• 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.

What is it about Cricketweb that puts people off taking part?

B

Brook's side

International 12th Man
Think I've read somewhere that cricket is the 2nd most widely supported sport in the world. There are an estimated 30 million active players.

Cricketweb seems to be the leading cricket forum, boasting 26,000 signed up members. Perhaps no surprise as it's a universal forum, unlimited to club or country. It's also got a very user friendly programmed format/style, which gives it an advantage over many online sports forums.

Yet there only seem to be about 20-30 likeminded people (out of the whole population of the world) who post on a regular basis.

This compares unfavourably to online forums for say mid tier premier league football teams. There are tennis forums (a sport far less widely followed than cricket) which have probably 10 times the useage and 10 times the regular contributors as Cricketweb.

What is it about the Cricketweb forum which makes the vast majority of potential contributors decide to stay away?
 
Shady Slim

Shady Slim

International Coach
with respect i reject your premise honestly

maybe that's the news and politics subforum - and even that, that's certainly not a hivemind - but in the cricket chat sub there's heaps of active and diverse viewpoints
 
ataraxia

ataraxia

International Coach
Some people post on and off; active but haven't much posted in the past month or two. I also think there's a surprisingly high amount of active members tbh – it's easy to underestimate, really. All of the 16 currently-online members are at least semi-active, if not mainstays.

But it is a shrinking forum, for it's a forum, and cricket fanbases tend to be more spread and offline than for other sports, ''spose.
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
Brook's side said:
Think I've read somewhere that cricket is the 2nd most widely supported sport in the world. There are an estimated 30 million active players.

Cricketweb seems to be the leading cricket forum, boasting 26,000 signed up members. Perhaps no surprise as it's a universal forum, unlimited to club or country. It's also got a very user friendly programmed format/style, which gives it an advantage over many online sports forums.

Yet there only seem to be about 20-30 likeminded people (out of the whole population of the world) who post on a regular basis.

This compares unfavourably to online forums for say mid tier premier league football teams. There are tennis forums (a sport far less widely followed than cricket) which have probably 10 times the useage and 10 times the regular contributors as Cricketweb.

What is it about the Cricketweb forum which makes the vast majority of potential contributors decide to stay away?
Click to expand...
Maybe more people should follow your fine example and find more examples of criminal wars of aggression around the world to post apologia about. That gets all the members rolling in I hear.
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
Like I'll be blunt: the reason that everyone piled onto you in the Paltrow thread is that you were a condescending prick. Burgey makes a, to my eye, reasonable point couched in an entirely reasonable way - no personal attacks, aspersions or even raised tone:

Burgey said:
I repeat. So what?

If I'm blind, deaf, have a brain injury and I'm sitting in the passenger seat of a car when some idiot runs into me, they're liable. If it makes my brain condition worse, they're liable for making it worse.
Click to expand...
And rather than responding to any points he made or making any sensible argument in reply, you reply with this:

Brook's side said:
Wow, this is genius. It's like Perry Mason's just walked in the room to enlighten us. It's a revelation to listen to your reasoning.
Click to expand...
You have no grounds to complain about how others are posting in reply to snide, substance-free trash like that.

Then later, stephenZA posts this, which is not addressed to you, and has nothing to do with you:

StephenZA said:
I have come to the conclusion she is trying to protect her reputation... whether she caused it or not.

Of course her reputation is already in the toilet being a pseudoscience bumpkin... so none of this is really that important...
Click to expand...
And to this you take extreme offence and start accusing him of saying things which are nowhere to be found in the post itself

Brook's side said:
So you've concluded that she doesn't know whether she caused it?
Click to expand...
Brook's side said:
OK then, so you think that she does know whether or not she caused it, but she is defending the case, "to protect her reputation... whether she caused it or not".

Hmmmm.
Click to expand...
Brook's side said:
Defending her reputation as being someone who does not cause ski collisions.

Can see where you're coming from @StephenZA.
Click to expand...
He didn't even post that at you ffs but here you are attacking him and needling him over an unbelievably anodyne post, and you make another half dozen posts forcing other posters to answer this incredibly tendentious reading of the post stephen made and dragging other posters into the debate when they try to point out that stephen at no point actually said what you tried to claim he said. It's being argumentative and petty for its own sake and is deeply, deeply unpleasant to deal with.
 
Last edited:
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
And like, we have quite a gamut of political worldviews and opinions here. We have socialists, social democrats, liberals, hardline libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, a few conservatives. Everyone in that subforum has found your posting off-putting, either by telling you outright or by liking a post saying as much. At some point you might consider that the problem may just be you.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Brook's side said:
Think I've read somewhere that cricket is the 2nd most widely supported sport in the world. There are an estimated 30 million active players.

Cricketweb seems to be the leading cricket forum, boasting 26,000 signed up members. Perhaps no surprise as it's a universal forum, unlimited to club or country. It's also got a very user friendly programmed format/style, which gives it an advantage over many online sports forums.

Yet there only seem to be about 20-30 likeminded people (out of the whole population of the world) who post on a regular basis.

This compares unfavourably to online forums for say mid tier premier league football teams. There are tennis forums (a sport far less widely followed than cricket) which have probably 10 times the useage and 10 times the regular contributors as Cricketweb.

What is it about the Cricketweb forum which makes the vast majority of potential contributors decide to stay away?
Click to expand...
[insert obscure in-joke here]
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
N+P is full of obnoxious grandstanding and counter pearl clutching but that's just a feature of political discussion everywhere. The rest of CW is alright. You'd end up with a decent number of users in CC if you also tallied up all the people who don't venture out of their niches I reckon.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
There's probably 50 active or semi-active posters in my timezone alone, then at night the poms regrettably wake up and we get india wake up around after work my time.

we do lack south african, sri lankan, pakistani, bangladeshi and west indian posters. all have some dedicated long term regulars but i don't think those together could even beat one of the big 4 cw fanbases.

r/cricket is absolutely massive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top