Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => Latest Matches => Topic started by: SouthpawMark on April 13, 2021, 08:56:06 AM
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/56724330 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/56724330)
I think we have reached the point where the ECB have decided to focus on being condescending towards potential new spectators, rather than making cricket more accessible.
-
That point passed us by a long time ago
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/56724330 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/56724330)
I think we have reached the point where the ECB have decided to focus on being condescending towards potential new spectators, rather than making cricket more accessible.
The ECB have been doing it for at least 10 years now, nothing new... sadly, people still aren't going to see it and will flock to the beer head games
-
Ridiculous.
Imagine the outcry if the FA changed Goals to "in's".
-
Can't wait for the winner be be decided by who scores the most points to go with the outs
-
Not fussed by it at all :D
if it helps towards making it easier for non-cricket fans.. I can live with that... Have way more important things to stress about :)
-
I feel even Mattchin Tendulkar could come up with something less condescending than “outs”
-
Given the sponsor, I’d be amazed if a a duck isn’t renamed as a Hula Hoop.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/56724330 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/56724330)
Lot of non-cricketers get confused by "wickets". The playing area is the pitch. Wickets are stumps. So, it makes sense to call "outs" outs and it removes the confusing bit.
Some of the comments here do reflect a certain elitism cricketers have about the sport. If you really want to make it popular, you'd simplify the terminology which is what ECB is doing. Some of us just refuse to acknowledge that cricket is NOT an easy sport to get into (unless you are born around people who play it) or even stay into (gear woes, bats are schit!).
Make the terminology clean, make bats easy to ping without extensive preparation, cheaper and better safety gear are some of the things that'd help invite and keep new cricketers.
Kudos to ECB for moving in the right direction.
-
I had posted in support of The Hundred on a different thread. But after reading this article, I would like to officially withdraw my support :D. This is indeed getting ridiculous now! This would not be justified even in countries like USA where people often confuse cricket with baseball, let alone the country that invented the game!
-
Lot of non-cricketers get confused by "wickets". The playing area is the pitch. Wickets are stumps. So, it makes sense to call "outs" outs and it removes the confusing bit.
Some of the comments here do reflect a certain elitism cricketers have about the sport. If you really want to make it popular, you'd simplify the terminology which is what ECB is doing. Some of us just refuse to acknowledge that cricket is NOT an easy sport to get into (unless you are born around people who play it) or even stay into (gear woes, bats are schit!).
Make the terminology clean, make bats easy to ping without extensive preparation, cheaper and better safety gear are some of the things that'd help invite and keep new cricketers.
Kudos to ECB for moving in the right direction.
It’s not elitism at all. It’s nothing other than dumbing down for no reason. By your rationale, anyone not familiar with the game of football would be confused when someone talks about goals...
-
Lot of non-cricketers get confused by "wickets". The playing area is the pitch. Wickets are stumps. So, it makes sense to call "outs" outs and it removes the confusing bit.
Some of the comments here do reflect a certain elitism cricketers have about the sport. If you really want to make it popular, you'd simplify the terminology which is what ECB is doing. Some of us just refuse to acknowledge that cricket is NOT an easy sport to get into (unless you are born around people who play it) or even stay into (gear woes, bats are schit!).
Make the terminology clean, make bats easy to ping without extensive preparation, cheaper and better safety gear are some of the things that'd help invite and keep new cricketers.
Kudos to ECB for moving in the right direction.
That's all fine except it's not the right direction.... In trying to make it more acceptable it's in danger of alienating the current fan base!
-
Lot of non-cricketers get confused by "wickets". The playing area is the pitch. Wickets are stumps. So, it makes sense to call "outs" outs and it removes the confusing bit.
Some of the comments here do reflect a certain elitism cricketers have about the sport. If you really want to make it popular, you'd simplify the terminology which is what ECB is doing. Some of us just refuse to acknowledge that cricket is NOT an easy sport to get into (unless you are born around people who play it) or even stay into (gear woes, bats are schit!).
Make the terminology clean, make bats easy to ping without extensive preparation, cheaper and better safety gear are some of the things that'd help invite and keep new cricketers.
Kudos to ECB for moving in the right direction.
I disagree to an extent. I think cricket could help itself out in some instances as parts just don’t make sense, even for people who play the game. Duckworth/Lewis and umpires call for example.
Changing the fundamentals just to cater to people who don’t know the sport doesn’t necessarily make it more appealing. If you want to play the sport, you learn the sport, the terminology and the rules. You don’t need it made more simple just to include people.
If you start changing wickets to “outs” where do you stop as it’s a pretty simple concept to grasp.
-
It’s not elitism at all. It’s nothing other than dumbing down for no reason. By your rationale, anyone not familiar with the game of football would be confused when someone talks about goals...
Not unusual to hear football commentary teams throwing around terms like "false nine", doesn't seem to harm the popularity of football.
-
It’s not elitism at all. It’s nothing other than dumbing down for no reason.
HAHAHHAHA
-
That's all fine except it's not the right direction.... In trying to make it more acceptable it's in danger of alienating the current fan base!
Why would it alienate the "current fan base"?
-
Changing the fundamentals just to cater to people who don’t know the sport doesn’t necessarily make it more appealing. If you want to play the sport, you learn the sport, the terminology and the rules. You don’t need it made more simple just to include people.
If you start changing wickets to “outs” where do you stop as it’s a pretty simple concept to grasp.
First there was officially Test cricket - 5 day and 3 day (yes kids, there was such a thing as a 3-day Test :D) . Then came ODI. Then came T-20I.
Your argument just doesn't hold water. Game has evolved and will continue to evolve.
Change is good. Embrace it.
-
Lot of non-cricketers get confused by "wickets". The playing area is the pitch. Wickets are stumps. So, it makes sense to call "outs" outs and it removes the confusing bit.
Some of the comments here do reflect a certain elitism cricketers have about the sport. If you really want to make it popular, you'd simplify the terminology which is what ECB is doing. Some of us just refuse to acknowledge that cricket is NOT an easy sport to get into (unless you are born around people who play it) or even stay into (gear woes, bats are schit!).
Make the terminology clean, make bats easy to ping without extensive preparation, cheaper and better safety gear are some of the things that'd help invite and keep new cricketers.
Kudos to ECB for moving in the right direction.
Of all the things that newbies get confused about that you might consider changing (fielding position names, names of different shots, the details of the lbw law, duckworth Lewis, why professionals can't play though a bit of drizzle etc), this isn't one of them.
-
^ It is possible they are afraid of the backlash and want to start small. I don't fault them for their approach. Better late than never, I say.
-
Not unusual to hear football commentary teams throwing around terms like "false nine", doesn't seem to harm the popularity of football.
A what? Please dumb it down for me, you elitist.
-
First there was officially Test cricket - 5 day and 3 day (yes kids, there was such a thing as a 3-day Test :D) . Then came ODI. Then came T-20I.
Your argument just doesn't hold water. Game has evolved and will continue to evolve.
Change is good. Embrace it.
I’m not sure if you’re on the wind up or not.
Yes the game evolves, the formats have evolved. I don’t see how getting newbies to call something outs instead of wickets will encourage participation and interest.
-
^ It is possible they are afraid of the backlash and want to start small. I don't fault them for their approach. Better late than never, I say.
Genuinely never met a newbie who was confused by the very basic and fundamental concepts of runs, wickets and overs. Those are the 3 easiest and best known bits of the game to understand and the least in need of simplification. If anything this will confuse people more.
-
I’m not sure if you’re on the wind up or not.
Yes the game evolves, the formats have evolved. I don’t see how getting newbies to call something outs instead of wickets will encourage participation and interest.
^ "Out" means something and a non-cricketer can correlate to a deficit of some sort. "Wicket"? 61% of the world population wouldn't know what the hell is a wicket!
Seeing you guys in a tizzy over this further confirms my suspicions.
Cricket needs broad reforms to shed off the archaic nonsense and attract new fans. Athletically, and aesthetically, cricket is an amazing sport! I have shown WC , Test video clips to non-cricketers friends and they are in awe of the sport and athletic ability of the players. The moment you start discussing cricket rules and terms, crowd peels off.
We live in different bubbles. As things stand, cricket is not winning new fans and new markets. Do you want the sport to stagnate.
Good job ECB!
-
Genuinely never met a newbie who was confused by the very basic and fundamental concepts of runs, wickets and overs. Those are the 3 easiest and best known bits of the game to understand and the least in need of simplification. If anything this will confuse people more.
Because you are in a different bubble.
There are many, other, bubbles in this world.
-
They need to make batters call 'in' when they've completed their run, or they could be 'out'! Are they still called runs? :(
-
Lot of non-cricketers get confused by "wickets". The playing area is the pitch. Wickets are stumps. So, it makes sense to call "outs" outs and it removes the confusing bit.
Some of the comments here do reflect a certain elitism cricketers have about the sport. If you really want to make it popular, you'd simplify the terminology which is what ECB is doing. Some of us just refuse to acknowledge that cricket is NOT an easy sport to get into (unless you are born around people who play it) or even stay into (gear woes, bats are schit!).
Make the terminology clean, make bats easy to ping without extensive preparation, cheaper and better safety gear are some of the things that'd help invite and keep new cricketers.
Kudos to ECB for moving in the right direction.
are you just trying to wind people up? Do you actually believe this will help?
Cricket as a game is fine. Life has changed from the day's people could give over regular Saturday AND/OR Sundays to sport. Added to that, team sports generally are in decline as we have 'evolved' our society to be more 'must go shopping' 'must go the pub' 'must go travelling'. No amount of format change or name changing will stop that trend. Only a society shift back towards less working hours, more working from home type stuff etc
It really can't be to actually benefit the game, as you'd just use the 2020 format and change a few things (say Wickets to out's if you really must insist it helps)...
Anyway, the 100 is here to stay and will be regarded as a success just like anything the ECB/SKY or media wish to profess is a success.. just look at how it tries to bull up the IPL in the UK.
-
Why would it alienate the "current fan base"?
Umm, you have seen the 99.9% negativity towards it right?? I mean.. quite literally just random people like yourself are very very very much the minority.. so who exactly IS going to support this?
I'd rather my 6yr old learn a different sport than play in a 100 game if I'm honest. Tennis/badminton and Hockey it is
-
Only a society shift back towards less working hours, more working from home type stuff etc
There are sports that are doing just fine even with messed up attention spans of their respectively society. Think broader. Different bubbles.
-
Umm, you have seen the 99.9% negativity towards it right??
12 angry CBF posters represent the majority of the cricket world? HAHAHA.AAAA
-
I wish people would stop calling the pitch 'the wicket'.
-
I wish people would stop calling the pitch 'the wicket'.
Too confusing. I have changed my mind - we need The Hundred. It will be an education as well as entertainment.
-
Too confusing. I have changed my mind - we need The Hundred. It will be an education as well as entertainment.
I thought you would, to be honest.
-
Because you are in a different bubble.
There are many, other, bubbles in this world.
I always find it hilarious when people say this. I've spent 20 years introducing cricket to working class kids who have never before seen a cricket match and couldn't name a single cricketer. I doubt anyone here has more insight into what does or does not put kids off cricket on this forum, certainly not you.
-
I always find it hilarious when people say this. I've spent 20 years introducing cricket to working class kids who have never before seen a cricket match and couldn't name a single cricketer. I doubt anyone here has more insight into what does or does not put kids off cricket on this forum, certainly not you.
Obviously your efforts of 20 years are in vain because ECB has chosen a different approach. They are not listening to you and you can't argue with that.
-
Obviously your efforts of 20 years are in vain because ECB has chosen a different approach. They are not listening to you and you can't argue with that.
Well no, they're idiots who have severely damaged the sport in this country, despite the hard work of thousands of volunteers to try to offset the damage they continue to cause.
That's what we've all been complaining about for the past 15 years, how are you not understanding this? They're clueless. We have every right to complain, and every right to argue - they're undermining OUR hard work.
If your response is about to be to gloat about how despite the best efforts of all us volunteers, cricket is still declining, I suggest you just don't post that and leave the forum instead, never to return.
-
Well no, they're idiots who have severely damaged the sport in this country, despite the hard work of thousands of volunteers to try to offset the damage they continue to cause.
That's what we've all been complaining about for the past 15 years, how are you not understanding this? They're clueless. We have every right to complain, and every right to argue - they're undermining OUR hard work.
If your response is about to be to gloat about how despite the best efforts of all us volunteers, cricket is still declining, I suggest you just don't post that and leave the forum instead, never to return.
That's a very arrogant post.
Instead of getting enraged and asking me to leave the forum, you should do some introspection: Are/were you effective? Do you know it all? Did you make enough difference at a grassroots level to affect a larger change? Answer is: No.
This is a good time for people (and you) to put their arrogance aside and listen to other people for a change.
-
I have to admit this is rather surprising as I had assumed that everyone hated this new hundred competition and finding myself agreeing with SLA is not a regular experience.
The ECB literally don't care what cricket fans think.
They don't have to.
They have hijacked the best players the best grounds at the best time of the year for this new hit and giggle nonsense.
They are trolling fans quite deliberately for social media publicity.
The only way a message to the ECB can be sent is if no one goes to this new competition.
As for the above great that people have views, but the main issue is that the ECB have bankrupted England cricket for no reason.
-
I find it hard to see why the Hundred was a necessity when there was an existing competition that could have been rebranded, heavily marketed and tweaked to appeal more widely.
As Buzz said, the ECB have taken a massive financial gamble on the Hundred. For the sake of English (and UK) cricket I hope it works out but inventing a new format seems like a completely unnecessary risk to have taken.
-
I'm also in the same boat of finding myself in agreement with @SLA, which doesn't happen very often. He is dead right.
The 2020 competition logically is the one to expand, as I posted before I think it will be the casualty of this new competition as they will be too similar and as Buzz pointed out, funds and advertising will be piled into it.
Glad this thread is getting back on track, the bashing of volunteers on here, and there's loads of us, is appalling.
-
100% with SLA on this.
ECB care not a jot for cricket. Only money. They will and have sold out the game for a fast buck.
-
There are sports that are doing just fine even with messed up attention spans of their respectively society. Think broader. Different bubbles.
Umm, which sports ??
Cycling isn’t a team sport and is already in decline after a brief upsurge post olympics
Golf isn’t a team sport and has always been played .. not more or less players generally
Football.. decline
Rugby decline
Tennis decline
Badminton declining
Hockey going down
Cricket naturally
Rounders you’re barely see
Umm, I can’t think of many more team sports !!
Kids play more now as they are a cash cow but come 13+ most fade away as they stop listening to mum and dad who use it as a cheap child minders !
Bubbles my backside fella. Are you employed by the ECB ?
-
I think a few people are missing fundamental points as to why the 100 was started....(I completely agree with these points by the way, the "outs" etc is a waste of time and as a coach I now have to explain everything in 2 formats, enhancing confusion to younger players trying to understand the game further).
The point is the 100 has been designed ultimately as a rivalry to the IPL and Big Bash. The IPL generates millions upon millions for the BCCI, the big bash works well because 90% of the Australian population lives in those areas. The 100 has attempted to combine the 2 in order to generate a big audience base whilst maintaining fewer teams to keep the standards and pay high to bring in the required players to make it work.
The ECB had to do something, you can't generate an 18 team franchise system as the cost would be to astronomical. They have to also try and get the balance, bring in new fans and maintain original fans (which is something I do feel they have failed to do).
Will I be attending myself? No as I am over an hour away from any matches. Do I feel they should have generated a new tournament? No, but I can understand why they have gone down the franchise route completely in order to bring the money in, the big players in and give it a try....if it works 5 years down the line the ECB will be laughing. If it doesnt work the I wouldn't think it would affect them, they have everything else to fall back on and ultimately the counties are benefitting from the revenue which given the current climate I think is more crucial.
-
As Buzz said, the ECB have taken a massive financial gamble on the Hundred. For the sake of English (and UK) cricket I hope it works out but inventing a new format seems like a completely unnecessary risk to have taken.
This is what it is all about. T20 market is cornered by IPL - it is the largest franchise tournament and no other tourney can compete with that. Full stop.
If T20 could've done the trick, kids all over the world would be lining to play cricket and it is not happening (except for a few places).
New format and with some marketing/branding is a very smart move.
-
Umm, I can’t think of many more team sports !!
Fine, you are limited. I don't blame you.
Bubbles my backside fella. Are you employed by the ECB ?
No. You don't have to be employed by them to be sensible; or, think clearly.
-
@InternalTraining can you back up your points please?
I'd love to know which team sports are thriving with participation going up...
-
The point is the 100 has been designed ultimately as a rivalry to the IPL and Big Bash. The IPL generates millions upon millions for the BCCI, the big bash works well because 90% of the Australian population lives in those areas. The 100 has attempted to combine the 2 in order to generate a big audience base whilst maintaining fewer teams to keep the standards and pay high to bring in the required players to make it work.
The ECB had to do something, you can't generate an 18 team franchise system as the cost would be to astronomical. They have to also try and get the balance, bring in new fans and maintain original fans (which is something I do feel they have failed to do).
EXACTLY!!!
You must work for ECB. :D
T20 is basically synonymous with IPL. New markets will require accommodations that will make sense to new fans and also make game easy to follow. Again key word is "new".
This will also help open up newer markets for new fans.
-
Only people who are angry about new format are the purists. They will be happy when ECB invents a time machine so they can travel back in time and oil bats for WG Grace.
-
This is what it is all about. T20 market is cornered by IPL - it is the largest franchise tournament and no other tourney can compete with that. Full stop.
If T20 could've done the trick, kids all over the world would be lining to play cricket and it is not happening (except for a few places).
New format and with some marketing/branding is a very smart move.
The IPL is only big because it’s Indian. Outside India, no one gives a crap . If China suddenly took up Cricket it would be bigger than the IPL due to sheer numbers.. the IPL really isn’t very good
-
For all the talk of bringing in new fans, I think everyone knows this is a load of nonsense.
You could get thousands of kids who love the hundred (unlikely) and want to give cricket a go. They'll then find out the only way they can play is to spend 8 hours in a field every Saturday and/or Sunday playing 40/50 overs which is nothing like the fast paced game they watched which got them interested in the first place.
It's all good though as the ECB got a load of sponsorship money from Hula Hoops
-
The IPL is only big because it’s Indian. Outside India, no one gives a crap . If China suddenly took up Cricket it would be bigger than the IPL due to sheer numbers.. the IPL really isn’t very good
You are so angry that you can't see what's right in front of you.
ECB or any other board can't put up that SCALE of a show! MONEY matters. A new product, a niche, will provide ECB with a competitive advantage. It is a business decision. Nothing more.
For a passionate purist like yourself, it may not make sense! But from a business perspective, it makes perfect sense.
-
It is a business decision. Nothing more.
For a passionate purist like yourself, it may not make sense! But from a business perspective, it makes perfect sense.
This short segment actually hits the nail on the head. It’s not about the sport we all love to play it’s about how they can make as much money as possible... is that right or wrong, different debate!
-
But how they make, and distribute, money has a direct impact on the sport we all love to play. If money is being spent paying marketing agencies, it isn't being spent supporting grassroots clubs, for example. Aware that's a very simplified version of things but the ECB is not completely divorced from the fortunes of your local club/league/ground.
-
I don’t really care much for the ECB, but in their defence, they aren’t really trying to change cricket. This seems more like a festival - so what if you make a few tweaks for fun? Other sports have these kinds of events too (home run derby in baseball for example).
End of the day however, these are just gimmicks - you might get packed stadiums but it won’t lead to more people wanting to play cricket...for that you need a fresh batch of heros (KP smashing McGrath into the stands, flintoff doing his thing, Monty getting the best of Sachin, etc).
-
You'd have thought people would have learned not to trust people in power when they say there is no money.
-
I think a few people are missing fundamental points as to why the 100 was started....(I completely agree with these points by the way, the "outs" etc is a waste of time and as a coach I now have to explain everything in 2 formats, enhancing confusion to younger players trying to understand the game further).
The point is the 100 has been designed ultimately as a rivalry to the IPL and Big Bash. The IPL generates millions upon millions for the BCCI, the big bash works well because 90% of the Australian population lives in those areas. The 100 has attempted to combine the 2 in order to generate a big audience base whilst maintaining fewer teams to keep the standards and pay high to bring in the required players to make it work.
The ECB had to do something, you can't generate an 18 team franchise system as the cost would be to astronomical. They have to also try and get the balance, bring in new fans and maintain original fans (which is something I do feel they have failed to do).
Will I be attending myself? No as I am over an hour away from any matches. Do I feel they should have generated a new tournament? No, but I can understand why they have gone down the franchise route completely in order to bring the money in, the big players in and give it a try....if it works 5 years down the line the ECB will be laughing. If it doesnt work the I wouldn't think it would affect them, they have everything else to fall back on and ultimately the counties are benefitting from the revenue which given the current climate I think is more crucial.
Its a myth that T20 is a big money spinner. Dobell wrote a big article on this a few years ago. There are only 2 T20 competitions that make money, the Blast and the IPL, and the IPL only started making money in the past few years.
The CPL and PCL both make big losses, the BBL is funded up by the revenues from Australian test cricket, and the hundred is projected to make a loss for at least 5 years (even before you account for the fact that it will probably fatally undermine the one English cricket competition that actually does make money) Its the road to complete bankrupcy.
-
Seems the hundred is to target the US market.
Which is just bonkers.
-
Seems the hundred is to target the US market.
Which is just bonkers.
Can't wait for the first 'Burger King Double Whopper Mega Hit, formerly known as a six'.
-
Only people who are angry about new format are the purists. They will be happy when ECB invents a time machine so they can travel back in time and oil bats for WG Grace.
I'm not sure there was much pure about WG Grace. :o
-
And a once you pop you can’t stop Pringles tactical timeout, after 50 balls.
-
Disco Demolition Night.
-
Only people who are angry about new format are the purists. They will be happy when ECB invents a time machine so they can travel back in time and oil bats for WG Grace.
Here's my view, I think the format is daft.
However I am upset that this has been railroaded through at the expense of the Blast, a very successful and profitable tournament, at the expense of the 50 over competition, just after we became world champions and at the expense of the county championship at a time when it is more popular than ever.
Test cricket bankrolls English cricket. We need a successful team to support that. As a result putting the 4 day games in April and September is utterly insane. There is no chance of us having a successful team long term with this, plus it will ruin squares.
The other thing that upsets me about this is that the ECB has blown the entire capital reserves on a massive gamble, driven by marketing and unpublished market research.
This is appalling.
Plus as said above it is alienating the majority of cricket fans.
It will take me longer to get to a match than a match will last, and my wife and kids are notionally the tarket market for this. Travel will cost them over £100.
It is just daft.
-
The fact that there is this much discussion about it already can only be a good thing. Cricket is being spoken about. People will be watching the hundred regardless of whether they agree with it or not. It's cricket at the end of the day, we're all cricket fans, we like to watch cricket.
-
Here's my view, I think the format is daft.
However I am upset that this has been railroaded through at the expense of the Blast, a very successful and profitable tournament, at the expense of the 50 over competition, just after we became world champions and at the expense of the county championship at a time when it is more popular than ever.
Test cricket bankrolls English cricket. We need a successful team to support that. As a result putting the 4 day games in April and September is utterly insane. There is no chance of us having a successful team long term with this, plus it will ruin squares.
The other thing that upsets me about this is that the ECB has blown the entire capital reserves on a massive gamble, driven by marketing and unpublished market research.
This is appalling.
Plus as said above it is alienating the majority of cricket fans.
It will take me longer to get to a match than a match will last, and my wife and kids are notionally the tarket market for this. Travel will cost them over £100.
It is just daft.
I'm not even a traditionalist - I don't particularly watch county cricket and have always lobbied for new ideas to adopted. But these ideas are just BAD. Everything about the 100 is just like a list of the dumbest ideas someone could come up with. I'm constantly amazed at how little the ECB seem to know about what makes sports leagues prosperous and successful.
Imagine if the MLB did this?
Reduce the number of venues - scrap half the teams, leaving millions of people without a team to support
Shorten the game in the most inefficient way possible - Replace a 9-inning game with an 8-inning game in order to save 10 minutes, but then add in extra advert breaks to use up all that extra time!
Mess with the rules for no apparent reason - odd numbered innings you only need 2 outs to retire the side
Destroy years of history and tradition - Abolish the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox and replace with the East River Nobodies and Massachusetts Tea Parties and then mix all the players up.
Arbitrarily change a bunch of the terminology - strikes are now "in-zones", balls are now "out-zones". Confusingly, the strike zone is still called the strike zone.
Waste your entire financial reserves - undermine a profitable tournament with one that you yourselves forecast is going to lose money
Burn all your goodwill - your existing fans should be your sports greatest ambassadors. Piss them off at your peril.
-
And then Covid comes along and makes the burning of the financial reserves look even more foolish.
-
The fact that there is this much discussion about it already can only be a good thing. Cricket is being spoken about. People will be watching the hundred regardless of whether they agree with it or not. It's cricket at the end of the day, we're all cricket fans, we like to watch cricket.
umm.. are you reading the same pages and social media as us?? literally no one is talking about it in a way that isn't 'what a bad idea' and 'I won't be watching or go to a game'...
sure, there is a saying that all publicity is good publicity but as Buzz said.. if these new kids and mums are the targets and they won't afford the time or expense to travel.. who exactly is going to watch it??
it's not really cricket is it... no real skill in it over than 'who can hit the ball harder most often'
-
umm.. are you reading the same pages and social media as us?? literally no one is talking about it in a way that isn't 'what a bad idea' and 'I won't be watching or go to a game'...
sure, there is a saying that all publicity is good publicity but as Buzz said.. if these new kids and mums are the targets and they won't afford the time or expense to travel.. who exactly is going to watch it??
it's not really cricket is it... no real skill in it over than 'who can hit the ball harder most often'
Pretty certain people were saying that when T20 was introduced. Remember how it was going to be the death of spin bowling?
Did we need a completely new format? Probably not and probably not at this level of expense but I for one will watch it where I can and as much as many might be too proud to admit it, I am certain I'm not the only one. Might even buy the Trent Rockets kit, don't live anywhere near Nottingham but I do love a pack of skips.
-
umm.. are you reading the same pages and social media as us?? literally no one is talking about it in a way that isn't 'what a bad idea' and 'I won't be watching or go to a game'...
sure, there is a saying that all publicity is good publicity but as Buzz said.. if these new kids and mums are the targets and they won't afford the time or expense to travel.. who exactly is going to watch it??
it's not really cricket is it... no real skill in it over than 'who can hit the ball harder most often'
There is plenty of people talking about it in a positive way between all the negativity. Yeah sure the negative comments on social media outway the positive comments.
Of course it is still cricket. Is T20 cricket? Yes. Is kwik cricket, cricket? Yes. Is test cricket, cricket? Yes.
I would hazard a guess that most people on here will end up watching some games on TV, live or both. Because guess what... its cricket.
I don't agree with all the changes and think it is daft trying to add another format into the season. But I will watch some of it I have no doubt about that.
-
Seems the hundred is to target the US market.
Which is just bonkers.
Right. This is the market where lot of franchises are headed next. In 2020, there was a franchise minor-league tourney. CPL wants to expand in the US and so does BCCI/IPL.
A new format that jazzes things up for a new market isn't a bad thing. If it takes off, it will be great for cricket "classic". :D Coke. Pepsi.
-
Plus as said above it is alienating the majority of cricket fans.
What happened to these fans when T20I and franchise cricket took over the airwaves or social-media waves.
I still follow Test cricket. I watch when I can.
I don't disagree with rest of your points but change is needed to attract/grow new markets. When IPL dominates a format, it is a pretty savvy strategy to try something different. I give ECB credit because they are trying something new despite criticism.
-
Imagine if the MLB did this?
They are highly profitable sporting franchises so the comparison is incorrect. They are minting money!
You don't know what they'd do if they were losing money or desperately competing against another franchise sport. Having said that, it has been very hard for them to get new teams from different countries - except maybe Canada.
-
Remember how it was going to be the death of spin bowling?
You could make a decent argument that it has been.
-
Pretty certain people were saying that when T20 was introduced. Remember how it was going to be the death of spin bowling?
Did we need a completely new format? Probably not and probably not at this level of expense but I for one will watch it where I can and as much as many might be too proud to admit it, I am certain I'm not the only one. Might even buy the Trent Rockets kit, don't live anywhere near Nottingham but I do love a pack of skips.
Spin bowling in t20 is totally different to a red ball game.
Where are the attacking spinners now in tests that can build pressure? They aren't there, they are all going at 7 plus an over in t20 leagues chucking in their "variations"
-
Remember how it was going to be the death of spin bowling?
umm, are you counting fire in in bowling as spin?????
-
Spin bowling in t20 is totally different to a red ball game.
Where are the attacking spinners now in tests that can build pressure?
Or even the spinners who can land six consecutive balls on roughly the same part of the pitch?
-
Spin bowling in t20 is totally different to a red ball game.
Where are the attacking spinners now in tests that can build pressure? They aren't there, they are all going at 7 plus an over in t20 leagues chucking in their "variations"
Exclude Warne and Murali as they are a class above anything that came before them, or anything that will ever follow them, and has there ever been this plethora of attacking spinners that could build pressure you seem to be suggesting there was? But certainly off the top of my head I can think of Lyon, Jadeja and Ashwin. The latter combines building pressure with lots of variations making him a real attacking threat.
Particularly in this country it's easy to think back to Swann and forget that prior to his emergence we never really had a spinner that could both attack and build pressure. For years we stuck with the likes of Tufnell, Giles and even to an extent Panesar who could all hold up an end but were never particularly attacking options. They were there to give the quick bowlers a rest.
-
"It doesn't matter that spin bowling in this country has been completely ruined, because it wasn't really any good anyway." :o
-
How are spin bowlers supposed to excel in this country when counties produce green tops for county championship matches in order to get results? It doesn’t help spinners, and it doesn’t help fast bowlers, and that’s why you have the likes of Darren Stevens and Tim Murtagh still taking a ton of wickets despite having a combined age of 127.
At our club we’ve got a 12 year old leg spinner who puts in on the spot every time, at good pace, and turns it a mile. He’s already got a reliable googly and a top spinner, and in any other cricketing country I’d put money on him playing the equivalent of county, and probably international cricket... he’s that good. Sadly, being English I’m not as confident. The ECB treat spinners with suspicion, the pitches don’t suit them, and captains don’t trust them.
-
If he's got variations and control as a leggie at 12 and is as talented as you say then there's not likely to be a shortage of white ball opportunity.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ey8gB7mXIAIAZcu?format=jpg&name=large)
Are they genuinely trolling cricket fans here?
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ey8gB7mXIAIAZcu?format=jpg&name=large)
Are they genuinely trolling cricket fans here?
Didn’t Sky try that a few years back with WASP?
-
Yeah, not convinced that's a novel idea. Have seen variations of a 'win predictor' on cricket coverage for a good while now.
-
If he's got variations and control as a leggie at 12 and is as talented as you say then there's not likely to be a shortage of white ball opportunity.
you don't need control in white ball!! that's kinda the point about it being dumbed down!! less skill required
-
you don't need control in white ball!! that's kinda the point about it being dumbed down!! less skill required
You don't need the same control of line and length, no. But if you're bowling to a tailored plan - as is almost always true now at the top level - you still need to exhibit some degree of control. Don't try and tell me the top white ball leggies don't have any control.
-
You don't need the same control of line and length, no. But if you're bowling to a tailored plan - as is almost always true now at the top level - you still need to exhibit some degree of control. Don't try and tell me the top white ball leggies don't have any control.
Course they have control. Just mot ‘control’ in the red ball sense.
-
Course they have control. Just mot ‘control’ in the red ball sense.
In the sense of landing it on a spot time and time again? Other than Warne, are there any other top leggies who have ever done that?
Control for a legspinner is not the same as for an offie, different disciplines with different roles. Plenty of good white ball spinners whose red ball record is perfectly good too.
-
I think it was David Lloyd who said the perfect bowler in professional T20 would be a bad club leg-spinner. Yes, he was being flippant and/or tongue-in-cheek; but there is some truth in this, surely?
-
I think it was David Lloyd who said the perfect bowler in professional T20 would be a bad club leg-spinner. Yes, he was being flippant and/or tongue-in-cheek; but there is some truth in this, surely?
If there was truth in it then surely you'd be hearing about the great T20 stats of leggies who bowl rubbish in comparison to the stats of Adil Rashid, Rashid Khan, Imran Tahir, etc?
You might get the odd wicket bowling filth but if the bowler has been whacked around for the preceding 17 balls then it's probably losing you more games than it wins.
-
If there was truth in it then surely you'd be hearing about the great T20 stats of leggies who bowl rubbish in comparison to the stats of Adil Rashid, Rashid Khan, Imran Tahir, etc?
You might get the odd wicket bowling filth but if the bowler has been whacked around for the preceding 17 balls then it's probably losing you more games than it wins.
umm, they do get wacked in red ball
-
umm, they do get wacked in red ball
The comment wasn't about red ball so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
-
But has a pro side ever actually tried a bad club leg-spinner in a competitive match? They wouldn't, would they? He'd be a liability in the field, offer nothing with the bat, and annoy everyone in the dressing room by constantly picking up bats and playing 'guess the weight', and complaining about the lack of cheese and pickle sanwiches and Battenburg cake.
-
But has a pro side ever actually tried a bad club leg-spinner in a competitive match? They wouldn't, would they? He'd be a liability in the field, offer nothing with the bat, and annoy everyone in the dressing-room by constantly picking up bats and playing 'guess the weight' and complaining about the lack of cheese and pickle sanwiches and Battenburg cake.
First part of your comment, you do see the occasional batsman who "bowls a few leggies" turning his arm over, Dom Sibley is the first that comes to mind. His bowling averages tell their own story.
Second part of the comment, fair point 😂
-
Talking of Sibley... why is he not batting?
-
Sibley has a broken finger (as does Stokes)
-
Sibley has a broken finger (as does Stokes)
Thanks. I knew about Stokes.
-
Decent match. I think The Hundred will be great for ladies cricket. I don’t think it is needed in men’s cricket.
-
Decent match. I think The Hundred will be great for ladies cricket. I don’t think it is needed in men’s cricket.
Absolutely...wasn't it the highest crowd for a womens match? I think the umpires need to get a bit more used to it. Will be interested to sense vibe at the mens game as perhaps this is more the family friendly option for those who don't want 1000 hooters blown at you or groups of 100 lads shouting the words to sweet caroline all night whilst attempting to break the world record for pints drunk in 2 hours.
Its still a game of cricket
-
Absolutely...wasn't it the highest crowd for a womens match? I think the umpires need to get a bit more used to it. Will be interested to sense vibe at the mens game as perhaps this is more the family friendly option for those who don't want 1000 hooters blown at you or groups of 100 lads shouting the words to sweet caroline all night whilst attempting to break the world record for pints drunk in 2 hours.
Its still a game of cricket
I also think they need to do something other than sticking a notepad in the air after five balls, to notify everyone whether or not the bowler has elected to bowl another five - looks a bit of an afterthought.
It also seems as though the ECB has decided against calling wickets OUTS, unless Sky Sports defied them due to it being idiotic.
-
Nah they dropped the "outs" thing a while ago.
-
I thought it was really impressive and a great advert for the game as a whole and the womens game.
BUT I'm not sure any of the good things came from the change of playing format. A game of high quality T20 cricket with good players concentrated into 8 rather than 18 teams, properly promoted and event packaged and on free to air TV would have delivered the same success in my view.
As a 'traditional' fan I actually found the scoring system/TV graphics etc harder to follow than usual, but I'm not really qualified to opine on whether it would be easier for a new fan given I've spend 25 years mentally calculating in base 6! I was still trying to think in terms of runs per over required etc which is quite hard to do unless you are pretty agile with your mental arithmetic!
-
I thought it was really impressive and a great advert for the game as a whole and the womens game.
BUT I'm not sure any of the good things came from the change of playing format. A game of high quality T20 cricket with good players concentrated into 8 rather than 18 teams, properly promoted and event packaged and on free to air TV would have delivered the same success in my view.
As a 'traditional' fan I actually found the scoring system/TV graphics etc harder to follow than usual, but I'm not really qualified to opine on whether it would be easier for a new fan given I've spend 25 years mentally calculating in base 6! I was still trying to think in terms of runs per over required etc which is quite hard to do unless you are pretty agile with your mental arithmetic!
Exactly this - we were trying to calculate the run rate back to overs or for when working out a par score. I agree on the T20 suggestion but its here to stay I suspect . Like I said will be interested to see how the mens game goes tonight and a shame that due to Covid we are not seeing all the overseas stars playing. Is it just me or do the helmets look better suited on a building site?
-
I thought it was really impressive and a great advert for the game as a whole and the womens game.
BUT I'm not sure any of the good things came from the change of playing format. A game of high quality T20 cricket with good players concentrated into 8 rather than 18 teams, properly promoted and event packaged and on free to air TV would have delivered the same success in my view.
As a 'traditional' fan I actually found the scoring system/TV graphics etc harder to follow than usual, but I'm not really qualified to opine on whether it would be easier for a new fan given I've spend 25 years mentally calculating in base 6! I was still trying to think in terms of runs per over required etc which is quite hard to do unless you are pretty agile with your mental arithmetic!
Trying to make the existing T20 competition better would have been everyone’s preferred option I think, but the ECB are looking for a moneyspinner, and I feel they are aware that they have zero chance of catching up with the IPL or BBL, so are pinning their hopes on the new format surpassing T20 in terms of interest, exposure, and most importantly, money.
That said, the ECB had a head start on T20 too, and managed to **** it up, so there’s no guarantee that they won’t do the same with the latest versions of biff cricket.
-
Trying to make the existing T20 competition better would have been everyone’s preferred option I think, but the ECB are looking for a moneyspinner, and I feel they are aware that they have zero chance of catching up with the IPL or BBL, so are pinning their hopes on the new format surpassing T20 in terms of interest, exposure, and most importantly, money.
Correct-o!
That said, the ECB had a head start on T20 too, and managed to **** it up, so there’s no guarantee that they won’t do the same with the latest versions of biff cricket.
Well, they have a head start this time around, and they must've learned something from their past mistakes.
Said it before, and I say it again: It's a great idea!
-
This crowd looks like your bog standard group of young males who go to T20 on a Friday...
-
Hate to put a downer on a new format and not embrace the thing but I think all the 100 will do is kill 2020
The formats are too similar and fans will only pay so much for tickets. I, like some others on here, would of liked to expand 2020 if that's what cricket needs.
The set up financially of the IPL is totally different than we have here, if the ECB want it to rival that, they will have to bankroll it.
A plus is its on BBC, any cricket behind a paywall destroys it's grass roots, so from that point of view-good
-
Problem with t-20 is that it is boring as hell! I can't watch it. If it goes away, I won't miss it.
-
The set up financially of the IPL is totally different than we have here, if the ECB want it to rival that, they will have to bankroll it.
Or in time the 100 gets franchised privately, which I fully expect to happen - it's definitely the best option for the competition/ECB.
-
This crowd looks like your bog standard group of young males who go to T20 on a Friday...
I agree last night it was and if that continues it could kill off the Blast. Like it or not the T20 Blast provides some opportunity of income and for a few the chance of making a profit as a county. If crowds decline for that,it could lead to a spiral where counties dont contract top overseas players and in turn reduce crowd numbers further. Tickets for the 100 hundred currently are very cheap.
Lets see what happens with the double header matches although how many with tickets will have the interest to sit through four hours plus of cricket with breaks for adjusting boundaries etc.
Positive has to be primetime cricket on BBC
-
Don't mind the shiny helmets.
Don't mind the bowler being able to bowl 2 overs in a row.
I like the time penalty.
ECB are trying to differentiate it from all the other T20 competitions in the world and by using 5 ball overs it is just about a big enough step away so it isn't just a poor man's IPL. I initially thought that they should just try to replicate the Big Bash (city teams, men's and women's comps, big stadia) but I now think this is a decent stab at reaching a wider audience by simplifying the game a little. We've had two matches, annoying things like the white card and the on-screen graphics are easy fixes. The only issue for me now is how it affects the county structure, which has been talked about extensively, and how the competition can maintain the enthusiasm and media focus in the coming weeks and seasons. Apparently there's an Olympics starting which will mean the BBC will give the 100 much less focus for a fortnight.
-
One thing is for sure - the new format certainly serves up a lot of close finishes.
One Could do without KP commentating on Sky though.
-
And everyone will wonder why our batsmen can't score any runs in the Test series.
-
I guess by compressing the game you perhaps reduce the chance for quality to tell over a longer period and thus increase the likelihood of a close finish... From a numerical point of view you are literally narrowing the range of possible outcomes given that the potential for runs per ball is not changed.
Either way the cricket has been very good thus far - regardless of pre tournament views I think you would be hard pressed to not call it a success. Then again you always have the angle that other things could have been equally successful.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/GmFvFqBS/AEE9-CE95-F363-4-A77-8-DC1-38661212-AEE8.jpg)
Oops
-
Which player is that ?
-
Don't mind the shiny helmets.
Don't mind the bowler being able to bowl 2 overs in a row.
I like the time penalty.
ECB are trying to differentiate it from all the other T20 competitions in the world and by using 5 ball overs it is just about a big enough step away so it isn't just a poor man's IPL. I initially thought that they should just try to replicate the Big Bash (city teams, men's and women's comps, big stadia) but I now think this is a decent stab at reaching a wider audience by simplifying the game a little. We've had two matches, annoying things like the white card and the on-screen graphics are easy fixes. The only issue for me now is how it affects the county structure, which has been talked about extensively, and how the competition can maintain the enthusiasm and media focus in the coming weeks and seasons. Apparently there's an Olympics starting which will mean the BBC will give the 100 much less focus for a fortnight.
I agree with this. With the addition that I am finding everything a little rushed because of the time penalties, the reviews are rushed, there are hardly any replays, and they will get one wrong soon because of it. There also aren't many general replays during the game.
I think they have struggled to find a balance between in stadium and on screen viewer experience.
I saw the 1st men's game had a peak viewing audience on the BBC of 2 million and that can only be a good thing.
-
That SS 'Keeley' must have edges bigger than 40mm?
Maybe it's just the angle of the photo?
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/GmFvFqBS/AEE9-CE95-F363-4-A77-8-DC1-38661212-AEE8.jpg)
Oops
But TK makes the best bats ever known to man and for every professional out there, why would anyone use anything else ;)
-
But TK makes the best bats ever known to man and for every professional out there, why would anyone use anything else ;)
As much as it is anathema to the whole concept of this forum, I suspect if you're a pro and (mostly) middle the ball - a decent bat made by a good maker to your specs does the job just fine... Particularly bearing in mind you probably get the best of whatever they produce - so even if bat maker A makes 70% good bats and bat maker B makes 50% - you don't care as you get the top 1% anyway!
-
When you're that good it's all about a bat that you feel good with, don't think they care who made it if they like the feel.
-
Just made me chuckle tbh, as for years we’ve had the whole tk makes bats for every pro thing,,,,and sticker up brands using tk for bats etc....and yet here we have the complete opposite
-
That was quite the innings from 16 year old Capsey. Such a great range of shots.
-
Nice to see some Red Ink Kit on the big stage today, even if it was for only a handful of balls!
-
When you're that good it's all about a bat that you feel good with
And when you're not.
-
Wouldn't it be great to be so in the know that you were able to tell all the 'in the know' people that actually all the top players don't get their bats made by Keeley at all? (Perhaps don't even tell them? Just nod at them and smile smugly?)
-
For all the negative comments against The Hundred on this forum, it looks like the tournament has had a very good start. High pace games, big names and good cricket on display. Lot of positives so far. Especially love the slow over rate penalty. Also great to see young new talent both in mens and womens cricket. The 5/10 set for a bowler is interesting too.
More Power to The Hundred!
-
the overseas drop outs due to covid has enabled many young county players the opportunity which is great. It has in turn depending on which way you look at it devalued the Royal London or again given a chance to young upcoming players.
I thought it would go ok as at the end of the day its a cricket game just with some funky stuff and it will improve further too. The pitch yesterday at Old Trafford was a not a good one for the kids wanting sixes.
T20 blast needs to go back to being on the clock as the games have been taking too long.
-
crowds are smaller than for 2020 right? and many of the tickets are being given away for free???
Women's cricket will be all the better for being on the air. Men's.. open to debate.
-
Difficult to get head around the new rules. Would have been better if they just made it a 18 ov or 15 ov game with same cricket rules, but these 5 balls overs and 5/10 balls just doesn't feel like cricket. Not sure how much the format contributed to the success, if they just had a 15 over format, believe it would have had the same level of success while still feeling like cricket.
-
That’s absolute cracker of a game of cricket! Regardless of format that is a great piece of entertainment!
-
And all for free on YouTube.
Whatever the ugliness of the ECB cash grab, that was a top match.
Hales must have felt good taking down Stokes.
-
Much to my surprise, I am quite enjoying the hundreding. It doesn’t mean I think it is needed though.
-
What a game last night! Alex Hales seem to be struggling but came through in the end for Trent Rockets! Brilliant hand played by Rashid Khan too. There seem to be a few moans about the pitches taking turn too early in the tournament, but I am loving it as such pitches can produce low scoring thrillers like yesterday!
-
Hales must have felt good taking down Stokes.
The same teammate he turned his back on down in Bristol that night and ran off into hiding
-
That's the one.
-
The worst thing about the hundred is the fact that KP commentates on it.
-
I'm so old - I've tried to watch, but I get confused by the graphics on the screen, and whatever I see, I can't get past the fact that:
for another 20 balls, this could simply be a 6 team franchise T20 competition on terrestrial telly.
I just don't get it.
-
I'm so old - I've tried to watch, but I get confused by the graphics on the screen, and whatever I see, I can't get past the fact that:
for another 20 balls, this could simply be a 6 team franchise T20 competition on terrestrial telly.
I just don't get it.
Same. I like the extra glitz and even the screen graphics are cool. But why not just make it 5 ball overs instead of changing everything else as well? One small change would have sufficed.
-
I really enjoyed The Hundred.
There, I said it.
Mills needs to be on the T20 WC plane.
-
I really enjoyed The Hundred.
There, I said it.
Mills needs to be on the T20 WC plane.
I'm with you!
Yes the coverage was a bit annoying at times but the actual cricket was excellent in both the men's and women's. Hardly missed a game and thoroughly enjoyed it.
-
Graphics are very nice ... easy to follow and keep the game right in the center of the vision w/out missing out on interesting details.
Very enjoyable cricket!
-
I have really enjoyed it to. For the first year of a new competition against the backdrop of a glob pandemic, I don't think that it could have gone any better
-
Yes! So glad The Hundred happened! It was thoroughly entertaining. The pace of the game especially was really good. Got to see some quality performances. Kudos to the ECB for pushing forward with the innovation.
-
I was very much on the fence of supporting the Hundred/why didn't they just invest the money into the Blast instead when it was first announced, but having seen the reaction around kids at our club and the final product produced I genuinely think it's been one of the best moves by the ECB in a long time.
Hell of a risk, but I really do think clubs will benefit no end from increased numbers as a result - especially in the womens/girls area
-
So we went to two games to support our "local" team and both times had a great day out. the visibility and recognition for the womens game is a gamechanger in my opinion. Stuff to tweak for watching live as on the Saturday game we went to 30% of crowd was your T20 blast/footie shout along fans on the beer which upset some families and also i think the double headers are too much for some of the small klds as many seem to leave during the mens game as tired etc. It was great entertainment but food and drink prices at the Ageas were a shocker!
it was great (not for my wife) for me and the boys to have cricket on every night and some on the BBC too.
What will it do to the counties? Who knows.....plus its hard not really having a team to truly support for those of us not living in or close to one of the cities.
Will be interested to see the tweaks for next year
-
I see that the ECB senior head honchos have decided to award themselves a pandemic pay bonus despite 60 odd job cuts...
-
I see that the ECB senior head honchos have decided to award themselves a pandemic pay bonus despite 60 odd job cuts...
Pretty disgusting, but not surprising when it's been happening in so many large organisations. Forget the junior staff who have been left jobless in a pandemic, just so long as the CEO can get enough of a bonus for a new Bentley.
-
I see that the ECB senior head honchos have decided to award themselves a pandemic pay bonus despite 60 odd job cuts...
Fs, that's GN level bullsh*t (Let half your staff go and give Babar 90 grand instead)
-
I see that the ECB senior head honchos have decided to award themselves a pandemic pay bonus despite 60 odd job cuts...
That's businesses for you. Zero morals.. all about the ££££
-
That's businesses for you. Zero morals.. all about the ££££
In fairness not all businesses are like it, just stems from the top and the types of people you have running the show.
The full article is here, it's a pay deal that was agreed in 2017 to be paid out in 2022 so not a spur of the moment bonus. But with recent events you'd have thought a little compassion might have been shown - not like the top dog is struggling on over £500k a year.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/23/senior-ecb-executives-to-share-21m-bonus-despite-covid-job-cuts (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/23/senior-ecb-executives-to-share-21m-bonus-despite-covid-job-cuts)
-
Fs, that's GN level bullsh*t (Let half your staff go and give Babar 90 grand instead)
Has stopped me ordering from them - son chose some nice Neon gloves :D and we (club) are moving our match and training kit from them too. "Someone" told me this was the reason Bairstow "left" GN as didn't want redundancies
-
It would be nice to believe that the real reason Bairstow changes bat sponsor so often is that he has a highly principled concern for workers' rights.
-
Has stopped me ordering from them - son chose some nice Neon gloves :D and we (club) are moving our match and training kit from them too. "Someone" told me this was the reason Bairstow "left" GN as didn't want redundancies
Ha good choice!
The GN thing gets even stickier, they apparently did claimed force majeure on a lot of their professionals contracts last season and refused to pay up what was owed to the players. Safe to say I'm sure that had something to do with it as well - and makes the whole redundancies/Babar contract debacle even worse in my opinion.