Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Interesting quote here.

What fans care about, though, are their team's fixtures. It is here that Manohar could push for and sign off on some fairly progressive changes. A rehaul and refreshing of the old Future Tours Programme, converting it into something both sustainable and equitable has already been under way for the last 12 months, with an aim to rescue bilateral cricket from torpor. A post-2015 World Cup meeting with television executives reminded board officials that the most profitable events for broadcasters tended to be ICC events and domestic T20 leagues. Bilteral cricket between the "core" nations (England, Australia, India, South Africa) was still a profitable business for television, but did not make as much profit as before. Tours by India did make the home boards some money, but not in as outrageous quantities as earlier (case in point: India's tour of Sri Lanka in 2015, when the SLC had to ask Ten Sports to bid twice before arriving at an agreeable figure).

seems very likely now ICC will introduce something to bilateral series.

ver the last year, ICC committee meetings have discussed the various possibilities that could give bilateral cricket enough context for broadcasters to invest in it. It is from where the idea of day-night Test cricket came into being, how the idea of a Test championship has returned to public debate (in a league-like format covering a larger period rather than a two-month scramble) and that of a points system across formats has been thrown into the open. Maybe mini-seasons with format-specific windows. Everything to create an appetite for nation-versus-nation contests that would translate into profits.

Can't believe it has taken ICC and it's members so long to realise more context and reason to play matches means more money for the boards, more viewers all in all more better for the sport.

Can't wait if ICC does actually implement a better FTP.

Should make the Ashes even more better.

The FTP went against everything the big three is all about. I'm not bothered about context for series, like the league or a Test championship. I just want all sides to get a programme of guaranteed series within a 4-5 year cycle and to know in advance when these would happen. I like the words, sustainable and equitable, because these are exactly what the big three plans weren't. A problem is making series less of home bankers, by challenging made-to-order pitch preparation, and to give teams more, and more meaningful, warm up games. And to get the weaker teams stronger. Lack of remuneration for playing Test cricket seems to be doing a great deal of harm. Hard to see a way around that, but eventually everyone will suffer with the one sided series we saw between Australia and West Indies.

I'm not so bothered about home pitch preparation... that's the point of home advantage. I can see an argument for scrapping the toss and letting the away capt choose whether to bat or bowl, though. If the home team gets the best of the pitch then the visiting side should be allowed to try and get the best of the overhead conditions............. except for Nasser, of course

Agree completely about the number of tour matches

I always liked triangular ODI tounaments between the 2 sets of visiting test tours, and I suppose that would work for T20I's too

Agree mostly about guaranteed series in a cycle... but not for pakistan..... there hasn't been anything good come out of a pakistan series since the '70's imo... more trouble than they're worth

Best news in the history of the cricket game.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/cont ... 22445.html
massive for the sport.

although Thakor is saying big three days are not over.
But crucially the big 3 does need division cricket to make more money so it should survive.

Only thing I've got against the divisions is that the big three can't be relegated. That makes the idea a sham.

Also interesting enough looks like test players will make more money for india.
Within a month or so we will be able to bring out something that will incentivise the Test players.

anyway the current system for india not wrong anyway since if you are moativated by money you essentially need to play all 3 formats for india.
Pawan negi makes what 5% of what the likes of Kohli, Rohit Sharma, Rahane and the 3 format players make.
Pujara makes a decent living and if he wants to make more he has to improve again to be the best in 3 format.

Wonder if the initiatives will be global or indian based.

if it is global it could be huge if NZ/WI players can make more playing Test cricket.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Only thing I've got against the divisions is that the big three can't be relegated. That makes the idea a sham.

Actually the current idea said they can.
but really the chances are they won't get relegated.
the idea mooted is that 3 test of each series counts in a league system.
so each team has to play 12 test in 2 years.
3 home/3 away each year.
boards then are free to play extra game but won't count on the table.
So the Ashes will still be played but only the first 3 test counts if they are in the same league.

The original plan mooted for two divisions which was announced during the big three carve up, stated that these countries couldn't be relegated.

Basically it would follow the women odi championship.
each team faces each other either home or away in a 2 yr period.
although traditionalist might not like it since it is likely 4-5 Test series will die since England would have to play at least 4 3 Test series in two year and probably face 6 teams in 2 yrs.
but really those traditionalist need to get a life since they really the reason Test cricket is dying in the first place.

Really the idea is that every 2 years a team would get relegated and the best team will be known and that every test/series actually means something.

Ashes might be interesting though since the first 3 test will have added meaning than the last 2 test and frankly speaking quite possible the Ashes means less than what the first 3 test means to the teams which it should be like since Winning the Test championship or not getting relegated should mean far more than winning a crap small trophy between two countries.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:The original plan mooted for two divisions which was announced during the big three carve up, stated that these countries couldn't be relegated.

in those days they didn't really know how the plan would work and playing outside the division wasn't really possible.
but now they basically merged the old FTP with the league.
so basically ICC gives everyone 12 Test-16 Test it has to play in 2 years.
and then each boards is free to play more but only those 12-16 test actually counts to the league.
So basically India, England and Aus are still free to play those friendlies if they do get relegated.

the boards don't really care if they get relegated since fans still can't differentiate between a friendly and an important game so they will still get big bucks for the Ashes and india vs Englnd games.
but crucially the value for the other games rises since the games that matter rates far higher than friendlies.
Tv ratings show that figures could be 50-100% higher for a game that actually counts to something.

The really the idea is that ECB and the boards want to be able to shout they are the best in the world or have a simplistic version of a test table.
they really want fans of WI saying if we win here we move 2 places in the league with 6 pt etc.
Essentially it makes it easier to sell Test cricket.

All boards rights now are struggling to sell test cricket since it means nothing, no money, no prestige, no global interest, you really have to ask why any players are actually playing it.

Players want change, Fans want change and so do the administrator.
Even the english players and the Aussies players have to ask what do they actually getting out of the current system in Test cricket.

really the Test cricket league will be far better than it is now since each series actually means something and their is actually something riding on each game.
it is really a joke when boards only care if they play india or england how can you expect test cricket to survive when everyone what to play 2 nations and would rather not even play any games against other nations.
plus more importantly everything is a level playing field each team plays the same amount of games and every team plays each other in a small time frame.

basically everyone has a motive and reason to play the sport everyone loves.

I will give you two incredible ratings that the UK achieved for the ICC t20 world cup.
India vs Australia more than a million watch the game.
india vs wI around 780K
those two games more people watch the contest than most of the Ashes in 2013/15 not only that rated far higher than 80% of english test match excluding the ashes and england didn't even take part.
wasn't even the anomaly the ratings were incredible for non England games and rated similar to an England test match.
The same thing was mirrored across the cricketing world which is why the broadcaster and boards are desperate for a change in Test cricket.

if Oman vs Ireland is getting better ratings than test cricket in most country there is something drastically wrong with Test cricket.

Really the T20 world cup was a wake up call to the rest of the cricketing world which caused a dramatically u turn on the division idea.

Excluding the India vs Pakistan game.
India vs WI was the most watched game and a similar friendly would get what 20% of that figure globally and probably 40-50% less in india.
England vs WI was watched by 2M people in the UK again a similar friendly would get 350K on Sky.


Those figures shows that ECB/BCCI can sell the lower crap games for far more higher price if the game actually means something.
before people say the Wisden trophy or what ever the name is called for England vs WI trophy is a trophy the fact is no one cares if England wins it, Sky don't the public don't and the players don't.
there is no story to england beating WI in a test series but could be if England needs to win a match or series to be world champions and WI need to win a game to survive relegation.

Stories are needed to sell the sport and Test cricket hasn't got any story apart from the crap Ashes.

Even has a fierce Ashes hater, would love the Ashes and actually get behind it if it actually means something to a global system.
Would get behind England if they need to beat the Aussies to finish above the rivals or to stop them winning the league or actually winning the league.