BertieWoostersDonsClub wrote:
I've seen the first few mens games in The Hundred competition but I've found them a hard watch.
I can cope with the format of the matches - I've seen plenty of T20, and shortened games of 5 or 10 overs, so it's not too dissimilar to those just with an extra layer of annoying gimmicks to cope with.
But, God, the presentation of it is bloody hard work. I'm really hating the way it's all put across - DJ's and half time music performances, and explanations of the rules and terms, just feels like I'm watching bloody NASL / early MLS games in America. Then there's way more presenters / commentators / intrusive pitch side interviews with fans and celebrities, etc, than is necessary. I know they're trying to push for a more diverse audience, so want that reflected in the presentation and coverage, but it leads to a lot of unnecessary and intrusive segments, interviews, music, etc, in order to crowbar so much in to appeal to the specific demographic that they're trying to attract.
The matches themselves are watchable - despite it continuing the 'dumbed down' trend of the modern era. But the whole hoopla around it is awful for me - not surprising, as I'm very specifically
not the demographic they're aiming it at - and I've found myself mostly watching it with the sound off, and avoiding the build up and between innings parts.
It's a competition that wasn't really needed. The T20 format works so well around the world, I don't get the need to shorten it any more, and at the same time effectively downgrade the 50 over competition because any decent players are unavailable, and push any remaining red ball county cricket into September which doesn't help our test team.
A re-vamp of our T20 competition, bringing in more international stars and making it available to terrestrial tv too, was all that was needed.
I also don't like it that my favourite Worcestershire player isn't even playing for the Birmingham team - he's in the Trent team!
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
