Jim05 wrote:Will be interesting to see much money the SACA make or lose from the test. Would conservatively think maybe 10-20,000 tix already pre sold for the two days to be refunded that's a fair bit of coin to hand back. The real winner will be the C9, sounds like their ratings were through the roof
True, but the crowd numbers for the first three days were quite significant - would be more than they'd anticipated I would suspect given the numbers over the first two tests, so may well even out.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
Grahaml wrote:I think you've got to say it was a success. The conditions were good enough for batting that sides could score 200. was probably the first time in a long time that there was no real clear change in the conditions. As close to a fair contest as you can get. The fact it was done and dusted in 3 days is disappointing but given the raft of differences I don't think it was unreasonable. No doubt it was a tad on the too tough side batting wise, but not a lot. The batsmen will learn a lot from this and had they another one next week, I'm sure we'd have seen higher scores.
Yeah, fair point, given the players haven't been too many day-night Shield games either, which begs the question if we have two day-night tests, how many more Shield games will be programmed at night?
In another indication that day-night Test cricket is here to stay, the thrilling finale to the inaugural match at Adelaide Oval on Sunday was watched by 3.19 million TV viewers in Australia.
The innovation – aimed at boosting crowd figures and interest in the five-day format – was a prime-time ratings hit for the Nine Network across all three days, with an average audience of 2.313 million fans watching Sunday’s night session.
"The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment" – Warren Bennis
Grahaml wrote:I think you've got to say it was a success. The conditions were good enough for batting that sides could score 200. was probably the first time in a long time that there was no real clear change in the conditions. As close to a fair contest as you can get. The fact it was done and dusted in 3 days is disappointing but given the raft of differences I don't think it was unreasonable. No doubt it was a tad on the too tough side batting wise, but not a lot. The batsmen will learn a lot from this and had they another one next week, I'm sure we'd have seen higher scores.
I'm not so sure about that part. Hooping unplayable outswingers are always hooping unplayable outswingers.
I think the bowlers would have learnt more, needing to be fuller than any other match they play in and I bet the next day/night Test isn't played on a fluffy grassy deck like the weekends event.
carey wrote:The back of the members was packed out all day
Thought it might have been, it's quite funny how many people go to the cricket and don't watch the cricket. Did you go to the cas Saturday night?
Was refused entry to the Cas and Woolshed Sat night I was devo'd
Eh, how the hell do you get refused from the cas?
I went there after a work function, did a couple of laps, had one bet and came out $100 up and then thought I better get my date home before my willy stopped working.
Jim05 wrote:Will be interesting to see much money the SACA make or lose from the test. Would conservatively think maybe 10-20,000 tix already pre sold for the two days to be refunded that's a fair bit of coin to hand back. The real winner will be the C9, sounds like their ratings were through the roof
I was told by a brewery rep in the last session on Friday that they had just gone onto Day 3s grog supply. Thought catering wise Friday was a disgrace, apparently it improved saturday and sunday. 47000 cricket fans obviously require more catering that 47000 footy fans
Supercoach Spring Racing Champion 2019 Spargo's Good Friday Cup Champion 2020
Jim05 wrote:Will be interesting to see much money the SACA make or lose from the test. Would conservatively think maybe 10-20,000 tix already pre sold for the two days to be refunded that's a fair bit of coin to hand back. The real winner will be the C9, sounds like their ratings were through the roof
I was told by a brewery rep in the last session on Friday that they had just gone onto Day 3s grog supply. Thought catering wise Friday was a disgrace, apparently it improved saturday and sunday. 47000 cricket fans obviously require more catering that 47000 footy fans
Jim05 wrote:Will be interesting to see much money the SACA make or lose from the test. Would conservatively think maybe 10-20,000 tix already pre sold for the two days to be refunded that's a fair bit of coin to hand back. The real winner will be the C9, sounds like their ratings were through the roof
I was told by a brewery rep in the last session on Friday that they had just gone onto Day 3s grog supply. Thought catering wise Friday was a disgrace, apparently it improved saturday and sunday. 47000 cricket fans obviously require more catering that 47000 footy fans
Grahaml wrote:I think you've got to say it was a success. The conditions were good enough for batting that sides could score 200. was probably the first time in a long time that there was no real clear change in the conditions. As close to a fair contest as you can get. The fact it was done and dusted in 3 days is disappointing but given the raft of differences I don't think it was unreasonable. No doubt it was a tad on the too tough side batting wise, but not a lot. The batsmen will learn a lot from this and had they another one next week, I'm sure we'd have seen higher scores.
I'm not so sure about that part. Hooping unplayable outswingers are always hooping unplayable outswingers.
I think the bowlers would have learnt more, needing to be fuller than any other match they play in and I bet the next day/night Test isn't played on a fluffy grassy deck like the weekends event.
Mark Taylor did a thorough analysis of some dismissals, pointing out how techniques were making batsmen more prone to the swinging ball. In any contest, it's always the one who struggled more who learns the most. I do agree about the pitch though. I think the curator just went a little too far on the bowler friendly side and maybe the ball might need a minor tweak. But neither were far off the mark IMHO.
The positive is we got a result Perhaps it was too bowler friendly but far too often in recent times the batsmen have had too many things in their favour. I actually don't mind wickets like the one we just had.....just proves that having big chunks of wood for a bat doesn't help poor techniques.
Matty Wade is a star and deserves more respect from the forum family!
The good players adapt to whatever conditions present at the start of day 1. It should be hard to bat first session of a test that's why its called that. Very kinda English conditions. I enjoyed the contest for a change instead of watching a 1400 runfest.
