinter]

This will make it simpler to understand wont it.

 

[trundler]

I'm not really against it now that I think about it. It's this sort of things which made cricket popular in the first place. Promoters would go city to city with their XI and play against XXII's as a challenge. Other things like single wicket competitions must have helped too. It's obviously not meant for the purist and test cricket will remain the pinnacle of the game but if there wasn't change we could still be stuck with dreary under arm bowling and monotonous batting.

 

[GotSpin]

I'm not really against it now that I think about it. It's this sort of things which made cricket popular in the first place. Promoters would go city to city with their XI and play against XXII's as a challenge. Other things like single wicket competitions must have helped too. It's obviously not meant for the purist and test cricket will remain the pinnacle of the game but if there wasn't change we could still be stuck with dreary under arm bowling and monotonous batting.

No it's not at all

 

[trundler]

My point was experiment unorthodox things. It's no more than a gimmick but no harm in trying.

 

[GotSpin]

There's definite harm in trying though with this kind of experiment