The Cricket Thread

Don't forget the £25 million they're getting this year for their contribution to The Hundred.
The bribe you mean ? The same amount every county gets

Would rather they bin off the Hundred and support the ODI cup , T20 blast and County Champs

Yesterday is the best day in the calendar - you can’t manufacture that
 
The bribe you mean ? The same amount every county gets

Would rather they bin off the Hundred and support the ODI cup , T20 blast and County Champs

Yesterday is the best day in the calendar - you can’t manufacture that
That's nonsense. How is negotiated profit sharing a bribe? They're being given a sum that is three times what you've described as their annual revenue.
And I see that Somerset are putting themselves in a position to bid for a franchise when The Hundred is expanded.
 
That's nonsense. How is negotiated profit sharing a bribe? They're being given a sum that is three times what you've described as their annual revenue.
And I see that Somerset are putting themselves in a position to bid for a franchise when The Hundred is expanded.

it’s a bribe imo

A way to keep the non test counties appeased and imo they should have stuck to their guns

And I hope the county goes now where near a franchise
 
That's nonsense. How is negotiated profit sharing a bribe? They're being given a sum that is three times what you've described as their annual revenue.
And I see that Somerset are putting themselves in a position to bid for a franchise when The Hundred is expanded.

I'm genuinely conflicted by this.

I mean NOT giving Somerset any expansion franchise would be absurd. Somerset are the strongest playing strength club in the country (no other team is in the top 4 in all three different competitions with three very different formats) and have been consistently for nearly a decade, despite not having any of the natural resource advantages of the big city Test-hosting counties. They're a phenomenally well run organisation (even if that does extend to ruthless resource-management decisions like not offering Dicko a contract extension - a decision I'm sad about even though I can 100% see why it was made).
Membership bases are a closely guarded secret but a basic look at the crowds at County match feeds show that only Surrey (the big rich boys of cricket) get more bums on seats consistently across all formats - many Counties play County Championship cricket in ghost town stadiums - you won't at Taunton, despite the town population being a tenth or less of the size of those city teams. They are always the most heavily supported team by far at Finals Day (unless Wawrickshire get there) - Edgbaston feels like a SCCC home crowd.

So if the top table is going to be the Hundred, however much we hate that, then it would be negligent of the club executive not to explore any and every option to make sure we're at that top table where we belong. I want them to do that. Doesn't mean I don't hate the franchise model. I just don't see the interest when both teams are 11 random players picked by auction for that year alone, with no connection to the team or the place where it resides? Somerset do lots of things a bit different and better than the rest - wonder if they could even do franchise cricket in a way that makes it matter?
 
I'm genuinely conflicted by this.

I mean NOT giving Somerset any expansion franchise would be absurd. Somerset are the strongest playing strength club in the country (no other team is in the top 4 in all three different competitions with three very different formats) and have been consistently for nearly a decade, despite not having any of the natural resource advantages of the big city Test-hosting counties. They're a phenomenally well run organisation (even if that does extend to ruthless resource-management decisions like not offering Dicko a contract extension - a decision I'm sad about even though I can 100% see why it was made).
Membership bases are a closely guarded secret but a basic look at the crowds at County match feeds show that only Surrey (the big rich boys of cricket) get more bums on seats consistently across all formats - many Counties play County Championship cricket in ghost town stadiums - you won't at Taunton, despite the town population being a tenth or less of the size of those city teams. They are always the most heavily supported team by far at Finals Day (unless Wawrickshire get there) - Edgbaston feels like a SCCC home crowd.

So if the top table is going to be the Hundred, however much we hate that, then it would be negligent of the club executive not to explore any and every option to make sure we're at that top table where we belong. I want them to do that. Doesn't mean I don't hate the franchise model. I just don't see the interest when both teams are 11 random players picked by auction for that year alone, with no connection to the team or the place where it resides? Somerset do lots of things a bit different and better than the rest - wonder if they could even do franchise cricket in a way that makes it matter?
Totally get it, even though I'm very much the other way.
From your point of view the issue is that The Hundred isn't going anywhere. So it's lucky that a Taunton based franchise would obviously be an amazing addition to the tournament.

I still think that the wider beneficial effects of the tournament are ignored by many.
How many younger guys at our clubs (regardless of whether we are a Hundred host) have been given opportunities in county cricket over the last few years because the first XI had been weakened by players departing for a franchise tournament? They might not otherwise have had that chance.
 
Forgetting your obvious bias in this matter, they are condoning the abuse that Sue Redfearn (TV umpire) has faced from the usual suspects on social media- how is this not the right thing to do?

How about just accept the decision , not mention it and just condone the abuse

And my bias has nothing to do with anything
 
Last edited:
It will be interesting to see how Jacob Bethell gets on today as Captain of the T20 side today. His first issue could be at the toss as he is that young he probably doesn't even recognise what a coin is :ROFLMAO:
 
Forgetting your obvious bias in this matter, they are condoning the abuse that Sue Redfearn (TV umpire) has faced from the usual suspects on social media- how is this not the right thing to do?

Fully declare my very obvious bias!
I do assume they’re condemning rather than condoning 😉

I’m actually fine with the statement. What I really did not like at all was that Livingstone stood and argued with the on-field umpires for quite a long time after the TV decision was made, not respecting the decision made. Not good. Every cricketer has had a poor umpiring decision or 10. The nature of humans and decisions is that if you ask someone to take on a role where they make judgement calls all day long, then eventually they will make a bad one, and an important part of the game is that you accept that, and walk off, you don’t stay and argue. If you don’t agree then sure, walk off shaking your head and looking at your bat, but you do walk off.

Would the abuse have been quite as bad if Livingstone hadn’t started the trend of refusing to respect the TV umpire’s decision, by trying to disregard her via the on-field umpires?

He entered my list of cricketers I don’t like. (Tom Curran heads that list - that nonsense in the big bash where he rightly got banned for deliberately ignoring the umpire’s instructions before the match is not a first offence…)
 
I think we can add Sonny Baker to the “not ready for international cricket yet” list.

That just means they will keep going with him until he is ready.

Getting hit around the park by Ireland isn't a glowing T20 start after the nightmare he had against SA
 
Will Jacks.

There is nothing more to say. I mean, I'm sure one of you fine folks will know what he has done to merit being selected as the back up spinner in the Ashes squad, but it seems to be escaping me at the present time.
 
Top