Is The Hundred A Gimmick ?

[William51]

I watched The Hundred and found it a confusing extravaganza with confusing graphics. With the Twenty20 using 120 ball deliveries and The Hundred with 100 deliveries i do not see much difference. They should have just promoted The Twenty20 and not add another format . Is it just a money making gimmick ?.

[bobbinwales]

One difference is they have regional teams not counties. I haven't worked out how they pick the teams. For example Livingstone play's for lancashire normally but played for Birmingham against manchester at Old Trafford. Some are internationals and some are over the hill players who not longer get county selection.

[ToraToraTora]

I too struggle with why it's necessary. I suppose the sport is struggling with ways to make it interesting.

[rowanwitch]

It's fun to watch, might attract a younger audience who would gnaw their own legs off rather than watch a proper test match or county game. Nice to see lots of coverage of the women's matches too.

[bednobs]

I have been really enjoying it and have tickets to the ageas in August. As to working out how the teams are picked-good luck! I have read it 3 times and still don't really get it (plus I believe it's different for the men an women)https://www.thehundred.com/info/how-the-hundred-draft-works

[bednobs]

I agree with you about the graphics though, although they do give you a lot of info.

[bednobs]

https://www.thehundred.com/info/how-the-hundred-draft-works
sorry just realised i mucked up the link

[Buenchico]

The Hundred aims to draw new fans to the sport (and seems to be doing it remarkably well).

Quote:
"The crowd was undoubtedly younger and more diverse than those seen at men's internationals, or in the current Twenty20 Blast.

Groups of young girls wandered into the famous old ground. Families took their seats with some children too small to hold a cricket ball, never mind swing a bat.

Instead of the bars, it was caterers selling pizza and ice cream that had the longest queues."

Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/57923883

I was sceptical at first but I now think that The Hundred has a great deal going for it.

[bednobs]

it's reasonably cheap and reasonably quick too. I wouldn't consider taking my daughter to an all day game, but for a few hours, plus with some music thrown in.
if it's rained off half way through, at least you don't lose too much

[brainiac]

As a cricket purist I wanted to hate The Hundred, but, having watched a couple of matches, I rather enjoyed it. Lots of people - families especially - having fun. Shame about the inane commentary by Vaughan and Tufnell, though.

[bobbinwales]

No quicker than 2020 match though bednobs. But i think it's the dual playing of ladies and men's cricket at one venue that's good plus a focus on kids not beer drinkers

[New Judge]

The trouble is, Chris, in drawing new fans to the sport, those new fans will think that sport is cricket. And it's not. It's played on the same pitch with roughly the same equipment, but there the similarity ends.

I've no objection to the game. I'm sure it will attract a wide audience who need a result in ten minutes or their concentration wavers. I just wish they'd call it something other than cricket.

[davebro]

Ah cricket! Only the English could come up with a game where you slog it out for 5 days through rain and sun (occasionally) and still end up with a draw!

[brainiac]

Yes, davebro - exactly what doesn't happen in The Hundred

[bednobs]

What is your definition of cricket then NJ?

[New Judge]

//What is your definition of cricket then NJ?//

In the professional version, a time bound game with two innings per side played using a red ball, during the daytime with the players dressed predominantly in white. No restrictions on field placements (apart from behind the bat on the leg side) and no restrictions on the number of overs a bowler may bowl. That'll do for starters.

I accept that in the amateur sphere (e.g club, village or school) a limited over game is the only practical version. However, I caught a glimpse of the "100" and quite honestly I found it appalling.

[bednobs]

Aren't ODIs cricket then?

[vulcan42]

I was once asked by an American professor to explain the rules of cricket and showed him the following. He said he finally understood but I somehow doubt it. :o)
\\ You have two sides, one out in the field and one in.
Each man that’s in the side that’s in the field goes out and when he’s out comes in and the next man goes in until he’s out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.
When they are all out, the side that’s out comes in and the side that’s been in goes out and tries to get those coming in out.
Sometimes there are men still in and not out.
There are men called umpires who stay out all the time, and they decide when the men who are in are out.
Depending on the weather and the light, the umpires can also send everybody in, no matter whether they’re in or out.
When both sides have been in and all the men are out (including those who are not out), then the game is finished.

[bednobs]

i hope that was some time ago - they let women play now you know :)

[Mozz71]

I'm pretty sure (if it hasn't already been stated) the players were picked using an American Football type draft.

[Buenchico]

>>> I accept that in the amateur sphere (e.g club, village or school) a limited over game is the only practical version.

Really? When I was at school, our school teams played timed matches against our opponents but just with a single innings, rather than two. When I was scoring for a club team in Sheffield during my college days, their games followed the same format, as did all games for the Yorkshire U-15 side that I was involved in. There still seem to be plenty of local cricket leagues, both at adult and junior level, playing timed matches, rather than limited over games.