A match late (we’re adopting the ECB approach to good governance), but what the hell. Here is a thread for general conversation about the ongoing white ball series out in the Caribbean, and for anything else that springs to mind. Unless we decide to write a different post in a day or two. Which we might. Maybe.
Being Outside Cricket 
The batting in the first match was good viewing on a Wednesday evening. But, again, it’s hard to really care too much considering the context of which these games are being played with a WC less than 100 days away now. Win/Lose it realistically has no impact on what is coming. Probably similar to the Test Series. Come the first ball of the ashes the loss here will be a distant memory. Not too sure what I am really trying to say with this post but probably feeling a bit meh towards the whole thing.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t worry, so are most. Even the UK journalists openly admit their page views crash when it’s about ODIs rather than Tests.
LikeLike
The problem is that the pitches make it meh. I really think 220-240 par wickets are way more fun to watch. While for Tests, the toss is simply too important on persistently substandard wickets. Not saying it would be ideal, but the games would be more interesting if they played the Tests on ODI wickets, and the ODIs on the Test wickets.
LikeLike
What you really want is a conversation about the newly revealed playing conditions of the H*ndred. As well as an aside about the ECB/Surrey argument and the fact that the Oval club have “incensed” somebody called Colin Graves. Anyone remember seeing him anywhere recently?
LikeLike
Pretty confident that subject will be returned to! But totally free to talk about anything on here, as ever.
LikeLike
I refuse to call it the hundred, and never will. I will always refer to it as the 16.4 because it is a ludicrous title, and more importantly I believe in the concept of “overs.” An essential component of cricket for over a hundred years.
16.4 shows the stupidity of the whole concept. 16 and a half overs because the people behind it don’t think the target audience are able to count to the already existing 120 by counting to six, and then multiply by 20 overs. The 16.4 is just a rip off of 20/20. A hundred balls instead of 120.
The whole thing is a steaming pile of crap, and could only have been invented by the ECB and all the morons who sail in her.
LikeLike
The Hundred. Just think to myself why…why is this necessary? I get that the cricket is cricket mentality from some comments I have seen from Twitter but that entirely misses the criticism of the whole competition. Why are the ECB putting together something that fans do not want, players do not want and counties realistically do not want. Surely the easier way to do things is make the existing competitions better than they already are? Invest more in the blast and actually make the game more visible. By that you can put it on FTA, subsidize counties t reduce ticket prices or even hold the games on days when people can attend. So much that could have been done with the money the ECB are ploughing into this.
LikeLike
It is really not that hard.
Even if they had insisted on doing the blast in the summer, they could easily have come up with 2-3 fixtures a day to get maximum exposure (due to the number of counties involved, and could thus easily have come up with a mechanism to get at least some of it on FTA. It would have meant that there is more cricket on TV (behind paywall and on FTA), that exposure is thus bigger, and thus that the value of rights is actually higher.
The increased value of the rights can then be used to lower prizes, or to allow the counties to come up with their own marketing strategy. So if they want to bring in the mums and kids that are too moronic to count to six, as per ECB strategy documents, they are free to do so – coming up with offers specifically aimed at new demographics could work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My absolute favourite fact about the 16.4 is that they’ve apparently done lots of market research and will no doubt spend heavily on marketing… while making the decision NOT to simply run with Twenty20 for a tournament to be launched…
…in the calendar year of…
2020
That’s some (white?) elephant in the room they ignored there.
LikeLike
Not sure why England opted to bowl. Probably to get more experience at chasing down a target. Plunkett is the first to strike, 61/1 after 12.1 overs. With Campbell yet again failing to convert a decent start into a 50
West Indies have strengthened the bowling by picking Cotrell over the rather poorly performing Pooran. They will hope that their lower middle order bats a bit better too.
LikeLike
Actually, it’s not chasing that I think we need to practice. I think we’ve already established we’re capable of chasing down anything. I’d look at it as the only way to beat us is to bowl first and hope we mess it up, and therefore the smart thing to do would be to get as much experience as possible winning in those circumstances (i.e. not messing it up).
LikeLiked by 1 person
England only mess up setting a target if the wicket does something, or takes some spin. Not on the roads that are usually dished out for ODIs. I think this England side would really struggle on some UAE pitches, which are sometimes prepared in such a state that even 180 can be competitive.
LikeLike
Have only been listening, not watching, but the fact that WI have found scoring more difficult could be down to 3 reasons:
1 – they didn’t bat as well (though great to see a century for Hetmyer)
2 – England bowled better. Both reasons so far point to an England victory.
3 – more difficult pitch to score on. This, if true, could lead to an interesting and more educational chase for England and their fans.
LikeLike
So England are just 6 overs short of bowling 50 overs in the allotted time. Anyone expect a penalty for yet another tardy overrate?
LikeLike
West Indies are not doing much better. 48 minutes to remain the outstanding 14.2 overs.
And this again gives away the lie that the ICC cares about overrates. They don’t.
LikeLike
Should be listening to Harrison on Talksport now … but … just … too ……. painful ……
LikeLike
Dobell was on straight after and had a nice little rip at the frayed seams of empty suit’s logic for 16/4…
LikeLike
10/2 is not the start England would have wanted. But a chance for the middle order to shine here.
LikeLike
A lot of talk after the first match of how “no target is safe” against England. Whilst true in that we do have a side who will have a go at anything, I certainly don’t make us favourites if someone scores 350 against us, and nor does even recent history. I think the stat was that we have actually failed to chase a 300+ target 7 times out of the last 13, although I am not able to fact check that right now.
I wonder if the West Indies might get on a roll come the WC. No t20 tournaments going on simultaneously means they should be able to pick whoever they want. Can Gayle get fit enough to be able to run singles? Where’s Lewis? Etc.
LikeLike
Best way to beat England ODI at the moment is to go for a more bowler friendly pitch it seems.
Mo looks a bit out of sorts with bat and ball and that bites a lot.
Mind you Curran also didn’t really cover himself with glory, which happens, but again, in closer games those things add up.
LikeLike
Anyway, I really came here to praise SL.
Incredibly bounce back from a rough year.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That looked a really tricky chase at the start of play today and they pulled it off without losing another wicket. Two wins in contrasting fashions and, I read, it’s the first ever series win by an Asian side in SA!
LikeLike
Another success story for ECB: Duanne Olivier is the latest Kolpak. Integrity of the international game means a lot, huh?
LikeLike
Don’t think you can reasonably lay the Kolpak thing at the door of the ECB to be honest. It’s a legal issue they can’t stop.
LikeLike
Olivier will be making more money playing domestic cricket than he could have made by playing international cricket. Comfortably so.
The ECB can perfectly stop it. One is to limit the subsidies the counties get, if they want to sign Kolpaks (and undoubtedly there are legal ways to do so – just as there are legal ways of making certain enough U-26 players are picked etc.). Really not that hard to do, since the ECB basically pays for all the domestic players’ salaries with the Sky money. So basically the money that the ECB makes from international cricket (the rights) is then used to reduce the quality of international cricket. Sensible.
The other would be a more equitable funding model, so that the smaller teams can pay the international players reasonably well, so that domestic cricketers in England / India / Australia don’t make more for playing domestic cricket than others do for playing international cricket.
Oh, a few years ago, a county wanted to sign Marchant de Lange on a Kolpak. That did not happen, due to not having played enough international cricket. But since his wife is Danish, he could sign on anyways. Which makes me wonder: are there tax benefits these Kolpaks get, compared to the exercise of EU citizens’ rights? Because otherwise it would have made no sense for Marchant to try to go Kolpak first.
LikeLike
Its actually not that straightforward, because if it’s really pushed to make a Kolpak unattractive as an option, that in itself can be deemed discriminatory. So doing what you say would fall foul of the law, which is why they’ve done it on the basis of developing England qualified players. But even that isn’t perfect as a young Kolpak can become one of those of course.
Unfortunately, the law prevents all those that might seem immediately obvious, it cannot act in a way that appears discriminatory at all.
LikeLike
Age discrimination is allowed. Not just in cricket, but plenty of other sports.
As for discrimination being allowed on the basis of nationality, that is also perfectly okay too (non-Full Member cricketers could not sign county contracts because of that). As far as I know, that nonsense has not even been challenged in court.
There is no will from the ECB to address the issue. That is all.
Apparently, Olivier will be the 59th Kolpak, and the 40th South African to go this route. Maybe Cricket South Africa should apply to become the 19th county in England.
LikeLike
It’s only allowed on nationality if outside the EU, otherwise they must be treated the same. The nature of the Kolpak issue is that it’s grandfathered in the EU basis, so they must be treated the same. The sporting exemptions are minimal here, which is why giving up their international aspirations means they are then treated identically to EU potential employees – and that’s the problem.
Age discrimination is very limited too.
I have total sympathy with the South African issue, but this is not at all straightforward legally, and in this one instance, the ECB are not culpable.
LikeLike
Whilst I agree that the Kolpak Option is not something the ECB can make go away, D’Arthez s right that the current funding model means cricketers from outside the big three will look to ‘domestic’ cricket to earn their corn. If cricket South Africa was funded better, then there would be less South African kolpaks and T20 specialists. The revenue hoarding model can and should be laid at the ECB’s door
LikeLiked by 1 person
Totally agree on that.
LikeLike
At least Olivier will raise the level of talent in the county game. Glamorgan typically played 7 players who weren’t born or raised in the UK last season, albeit only one was a Kolpak and the rest on UK/EU passports, and they were crap at everything.
LikeLike
I wish they would NOT raise the level of the county game. Because then these players would not be missed by their national side(s). Glamorgan having 7 poor Kolpaks is definitely more preferable than English counties buying themselves a Test-quality attack. Because that does not adversely impact on the national sides of these nations.
But it should be pointed out, that it is clearly beyond the counties to investing in the local youth.
The problem now is for CSA is that they can’t hand out caps to anyone anymore, lest they qualify for Kolpaks. And the problem for the WICB is that they can’t let anyone take up cricket, lest they be poached on sporting scholarships. That is a great way to nurture the game! Need a spinner? Buy an Afghani! Need a pacer? Buy a South African. Need an allrounder? Buy a Barbadian!
Why bother playing international cricket when one or two sides habitually cripple other teams with their financial doping, TIME AND AGAIN, on the basis of the finances gained through the international game?
LikeLike
The kolpak thing is based on football. Cape verde seems to bat high on providing footballers to top clubs. The local cricket ground is looking neglected these days
LikeLike
Wasn’t it a case of a Slovakian handballer, pre that country’s accession to the EU, that brought about the situation, i.e, someone from a country with a trade agreement with the EU, can seek to settle provided they have an employment contract or something similar? Sometimes folks set themselves up as businesses but whatever the case folk who have business or employment arrangements can take those up as things stand.
Anyway got to admit I have seen little of the ODIs. Can’t get into them, no matter how dynamic the England batting lineup is.
LikeLike
That guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maro%C5%A1_Kolpak
Luckily it was him and not, say, Csaba Szücs.
LikeLike
I see Adil Rashid has been bowling too slowly again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, and those utterly meaningless tailender wickets really flattered his bowling figures 😉
LikeLike