Anyone for 10/10?

No not a joke, I can assure you!

The first high-profile ten-over cricket league starts (and finishes) in the UAE this week. Adil Rashid, Alex Hales and Eoin Morgan are some of the English players signed up to the various franchises.

Featuring two-over powerplays and 90 minute matches, Eoin Morgan reckons this format is ideal for the Olympics.

Future of the game, or soon-to-be forgotten fad?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T10_League

Ridiculous , I think. Unless it involves just four per side fielding and bears on unicycles...

I know the younger generation is supposed to have short attention spans , but really ?

Globalisation and run for time has damped the cricket. I know that being into Olympics will bring world wide recognition to Cricket. But we need to ask one question to ourselves, 'Do we need recognition at the cost of our self?'
Though shorter format are getting more recognition these days, thanks to the leagues like IPL, BBL etc. the longer format needs to be nurtured.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/24158702/ecb-considering-10-cricket-domestic-game

Coming to a Green and Pleasant Land, perhaps.

Playground cricket

The thing about 20 over cricket is that it is what most people play whether at school, week night leagues and weekend leagues. I have certainly played in all of those.

This 100 ball stuff is just a gimmick. It doesn't relate.

If people aren't watching cricket it's because the competition structures don't work. The calendar structure doesn't work. There is too much cricket.

I certainly started to lose interest when they split the county championship into two divisions. Now I never know what is being played? Some days it's the county championship then the T20 Blast then the Royal London Cup. The calendar seems too sporadic.

Also cricket have become less accessible. I can't remember any live cricket on free tv since the 2005 Ashes. I also loved checking the games on Ceefax on pages 340. I used to go through all the games. Know most of the players, batting and bowling averages.

I like the counties. Don't like the nicknames. Don't like franchises. Don't like 100 balls.

subhranshu.kumar.5 wrote:Globalisation and run for time has damped the cricket. I know that being into Olympics will bring world wide recognition to Cricket. But we need to ask one question to ourselves, 'Do we need recognition at the cost of our self?'  
Though shorter format are getting more recognition these days, thanks to the leagues like IPL, BBL etc. the longer format needs to be nurtured.

I have been saying for 10 years scrap all cricket apart from 20 overs domestically and 20 overs and test matches internationally.

This 10/10 stuff is carrying on.

Doesn't seem to be taken much notice of in the UK cricket press, but there's plenty of English players taking part.

Bairstow currently 48* off 16.

Duty281 wrote:This 10/10 stuff is carrying on.

Doesn't seem to be taken much notice of in the UK cricket press, but there's plenty of English players taking part.

Bairstow currently 48* off 16.

 84* off 24.

Bloody ridiculous.

LondonTiger wrote:

Duty281 wrote:This 10/10 stuff is carrying on.

Doesn't seem to be taken much notice of in the UK cricket press, but there's plenty of English players taking part.

Bairstow currently 48* off 16.

 84* off 24.

Bloody ridiculous.

He's obviously still in a real bad mood!

So we started with 60 overs per side ODIs, that became 50 overs per side ODIs. Then T20 happened, which works perfectly for the casuals. Now 10 overs per side? What new 6 balls per side?

LondonTiger wrote:

Duty281 wrote:This 10/10 stuff is carrying on.

Doesn't seem to be taken much notice of in the UK cricket press, but there's plenty of English players taking part.

Bairstow currently 48* off 16.

 84* off 24.

Bloody ridiculous.

Absolutely. The boundaries were so tiny that I failed to take it seriously.

My younger daughter plays in a Winter Indoor League - scoring methods differ slightly from normal, but games last 45 minutes with usually 12 overs a side and similar scoring rates to this 10/10 and probably just as meaningful.

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:So we started with 60 overs per side ODIs, that became 50 overs per side ODIs. Then T20 happened, which works perfectly for the casuals. Now 10 overs per side? What new 6 balls per side?

And actually 65 overs per side for counties when the Gillette Cup was introduced in '63 as you'll remember, Nathaniel.

LondonTiger wrote:

Duty281 wrote:This 10/10 stuff is carrying on.

Doesn't seem to be taken much notice of in the UK cricket press, but there's plenty of English players taking part.

Bairstow currently 48* off 16.

 84* off 24.

Bloody ridiculous.

And he still can't get a game in the England t20 ! Have some seriously good bashers ...fear is they're forgetting how to bat for eighty overs or more...

Suppose t10 might be fun in its way ; but I have trouble taking the idea seriously.

The two a side/ four a side , four over competition can be fun . But I think 20 overs should be a minimum for a team game.

Hales has hit 87 from 32 balls to break the record, albeit in a worse strike rate.

Its a ridiculous competition with a few of the worlds top batsmen making semi pro bowlers look like what they are on postage stamps.

Basically everything we said about T20 when that first started.

Jokes aside it exists to feed the gambling markets which is probably the most worrying thing about it. I cant even imagine its much fun for the payers, just a handy low pressure way for some of these guys like Hales who cant always do full IPL seasons to make a bit of cash to pay their legal bills top up their pensions.

guildfordbat wrote:

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:So we started with 60 overs per side ODIs, that became 50 overs per side ODIs. Then T20 happened, which works perfectly for the casuals. Now 10 overs per side? What new 6 balls per side?

And actually 65 overs per side for counties when the Gillette Cup was introduced in '63 as you'll remember, Nathaniel.

Well I for one learned something new today, ta guildford

I do remember that when I started following cricket reasonably seriously (mid-to-late nineties) there were three different limited overs competitions in England. You had the Natwest Trophy (continuation of the Gilette Cup), which was a 60 over comp at that time, straight knock-out, with the first round matches being played between the first-class counties and minor counties (the latter included Ireland, Scotland and the Netherlands IIRC). You also had the Benson & Hedges Cup, played over 50 overs, which had a group stage followed by knock-outs and also included some minor counties, though I think fewer than in the Natwest Trophy. And finally you had the Sunday/Axa League, played over 40 then 45 (!) overs, and which was a simple league format involving only the first class counties IIRC.

The first game I went to live was a Sunday League fixture between Middlesex and Hampshire. It was in 96 or 97 (the year Kallis was the overseas player for Middlesex, though he didn't play in this one). Hayden smashed 89 or so for Hants, but Jason Pooley nearly guided the Middlesex tail to an improbable win, including a big last wicket stand with Phil Tufnell of all people. Unfortunately Tuffers was cleaned up with 17 needed from the final 2 overs, and Pooley was left stranded on a magnificent 94 not out. Happy days

I imagine the first game guildford went to may be a bit longer ago, mind

The biggest problem with the 60 overs competition was getting it done in a day ...rather ruined the concept of a one !

Had a look through some of the scorecards from T10... one game was won in the 6th over. Not exactly value for money. The wages seem to have gone on batsmen too, with very few bowlers with any significant pedigree...mostly fringe associate nation players.

The forgotten man of English fast bowling Mills is playing though, the hype train on him seems to have died off quickly. Yesterdays Jofra Archer!

Shahid Afridi (thought he was retired, my mistake) clubbed 59* off 17 balls yesterday.

Afridi has been talking the competition up. Obviously in his interests to do so as he's not really viable or relevant even in T20s anymore. Give Bairstow the same awful bowlers to face in a Test match and he'd probably make the same score just as quickly again. Just to confirm, I think T10 is utterly awful