First impressions of #TheHundred
The quality of cricket was good as expected, but how can we say it's a success?
ECB’s all-new franchise tournament named “The Hundred” kicked off yesterday. And if you (like me) haven’t paid a lot of attention to the rule differences, here’s a quick summary:
Instead of 120 balls as in T20 cricket, each team will get to bat 100 balls.
“Over” is not the terminology for this form and instead each bowler bowls a set of 5 balls with a limit of 20 balls per match. Interestingly though, a bowler is allowed to bowl 10 balls in a row.
Unlike other forms of Cricket, batters are NOT allowed to cross when a catch is taken. So the new batter always faces the next ball. Additionally, the change of end happens once every 10 balls and not every 5 balls.
The PowerPlay consists of 25 balls
If a team is behind on the over-rate, they will be required to field 1 fewer fielder outside the circle from that point.
And that’s about it - pretty much everything else remains the same as T20 Cricket.
Here’s how the 1st edition of the tournament has been laid out:
8 franchises - 2 teams each for Men’s and Women’s
32 group matches, with each franchise playing their local rival (geographically) home and away and then playing the other 6 just once
The team that finishes 1st reaches the Final, 2nd v/s 3rd compete in an Eliminator to get to the Final.
OK - now that we have context out of the way, let’s get into the details.
How did the cricket feel?
Honestly, it felt exactly like any other Women’s T20 league would. Apart from a few dropped catches, the quality of cricket was quite solid and it sure was entertaining. While the graphics and way the scoring felt like a distraction, that’s probably because I am used to watching cricket in a certain way. I am not sure this would be a concern for anyone watching Cricket for the 1st time.
Why was this needed?
Many have asked, So why can’t they just bowl another 20 balls? That’s the thing - it’s not just about the 20 extra balls. If you read the two rules highlighted (in bold) at the beginning, it’s clear that the motivation is to keep the game as short as possible. The rules push teams to keep each game within 2.5 hours and therefore, they are hoping to catch the attention of new viewers who either think “Cricket goes on for too long” or just have less time in the day to watch sports.
In addition, as someone who has tried to explain the sport to Americans on a number of occasions, by simply focusing on balls instead of overs this format is definitely moving in the right direction. Also, for most people, it’s just easier to understand numbers at the Base 10 level as Clive noted.
The changes may feel drastic for ardent fans, but the economics of the broadcasting (which generate most of the money) require modifications if we are hoping to someday see Cricket as a world sport, instead of one played by a handful of Commonwealth nations.
Was it a success?
The day after the 1st game, I have seen a number of English pundits share fantastic numbers. A record audience for women’s cricket in the UK is something to be proud of no doubt.
People want to claim it a success already but the main purpose of this experiment was to get more families and younger audiences involved in the sport. Has that actually worked? Or was it mostly curiosity from existing fans to see what the new format has to offer?
A definite answer will require data to be crunched, surveys to be answered, and engagement to be measured - all of which take time. Anecdotally though, this has been a solid start. Journalists like Jarrod Kimber have written how Cricket in the UK felt like a family affair for the 1st time and here’s a Dad who helps run junior Cricket in the UK sharing his thoughts:
What about impacts on other forms of the game?
This is definitely the hardest question to answer. While T20 and the popularity of contests like the IPL have definitely expanded the reach of the sport and even improved scoring rates in other formats, it has had some negative impacts as well.
It’s safe to say that the majority of Cricket fans follow all the 3 formats, however even among these folks, the excitement around ODI cricket has been decreasing. And between all the T20 franchise leagues around the world, international T20 contests (especially in the men’s game) seem more like one-offs. Therefore, more and more fans seem to prefer Tests, followed by franchise T20 cricket and then T20Is and ODIs.
ICC has rightly started the ODI Super League to add context to each ODI game, and that along with the importance of the ODI World Cup will keep the format safe - for now. But if #TheHundred continues to grow and we start seeing more involvement from stars from India, Pakistan (they bring the fans to the ground and masses to TV), and Australia - then there is certainly a chance that boards will need to prioritize one format over the other.