info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The T20 penny drops with Jimmy Anderson
85 views
Skip to first unread message
RH156RH
Mar 3, 2018, 12:30:02 PM3/3/18
to
http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/22625262/james-anderson-adds-voice-test-fears
Anderson adds voice to Test fears
play
James Anderson has admitted he fears for the future of Test cricket as players and spectators favour the shorter formats.
While Anderson, a veteran of 134 Tests, insists a career as a T20 specialist would never have appealed to him, he concedes younger players could be seduced by a format of the game that is, as he puts it, "easier on the body and brain and a lot easier on the pocket". As a result, he feels it appears "less likely" that all three formats of the game will survive.
And while Anderson defended the ECB's apparent prioritisation of white-ball cricket in recent times - "what the ECB did was the right thing as our white-ball form was horrendous" - he has also called on the governing body to do something to ensure Test cricket isn't "pushed to one side".
Anderson's comments are, in part, inspired by recent announcements from Alex Hales, Adil Rashid and Morne Morkel who have all committed themselves, in the short term at least, to a future outside Test cricket. But Anderson was also alarmed by the paucity of spectators attending the first day of the Test series between South Africa and Australia in Durban.
"That's potentially the most exciting series around the world," Anderson says, "but crowds around the world seem to be dwindling.
"It's a really tricky time for cricket. And yes, I do worry that it could become a one-format game. People have asked for a long time if three formats can survive and, the more time goes on, the less likely it looks. I'd hate to see it. I'd hate to see cricket being a one-format game."
Although unsurprised by recent developments he feels there is a danger such prioritisation of T20 cricket will "set an example" to young players.
"I am not surprised at all. I thought it would happen with the way contracts have gone and I am sure there will be other people that follow in the future," he said. "There are incentives in white-ball cricket now, especially being able to play all the Twenty20 stuff around the world. It's getting quite lucrative in terms of the money you can earn.
"The danger for us is that it becomes, not an epidemic, but popular among players to do this. I do worry if more and more players do this, whether that sets the kind of example we want for younger guys coming through into the game. Will they want to go on and play Test cricket and put in the hard graft of playing five days on tough pitches? Or will they want to go forward in a game that would potentially be more lucrative for them?
"If you speak to the young guys coming through, the chance to play Test cricket is still what motivates them. I just worry they will get caught up in T20 as it's easier on the body and brain. And a lot easier on the pocket as well."
Anderson adds voice to Test fears
play
James Anderson has admitted he fears for the future of Test cricket as players and spectators favour the shorter formats.
While Anderson, a veteran of 134 Tests, insists a career as a T20 specialist would never have appealed to him, he concedes younger players could be seduced by a format of the game that is, as he puts it, "easier on the body and brain and a lot easier on the pocket". As a result, he feels it appears "less likely" that all three formats of the game will survive.
And while Anderson defended the ECB's apparent prioritisation of white-ball cricket in recent times - "what the ECB did was the right thing as our white-ball form was horrendous" - he has also called on the governing body to do something to ensure Test cricket isn't "pushed to one side".
Anderson's comments are, in part, inspired by recent announcements from Alex Hales, Adil Rashid and Morne Morkel who have all committed themselves, in the short term at least, to a future outside Test cricket. But Anderson was also alarmed by the paucity of spectators attending the first day of the Test series between South Africa and Australia in Durban.
"That's potentially the most exciting series around the world," Anderson says, "but crowds around the world seem to be dwindling.
"It's a really tricky time for cricket. And yes, I do worry that it could become a one-format game. People have asked for a long time if three formats can survive and, the more time goes on, the less likely it looks. I'd hate to see it. I'd hate to see cricket being a one-format game."
Although unsurprised by recent developments he feels there is a danger such prioritisation of T20 cricket will "set an example" to young players.
"I am not surprised at all. I thought it would happen with the way contracts have gone and I am sure there will be other people that follow in the future," he said. "There are incentives in white-ball cricket now, especially being able to play all the Twenty20 stuff around the world. It's getting quite lucrative in terms of the money you can earn.
"The danger for us is that it becomes, not an epidemic, but popular among players to do this. I do worry if more and more players do this, whether that sets the kind of example we want for younger guys coming through into the game. Will they want to go on and play Test cricket and put in the hard graft of playing five days on tough pitches? Or will they want to go forward in a game that would potentially be more lucrative for them?
"If you speak to the young guys coming through, the chance to play Test cricket is still what motivates them. I just worry they will get caught up in T20 as it's easier on the body and brain. And a lot easier on the pocket as well."
jzfre...@gmail.com
Mar 4, 2018, 9:20:04 PM3/4/18
to
Hopefully they' just let the 50 over game die the death it should.
Michael Gooding
Mar 5, 2018, 9:03:56 AM3/5/18
to
The market rules; we shouldn't subsidise any variant of the game. If people fail to come and advertisers fail to advertise, then that version of the game's done.
RH156RH
Mar 5, 2018, 2:23:54 PM3/5/18
to
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:03:56 PM UTC, Michael Gooding wrote:
> The market rules; we shouldn't subsidise any variant of the game. If people fail to come and advertisers fail to advertise, then that version of the game's done.
The soulless mind of the laissez faire religious believer on display... RH
> The market rules; we shouldn't subsidise any variant of the game. If people fail to come and advertisers fail to advertise, then that version of the game's done.
Michael Gooding
Mar 6, 2018, 9:38:25 AM3/6/18
to
Cricket exists for the spectator, although codified for the gambler; if the consumer is no longer willing to pay for a product then that product must be subsidised or die.
F1 is subsidised by governments everywhere (except the UK), as it's a money-loser - do you think we should subsidise it here?
Mike Gooding
----------------
F1 is subsidised by governments everywhere (except the UK), as it's a money-loser - do you think we should subsidise it here?
Mike Gooding
----------------
John Hall
Mar 6, 2018, 2:31:21 PM3/6/18
to
In message <9e7c3361-0b19-4a29...@googlegroups.com>,
Michael Gooding <michael...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
brings in enough income from tourists visiting because of the race to
make the subsidy worthwhile.
> - do you think we should subsidise it here?
I wondert whether we get many tourists coming to Silverstone or Brands
Hatch. They are hardly as glamorous locations as Monte Carlo.
--
John Hall
"Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history
that man can never learn anything from history."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
Michael Gooding <michael...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>F1 is subsidised by governments everywhere (except the UK), as it's a
>money-loser
I'm surprised. If they do so, it is presumably because they think it
>money-loser
brings in enough income from tourists visiting because of the race to
make the subsidy worthwhile.
> - do you think we should subsidise it here?
Hatch. They are hardly as glamorous locations as Monte Carlo.
--
John Hall
"Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history
that man can never learn anything from history."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
RH156RH
Mar 6, 2018, 2:35:48 PM3/6/18
to
Henry
Mar 6, 2018, 3:00:11 PM3/6/18
to
flag beside his name? The constructor standings have no such national
identity beside their team name.
David North
Mar 6, 2018, 3:48:35 PM3/6/18
to
each race though.
--
David North
Bob Dubery
Mar 6, 2018, 10:06:52 PM3/6/18
to
Teams and drivers are tied to a country, but are not representative in the sense that there is a single team representing a country.
Bob Dubery
Mar 6, 2018, 10:14:56 PM3/6/18
to
On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 21:31:21 UTC+2, John Hall wrote:
> In message <9e7c3361-0b19-4a29...@googlegroups.com>,
> Michael Gooding <michael...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
> >F1 is subsidised by governments everywhere (except the UK), as it's a
> >money-loser
>
> I'm surprised. If they do so, it is presumably because they think it
> brings in enough income from tourists visiting because of the race to
> make the subsidy worthwhile.
That's the usual defence. The race in Austin for example, is monitored by State government. The subsidy they get from the state of Texas is based on the increase in hotel bookings, restaurant revenues and so on.
> In message <9e7c3361-0b19-4a29...@googlegroups.com>,
> Michael Gooding <michael...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
> >F1 is subsidised by governments everywhere (except the UK), as it's a
> >money-loser
>
> I'm surprised. If they do so, it is presumably because they think it
> brings in enough income from tourists visiting because of the race to
> make the subsidy worthwhile.
Does Britain not do this for things like a Cricket world cup?
RH156RH
Mar 7, 2018, 2:15:15 AM3/7/18
to
John Hall
Mar 7, 2018, 3:54:00 AM3/7/18
to
In message <862ac779-62e5-4e8d...@googlegroups.com>, Bob
Dubery <mega...@gmail.com> writes
Not that I've ever heard of.
Dubery <mega...@gmail.com> writes
Mike Holmans
Mar 7, 2018, 5:42:46 AM3/7/18
to
On Wed, 7 Mar 2018 08:46:33 +0000, John Hall <john_...@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:
>In message <862ac779-62e5-4e8d...@googlegroups.com>, Bob
>Dubery <mega...@gmail.com> writes
>>On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 21:31:21 UTC+2, John Hall wrote:
>>> In message <9e7c3361-0b19-4a29...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Michael Gooding <michael...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>>> >F1 is subsidised by governments everywhere (except the UK), as it's a
>>> >money-loser
>>>
>>> I'm surprised. If they do so, it is presumably because they think it
>>> brings in enough income from tourists visiting because of the race to
>>> make the subsidy worthwhile.
>>
>>That's the usual defence. The race in Austin for example, is monitored
>>by State government. The subsidy they get from the state of Texas is
>>based on the increase in hotel bookings, restaurant revenues and so on.
>>
>>Does Britain not do this for things like a Cricket world cup?
>
>Not that I've ever heard of.
Certainly not for a single-sport event. I think it's a bit different
for a city hosting an Olympic or Commonwealth Games, but that's not a
very common event.
Cheers,
Mike
wrote:
>In message <862ac779-62e5-4e8d...@googlegroups.com>, Bob
>Dubery <mega...@gmail.com> writes
>>On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 21:31:21 UTC+2, John Hall wrote:
>>> In message <9e7c3361-0b19-4a29...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Michael Gooding <michael...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>>> >F1 is subsidised by governments everywhere (except the UK), as it's a
>>> >money-loser
>>>
>>> I'm surprised. If they do so, it is presumably because they think it
>>> brings in enough income from tourists visiting because of the race to
>>> make the subsidy worthwhile.
>>
>>That's the usual defence. The race in Austin for example, is monitored
>>by State government. The subsidy they get from the state of Texas is
>>based on the increase in hotel bookings, restaurant revenues and so on.
>>
>>Does Britain not do this for things like a Cricket world cup?
>
>Not that I've ever heard of.
for a city hosting an Olympic or Commonwealth Games, but that's not a
very common event.
Cheers,
Mike
0 new messages