It just isn't cricket

[ad hoc]

Oh, and I've been meaning to show this logo to ursus arctos for a while now, and I just reminded myself
cricket.jpg

[Etienne]

That's even quicker than Rakheem Cornwall's 205 off 77 balls for Atlanta Fire in a T20.

Is this the right thread for Will Smeed signing a white ball only contract for Somerset aged 21, so effectively retiring from first class cricket before making his debut (he's played for Somerset seconds but not played red ball county cricket.)

[ursus arctos]

Oh, that is outstanding from Romania

[Etienne]

Rutaraj Gaikwad just hit seven sixes and 43 runs off an over (one delivery was a no ball, so I guess strictly he only hit 42 of them) in a domestic one dayer.

[Etienne]

https://twitter.com/BBL/status/1609514038337368076?s=20&t=bL70C5KQMuuG7udGH_aOKQ

That can't be out can it? They have to change the wording of the rule otherwise it's ridiculous.

[Nurse Duckett]

Not out. Looks like he completed the catch outside the field of play, with full control, before throwing it back.

[Etienne]

It was given out, by the way.

[Satchmo Distel]

I'd like to see it at normal speed or from another angle but it looks like he's conned the video umpire into thinking that he's knocked the ball back into play rather than throwing it from a planted position.

Has BBL now permanently replaced NYD Tests or am I misremembering that they were a thing?

[Etienne]

More running out of the non striker drama. Not out this time.

https://twitter.com/WisdenCricket/status/1610212786570956800?s=20&t=aVqcaTLIHKUyi6ducYBZwg

[E10 Rifle]

Trying to work out what I think the implications of this might be - a possible free-for-all undermining domestic planning or a greater cricketing melting pot?

[George C.]

More micro limited overs cricket?

No thanks.

Plus Ingerland, Cymru & ROTW have more than enough Diaspora(s) to hoover up already...

[Jobi1]

The Hundred's title sponsors have confirmed they're not renewing their deal, as (unfortunately) have those for the Championship and the 50-over cup. That's got to be slightly concerning for the ECB. Hard not to slightly hope they don't find a new sponsor for the Hundred, although it would be a concern that they'll still go ahead with it and the costs will come out of cricket's pocket instead of a sponsor's.

[Etienne]

The ECB have decided to try and funnel barrowloads of cash to some of the top English players to get them to play in the Hundred this year - further emphasising the disparity in how much money the women are getting. I doubt it will be that effective given how much the players who have the requisite star power to warrant this can earn in the IPL.

Also disconcerting is that Steven Smith having been consistently mediocre as a T20 player, has suddenly transformed into a beast.

[ursus arctos]

https://twitter.com/TimesSport/status/1643689844160225284?t=XNCyL2KdIk3g-8-2v2Gk2g&s=19

[Ray de Galles]

Predictable, if true ;

https://twitter.com/theoldbatsman/status/1651856342594772992?s=46&t=YPTuyXx_pzpV4Wjm6pdF-Q

[Etienne]

No tears would be shed about it disappearing from the Men's side, but it will be a huge blow to the women's game.

[ursus arctos]

That's the primary concern.

The Women's Hundred is the one "world class" competition the ECB has, and Im not sure that it would survive on its own (though it likely could if run properly)

[Etienne]

I think they probably could run a stand alone tournament, they just won't get the audiences that the double headers with the men's game get them - and the TV and media coverage that comes with it.

[Ray de Galles]

Wouldn't it just be converted to a Women's T20 competition as well? I mean, the actual difference in format was all gimmicky nonsense anyway and wasn't intrinsically important so I'm sure the positive elements of the women's competition could transfer.

[Etienne]

The double headers couldn't convert. Both because women's cricket is franchised (and was before the Hundred) at the top level, and because you couldn't play two T20 matches in an evening without a ridiculously early start or finish, because of the extra 40 balls.

You might get TV and media coverage of a women's only t20 tournament in the future - you certainly haven't so far.

[Botswana Meat Commission]

I quite liked having some form of cricket on free-to-air TV at a reasonable time in the day to see most of the action and quite enjoyed that aspect of it, if I then couldn’t care less who was actually playing and had no interest in the teams or any affiliation towards them. That was the only positive for me.

The advent of Twenty20 some twenty (?) years ago was exciting and interesting for someone who was pretty young at the time. If they could provide a bit of a lift to that, it wouldn’t be a bad thing at all especially if the Hundred was to go.

I’m no cricket buff but would a revitalised twenty over format see these made up teams instead of the usual county sides?

[Etienne]

There isn't scope for two T20 tournaments in one summer, so there are 4 options that I can see.

Ditch the Blast (which the counties play) and have a T20 with these franchises which would bankrupt half the counties and please no-one.
Revamp the Blast (2 divisions possibly) and try and give it the marketing and media focus that was given to the Hundred (would irk traditionalists/county fans, might be hard to sell to media, would increase the financial disparity within the counties)
Keep the Blast as it is and try and give it the marketing and media focus that was given to the Hundred (would please traditionalists/county fans, might be hard to sell to media)
Ditch the Blast and sell off the franchises to the IPL global behemoths (would bankrupt half the countries, further destroy international cricket, but make lots more money for administrators and top players)

[ursus arctos]

Yes, the options are not attractive.

And I assume that there is no way the ECB can claw back the massive bonuses the previous administration awarded themselves for the "successful launch" of The Hundred.

Are they included in the 9 million?

[Botswana Meat Commission]

There isn't scope for two T20 tournaments in one summer, so there are 4 options that I can see.

Ditch the Blast (which the counties play) and have a T20 with these franchises which would bankrupt half the counties and please no-one.
Revamp the Blast (2 divisions possibly) and try and give it the marketing and media focus that was given to the Hundred (would irk traditionalists/county fans, might be hard to sell to media, would increase the financial disparity within the counties)
Keep the Blast as it is and try and give it the marketing and media focus that was given to the Hundred (would please traditionalists/county fans, might be hard to sell to media)
Ditch the Blast and sell off the franchises to the IPL global behemoths (would bankrupt half the countries, further destroy international cricket, but make lots more money for administrators and top players)

What would be the most likely? Presumably the last option as it involves the most money for the administrators?

[ursus arctos]

The ECB is run by the counties, and turkeys aren't going to vote for Christmas