[Ska'dForLife-WBA]

Anybody watching it then?

Yeah I watched it, I struggled to get my head around the concept at first while watching the Manchester Originals bat but when the Oval Invincibles went in for their innings it started to make sense. The graphics for the scorecard are the only problem in my opinion. 100 balls is technically 16 overs with 4 extra balls but over's don't exist and the bowlers can bowl either 5 balls or 10 balls and the umpire holds a white piece of card up to single change of bowler. The umpires did get a bit confused at one point over free hits.

I recorded it and just got through watching now. A lot of what I predicted seems to be true, especially with regards to the desperate pundits; I was especially impressed by the absolute div who was gushing about "a filled stadium" whilst standing in front of a backdrop of stands that were visibly half-empty at best.

The scorecard graphics have definitely been tailored for simpletons, though I think they've done well with the DRS display, where all the available camera angles are simultaneously onscreen, and the third umpire doesn't have to fanny about asking for them. If this technology has been on offer for some time then it's poor that other formats of the game haven't used it before, because it clearly streamlines things and keeps the game ticking over.

As for the overs thing, pre-tournament I was under the impression that the final ten balls of an innings would be from a single bowler, mandatory. Have they scrapped that? Because Manchester switched bowlers with five balls to go. And if that's the case, then really, it's just T20 with five-ball overs instead of six, isn't it? Having the option to keep a bowler on for ten consecutive balls is the only difference in that regard, and it's hardly revolutionary stuff.

All in all, after one match I remain firmly of the opinion that streamlining T20 and making it accessible would have been better than this.