Re: Cricket fred
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:28 am
Its squarely aimed at the yoof. And thats fine. Purists will hate it and the presentation may need to be tweaked but cricket on prime time tv is a positive.
I didn't know it was on the Beeb. No idea why the terrestrial channels wouldn't want the T20, one of them shows the IPL or did, so if they're willing to show the IPL it seems possible they'd show our domestic version. Is it just it'd entail more production costs?Big D wrote:The key is it being on terrestrial TV. Millions of kids don't have access to Sky. The terrestrial channels didn't want an 18 team T20 competition.Digby wrote:Simply no idea who the hundred is catering for that didn't already have an option in 20/20
About the only amusement is asking cricket statisticians how they're planning to amalgamate stats across the formats now overs aren't a thing
The move to a smaller field is a good idea. The IPL and Big Bash work well with 8. From what I have read, part of the reason for moving from 120 balls to 100 is about fitting it into a suitable terrestrial TV spot and rest of the tweaks to try and make it easier to understand (not sure it does tbh).
I believe BBC2 are showing some but not all games. The IPL was on ITV4 hidden away and not really advertised IIRC. The hundred will be BBC2 front and centre.Digby wrote:I didn't know it was on the Beeb. No idea why the terrestrial channels wouldn't want the T20, one of them shows the IPL or did, so if they're willing to show the IPL it seems possible they'd show our domestic version. Is it just it'd entail more production costs?Big D wrote:The key is it being on terrestrial TV. Millions of kids don't have access to Sky. The terrestrial channels didn't want an 18 team T20 competition.Digby wrote:Simply no idea who the hundred is catering for that didn't already have an option in 20/20
About the only amusement is asking cricket statisticians how they're planning to amalgamate stats across the formats now overs aren't a thing
The move to a smaller field is a good idea. The IPL and Big Bash work well with 8. From what I have read, part of the reason for moving from 120 balls to 100 is about fitting it into a suitable terrestrial TV spot and rest of the tweaks to try and make it easier to understand (not sure it does tbh).
I'd like them to show County matches on the BBC, which would easily finish before 9pm. This I suspect will simply not happen. The pyjama stuff is perhaps useful for raising money, and some of the skill adaptations are technically interesting, but the actual construct isn't my cup of teaBig D wrote:I believe BBC2 are showing some but not all games. The IPL was on ITV4 hidden away and not really advertised IIRC. The hundred will be BBC2 front and centre.Digby wrote:I didn't know it was on the Beeb. No idea why the terrestrial channels wouldn't want the T20, one of them shows the IPL or did, so if they're willing to show the IPL it seems possible they'd show our domestic version. Is it just it'd entail more production costs?Big D wrote:
The key is it being on terrestrial TV. Millions of kids don't have access to Sky. The terrestrial channels didn't want an 18 team T20 competition.
The move to a smaller field is a good idea. The IPL and Big Bash work well with 8. From what I have read, part of the reason for moving from 120 balls to 100 is about fitting it into a suitable terrestrial TV spot and rest of the tweaks to try and make it easier to understand (not sure it does tbh).
I have read that the ECB spoke to groups of the target demographic (families) and they wanted the games finished before or close to 9pm for the kids. Speculating a bit the BBC have two main channels that everyone knows how to access, working backwards from 9ish, I can understand why they want to keep the time as concise as possible so that they don't have to give up too much time early evening.
Even Sky with their dedicated cricket channel only show county 4 day games when they really have to and I imagine have the T20 blast under contract. To get the crowd in and max TV audience during week nights there is only a relatively small window of time that fits. I like watching cricket and will watch days of test cricket at a time, but on another rugby forum I was conversing with a committee member from a club and he was saying cricket badly needs something to get young kids involved. If this "only" becomes a gateway for kids to get into the longer forms then it would be a success imo.Digby wrote:I'd like them to show County matches on the BBC, which would easily finish before 9pm. This I suspect will simply not happen. The pyjama stuff is perhaps useful for raising money, and some of the skill adaptations are technically interesting, but the actual construct isn't my cup of teaBig D wrote:I believe BBC2 are showing some but not all games. The IPL was on ITV4 hidden away and not really advertised IIRC. The hundred will be BBC2 front and centre.Digby wrote:
I didn't know it was on the Beeb. No idea why the terrestrial channels wouldn't want the T20, one of them shows the IPL or did, so if they're willing to show the IPL it seems possible they'd show our domestic version. Is it just it'd entail more production costs?
I have read that the ECB spoke to groups of the target demographic (families) and they wanted the games finished before or close to 9pm for the kids. Speculating a bit the BBC have two main channels that everyone knows how to access, working backwards from 9ish, I can understand why they want to keep the time as concise as possible so that they don't have to give up too much time early evening.
Was it the Benson and Hedges that was 60 overs a side? Come a long way since then!Galfon wrote:Great that the sport is getting regular live play-time again on the beeb.The launch of the 40-over Sunday league in '69 coincided with the first test series managed to watch on a small b & w telly (Ward & Hampshire debuts with good stuff)
Regular whites, Frank Bough presenting with Laker and Arlott warbling for 4 - 5 hrs...seeing the SA stars and new Windie talent strut their stuff was good, and getting a result before 7 pm ( 2 pm start i think ) was novel.
Seemed to recall families making a day of these, and Kent being on alot (probs. because they had half the Eng team back then).
Could never have predicted the game evolving into this tbh, but my name's not Kerry Packer.
It was the Gillette Cup from early 60's - 60 overs each with showpiece final at Lords late summer, 12 overs max. per bowler.Big D wrote: Was it the Benson and Hedges that was 60 overs a side? Come a long way since then!
His dad has been poorly and his finger is still knackered- I note he has been playing in the Hundred though.Galfon wrote:Ben Stokes in a low place - hope he can return to playing soon, Eng. games not the same without the blitzmeister.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/58033393
I would imagine the ECB put quite a bit of pressure on him to appear in at least the opening rounds of their new flagship, given he's the most recognisable English cricketer to the public at large. A break from "all cricket" would probably include that going forwards though.Banquo wrote:His dad has been poorly and his finger is still knackered- I note he has been playing in the Hundred though.Galfon wrote:Ben Stokes in a low place - hope he can return to playing soon, Eng. games not the same without the blitzmeister.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/58033393
Lack of prep further compounds lack of test batting quality.fivepointer wrote:What sort of preparation have the players had. When was the last Championship game they played? Biffing a few in a 20 over bash isnt at all like Test cricket. I think I heard that this was Buttler's first red ball game for 6 months. On what basis was Bairstow selected? His test form has been dire and he's done nothing in the Championship (mind you, few have)
If we dont structure our season properly and give our Test team the best possible preparation we will continue to slide.
Jimmy continues to er…deliver.Galfon wrote:4 back in the shed, incl Kohli for nowt.
India's turn to squirm with the not-so-easy conditions..