The Hundred - New Cricket Format

[Gary]

Anyone else watching The Hundred? What’s your thoughts?

[csnewton2701]

Seems a bit of a gimmick to me. Not sure on the 10 ball overs.

Chris

[paddyboy]

Give me proper test cricket every time

Wonder what Sir Geoffrey thinks of it

Does seem a bit ‘gimmicky’

[raptor9]

Absolutely with Paddy. For me, the only proper cricket is Test Match cricket. Can't be bothered with any of the others.

[Tooks]

I started watching it without much expectation, I’ll be honest, but I enjoyed the game a lot by the end.

I’m not sure about the 5 balls per over thing, nor the 10 ball overs, seems like they had to find a way to differentiate the tournament from ‘another 20/20’ setup.

They need to sort the on screen graphics as well, garish and a little confusing!

Seemed to be a lot of kids in the crowd getting excited, which I suppose is one of the aims as well.

[csnewton2701]

It was entertaining despite being on the loosing side. Good to see a thrilling end. I agree with you Tooks, the graphics were poor and took up a fair amount of the screen.

Chris

[d555]

I enjoyed the cricket, luckily for the organisers it was a close game in the end. I'm not to sure about all the other gimmicks, fireworks etc., but maybe I'm a little too old, it's probably aimed more towards getting younger people involved in the game.
As others have said that the graphics on the TV where completely baffling to me, I spent half the time watching trying to work out what it all meant and was still no further forth at the end!
Still, was a good start and will watch the men's game today.

[iainpeden]

If they had put the equivalent money and advertising effort into the 20/20 (Which is very popular in all cricket playing countries south of Dover) as they have into this they would not need the hundred.
What's next?
Soccer split into 4 quarters.
Tennis - scoring 1,2,3,4,5 in a game and first to 100 wins.
Chess - pieces only move forward and back.

Edit:
Having just listened to a radio interview I understand that women's cricket is very keen on the format because they are treated as exact equals, same grounds, same quality of kit, same money so it does have it's good points.

[Mike]

I wasn't really interested in this at first but have now watched a few games and I'm enjoying it now. The on-screen graphics take a while to work out, they need a few tweaks before being perfect but good luck to them in attracting more youngsters to the sport.

It's just a pity that the good-old UK weather managed to get both games cancelled at The Oval yesterday.

[plmc135]

No it didn't. The women's game was completed before the heavens opened, won by the Oval Invincibles.

[Mike]

You are quite correct, I was just checking to see who was paying attention.

[Malcolm]

As an old fuddy-duddy I'm not a fan, but I'm not keen on ANY of the one day formats. Sure it can be exiting, but it ain't cricket and is doing immeasurable damage to the test team, particularly the top-order batsmen.

If you put your test teams opening batsmen into a one day competition where they are expected to swing at everything baseball style then they are being encouraged to learn very bad habits. A good opening test batsman needs to be able to fend off the first 20 overs, perhaps only scoring a handful of runs. The important bit is to see off the new ball, get your eye in and not get out. Leave anything wide of the stumps well alone and only play with a straight bat at stuff that's going to bowl/LBW you otherwise. You want two of your top 3 to be scoring 50 every game to give you a start. An opening batsman who averages more than one run an over for the first 10 overs he faces should be sacked immediately.

I'm half hoping this winter's Ashes tour is called off because all this one day cricket is destroying our batsmen, and I fear a drubbing if the tour goes ahead.

[gamecock]

Some good points being made. I just don’t see the need for it when T20 is already massively successful. Some of the commentators have tied themselves in knots trying to explain how it works because they’re so used to normal playing conditions. Good to see the excitement it’s generating, but 20 over cricket has been producing exciting matches for years now. The major difference is the city franchise system over counties, which the counties have pushed back against for years. We shall see…

[paddyboy]

Malcolm:

[plmc135]

Too many different versions of cricket now appearing. As well as those already mentioned, there was also the T10 tournament played in the UAE earlier this year. Next there will be a super over competition.

[slogen51]

T10 ! Surely not a 10 over innings ?

Soon there won't be enough time to get your box adjusted.

[plmc135]

T10 ! Surely not a 10 over innings ?

Soon there won't be enough time to get your box adjusted.

Oh yes, cannot remember which TV channel showed it

[jpickers56]

As an old fuddy-duddy I'm not a fan, but I'm not keen on ANY of the one day formats. Sure it can be exiting, but it ain't cricket and is doing immeasurable damage to the test team, particularly the top-order batsmen.

If you put your test teams opening batsmen into a one day competition where they are expected to swing at everything baseball style then they are being encouraged to learn very bad habits. A good opening test batsman needs to be able to fend off the first 20 overs, perhaps only scoring a handful of runs. The important bit is to see off the new ball, get your eye in and not get out. Leave anything wide of the stumps well alone and only play with a straight bat at stuff that's going to bowl/LBW you otherwise. You want two of your top 3 to be scoring 50 every game to give you a start. An opening batsman who averages more than one run an over for the first 10 overs he faces should be sacked immediately.

I'm half hoping this winter's Ashes tour is called off because all this one day cricket is destroying our batsmen, and I fear a drubbing if the tour goes ahead.

I have to disagree Malcolm, I enjoy all aspects of cricket whether limited overs or a Test match. I recall Test matches back in the 70’s , very traditional,often dull, it was slow and took the likes of Mr Botham and Mr Lamb to shake things up a bit in the eighties. Remember Chris Tavare, he would need 100 balls to just get his eye in yet he was considered a great batsmen . Test matches are more exciting now and often finish in 4 or even 3 days and certainly more entertaining for the spectator . Yes Sir Geoffrey will have his opinion but does he not always find some sort of criticism anyway whoever is playing. As got the Hundred, jury still out as it is very similar to Twenty Twenty and not seeing what point of difference it is bringing to the game. I love Twenty Twenty, great excitement and brings a new and younger fan base to the sport and is encouraging greater participation in the game. Will have to see how the Hundreds pan out but what I have seen is exciting.

[Malcolm]

As an old fuddy-duddy I'm not a fan, but I'm not keen on ANY of the one day formats. Sure it can be exiting, but it ain't cricket and is doing immeasurable damage to the test team, particularly the top-order batsmen.

If you put your test teams opening batsmen into a one day competition where they are expected to swing at everything baseball style then they are being encouraged to learn very bad habits. A good opening test batsman needs to be able to fend off the first 20 overs, perhaps only scoring a handful of runs. The important bit is to see off the new ball, get your eye in and not get out. Leave anything wide of the stumps well alone and only play with a straight bat at stuff that's going to bowl/LBW you otherwise. You want two of your top 3 to be scoring 50 every game to give you a start. An opening batsman who averages more than one run an over for the first 10 overs he faces should be sacked immediately.

I'm half hoping this winter's Ashes tour is called off because all this one day cricket is destroying our batsmen, and I fear a drubbing if the tour goes ahead.

I have to disagree Malcolm, I enjoy all aspects of cricket whether limited overs or a Test match. I recall Test matches back in the 70’s , very traditional,often dull, it was slow and took the likes of Mr Botham and Mr Lamb to shake things up a bit in the eighties. Remember Chris Tavare, he would need 100 balls to just get his eye in yet he was considered a great batsmen . Test matches are more exciting now and often finish in 4 or even 3 days and certainly more entertaining for the spectator . Yes Sir Geoffrey will have his opinion but does he not always find some sort of criticism anyway whoever is playing. As got the Hundred, jury still out as it is very similar to Twenty Twenty and not seeing what point of difference it is bringing to the game. I love Twenty Twenty, great excitement and brings a new and younger fan base to the sport and is encouraging greater participation in the game. Will have to see how the Hundreds pan out but what I have seen is exciting.

Alan Lamb played most of his test matches at numbers 4 and 5, and Ian Botham was 5 or 6. The reason they were entertaining is that they came in AFTER the opening batsmen had done their stuff and taken the edge off the new ball. If you put either of them in at numbers 1, 2 or 3 then they'd really struggle. At numbers 4-6 they can swing the bat a bit more in a one day fashion - I've no problem with that - that's the job od the middle order.

I'm specifically talking about opening test batsmen, and the best of the English are probably Boycott, Cook and Gooch. These could all reliably average mid 40's - which means you've got 120 on the board from your top three. But they weren't suited to one-day cricket where fast scoring is the aim. England don't currently have one good opening test batsman, never mind three of them. That's entirely down to everyone playing the one day format and losing the discipline required to be a good opener IMV. Hence we don't really have 3 openers and 3 middle order batsmen - we have 6 middle order batsmen in, none of whom have the discipline to be openers, and they all get skittled out easily by a good test side resulting in the tail end struggling to get us past the 150 mark.

Test match cricket is the ultimate test - 5 days of intense competition and concentration. I accept that's not for everyone. Comparing it to 100 ball a side which is done and dusted in 3 hours is chalk and cheese. They're different games, and require different skill sets.

[Mike]

Malcolm, you have some very good points there and I agree entirely.