Will 'The Hundred' become an international format in future?

[Rajdeep]

Remember, T20 was England's brainchild back in 2005. At that time no one thought it would be a giant in world cricket as it is today.

Now they are launching another new format - the hundreds. I just hope it remains a domestic tournament in Eng and never transcends to international cricket.

We already have 3 formats and adding a 4th one will be a logistical nightmare. Imagine a full bilateral series consisting of - 3 tests, 3 ODIs, 3 T20Is and 4 hundres.

#NoMoreNewFormats

 

[Rana]

The ECB have a way of being different. They just have to stand out.

This is the future of cricket

 

[Ab Fan]

T20 format need to be shelved first even before 'the Hundred' becomes an international format.

They are hurting the techniques of modern day batters. Neither does T20 success define your legacy.

 

[Rajdeep]

The ECB have a way of being different. They just have to stand out.

This is the future of cricket

But are you in favour of adding another format to international calendar? That will be nightmare. We perhaps then also add T10 as well.

It will also be interesting to see how England domestic cricket manage so many formats in a season - County Championship, Royal London One day tournament, Vitality blast t20 and theHundreds.

ECB is unnecessarily making their own life more complicated. Just hope this raita dosen't spread outside England.

 

[Rana]

But are you in favour of adding another format to international calendar? That will be nightmare. We perhaps then also add T10 as well.

It will also be interesting to see how England domestic cricket manage so many formats in a season - County Championship, Royal London One day tournament, Vitality blast t20 and theHundreds.

ECB is unnecessarily making their own life more complicated. Just hope this raita dosen't spread outside England.

No I’m not in favour, but it’s not like I can stop this from happening. It will happen regardless and you can’t stop this.

 

[volcyz]

Yes 120 balls is too long

Need more bang for buck hitting

 

[liam26]

No more International formats , three formats are enough. There's another T10 format which is played in various leagues in Dubai however International Cricket hasn't adopted it , same will be the case with the Hundred too.

 

[Zeshan547]

No I’m not in favour, but it’s not like I can stop this from happening. It will happen regardless and you can’t stop this.

If football fans can stop the super league we cricket fans should also be able to do this, it's much more manageable than that in comparison, i am not against hundred but than you have to first scrap T20s first. what the freaking difference in 120 balls and 100 other than name, and if you want to really shorten game to as long as football or hockey for Olympic etc than go for T10, and then have only T10, ODI and tests, one for Purest, one for New generation fans who need action and cricket on steroids and third for those who want best of both worlds.

But for that you need some balance back in ODIs, like no ball laws pre 2010, mean one ball for fifty overs for bringing back reverse swing, with 10 year newer tech i think we can manage balls wick last whole 50 overs bit just 35 and if had to replace, replace at or after 40 over mark with another old bally but slightly better condition to last 10 remaining over, plus no field restrictions. Let the fielding captain ***** risk reward equation and give him free hand and how batting teams handle it. It will bring captaincy control to while new level like proper chess game.


As per test no major changes in game itself needed other than making pink ball better and more day night tests. But this current two year test league as idea is ok in theory but practically a joke, just have to make top 8 teams tier 1 and second tier from no. 9 to 12. Plus bring back continental cup. And than make it 4 year cycle with relegation promotion for last and top team within both tiers. And within tier every team must play other home and away, and every series of 3 tests to make it fair and consistent. Any teams what more tests like they can play even 5 but those extra won't count to league. In indo pak scenario etc neutral test must be played if one team even deny that than they will have to forfeit their points. And plz no 4 days tests garbage ideas.


Now in T10 keeping 11 players a side is joke. And totally unfair to bowlers. Make it 8 player game. Like 4 batsman a keeper and three kinda specialist bowlers. And 2 bowlers allowed max 3 overs each and one 4 overs, like imagine Bumrah for India and Archer for England with that extra over. No filed restrictions because with only 6 fielders other than bowler and Keeper batsmen will have enough empty spaces and will make positioning of those few fielders very critical for captain and bowler. And in such cut throat scenario only best can survive. I know that Will not be proper cricket but is T10 can ever be so just stop hiding it as one and go full steroids mode and with rules i suggested it will surely be more interesting. And match over in max 90 mins like fotty. 40 min a side innings of 10 overs. Big penalties for any unnecessary delays. You guys can give some tweaks to my ideas to make it even better.

And in current busy and covid hit world managing anything more than three formats Will be nightmare and not is it needed. Sorry for the lengthy post but I think my ideas if implemented will be worth it and make all those three formats more entertaining for fans.

 

[Rana]

If football fans can stop the super league we cricket fans should also be able to do this, it's much more manageable than that in comparison, I am not against hundred but than you have to first scrap T20s first. what the freaking difference in 120 balls and 100 other than name, and if you want to really shorten game to as long as football or hockey for Olympic etc than go for T10, and then have only T10, ODI and tests, one for Purest, one for New generation fans who need action and cricket on steroids and third for those who want best of both worlds. But for that you need some balance back in ODIs, like no ball laws pre 2010, mean one ball for fifty overs for bringing back reverse swing, with 10 year newer tech I think we can manage balls wick last whole 50 overs bit just 35 and if had to replace, replace at or after 40 over mark with another old bally but slightly better condition to last 10 remaining over, plus no field restrictions. Let the fielding captain ***** risk reward equation and give him free hand and how batting teams handle it. It will bring captaincy control to while new level like proper chess game.
As per test no major changes in game itself needed other than making pink ball better and more day night tests. But this current two year test league as idea is ok in theory but practically a joke, just have to make top 8 teams tier 1 and second tier from no. 9 to 12. Plus bring back continental cup. And than make it 4 year cycle with relegation promotion for last and top team within both tiers. And within tier every team must play other home and away, and every series of 3 tests to make it fair and consistent. Any teams what more tests like they can play even 5 but those extra won't count to league. In Indo Pak scenario etc neutral test must be played if one team even deny that than they will have to forfeit their points.
And plz no 4 days tests garbage ideas.

Now in T10 keeping 11 players a side is joke. And totally unfair to bowlers. Make it 8 player game. Like 4 batsman a keeper and three kinda specialist bowlers. And 2 bowlers allowed max 3 overs each and one 4 overs, like imagine Bumrah for India and Archer for England with that extra over. No field restrictions because with only 6 fielders other than bowler and keeper, the batsmen will have enough empty spaces and that will make positioning of those few fielders very critical for captain and bowler.

And in such a cut-throat scenario only the best can survive. I know that will not be proper cricket but as T10 can never be so just stop hiding it as one and go full steroids mode and with rules I suggested, it will surely be more interesting.
And match over in max 90 mins like 40 min a side innings of 10 overs. Big penalties for any unnecessary delays. You guys can give some tweaks to my ideas to make it even better.

And in current busy and covid hit world managing anything more than three formats will be nightmare and nor is it needed.
Sorry for the lengthy post but I think my ideas if implemented will be worth it and make all those three formats more entertaining for fans.

What cricket fans need to stop is Big 3 monopoly more than T20 leagues. Also the IPL dictating the international calendar

 

[Zeshan547]

What cricket fans need to stop is Big 3 monopoly more than T20 leagues. Also the IPL dictating the international calendar

Sadly those two things are harder to implement in real world my friend than these ideas I posted. Just make these leagues T10 league and it will be even bigger hit for these greedy leagues. Like say ipl can then even have upto 16 teams and get done with league in same time as now with daily two double headers inside 4 hours of prime time from say 7 to 11 pm Indian time. Imagine the eye balls.

 

[Zeshan547]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=90888]Itachi[/MENTION] [MENTION=151783]liam26[/MENTION] and others do you agree with changes i suggested in my first post in this thread.

 

[Mamoon]

As I said a year back, it is a genuine possibility that The Hundred could replace the T20 format in the long-term, just like the 60 over ODI format was supplanted by the 50 over version.

The focus on balls rather than overs is a modern and catchy approach and the 10 ball over could be a game-changer. You would love to see a Bumrah or a Starc or an Archer bowl the last 10 balls in a tight run chase.

ECB did a masterstroke by distinguishing itself with this format instead of copying the IPL model like every other country and jumping on the bandwagon a few years too late.

The Hundred will quickly establish itself the second biggest and second best league in the game and the modern flavor of the format could, in the long-term, influence other leagues including the IPL to experiment with the format, which essentially a superior version of the current T20 format.

 

[PakLFC]

Yes it could be the future of the game. Today people want instant entertainment unwilling to wait hours for a result. We may eventually even have five overs aside!

 

[AMSS]

The Hundred has been birthed *only and only* due to broadcasting exigencies. There's no cricketing logic at work here. Forget about any *meaningful* change, the hundred will be practically indistinguishable from T20 in how players approach the game.

This wasn't the case when T20 came along. The motivation behind T20 was also to make the game more appealing for public and therefore the broadcasters. And while it did that, T20 also changed how players played the game. So it was, unintentionally, very consequential in cricketing terms and brought along a number of innovations and changes in approach.

So yeah, unlikely the Hundred will catch on internationally *unless* broadcasters elsewhere insist on it. Don't see that happening in India at all.

 

[Zeshan547]

As I said a year back, it is a genuine possibility that The Hundred could replace the T20 format in the long-term, just like the 60 over ODI format was supplanted by the 50 over version.

The focus on balls rather than overs is a modern and catchy approach and the 10 ball over could be a game-changer. You would love to see a Bumrah or a Starc or an Archer bowl the last 10 balls in a tight run chase.

ECB did a masterstroke by distinguishing itself with this format instead of copying the IPL model like every other country and jumping on the bandwagon a few years too late.

The Hundred will quickly establish itself the second biggest and second best league in the game and the modern flavor of the format could, in the long-term, influence other leagues including the IPL to experiment with the format, which essentially a superior version of the current T20 format.

What about my proposed version of T10, i think it fulfill modern time constraints and entertainment needs even more and is more out of the box than hundred. and i also suggested other improvements in two other formats. And one thing is for sure our of T20, Hundred and T10 only one can survive and by all accounts T10 is more appealing specially for quick bang for buck and considering modern life style of casual fans.

 

[Rajdeep]

As I said a year back, it is a genuine possibility that The Hundred could replace the T20 format in the long-term, just like the 60 over ODI format was supplanted by the 50 over version.

The focus on balls rather than overs is a modern and catchy approach and the 10 ball over could be a game-changer. You would love to see a Bumrah or a Starc or an Archer bowl the last 10 balls in a tight run chase.

ECB did a masterstroke by distinguishing itself with this format instead of copying the IPL model like every other country and jumping on the bandwagon a few years too late.

The Hundred will quickly establish itself the second biggest and second best league in the game and the modern flavor of the format could, in the long-term, influence other leagues including the IPL to experiment with the format, which essentially a superior version of the current T20 format.

You know Mamoon that I absolutely adore and respect you as a poster but I dont like the idea of the hundred replacing T20s in future. 10 over an innings with 10 balls/over is an elongated T10 format basically. Cricket as it is has too many variations - test cricket, 50 overs, 20 overs etc. Throwing in one more variation (which is totally different from basic rule of cricket) just bcoz ECB wants to stand seperate from the crowd dosen't sound like a good idea. It will simply make the game more complicated.

Then again ECB can do whatever they like on their domestic circuit. Just hope it dosen't transcends to international cricket.

 

[IMMY69]

I would like to see a few games of The Hundred before forming a judgment.

But since others here are advocating for it (or not), perhaps they've already seen it and can give their views on how exciting it is a format?

 

[ElRaja]

t20 internationals problem is not the length of the game, its the irrelevance of the format outside of world tournaments, same with odis.

rather than 100 supplanting t20 in internationals, if its successful eventually itll pbly open up circlet boards to being more fancy in their local tournaments, can imagine more "innovations" by the smaller boards to try and get ppls attention and differentiate from ipl.

have max 5 overs per bowler, teams rarely field 5 specialist bowlers anyway, so why not just increase bowling quality by allowing 4 bowlers to bowl 20 overs.

increase margin for error of leg side wides, batsmen move like crazy and invariably swing at balls a few inches down the legside, why not acknowledge that and let bowlers bowl a bit wider on legside.

get rid of legbyes, no place for them in an all action format, if u dont hit the ball with ur bat, u dont get runs.

 

[Mamoon]

What about my proposed version of T10, i think it fulfill modern time constraints and entertainment needs even more and is more out of the box than hundred. and i also suggested other improvements in two other formats. And one thing is for sure our of T20, Hundred and T10 only one can survive and by all accounts T10 is more appealing specially for quick bang for buck and considering modern life style of casual fans.

I think the 10 over format is not long enough to grab attention of the masses. It has been around for 4-5 years now but it has not achieved widespread fan following which is why it is still limited to the Abu Dhabi league.

The T20 over format, or the Hundred, seems to provide the ideal balance between entertainment and duration.

 

[Mamoon]

You know Mamoon that I absolutely adore and respect you as a poster but I dont like the idea of the hundred replacing T20s in future. 10 over an innings with 10 balls/over is an elongated T10 format basically. Cricket as it is has too many variations - test cricket, 50 overs, 20 overs etc. Throwing in one more variation (which is totally different from basic rule of cricket) just bcoz ECB wants to stand seperate from the crowd dosen't sound like a good idea. It will simply make the game more complicated.

Then again ECB can do whatever they like on their domestic circuit. Just hope it dosen't transcends to international cricket.

The T10 format has failed to gain interest because it is too short. 60 balls per innings simply do not provide enough entertainment.

The reason why I think The Hundred will succeed and eventually supplant T20s in the long run is because it is almost the same as T20 cricket with a difference of only 20 balls, plus the added stipulation of one bowler bowling a 10 ball over will prove to be popular. Moreover, the emphasis on balls rather than overs is modern and catchy.

I see T20 vs The Hundred in the same vein as 60 over ODIs vs 50 over ODIs. There is no room for a fourth international format so in the long-term, you will either have T20s or The Hundred, and I feel that the Hundred could win this battle.

 

[Zeshan547]

I think the 10 over format is not long enough to grab attention of the masses. It has been around for 4-5 years now but it has not achieved widespread fan following which is why it is still limited to the Abu Dhabi league.

The T20 over format, or the Hundred, seems to provide the ideal balance between entertainment and duration.

But T10 is the future i think specially for common wealth games and Olympics etc it can easily fit in. Plus as I said above this way IPL And other leagues can manage even the double amount of teams in same time with daily Double headers in prime time. More teams more following, shorter time, more casual fans tuning in for quick gratification, and with 8 player a side it will bring some balance back as well. and main strike bowler can bowl 4th extra over. And as per proper cricket wo tu T20 b nai hai for purest. So cricket should go full futuristic and action on steroids. Why the Abu Dhabi T10 hasn't catched on yet because only has beens or mediocre players played it, plus still people are not fully saturated with 20 over format but down the line in 4 to 5 years even T20 will seem too long for causal fan who want quick entertainment and a two hour going out with fiends or family like football match etc.

 

[Mamoon]

But T10 is the future i think specially for common wealth games and Olympics etc it can easily fit in. Plus as I said above this way IPL And other leagues can manage even the double amount of teams in same time with daily Double headers in prime time. More teams more following, shorter time, more casual fans tuning in for quick gratification, and with 8 player a side it will bring some balance back as well. and main strike bowler can bowl 4th extra over. And as per proper cricket wo tu T20 b nai hai for purest. So cricket should go full futuristic and action on steroids. Why the Abu Dhabi T10 hasn't catched on yet because only has beens or mediocre players played it, plus still people are not fully saturated with 20 over format but down the line in 4 to 5 years even T20 will seem too long for causal fan who want quick entertainment and a two hour going out with fiends or family like football match etc.

T10 format was introduced in 2017 and it has not grabbed the attention of the masses. It is evident by now that it is not the future and has not been well-received by the fans.

It is not about proper/improper cricket. All formats are proper cricket, they simply test different skill-levels. Terms like pure cricket, proper cricket etc. don’t mean anything. Different formats challenge different skills.

If T20 cricket or T10 cricket was easy all great Test players would excel in it, but they cannot because they are not good enough to perform at the level required in these formats.

If T10 cricket succeeds in the future ICC will capitalize on its market, but as of now, it is a flop format and is no threat to T20 cricket.

 

[princeuk]

I would like to see a few games of The Hundred before forming a judgment.

But since others here are advocating for it (or not), perhaps they've already seen it and can give their views on how exciting it is a format?

This, we cant form a judgement yet, however if the ECB have anythign to do with it then yes it will, I think that the ECB deserve it considering that they were the ones that came up with 20/20 but other countries were more succesful in making it an international fixture, i feel that it should have been England in that position.

 

[HitWicket]

The focus on balls rather than overs is a modern and catchy approach and the 10 ball over could be a game-changer. You would love to see a Bumrah or a Starc or an Archer bowl the last 10 balls in a tight run chase.

I think it'll be rare to see pace bowlers going with 10 balls overs, expect it'll be something we see mostly coming from the spinners.

 

[mastimasti]

Let's see how this pans out, the organisation could not have gotten off to a worse start but then again a lot of the issues with covid and travel are out of ECB control.

Having said that, I can see the appeal for broadcasters if it works out well. Shorter time period with more sponsors on our screens, yes!

 

[ChTab]

I hope it doesn't become an international format. How much different it can be from the T20's. I hope this format vanishes in the next 5 years or it doesn't get much attention like the T10 or Hong Kong sixes.

 

[Hasan123]

I think a lot will depend on how The Hundred tournament does. If it successful and makes revenue, it could become a format at international level.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

What ICC should experiment on is a 2 innings ODIs.

Even SRT likes it.

ODIs with 2 innings of 20 overs...

 

[asifp]

For all the hype saying England invented T20, ask any Pakistani club cricketer, that was the only format we playing growing up

 

[Thanos]

I remember reading a newspaper editorial way back in 2007. T20 was getting popular after India's T20 WC win and BCCI was planning IPL.

The editor was lover of longer formats and international games.
He used lines of Bible said by Jesus when he was getting crucified.
Those lines have stayed in my mind since and may be the reason I never liked any T20 tamasha league.

I've same feelings for any new tamasha format.

"Oh God, please forgive them. They don't know what they are doing".

 

[golagunda]

T20s (or the hundreds) format has its place but international cricket is not it. For me T20s should be limited to leagues like the IPL/PSL etc and a T20 world cup every 2 or 3 years. Bilateral T20s are a waste of time and should be scrapped.

 

[Ab Fan]

T20s (or the hundreds) format has its place but international cricket is not it. For me T20s should be limited to leagues like the IPL/PSL etc and a T20 world cup every 2 or 3 years. Bilateral T20s are a waste of time and should be scrapped.

Agreed. Bilateral T20s should be completely scrapped, maybe scrap WT20 too because a WT20 without some practice of bilateral T20s before that doesn't makes sense.

 

[Cric_lover4487]

What cricket fans need to stop is Big 3 monopoly more than T20 leagues. Also the IPL dictating the international calendar

I doubt you would have said the same if Pakistan was part of Big 3.

 

[Rana]

I doubt you would have said the same if Pakistan was part of Big 3.

I doubt Pakistan would be as greedy either.