Re: Sam Curran: English cricket needs to accept the H*****d

by adelaide Sun Aug 27, 2023 12:18 am

Chinaman wrote:Well you can apply that to almost anything including this blog.

You can indeed. I wouldn't assume that views expressed on this forum are actually representative of anyone but the people making the posts, however well or politely they are put. Same applies to any HYS on the Hundred; you can't take it that the dislike expressed there are at all representative of actual or potential cricket supporters as a whole. They may well be but the HYSs and forums don't provide reliable evidence.

by VicNorth Sun Aug 27, 2023 3:50 am

Badges wrote:https://countycricket.substack.com/p/no-102-aug-26-the-grumblers-county?fbclid=IwAR0q5GLKtoqEOprgJgkU-qZEUzu1q7nwbf2xa1Y-TRj9I6_CoqvRBDI0eLA

This is excellent. Thanks for posting.

by Chinaman Sun Aug 27, 2023 5:34 am

adelaide wrote:
Chinaman wrote:Well you can apply that to almost anything including this blog.

You can indeed. I wouldn't assume that views expressed on this forum are actually representative of anyone but the people making the posts, however well or politely they are put. Same applies to any HYS on the Hundred; you can't take it that the dislike expressed there are at all representative of actual or potential cricket supporters as a whole. They may well be but the HYSs and forums don't provide reliable evidence.

Not reliable but actually a fairly good indicator of the situation or mood of the people at the time. Mind you, you get a pretty good idea of how awful the 100 is by talking to friends at the game and opinions on here. Many will agree with the opinions of others. TV figures are probably more a reliable indicator however of the relatively small audience that watch it.
The BBC is trying to meet the case for ULEZ in a bottom of the page article this morning, but doesn't touch on the real reason why the Great Dictator of London who calls people obscene names who don't agree with him, is actually doing it. You have to go to other news media for that.

by adelaide Sun Aug 27, 2023 8:59 am

Chinaman wrote:Not reliable but actually a fairly good indicator of the situation or mood of the people at the time.

The mood of the very few people who post, not "the people".

Chinaman wrote:The BBC is trying to meet the case for ULEZ in a bottom of the page article this morning, but doesn't touch on the real reason why the Great Dictator of London who calls people obscene names who don't agree with him, is actually doing it. You have to go to other news media for that.

Other news media such as the Daily Mail, perhaps? They definitely have got their own agenda (which includes BBC-bashing of course)! The most often quoted "real reason" is to raise revenue but the projections say that it won't after the first two or three years, so I'm not sure that washes very well. I'm not going to get into the merits or otherwise of ULEZ itself (outbreak of mass cheering).

by Jackers Sun Aug 27, 2023 9:36 am

The greatest example is twitter. If you believed that what is trending is fully representative of public opinion, Jeremy Corbyn would have won a landslide (twice) and Donald Trump would have been hanged, drawn and quartered (rather than merely indicted) by consensual acclamation. The platform is 97% dominated by liberal left contributors. Adelaide has a point that the BBC "Have your say" responses consist of those who have a particularly strong dislike of the Hundred, but this is largely because the national publicly-funded broadcaster's biased "pro-Hundred" propaganda articles provoke and require the opposite viewpoint for counterbalance.

by dougieginn Sun Aug 27, 2023 9:39 am

Chinaman wrote:
adelaide wrote:
Chinaman wrote:Well you can apply that to almost anything including this blog.

You can indeed. I wouldn't assume that views expressed on this forum are actually representative of anyone but the people making the posts, however well or politely they are put. Same applies to any HYS on the Hundred; you can't take it that the dislike expressed there are at all representative of actual or potential cricket supporters as a whole. They may well be but the HYSs and forums don't provide reliable evidence.

Not reliable but actually a fairly good indicator of the situation or mood of the people at the time. Mind you, you get a pretty good idea of how awful the 100 is by talking to friends at the game and opinions on here. Many will agree with the opinions of others. TV figures are probably more a reliable indicator however of the relatively small audience that watch it.
The BBC is trying to meet the case for ULEZ in a bottom of the page article this morning, but doesn't touch on the real reason why the Great Dictator of London who calls people obscene names who don't agree with him, is actually doing it. You have to go to other news media for that.[/

Wasn’t sure what I was reading when I saw this coming,thought I was reading the Daily Mail!! By the way “Dictators “ aren’t elected ,by definition!
I don’t think we should be using this forum for political diatribes!!!!

by Badges Sun Aug 27, 2023 10:37 am

VicNorth wrote:
Badges wrote:https://countycricket.substack.com/p/no-102-aug-26-the-grumblers-county?fbclid=IwAR0q5GLKtoqEOprgJgkU-qZEUzu1q7nwbf2xa1Y-TRj9I6_CoqvRBDI0eLA

This is excellent. Thanks for posting.

This bloke is very good.He has a column in The Cricket Paper every Sunday.

by VicNorth Sun Aug 27, 2023 10:47 am

'I don't think we should be using this forum for political debates."

It is a political debate!

by dougieginn Sun Aug 27, 2023 11:37 am

VicNorth wrote:'I don't think we should be using this forum for political debates."

It is a political debate!

It is CRICKET forum not a political forum for goodness sake, set up for Surrey members to exchange views concerning Surrey and other cricket matters. If you want to discuss political matters,I suggest you go to an appropriate site!!!

by Chinaman Sun Aug 27, 2023 12:29 pm

dougieginn wrote:
VicNorth wrote:'I don't think we should be using this forum for political debates."

It is a political debate!
It is CRICKET forum not a political forum for goodness sake, set up for Surrey members to exchange views concerning Surrey and other cricket matters. If you want to discuss political matters,I suggest you go to an appropriate site!!!

Sometimes topics cross into other areas, like BBC and cricket for example.

by VicNorth Sun Aug 27, 2023 1:47 pm

I can't believe people are coming out with nonsense like this!

by VicNorth Sun Aug 27, 2023 1:49 pm

How the **** is corporate greed vs. the people not a political issue?

by Chinaman Sun Aug 27, 2023 2:40 pm

VicNorth wrote:How the **** is corporate greed vs. the people not a political issue?

Eh?

by dougieginn Mon Aug 28, 2023 9:41 am

Returning to the real thread ie Sam Curran etc etc. I’d like to inject some realism into the debate: Sam’s views I’m sure are identical to the other 12 Surrey players in the100. If we’re getting rid of Sam ,are we getting rid of the other 12, obviously not!!! That really would be cutting our nose off .. We have to accept that we can do nothing about this until after 2028. Can’t blame anyone for trying to maximise their earnings,can you?? As long as it doesn’t harm Surrey cricket,we just have to accept it until 2028!!!

by Chinaman Mon Aug 28, 2023 10:03 am

dougieginn wrote:Returning to the real thread ie Sam Curran etc etc. I’d like to inject some realism into the debate: Sam’s views I’m sure are identical to the other 12 Surrey players in the100. If we’re getting rid of Sam ,are we getting rid of the other 12, obviously not!!! That really would be cutting our nose off .. We have to accept that we can do nothing about this until after 2028. Can’t blame anyone for trying to maximise their earnings,can you?? As long as it doesn’t harm Surrey cricket,we just have to accept it until 2028!!!

Of course any one is entitled to maximise their earnings. In saying that when Sam Curran and Co are getting half a million quid to play in the IPL and other T20 Leagues and still expect to play for their countries when it's convenient, it's rather bordering on greed to me.

And it harms all the counties cricket and demeans other formats, not just Surrey: we struggled to put out a side in the ODC with 12 "missing" players, a couple of whom miraculously recovered from injury just in time for the 100.

Maybe it's time for those who want to play the hit and giggle circus to do so full time, and get other new players into the counties who might be more keen to play the County Game. Not sure these guys can keep having it both ways.

by Badges Mon Aug 28, 2023 12:40 pm

More,more,more.When do you have enough? If you already have a million,or two,or three why do you need more? To pinch a line from an article i read...............

Full bank account empty moral compass.

by Chinaman Mon Aug 28, 2023 1:13 pm

Badges wrote:More,more,more.When do you have enough? If you already have a million,or two,or three why do you need more? To pinch a line from an article i read...............

Full bank account empty moral compass.

Sorry to be off topic but

Maybe they should give their millions to Sadie Khan to bail out TFL instead of ripping off motorists?
Actually it could be better used to clean up all the toxicity on the London Underground.

by dougieginn Mon Aug 28, 2023 1:14 pm

I suggest that Surrey do benefit from the 100, in the rental they get from providing the Oval for the O I. home fixtures, no one mentions that,do they?? If we prevent the 13 from playing in the 100 for other teams,I suspect we may fall foul of employment legislation. Agree we should have more financial compensation from those that steal our players,rather than produce their own. The fact that we can’t field a decent side in the ODC is a tribute to our strength in depth. It’s a second rate competition anyway. I think you are swimming against the tide if you think it will change before 2028.

by VicNorth Mon Aug 28, 2023 1:19 pm

Badges wrote:More,more,more.When do you have enough? If you already have a million,or two,or three why do you need more? To pinch a line from an article i read...............

Full bank account empty moral compass.

And what on earth could that possibly have to do with politics?

by VicNorth Mon Aug 28, 2023 1:21 pm

Chinaman wrote:
Badges wrote:More,more,more.When do you have enough? If you already have a million,or two,or three why do you need more? To pinch a line from an article i read...............

Full bank account empty moral compass.

Sorry to be off topic but

Maybe they should give their millions to Sadie Khan to bail out TFL instead of ripping off motorists?
Actually it could be better used to clean up all the toxicity on the London Underground.

Clean air and wholesome cricket are natural bedfellows, Mr Eh.

by Chinaman Mon Aug 28, 2023 1:34 pm

[quote="VicNorth"]

Chinaman wrote:
Badges wrote:More,more,more.When do you have enough? If you already have a million,or two,or three why do you need more? To pinch a line from an article i read...............

Full bank account empty moral compass.

Sorry to be off topic but

Maybe they should give their millions to Sadie Khan to bail out TFL instead of ripping off motorists?
Actually it could be better used to clean up all the toxicity on the London Underground.

Clean air and wholesome cricket are natural bedfellows, Mr Eh.[/quote

Couldn't agree more, except ULEZ has nothing to do with clean air.

by dougieginn Mon Aug 28, 2023 2:01 pm

Chinaman wrote:
VicNorth wrote:
Chinaman wrote:
Badges wrote:More,more,more.When do you have enough? If you already have a million,or two,or three why do you need more? To pinch a line from an article i read...............

Full bank account empty moral compass.

Sorry to be off topic but

Maybe they should give their millions to Sadie Khan to bail out TFL instead of ripping off motorists?
Actually it could be better used to clean up all the toxicity on the London Underground.

Clean air and wholesome cricket are natural bedfellows, Mr Eh.[/quote

Couldn't agree more, except ULEZ has nothing to do with clean air.

More political diatribes in a cricket forum,don’t answer any of the points I made,I give up.

by Jackers Mon Aug 28, 2023 3:40 pm

Gould and Thompson need to do whatever is possible within the parameters of the existing contract to marginalise this nonsense. Ideally it should be moved to May, but if this is really not going to be acceptable to the broadcasters then it should be reduced to a three-week window in August, allowing for a round of championship cricket. There should be a cap on the number of players who can be taken at any one time from a county. If this means that we lose people who don't want to play for Surrey except when there is nothing else going on then so be it.

Longer term, the negotiations with the TV companies should centre around a single white-ball competition, whether of 20-overs or 100 balls, but played by all 18 counties in the school holidays. The Welsh Wallies and the Northern Numpties can be consigned to the dustbin, as well as the Oval Invisibles.

by adelaide Mon Aug 28, 2023 5:37 pm

Badges wrote:More,more,more.When do you have enough? If you already have a million,or two,or three why do you need more? To pinch a line from an article i read...............

Full bank account empty moral compass.

However rich they are, people think it's those who have twice what they have who are rich, not them.

Some footballers will still earn more in a week than an agglomeration of Currans in a year!

by adelaide Mon Aug 28, 2023 5:44 pm

Chinaman wrote:
VicNorth wrote:
Chinaman wrote:
Badges wrote:More,more,more.When do you have enough? If you already have a million,or two,or three why do you need more? To pinch a line from an article i read...............

Full bank account empty moral compass.

Sorry to be off topic but

Maybe they should give their millions to Sadie Khan to bail out TFL instead of ripping off motorists?
Actually it could be better used to clean up all the toxicity on the London Underground.

Clean air and wholesome cricket are natural bedfellows, Mr Eh.[/quote

Couldn't agree more, except ULEZ has nothing to do with clean air.

You can argue that there are ulterior motives or that there are better ways of getting to clean air. But to claim that ULEZ is nothing at all to do with clean air seems to be losing the plot.

ULEZ of course is relevant to cricket as you won't be able to drive to The Oval in a non-exempt car without paying the charge. Shocking.

Oh, hang on a moment, you haven't been able to do that for years.

It is curious how this ULEZ extension is the focus of so much anger compared to the original LEZ and the extension of ULEZ out to the NCR and the South Circular Goat Path).

by Sponsored content