|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 3, 2019 14:20:43 GMT
Good luck to that break-away group. Talk about 'cutting off the nose to spite the face'. Only Surrey can afford not to accept the £6.5m from the ECB over 5 years. SKY and BTSport were not interested in a revamped Blast - only the new 100. At least, give it a chance. If after 3 years it's not proving successful then all the naysayers will be proven correct and county cricket can rejoice, while each still accepting their annual £1.3m+.  |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 3, 2019 14:22:55 GMT
Perhaps try and fit it somewhere that Colin Graves will find painful? Piles of fun for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 3, 2019 14:24:13 GMT
Good luck to that break-away group. Talk about 'cutting off the nose to spite the face'. Only Surrey can afford not to accept the £6.5m from the ECB over 5 years. SKY and BTSport were not interested in a revamped Blast - only the new 100. At least, give it a chance. If after 3 years it's not proving successful then all the naysayers will be proven correct and county cricket can rejoice, while each still accepting their annual £1.3m+. I also wish the break-away group every success. |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 3, 2019 14:36:12 GMT
ECB reduced to using junk food companies to sponsor a tournament aimed at kids! Words fail . . .  |
|
|
|
Post by sussexforever on Oct 3, 2019 15:27:08 GMT
Good luck to that break-away group. Talk about 'cutting off the nose to spite the face'. Only Surrey can afford not to accept the £6.5m from the ECB over 5 years. SKY and BTSport were not interested in a revamped Blast - only the new 100. At least, give it a chance. If after 3 years it's not proving successful then all the naysayers will be proven correct and county cricket can rejoice, while each still accepting their annual £1.3m+. Ah yes, the 1.3m Sussex will get for the one season before this is dead. The counties have essentially been bribed as none of them would have voted for this competition otherwise. The ECB have refused to publish their market research because clearly, it doesn't exist. This deserves about as much of a chance as MK Dons. I guess I can't blame players for securing their futures by taking the cash. The contracted ones don't have a choice but it will irk seeing CJ and Jofra turn out for this dross. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 3, 2019 15:37:46 GMT
Fb, The one saving grace is the shirt advertising are for crisps, nuts and popcorn rather than betting companies. Pity Kevin Pietersen isn't playing. That KP shirt would have been a perfect fit.  |
|
|
|
Post by glosexile on Oct 3, 2019 18:13:53 GMT
As to the 8 kits, no wonder that they are all smiling (laughing). Apparently, never wishing to miss out on an additional income stream, Woakes and Archer manage to gatecrash the party and model their jockey outfits for their forthcoming appearance in the 6 Furlong, Celebrity Dubai Classic. Great shame that they are not also wearing their jockeys headgear.
"Anyone l speak to who loves sport but doesn't necessarily love cricket is crying out for a tournament that he or she understands, because 18 teams going on for a long period of time just doesn't make sense to anybody".
Congratulations to Eoin Morgan. Despite a number of impressive entries from our politicians, Morgan comfortably walks away with the 'DRIVEL OF THE WEEK AWARD'.
Test players may also be selected as 'non-playing players' !!!
Please may l volunteer to be a non-paying, non-spectator.
Previously, we have had to endure the cotton wool protection of central contracts for England test stars. You had much more chance of seeing Stokes, Root, Buttler and Co at 02.00 on a Bristol nightclub dancefloor, than ever catching seeing them playing in our domestic cricket. What a massive dose of irony and double standards 'The Hundred' brings.
|
|
|
|
Post by lovelyboy on Oct 3, 2019 18:18:42 GMT
Good luck to that break-away group. Talk about 'cutting off the nose to spite the face'. Only Surrey can afford not to accept the £6.5m from the ECB over 5 years. SKY and BTSport were not interested in a revamped Blast - only the new 100. At least, give it a chance. If after 3 years it's not proving successful then all the naysayers will be proven correct and county cricket can rejoice, while each still accepting their annual £1.3m+. “SKY and BTSport were not interested in a revamped Blast - only the new 100” That’s not actually true S and F. |
|
|
|
Post by sussexforever on Oct 3, 2019 18:39:17 GMT
"Anyone l speak to who loves sport but doesn't necessarily love cricket is crying out for a tournament that he or she understands, because 18 teams going on for a long period of time just doesn't make sense to anybody". Congratulations to Eoin Morgan. Despite a number of impressive entries from our politicians, Morgan comfortably walks away with the 'DRIVEL OF THE WEEK AWARD'. Ah yes. Eoin has clearly not been introduced to the Premier League, Football League...whole host of other sports. Mind you, it was probably in his contract not to slag it off! |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 3, 2019 19:11:43 GMT
The intensity of negativity and despair on social media shows no sign of letting up. Some are now suggesting that, in order to protect the 3 existing formats, all cricket lovers should join together in boycotting The Hundred.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 3, 2019 19:23:29 GMT
"Anyone l speak to who loves sport but doesn't necessarily love cricket is crying out for a tournament that he or she understands, because 18 teams going on for a long period of time just doesn't make sense to anybody". Congratulations to Eoin Morgan. Despite a number of impressive entries from our politicians, Morgan comfortably walks away with the 'DRIVEL OF THE WEEK AWARD'. Ah yes. Eoin has clearly not been introduced to the Premier League, Football League...whole host of other sports. Mind you, it was probably in his contract not to slag it off! The England players voicing their "enthusiasm" for The 100 sound very much like those back bench politicians regurgitating their rehearsed party line phrases. Unlike the politicans, however, the cricketers have not been trained to fully conceal their embarrassment. |
|
|
|
Post by sussexforever on Oct 3, 2019 19:30:39 GMT
The intensity of negativity and despair on social media shows no sign of letting up. Some are now suggesting that, in order to protect the 3 existing formats, all cricket lovers should join together in boycotting The Hundred. Yep, England Cricket get hammered on their facebook page on every Hundred related post. I wonder if they would care to use it in their market research? I won't be attending or watching on TV. No one I talk to about cricket will be either. In fact I'm annoyed I can't filter it out of the BBC Sport app! |
|
Bazpan
2nd XI player
Posts: 191 
County club member: Kent
|
Post by Bazpan on Oct 4, 2019 0:18:07 GMT
SKY and BTSport were not interested in a revamped Blast - only the new 100. Wicked Cricket, you're fond of the "fake news" chant yourself, but where's the authentication for the assertion you're making here? I must admit you had me doubting my own memory for a moment, as I'd been certain that the broadcasting deals were already nailed down when city-based T20 was still the plan. And that the Hundred was something the ECB came up with on their own. They weren't cornered into it by broadcasters. Sky and BBC had already agreed the broadcasting deal before the ECB changed the format from T20 to Hundred. That's what I thought I remembered, so I had to check.
There's this from The Guardian in July 2015:-
"Sky has offered to pay around £40m a year in broadcasting rights for a Twenty20 tournament with teams billed as cities rather than counties when the new format gets under way in 2017."
Incidentally, that tallies with the £200m figure that the ECB have quoted as the Hundred's contribution to the £1.1bn five-year broadcasting deal. So let's have no more of this fake accountancy implying that the Hundred will single-handedly generate £1.1bn of broadcasting revenue.
This Daily Mail article from June 2017 was published after the broadcasting deal had been signed. There's no suggestion that Sky (or BTSport) are only interested in the Hundred. It hadn't been invented yet. Again, it's still T20 at this point.
"Sky are understood to have forked out around £200m-a-year to retain their live international cricket rights and the lion's share of the new T20 competition after a cash battle with rivals BT Sport."
We haven't got to agree about the Hundred, but don't ask us to believe that the broadcasters put a gun to the ECB's head about it. That storyline is readily disproven, and doesn't get the discussion anywhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 4, 2019 9:46:50 GMT
Incidentally, that tallies with the £200m figure that the ECB have quoted as the Hundred's contribution to the £1.1bn five-year broadcasting deal. So let's have no more of this fake accountancy implying that the Hundred will single-handedly generate £1.1bn of broadcasting revenue.
I wish I had time to write a proper synopsis, but it might end up as a book.
There is so much fake news and rumour-mongering out there, who knows what the truth is, not helped by the ECB who still seem unsure of The 100 structure, although, some meat is now being placed on the bones this week with the first of two player drafts and why the increasingly vocal charge from those who are against the new competition. There appear to be two major concerns.
Q: What is primarily driving the negativity against the new tournament? A1: It will irreparably damage the increasingly successful T20 Blast. A2: The new competition will create a chasm between the TMGs and the smaller counties like Sussex leading to non-TMGs withering on the vine.
How does anyone know this? I can see the Blast continuing to be successful as it's not in direct competition. A different time of the season - a different audience. And how can smaller counties wither when they are being given £1.3m a year for 5 years. It seems such dystopian fears are similar to those who don't believe Britain should leave the EU. Their concerns are based on speculation. No-one knows until after the event happens. Therefore, give The 100 three years, then criticise if the tournament is failing. There will still be 18 counties. The ECB has made it fundamentally clear there'll be 18 and 18 must remain, clearly seen by their recent determination to keep Durham financially propped up and alive.
Imho, the reason why the ECB gained such an extraordinary sum of £1.1bn is down to two primary reasons. The Board used the presence of BTSport to entice the SKY offer, while using The 100 as the sugar to sweeten the deal. The idea that it 'single-handedly' generated the revenue is utter tosh. The ECBs Sanjay Patel when going around the counties in 2016 discussing the new tournament, spoke of the media companies showing greater interest in The 100 than changing the T20 to a larger tournament. It makes financial sense when you're offering them a form of BOGOF.
Finally, those who are against the new tournament may still watch their counties playing in the Championship, the T20 and the 50 over during the next 5 years. Normal service continues. They can carry on as before, where no-one is putting a gun to their head to venture off to The Oval or Rose Bowl.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 4, 2019 10:51:43 GMT
Incidentally, that tallies with the £200m figure that the ECB have quoted as the Hundred's contribution to the £1.1bn five-year broadcasting deal. So let's have no more of this fake accountancy implying that the Hundred will single-handedly generate £1.1bn of broadcasting revenue.I wish I had time to write a proper synopsis, but it might end up as a book. There is so much fake news and rumour-mongering out there, who knows what the truth is, not helped by the ECB who still seem unsure of The 100 structure, although, some meat is now being placed on the bones this week with the first of two player drafts and why the increasingly vocal charge from those who are against the new competition. There appear to be two major concerns. Q: What is primarily driving the negativity against the new tournament? A1: It will irreparably damage the increasingly successful T20 Blast. A2: The new competition will create a chasm between the TMGs and the smaller counties like Sussex leading to non-TMGs withering on the vine. Yes to both - A1 (The Blast will no longer be in the school holidays) and A2 (This is the beginning of a slippery slope for the smaller counties.) Additionally: A3; It will marginalise the CC and the 50 over competition. A4: As a result of A3, membership subscriptions will continue to fall. A5: It pretends to have a new audience, consisting of people who have never been interested in cricket. If the target audience excludes Blast fans, who on earth is going to attend? A6: The competition must be so poorly regarded in the business world that the ECB has been reduced to accepting sponsorship from junk food manufacturers. This reinforces the existing terrible image, and is a damaging image to project to the young audience it seeks. How does anyone know this? I can see the Blast continuing to be successful as it's not in direct competition. A different time of the season - a different audience.
See A1 and A5 aboveAnd how can smaller counties wither when they are being given £1.3m a year for 5 years. I hope the smaller counties don't spend this money too quickly. They might need it in reserve if the 100 bubble bursts.It seems such dystopian fears are similar to those who don't believe Britain should leave the EU. Their concerns are based on speculation. No-one knows until after the event happens. Therefore, give The 100 three years, then criticise if the tournament is failing. There will still be 18 counties. The ECB has made it fundamentally clear there'll be 18 and 18 must remain, clearly seen by their recent determination to keep Durham financially propped up and alive. I don't think Durham supporters think the ECB was very supportive!Imho, the reason why the ECB gained such an extraordinary sum of £1.1bn is down to two primary reasons. The Board used the presence of BTSport to entice the SKY offer, while using The 100 as the sugar to sweeten the deal. The idea that it 'single-handedly' generated the revenue is utter tosh. The ECBs Sanjay Patel when going around the counties in 2016 discussing the new tournament, spoke of the media companies showing greater interest in The 100 than changing the T20 to a larger tournament. It makes financial sense when you're offering them a form of BOGOF. Finally, those who are against the new tournament may still watch their counties playing in the Championship, the T20 and the 50 over during the next 5 years. Normal service continues. They can carry on as before, where no-one is putting a gun to their head to venture off to The Oval or Rose Bowl.
Normal service?? See A1 and A3 above. Let's see whether the 2020 fixture list results in 'normal service' The awful paradox is that the ECB's obsession with generating money from the 100 is likely to undermine the cricketing structure that it purports to benefit. |
|
