The UK Babe Channels Forum

It finally here, after last years cancellation. Tonight's launch match is from the Women's Hundred, with Oval Invincibles v Manchester Originals from the Kia Oval. This is the first match of a double-header over 2 nights, tomorrow will be the men's turn, with the same franchise team names as the women.
I'm prepared to give this a chance, & keep an open mind. I can already see both benefits & disadvantages with this format, & the impact that it will have on the other domestic competitions, & the ramifications on the game as a whole.

I'm watching and of course I'll be supporting Manchester Originals given where I live. Getting a thumbs up from me so far

Manchester Originals 61 from 51 balls latest score

Well I enjoyed the opening match, although I'll be able to judge the format better after I've watched a men's match. The graphics were dreadful though. The score on one side of the screen and the balls and wickets on the other side - why is that a good idea? What an eyesore.

^^
I enjoyed it too. The Men's fixture between the Oval Invincibles & Manchester Originals is today (Thursday) at 6pm on Sky Sports & BBC2 from 6pm.

wasn't keen on the graphics either, hopefully they will improve. but apart from the graphics, the hundred gets a thumbs up from me

I think the graphics was a case of trying too hard to be different. The funniest part for me was in the interview, the player explained that in the run chase she was calculating the run-rate in sixes, & apologized, as it should've been in fives. It's just cricket, after all it shouldn't matter how many balls consist an over. I think they made a big fuss about a bowler opting to bowl 10 balls on the trot, it's not really such a big tactical leap, not any different from bowling a 3rd or fourth over when there're in the groove or on top. These changes are there for the sake of change & haven't added that much to the game, all to fit into the Hundred name.

So if the men's game is good as women's do we see a long term future fior the format?

I thought the scoreboard showing runs required rather than the score was a poor move. As for the fielding timeouts, is it simply an opportunity for Sky to go to a commercial break? I assume that when an umpire waves a white card it marks 5 balls bowled?

(22-07-2021 09:52 )lovebabes56 Wrote: [ -> ]So if the men's game is good as women's do we see a long term future fior the format?

s
This is here to stay, a five year tv deal will ensure that. It should do more for the women's game than the men, with primetime tv exposure. As for the crowds, if you ignore the pandemic (which quite a few seem to be doing, sadly) they had around 2,000 tickets sold last night, but gave away 8,000. This is something that never happened to to Blast. They will make the figures work to make this look like a success regardless. The best spectacle in the domestic game was a 50 over Lords Final, now because of the hundred this is now a 2nd team comp, with a Final at Trent Bridge (great ground) but on a Thursday ? I'll explain what I mean by a 2nd team comp, today, Yorkshire host Surrey at Scarborough, both sides are without 10 players. These 2 sides will play other counties that have 1 or 2 players missing who are unavailable due to the Hundred.
The Hundred will be, unfairly compared to the Blast, in term of crowds, tv deals & sponsorship. The Blast has drawn bigger crowds, year on year despite the constant fixture tweeks. It is at it's best when played in good weather & with regular Friday night fixtures. This years comp has been crammed into a short window, with many teams playing 6 games within 10 days, so the travelling, & lack of preparation will lead to poorer quality cricket, & not many can afford to take a family to 3 or 4 home games in little over a week.
By all means let's encourage a new young audience, but not at the expense of the loyal existing one.
Think of the impact that this will also have on the International game., England have not been able to be successful across all formats. We focused on Test cricket, achieved number one status, yet our white ball cricket suffered. The focus switched to the 50 over World Cup, which we won, but as a result, our Test side slipped down the rankings. Now the drive is all about the back to back T20 World Cups. Down the line we have another 50 over World Cup, which we are defending Champions, yet with the best 30% of our white ball stars all competing in the Hundred, it leaves only the worst 70% of players actually playing 50 over cricket, so a much lower standard, which isn't going to create future 50 over International players.
If the aim of the hundred is to attract better overseas stars, then I've seen very little evidence to support this, given the current squads. If this comp is no better than the Blast then it's a massive fail given the money thrown at it. Will it rival Australia's Big Bash, doubtful, will it better the IPL, never. The BCCI so far don't allow their contracted players to compete in any other domestic T20 competitions, unless this changes, the IPL will always be regarded as the best.

Since I live not far from the Oval I guess it's easy to adopt Oval Invincibles as the team to follow, although if they start losing matches that name could end up looking a bit silly. I'm not convinced that these city franchises are really going to catch on here, but we'll see how it develops. I'm sure everyone in the women's game thinks the whole thing is brilliant.

I must concede, that although we most of the overseas stars have appeared in the Blast, but with 8 Hundred teams , with 3 overseas. compared to 18 Blast sides with only 2 overseas players, then this must naturally lift the standards. But, the Hundred will see 10 England players for only 2 out of 14 games, this would never happen in the IPL.