Dumbing down of cricket
-
@mariner4life said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@nzzp said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@mn5 said in Dumbing down of cricket:
To be honest it’s the “when you’re out you’re out” that I’m worried about ( currently they bat partnerships and lose runs each time they get dismissed ). His first Golden duck will be a sad time.
It'll be a few years if he's playing in NZ. They have done a great job of easing people in - next year will be something like a 9 ball grace period (and retire after 18 deliveries), and then a 6 ball (retire at 21 balls). Ensures kids actually get a game at the weekend -- a decent bat and bowl each week. Fair play to NZC (and I think Martin Snedden)
what? fucking snowflake children
The quicker they learn what an absolute fluffybunny of a game cricket is, the better for their mortal soul. It doesn't matter what level you play, or what your form is like, or how much time you spent in the nets, some days you are going to turn up, bowl 10 overs 0-88, and get a 3rd ball duck, and drop a catch. And your dad won't even be there to watch.
Cricket hates you, and you need to learn that as quickly as possible.
Nothing more deflating than being an opening batsmen, batting first, and getting out in the first over. Not only are you fucking pissed at getting out, you realise you have to hang around for another 5 fucking hours and all you have to look forward to is a bit of bloody fielding. fluffybunny of a game alright, who the hell would play it.
-
@no-quarter said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@mariner4life said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@nzzp said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@mn5 said in Dumbing down of cricket:
To be honest it’s the “when you’re out you’re out” that I’m worried about ( currently they bat partnerships and lose runs each time they get dismissed ). His first Golden duck will be a sad time.
It'll be a few years if he's playing in NZ. They have done a great job of easing people in - next year will be something like a 9 ball grace period (and retire after 18 deliveries), and then a 6 ball (retire at 21 balls). Ensures kids actually get a game at the weekend -- a decent bat and bowl each week. Fair play to NZC (and I think Martin Snedden)
what? fucking snowflake children
The quicker they learn what an absolute fluffybunny of a game cricket is, the better for their mortal soul. It doesn't matter what level you play, or what your form is like, or how much time you spent in the nets, some days you are going to turn up, bowl 10 overs 0-88, and get a 3rd ball duck, and drop a catch. And your dad won't even be there to watch.
Cricket hates you, and you need to learn that as quickly as possible.
Nothing more deflating than being an opening batsmen, batting first, and getting out in the first over. Not only are you fucking pissed at getting out, you realise you have to hang around for another 5 fucking hours and all you have to look forward to is a bit of bloody fielding. fluffybunny of a game alright, who the hell would play it.
Graham Gooch got a pair on test debut. If I was him I woulda quit then and there.
-
-
@chris-b said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@snowy said in Dumbing down of cricket:
What next a one ball game, for those that can only count that high?
That's actually got massive marketing potential...I might have a go at promoting it.
I shall call it, "Hitler Cricket"!
Nice work. Have even managed to get Godwin's Law into a stupid concept for some game that isn't cricket. Well done.
The worst thing about it is that it may also be true - not just from the song.
*"A German historian has unearthed the Nazi leader’s long-lost medical records, which seem to confirm the urban legend that he only had one testicle.
The records, taken during a medical exam following Hitler’s arrest over the failed Beer hall putsch in 1923, show that he suffered from “right-side cryptorchidism”, or an undescended right testicle.
The records seem to contradict long-running specualation that Hitler lost one testicle to shrapnel during the Battle of the Somme in the first world war.
That rumour was backed up by Franciszek Pawlar, a Polish priest and amateur historian, who claimed a German army medic who treated Hitler after the shrapnel incident told him about the injury.
The medical records also contradict Hitler’s childhood doctor, who told American interrogators in 1943 that the future Führer’s genitals were “completely normal”.*
How the fuck do I end up in these discussions...
-
-
@mn5 said in Dumbing down of cricket:
I reckon they should have a professional beach cricket league, fuck all fielders but a tennis ball and one hand one bounce would make it deadly for batsmen.
Half the ball has to be covered in insulation tape. That sorts the men from the boys.
-
@rapido said in Dumbing down of cricket:
Poms are dumb. Aussie are geniuses. Fact.
Aussie invented new term for sub. Called x fact or. 3 syllables.
Poms find wick et too hard.
To simplify the game away from jargon and non-decimals. I count 4 new jargon now introduced in 6 months, a 5th professional version of the sport has been introduced.
Simple as.
Money well spent. I'm sure it's better value than the zero spend of simply not exasperating Dads away from watching as sick of gimmicks and noise. I mean whoever's heard of a kid getting into a sport because their dad was watching it one day when they were young.
Judging by your grammar then, you'd be a Pom?
-
Jesus christ, as NostraMN5 predicted with superb accuracy, completely becoming of his incredible intellect, this thread needs to be merged to the Grumpy Old Man one.
I'm sure the same was said of one day cricket, and T20. I know the same was said of Cricket MAXX. 4 wickets? 12 runs for a 6 over the bowlers head? Ridiculous.
Concepts, are concepts. The point is to try something else out and see how it goes. The point is to try and keep moving kids back to being outdoors playing sport, and less time on screens. To try and attract people to lesser games in order to increase the live experience. To try and get and keep kids interested. To try something.
Far be it for me to be on the other side of this discussion, given that I think all the ideas are quite poor and will never catch on. But this is the point of concepts.
1.2 billion Indians watching cricket, doesn't change the fact that 25 years ago, the Shell cup cricket in NZ had audiences of 15-20k, with the final being a must watch event in front of a sold out Eden / Lancaster Park / Carisbook. And this was when our national team sucked shit.
Whats the status of that now? When our team is the best it ever has been and is about to play in the final of the world test championship??
The horror of trying something eh.
-
@majorrage said in Dumbing down of cricket:
Jesus christ, this thread needs to be merged to the Grumpy Old Man one.
I'm sure the same was said of one day cricket, and T20. I know the same was said of Cricket MAXX. 4 wickets? 12 runs for a 6 over the bowlers head? Ridiculous.
Concepts, are concepts. The point is to try something else out and see how it goes. The point is to try and keep moving kids back to being outdoors playing sport, and less time on screens. To try and attract people to lesser games in order to increase the live experience. To try and get and keep kids interested. To try something.
Far be it for me to be on the other side of this discussion, given that I think all the ideas are quite poor and will never catch on. But this is the point of concepts.
1.2 billion Indians watching cricket, doesn't change the fact that 25 years ago, the Shell cup cricket in NZ had audiences of 15-20k, with the final being a must watch event in front of a sold out Eden / Lancaster Park / Carisbook. And this was when our national team sucked shit.
Whats the status of that now? When our team is the best it ever has been and is about to play in the final of the world test championship??
The horror of trying something eh.
I already suggested that. Not reading earlier posts is such a Grumpy Old Man thing to do.
-
@mn5 said in Dumbing down of cricket:
I already suggested that. Not reading earlier posts is such a Grumpy Old Man thing to do.
I know. But it was the second post and TSF collective deserved the opportunity to prove you wrong. Which they didn't.
Regardless, I have updated my post to acknowledge you.
At the same time, I've also edited yours so the bit you tried to bold, is actually bolded, as opposed to just having random stars on it.
-
@majorrage said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@mn5 said in Dumbing down of cricket:
I already suggested that. Not reading earlier posts is such a Grumpy Old Man thing to do.
I know. But it was the second post and TSF collective deserved the opportunity to prove you wrong. Which they didn't.
Regardless, I have updated my post to acknowledge you.
At the same time, I've also edited yours so the bit you tried to bold, is actually bolded, as opposed to just having random stars on it.
This is even better than the time I predicted David Tua would knock out Shane Cameron in the second round. I thought I’d never reach such highs again.
-
@mn5 said in Dumbing down of cricket:
I reckon they should have a professional beach cricket league, fuck all fielders but a tennis ball and one hand one bounce would make it deadly for batsmen. No limit on rubber tape for one side of the tennis ball either.
That's where they found Maslinger I believe, he developed that action to get maximum pace with a tennis ball. He'd be damn near unplayable on the beach if you give him a bit of rubber tape to work with as well.
-
@snowy said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@act-crusader said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@mn5 said in Dumbing down of cricket:
@sparky said in Dumbing down of cricket:
What I don't get in all this is the ECB's obsession with chasing a potential new audience for Cricket ahead of the millions of fans who know and love the game.
I’m no expert but I’d say over a billion Indians contribute a fair bit to a game that ain’t broke and doesn’t need fixing.
How many of that ‘billion’ have started watching cricket because of the emergence of IPL. I’d hazard a guess at the odd hundred million or so...
Difficult to know, but I worked with loads of Indian cabin crew (many hundreds if not thousands), mostly female, pre IPL. They all knew their cricket, had a complete disdain for the Craps (and they were crap then, even though we beat India some of the time.) They were just as knowledgeable about tests as ODIs and were just as willing to enter a debate about players as we are on here. Indians will fill cricket grounds and watch it on TB no matter what. It's not like they have too many other internationally competitive teams, or sports people for that matter.
I agree if they are of that generation, but there are millions of kids/teens that have now experienced a healthy staple of IPL with their bright lights, coloured uniforms and more rupees to poke a stick at. All in their formative years
-
This was always going to be a GOM thread even if much of it is firmly tongue in cheek piss taking.
@majorrage said in Dumbing down of cricket:
I'm sure the same was said of one day cricket, and T20. I know the same was said of Cricket MAXX. 4 wickets? 12 runs for a 6 over the bowlers head? Ridiculous.
Yes ODIs and T20 did get much of the same reaction. Pyjama cricket, etc. The documentary on Kerry Packer highlights it all and how he changed cricket. Of course cricket Max failed and concept evolved into T20 which wasn't quite so radical.
@majorrage said in Dumbing down of cricket:
The horror of trying something eh.
As has been pointed out though we already have T20 - this "100" really isn't much different, so as an innovative concept it seems to be a bit flat.
-
@snowy I still say it! Test cricket - the name says it all. It tests the participants. The more you dilute it, the more you cheapen it and the less interesting it becomes.
I can't remember the last time I bothered to watch a T20 although I will admit the advent of that bastardised form of the noble game did serve to resuscitate ODI's which had become stultifyingly boring.
-
@dogmeat You won't get any disagreement from me about that.
Unfortunately kids these days (GOM mode) have the attention span of a chocolate fish and apparently this is who they are trying to attract (the kids, getting chocolate fish into cricket would need even more innovative thing).
They have it covered with T20. Calling it something else and changing some words may not be that effective as a marketing ploy. Putting it on free to air TB maybe though.
-
@majorrage said in Dumbing down of cricket:
1.2 billion Indians watching cricket, doesn't change the fact that 25 years ago, the Shell cup cricket in NZ had audiences of 15-20k, with the final being a must watch event in front of a sold out Eden / Lancaster Park / Carisbook. And this was when our national team sucked shit.
Whats the status of that now? When our team is the best it ever has been and is about to play in the final of the world test championship??I remember big crowds for the final but not the preliminary games but really the point you make reinforces the argument against the 100 IMO.
Domestic cricket has suffered in NZ precisely because it has been either directly or indirectly been treated as product. Just like this latest shiny 'new' thing.
25 years ago there was far less sport on TV and way fewer other TV options
Shell Cup games were scheduled in a tight period over the holidays building momentum towards a final now they're all over the place
NZ's stars played in the Shell Cup - now it often clashes with international tours
Super Rugby wasn't a thingAll of the above changes have come about in order to ensure product for Sky and now Spark. An absolute case of never mind the quality- feel the width. Exactly what the ECB are doing with the 100.
