The Hundred

Remove this Banner Ad

Their 40 over OD matches counted for list a stats.
I think I read early on that they intended to be counted with t20 domestic stats.

List A cricket doesn't necessarily mean 50 overs per side though, we used to have the ridiculous 45 over split innings format over here for instance.
 
List A amd Twenty20 are official ICC definitions while Cricinfo stats are not official, so they can do whatever they like.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

England invented T/20 CRICKET, Geoff Boycott carried his bat in the first ever game, he made 4 not out.
Or did I just make that up.
no one gives a sh9t where it started// they give a s**t as to where it lives today...
that sounds rude.. I love Mr Boycott... just saying that people are attuned to today...
 
no one gives a sh9t where it started// they give a s**t as to where it lives today...
that sounds rude.. I love Mr Boycott... just saying that people are attuned to today...
Are you just out of the nick, I posted that 2 years ago, read what I said again, it was a piss take.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What's wrong with it?
Every other dismissal (except for run outs, for obvious reasons), the batters revert to the original positions. So why not if you are caught?

Or if you accept they can swap ends if the batters cross, why doesn't a run count if they make it to the other end, as it would for a run out (if being run out going for a second or subsequent run)?

Just a couple of inconsistencies in the rules, that's all.
 
100 balls is a gimmick too far. Almost comes across as England being offended at the Indians making T20 a success and want to make their own format successful instead of being second.

Would be worth it if they can bring cricket back to the common man in the country though. Someone said something about England falling to T20, if you ask me it's much better than England fully falling to soccer.
He hundred is a new way to appeal to shortening attentions spans.... T20 has and still is successful, why the change? It is simply to appease said attention spans and fit in with the modern world. I feel this a step in the wrong direction. The one hundred will be a success, for a bit, then will die down as the more prominent, established T20 comps will hold their fan bases. I just hope County cricket fights back.
 
He hundred is a new way to appeal to shortening attentions spans.... T20 has and still is successful, why the change? It is simply to appease said attention spans and fit in with the modern world. I feel this a step in the wrong direction. The one hundred will be a success, for a bit, then will die down as the more prominent, established T20 comps will hold their fan bases. I just hope County cricket fights back.
It's nothing to do with attention spans, or fans at all, really.

It was designed to ensure a whole match was done in three hours, so the BBC would show it. T20 gets close, but not close enough.
 
Reports in the Aus paper that CA will not be making Aussie star players available for this tournament.

Reports over here now that the ECB are 'hoping' CA will 'rest' key players given it's only a Zimbabwe series and let them play in the hundred instead. They've also apparently requested permission for Smith and Starc to be available for the opening games at The Oval the day after the final ODI of the series in Bristol.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top