England Cricket 2025

Zulu

Thank you TMA for a balanced view.

PrincessFiona

Zulu said:

When the domestic 20 over comp was inaugurated, it was regarded as 'hit and giggles' but soon became the top comp domestically - you may well find the 100 to do the same - not just here but also globally. Certainly in terms of attendances its already there.

The T20 format is international, no-one is bothering with the Hundred and its been a few years. Talking to friends in Australia, South Africa and Pakistan and colleagues from India it is regraded as a joke and will not be taken up their. It's about money in the UK/England, not cricket.

There isn't the time for all the competitions. T20 is international, the Hundred is not and it the one to go

MarcusH26

thai malaysia addick said:

@Zulu The problem is that our summer is too short to have four competitions. One has to go. The Hundred and T20 Blast are, in terms of skills, very similar. T20 must be the preferred format as it is recognised worldwide. Abandoning 50-over would mean abandoning another format recognised worldwide. Effectively, we are abandoning 50-over, as it’s been demoted to a second-rate competition, yet is the preferred type of format for grassroots club cricket. Arguably, 50-over is the best World Cup as it is a good measure of skill between each nation. Why? Test cricket doesn’t lend itself to world championships (the current final is a poor relation) and T20, as we know, hinges on too much luck. A team can have one bad day or one batsman has a lucky day and the weaker side wins. If we drop the T20 Blast and persevere with the Hundred, that leaves a lot of good county players twiddling their thumbs for a month (and maybe longer soon). It’s a difficult one but the Hundred is the bad egg for me.

I just have no reason to get excited for any aspect of the Hundred. I've seen Steve Smith play red ball for Sussex which was absolutely incredible to watch one of the greats of the game so him playing for Welsh Fire does nothing for me. I've got no interest in watching the " Southern Brave" with a Hodgepodge of Sussex and Hampshire players whilst the One Day Cup is now essentially a B Team/Academy competition that's usually won by whoever has the most squad depth or decides to play a couple of overseas against a 2XI attack. 

Now with The Hundred being sold off to Indian based investors you're just going to have Manchester Super Giants Vs Mumbai Indians London like we have in all the other franchise comps. I'm worried eventually this all leads to players rejecting domestic contracts and signing year long deals to an ownership group and just globetrotting from competition to competition. 

Addick Addict

Zulu said:

MarcusH26 said:

Yesterday's finals day at the Blast proved the Hundred is utterly pointless. We already had a  fantastic domestic white ball competition. 

I honestly dont see what the problem is.
In football there are many competitions, League,FA Cup,League Cup, other cups.
I really dont get the negativity re the 100 (aside from the fact that we dont play Tests during August any longer, which i disagree with.)
It gives an opportunity for our young players to be around greats such as Smith,Warner,Williamson etc. which can surely only benefit them - i mean look at Will Smeed yesterday.

Will Smeed was playing with Babar Azam for Somerset before the Hundred ever came into existence. Had the money that was pumped originally into the Hundred been re-directed into the Blast with the offer of £25,000 per match to England centrally contracted players by the ECB, as they do with the Hundred, then that would have been as strong. 

County cricket has survived by virtue of Test cricket sales. Test players aren't provided by Hundred franchises. They are provided by counties through their age group system. The ECB will, ultimately, be creating 8-10 super powers where the tail of those IPL owners will be wagging the dog so far as when "their" players are available to play elsewhere.  

PrincessFiona

Zulu said:

MarcusH26 said:

Yesterday's finals day at the Blast proved the Hundred is utterly pointless. We already had a  fantastic domestic white ball competition. 

I honestly dont see what the problem is.
In football there are many competitions, League,FA Cup,League Cup, other cups.
I really dont get the negativity re the 100 (aside from the fact that we dont play Tests during August any longer, which i disagree with.)
It gives an opportunity for our young players to be around greats such as Smith,Warner,Williamson etc. which can surely only benefit them - i mean look at Will Smeed yesterday.

You are told why, yet still keep claiming you can't see the problem. 

PrincessFiona

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

I'm a 'pwopa' cricket fan, and i like/enjoy it. Its far from a 'shit' competition' - i find that comment a bit childish tbh.
50 over cricket is dying globally anyway, not just because of the 100.
Plus, the 100 has paid off the debt of all the counties .
So, cant be that bad.

50 over is not dying globally, far from it

the 100 is that bad, if not worse

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2022/07/18/witnessing-long-slow-death-50-over-cricket/

There are plenty of other articles stating that 50 over cricket is on the wane.

not worldwide/internationally. There is a ODI world cup and not a 100 world cup and there won't be either

Zulu

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

cantersaddick

Zulu were you in favour of the European Super League in football?

Or maybe more accurately would you be okay if 10 new English football franchises with random names were set up and they played a mini league for 2 months in the middle of the season and were allowed to pick the best players from every club in the country and the clubs just have to get on with it and play without them. And it's fine because it's "only" the FA cup you play during that period. And no international matches can happen then. And your club can't play games at their home ground coz a franchise is using it and has changed all the branding. You'd be fine with that?

Zulu

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

MarcusH26 said:

Yesterday's finals day at the Blast proved the Hundred is utterly pointless. We already had a  fantastic domestic white ball competition. 

I honestly dont see what the problem is.
In football there are many competitions, League,FA Cup,League Cup, other cups.
I really dont get the negativity re the 100 (aside from the fact that we dont play Tests during August any longer, which i disagree with.)
It gives an opportunity for our young players to be around greats such as Smith,Warner,Williamson etc. which can surely only benefit them - i mean look at Will Smeed yesterday.

You are told why, yet still keep claiming you can't see the problem. 

Of course i have, but it doesnt mean i have to agree with them !!

Zulu

Addick Addict said:

Zulu said:

MarcusH26 said:

Yesterday's finals day at the Blast proved the Hundred is utterly pointless. We already had a  fantastic domestic white ball competition. 

I honestly dont see what the problem is.
In football there are many competitions, League,FA Cup,League Cup, other cups.
I really dont get the negativity re the 100 (aside from the fact that we dont play Tests during August any longer, which i disagree with.)
It gives an opportunity for our young players to be around greats such as Smith,Warner,Williamson etc. which can surely only benefit them - i mean look at Will Smeed yesterday.

Will Smeed was playing with Babar Azam for Somerset before the Hundred ever came into existence. Had the money that was pumped originally into the Hundred been re-directed into the Blast with the offer of £25,000 per match to England centrally contracted players by the ECB, as they do with the Hundred, then that would have been as strong. 

County cricket has survived by virtue of Test cricket sales. Test players aren't provided by Hundred franchises. They are provided by counties through their age group system. The ECB will, ultimately, be creating 8-10 super powers where the tail of those IPL owners will be wagging the dog so far as when "their" players are available to play elsewhere.  

Yes, thats the worry/concern.

PrincessFiona

Zulu said:

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

Well your friends disagree with mine and my colleagues. You cannot say what my friends and say is nonsense just because they disagree with you. It's this attitude that leads you to keep saying you don't understand the problem when respected cricket experts on here are telling you (the same as I have)

Insatiable though India's appetite is for cricket, it does not mean they are able to cram any more fixture into an already saturated schedule - it is far more likely the franchise tournament will revert to T20, as has been talked about widely

killerandflash

4 out of the last 5 Blast winners, and 7 out of the last 10 Blast winners have all been "non Hundred host" counties.

Zulu

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

Well your friends disagree with mine and my colleagues. You cannot say what my friends and say is nonsense just because they disagree with you. It's this attitude that leads you to keep saying you don't understand the problem when respected cricket experts on here are telling you (the same as I have)

Insatiable though India's appetite is for cricket, it does not mean they are able to cram any more fixture into an already saturated schedule - it is far more likely the franchise tournament will revert to T20, as has been talked about widely

I apologise for not being a 'respected cricket expert'.!

MarcusH26

killerandflash said:

4 out of the last 5 Blast winners, and 7 out of the last 10 Blast winners have all been "non Hundred host" counties.

That's a fantastic stat! I'm very interested to see how the return to the "old" format goes next year with the 3 groups and the 1 block perhaps giving better overseas availability. 

I'd still expect Somerset and Hampshire to make finals day!

PrincessFiona

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

Well your friends disagree with mine and my colleagues. You cannot say what my friends and say is nonsense just because they disagree with you. It's this attitude that leads you to keep saying you don't understand the problem when respected cricket experts on here are telling you (the same as I have)

Insatiable though India's appetite is for cricket, it does not mean they are able to cram any more fixture into an already saturated schedule - it is far more likely the franchise tournament will revert to T20, as has been talked about widely

I apologise for not being a 'respected cricket expert'.!

Why and why should you? Not everyone is, and I'm not but listen to those who are

Zulu

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

Well your friends disagree with mine and my colleagues. You cannot say what my friends and say is nonsense just because they disagree with you. It's this attitude that leads you to keep saying you don't understand the problem when respected cricket experts on here are telling you (the same as I have)

Insatiable though India's appetite is for cricket, it does not mean they are able to cram any more fixture into an already saturated schedule - it is far more likely the franchise tournament will revert to T20, as has been talked about widely

I apologise for not being a 'respected cricket expert'.!

Why and why should you? Not everyone is, and I'm not but listen to those who are

  

Zulu

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

Well your friends disagree with mine and my colleagues. You cannot say what my friends and say is nonsense just because they disagree with you. It's this attitude that leads you to keep saying you don't understand the problem when respected cricket experts on here are telling you (the same as I have)

Insatiable though India's appetite is for cricket, it does not mean they are able to cram any more fixture into an already saturated schedule - it is far more likely the franchise tournament will revert to T20, as has been talked about widely

I apologise for not being a 'respected cricket expert'.!

Why and why should you? Not everyone is, and I'm not but listen to those who are

I'm not biting.

PrincessFiona

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

Well your friends disagree with mine and my colleagues. You cannot say what my friends and say is nonsense just because they disagree with you. It's this attitude that leads you to keep saying you don't understand the problem when respected cricket experts on here are telling you (the same as I have)

Insatiable though India's appetite is for cricket, it does not mean they are able to cram any more fixture into an already saturated schedule - it is far more likely the franchise tournament will revert to T20, as has been talked about widely

I apologise for not being a 'respected cricket expert'.!

Why and why should you? Not everyone is, and I'm not but listen to those who are

I'm not biting.

You're not taking notice, that's what's relevant. 

Zulu

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

Well your friends disagree with mine and my colleagues. You cannot say what my friends and say is nonsense just because they disagree with you. It's this attitude that leads you to keep saying you don't understand the problem when respected cricket experts on here are telling you (the same as I have)

Insatiable though India's appetite is for cricket, it does not mean they are able to cram any more fixture into an already saturated schedule - it is far more likely the franchise tournament will revert to T20, as has been talked about widely

I apologise for not being a 'respected cricket expert'.!

Why and why should you? Not everyone is, and I'm not but listen to those who are

I'm not biting.

You're not taking notice, that's what's relevant. 

What you are not accepting is that i dont necessarily agree with the views of the 'respected cricket experts' and i am sure that some of the so-called 'experts' on here will acknowledge with my posts that i know what i am talking about re cricket , and whilst i am happy to listen to other peoples opinions (and agreed with some, and sometimes 'liked' their post) i dont take too kindly to being patronised.
Thank you.

PrincessFiona

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

PrincessFiona said:

Zulu said:

20 over cricket started in England in 2003. The IPL started in 2007. So, it took 4 years for them to copy it.
I also have friends in SA and AUS who i can reliably say are looking closely at the possibility of copying the 100 model - maybe simply because of the financial element, but copying it nonetheless. Its nonsense to say they regard it as a joke - because they look at 1) The money generated and 2) the crowds therein.
Also, India wont also be treating it as  a 'joke' else they wouldnt be pumping in all their money from next season.!
You will likely be seeing a IPL 100 in a couple of years time - probably tagging on to the current IPL, as long as the calendar admits. And then a 100 World Cup thereafter. As you will know Cricket is insatiable in India and they will consume any format that is put in front of them.

Well your friends disagree with mine and my colleagues. You cannot say what my friends and say is nonsense just because they disagree with you. It's this attitude that leads you to keep saying you don't understand the problem when respected cricket experts on here are telling you (the same as I have)

Insatiable though India's appetite is for cricket, it does not mean they are able to cram any more fixture into an already saturated schedule - it is far more likely the franchise tournament will revert to T20, as has been talked about widely

I apologise for not being a 'respected cricket expert'.!

Why and why should you? Not everyone is, and I'm not but listen to those who are

I'm not biting.

You're not taking notice, that's what's relevant. 

What you are not accepting is that i dont necessarily agree with the views of the 'respected cricket experts' and i am sure that some of the so-called 'experts' on here will acknowledge with my posts that i know what i am talking about re cricket , and whilst i am happy to listen to other peoples opinions (and agreed with some, and sometimes 'liked' their post) i dont take too kindly to being patronised.
Thank you.

You aren't being patronised. What's with the apologising - that's unnecessary and passive-aggressive

Yorkshireaddick

Seeing Johnny Bairstow turning out for Welsh Fire in The Hundred had me giving my head a wobble I have to admit…

Diebythesword

If you can tell me what new techniques, shots and tactics the hundred has bought to the rest of the game like t20 did then there might be some validity to the argument “it’s just new, what’s wrong with it?”. However I really can’t think of any. 

killerandflash

Yorkshireaddick said:

Seeing Johnny Bairstow turning out for Welsh Fire in The Hundred had me giving my head a wobble I have to admit…

I can't imagine a proud Yorkshireman like Bairstow particularly enjoys playing for them either. Especially when he was allocated to a rubbish franchise, who only exist for political reasons.

thai malaysia addick

killerandflash said:

Yorkshireaddick said:

Seeing Johnny Bairstow turning out for Welsh Fire in The Hundred had me giving my head a wobble I have to admit…

I can't imagine a proud Yorkshireman like Bairstow particularly enjoys playing for them either. Especially when he was allocated to a rubbish franchise, who only exist for political reasons.

I expect his accountant approves

killerandflash

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vILgKyugQFA

Great episode of the "Stick to Cricket" podcast with Sir Geoff Boycott as the guest.

Chizz

Ireland 196-3 - their highest T20 score against England

Chizz

England fifty up in three overs

North Lower Neil

Chizz said:

Ireland 196-3 - their highest T20 score against England

Never lost to us in t20s

Chizz

Buttler and Salt become the first two batters to score more than 1,000 T20 runs in partnership for England.  Buttler is in first place, second place (with Roy) and fourth place (with Hales) in the list of highest-scoring partnerships. 

Chizz

England 84-1.  The highest powerplay score by England since last Friday.