GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Yeah a knockout 50 over trophy doesn’t seem like the hardest thing to schedule
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
The Hundred could be scrapped
- Thread starter Aidan11
- Start date
chris.hinton
International Captain
14 Minor Counties to qualify with the 18 first class counties. Bottom 4 of the CC all play each other the rest away at a minor county
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Could have a preliminary round so all National Counties at least get a crack at entering
Third_Man
U19 Cricketer
As I understand things, the showcase games were on an original 3 year agreement which now needs to be renewed. A couple of NCs make a lot of money out of them, but others aren't allowed to even sell tickets /collect the car park income. Only a guess but I suspect the first class counties have a wide range of views about these matches.
Agree bringing back a proper List A game would be good.
Rereading my earlier post it clearly should have said "paid one player to play for three games". With an overall season of 20 games (due to reaching the one day final), Cumbria used 20 players 2 of which were single appearances as illness / injury replacements on the morning of the game / between T20 double headers luckily both were at home games.
There is very little spare room in the calendar which even started before any club games this season, very few weekends off for rest (from April to August) , a single List A game is probably the most which could be fitted - little incentive to try and win. Second round would need a sympathetic employer to allow time off at short notice (no spare Sundays) so any teacher likely to be unavailable.
Last edited:
Third_Man
U19 Cricketer
Really? Maybe in an open league where they pay half the players, but seriously, have you watched much national county cricket?
A more considered response would include: the national club championship final was between Bexley and Cucckney this year, I doubt either side would be eligible to play in the national counties. What would be the point of including sides in List A cricket of average age over 30?
Last edited:
No I don't watch NC cricket, hence why I asked. You said that they can't generally pay pros so that, in my mind, might put them at a disadvantage compared to the very top clubs that might have both overseas pros and 1 or 2 of their county's squad players. When I used to live in Beckenham they had a couple of Kent players in the XI and at least for one season a Pakistani pro with a few hundred first class wickets.
Third_Man
U19 Cricketer
No I didn't say they can't generally pay pros. But there are wide discrepancies in financial resources. They are amateur, even those who do pay for a pro (as are leading clubs). Overseas pros are a definite no, thankfully as they already have a disproportionate effect in club cricket, employing the right pro can materially effect your league position. But there are many restrictions on eligibility which would not be the case in open leagues:
Primarily age, timing of registration, connection to the county, and UK qualification.
But other than blindly "best vs best" which is already meaningless within List A in the UK what is the point of allowing a club with buckets of money join into any 50 over KO competition with the first class counties? Or even a T20 / T10 competition where the ECB franchise at least pretends to be "best v best" and where single stand out performances can have a greater effect on a match.
I think maybe we are talking at cross purposes. My point was that if the desire is to expand one of our limited over competitions, why is the assumption that these should be the NCs if actually little distinguishes them between in terms of quality and some of the best clubs? If the desire is to be genuinely innovative, then they need to move beyond the historic representative structure of English cricket.
Secondly, in terms of widening interest in the game, I'm not sure that's best achieved by giving Herefordshire (pop170k and my county of birth) more matches with the professional counties rather than elevating a top club in somewhere like Sheffield, Merseyside or the London parts of Kent and Essex (or maybe creating new teams that merges a number of clubs in those areas).
I mean overall, I'm not in favour full stop of those widened options listed above, but I just disagree with the idea that expanding the game automatically means going to the NCs first.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Replace could with should in the thread title and I agree.
Third_Man
U19 Cricketer
Neither am I convinced that the expansion is desirable. But the assumption is the one apparently on the table as reported in the press, and I would suggest that is because it is the highest standard of cricket outside the first class counties in this country. Two county staffers being released to the likes of Beckenham, Sheffield or Merseyside along with an overseas fast bowler may put in an occasional match winning performance, but I don't see how that elevates week in week out, the standard of cricket above a national county where the whole 11 have been selected on merit, nothwithstanding availability problems.
It's often said the difference in division one compared to division two is the first change bowlers, or the batting right down to no.11 that applies to national counties as well. Change bowlers are first choice at their clubs, batsmen at 8, 9, 10 can open for for their clubs.
The overall standard is high.
I am not sure where the idea of "little distinguishes them between in terms of quality and some of the best clubs" comes from. Just the suggestion of the overseas pro or that a couple of county staffers playing for the same club? Berkshire beat Cumbria at Wormsley complete with Jack Davies and Toby Greatwood from Middlesex. Both were outplayed by other members of a well prepared and coached Berkshire team.
One of the problems levelled at franchise cricket in this country is the creation of new teams from county players, not sure creating new super clubs would address those problems. Or how the selection process etc. would take place, at League level? My recollection is that in the first year of 'devalued' one day cup it was suggested that it would give club cricketers a chance to play at a higher level. Did one or two get a call up? Can't remember.
Third_Man
U19 Cricketer
Imagine creating a product designed to widen interest and participation in the game then spending most of the time undermining it.
Anyone who aspires to cricket administration should be immediately disqualified from doing so as it's a clear marker of lack of competence.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
why attack @cnerd123
mackembhoy
International Debutant
Wouldn't be as bad if more of the Hundred teams had this attitude. Pick 15 man squads and yet can steal county players at a whim and impact the One Day Cup chances for sides.
Clark got taken from Durham to replace Cox and then didn't even play.
"I'll give you an example: in 2022, we lost a bowler in our men's team to injury and looked at a couple of bowlers - John Turner at Hampshire, and Danny Lamb at Lancashire - as replacements. We had a final group game and then the eliminator, and we were looking to bring someone in, but they'd have missed the semi-finals of the One-Day Cup.
"We had a long think about it and said, 'do you know what? Go and play your 50-over semi-finals'. That was why we had a squad of 15 in the first place, and Tom Lammonby came into the side and did well. Sometimes when the Hundred gets hammered I think, 'we are trying to be fair'. And the worry is that if private investment comes in, that could easily blow county cricket apart."
Third_Man
U19 Cricketer
Exactly. That was what I took from that interview aswell.
Third_Man
U19 Cricketer
Telegraph reporting London want a third team when expanded to 10. 3 inc Somerset and Durham into 2 don't go but London is where the money is.
A team without any county allegiance might euphemistically be called interesting. Just take the players.
Any external investment, assuming it will happen, needs to be tied into paying for academies.
A team without any county allegiance might euphemistically be called interesting. Just take the players.
Any external investment, assuming it will happen, needs to be tied into paying for academies.
Just read the article. The part about the third London team seems rather speculative. I appreciate that much about the Hundred is contrived already however having two teams share a home ground would be most odd.
As for Beckenham having a capacity of 10,000, I suppose that there is room however it would require a huge amount of temporary seating.
Third_Man
U19 Cricketer
Only saw the headline myself. Assumed they were talking Olympic stadium.