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

That will never work since Broadcaster don't want a test world cup or any test knockout games in neutral venues.
2013/17 failed for both reasons.
Essentially broadcaster want the same System now but with less teams and a proper test Ranking/League and really it only works if all teams play the same amount.

it really stem from the fact the big 3 just don't want to play the lesser nations and they also want more money for the TV rights for the lesser teams.

lesser teams want it since they get guaranteed fixtures and essentially fixtures that warrant their success.

NZ and SA in recent times have been very annoyed, SA for not being able to play the big 3 regularly enough even though they were big 3.
NZ for not really playing much big/long tours even when they were actually good.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2016 ... the-dange/
these scaremongering articles or view are funny.
Considering without change Test cricket will die, you can literally make a very good case now it is dead.
even if the Divisional cricket doesn't work and Test cricket still dies, Test cricket hasn't lost anything from trying it.

TBH the reason Test cricket is dying is mostly because of all the elitism in Cricket especially Test cricket.
Pretty much says everything that the only Test series he cares about is Ashes.

bhaveshgor wrote:That will never work since Broadcaster don't want a test world cup or any test knockout games in neutral venues.
2013/17 failed for both reasons.
Essentially broadcaster want the same System now but with less teams and a proper test Ranking/League and really it only works if all teams play the same amount.

it really stem from the fact the big 3 just don't want to play the lesser nations and they also want more money for the TV rights for the lesser teams.

lesser teams want it since they get guaranteed fixtures and essentially fixtures that warrant their success.

NZ and SA in recent times have been very annoyed, SA for not being able to play the big 3 regularly enough even though they were big 3.
NZ for not really playing much big/long tours even when they were actually good.

Why? A qualification based championship means the Future Tours Programme can be run as normal, all test series have value and smaller test nations have an incentive to play red ball cricket.

From a test nations perspective, the bigger nations don't have to worry about relegation. Even the smaller test nations who struggle to qualify can end up benefitting, for example Bangladesh or Zimbabwe become sought after opposition by bigger test nations wanting winnable games to secure ranking points.

As for broadcasting, having the two groups/semi-finals held in separate countries with a 7hr time difference means matches can be played back to back like the World Twenty20, also splitting the tournament in two or three phases over 6 months makes it TV friendly.

Well how will that sort out the fact Big 3 play more number of matches or how will the points or total be equal if everyone plays different amount, not everyone plays each other, the Current FTP is a mess it isn't even a full cycle.

Anyway report yesterday suggested they may be a playoff in the first division but it probably likely to be number 1 vs 2.

Think fixing the FTP is more important than having or organising knockout games.
Knockout games is quite easy to bring in the future, but the FTP is quite hard to fix and gets quite political and need to be fixed again after during the big 3 reforms the big 3 changed things which caused a huge divide in the fixtures.

No world championship either league/World cup/Knockout can work till the FTP get back to being a cycle and everyone plays each other during a period of time and guaranteed number of fixtures.
Currently the teams outside the big 3 are mostly playing the same team every 12 months and really the fixture list will do the same thing the current Test ranking does and the table will just look like a joke.

None of the teams outside the big 3 will accept anything unless FTP is guaranteed fixtures and that revenues are 50 percent shared for tours.

Can't see them doing a world championship for test anyway most likely to be a league with possibly a playoff for the championship in the end but will be 1st plays 2nd.

bhaveshgor wrote:Well how will that sort out the fact Big 3 play more number of matches or how will the points or total be equal if everyone plays different amount, not everyone plays each other, the Current FTP is a mess it isn't even a full cycle.

ICC Champions Trophy qualification is based on ODI rankings and not all nations play an equal amount of matches, my proposal is based on that.

Test nations have always played differing number of matches to each other, even in the previous FTP cycle. Currently Australia and England have played 32 test matches, India 20.

http://www.icc-cricket.com/team-rankings/test

Logistically and financially it is difficult for all test nations to play the volume of matches England do, mainly because most test nations play their tours between October and March. All test nations should be able to fit six test matches per year, 24 matches over a 4 year cycle is a sufficient number to determine a ranking.

TBH prefer if everyone plays the same amount of games, with the extras being friendlies.

bhaveshgor wrote:TBH prefer if everyone plays the same amount of games, with the extras being friendlies.

But it makes no financial sense for , say , Sri Lanka v Pakistan , to be scheduled as often as England v India. Doesn't matter how you dress the fixtures up to supply more "meaning" - one makes money , the other won't.

Alfie you do realise each fixture will only be guaranteed 3 fixture, so not exactly a regular or a nuisance.

alfie wrote:

bhaveshgor wrote:TBH prefer if everyone plays the same amount of games, with the extras being friendlies.

But it makes no financial sense for , say , Sri Lanka v Pakistan , to be scheduled as often as England v India. Doesn't matter how you dress the fixtures up to supply more "meaning" - one makes money , the other won't.

Well if this won't work then Test Cricket is dead since only 3 nations will survive and it only makes financially sense to play the Ashes and the India vs England and England vs Australia games they may not even bother with the others.

The whole point of the idea is to make England or the india vs crap/poor nations more financially viable and if anything Sri lanka vs Pakistan will be less common since they now actually play quite a bit since Sri lanka and pakistan can't really find anyone else to play.

Alfie it is only 6 Test matches per series every 4 years or 3 test every 2 years, not really a big ask and only 18 test matches in 2 and half years.

MCC pretty much guaranteeing some sort of change in 2020.
ECB reducing number of Test matches in the cricketing summer and ICC bringing some sort of Division or Test championship.

if England host 6 test a summer with 2 touring teams, tough ask giving 3 test to london.

2 division likely to be rubber stamp by next month and graves still wants 4 day test cricket although BCCI doesn't want it so it probably won't happen.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricke ... ality.html

good article by dobell.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england-v-s ... 24571.html

bhaveshgor wrote:if England host 6 test a summer with 2 touring teams, tough ask giving 3 test to london.

I never understand why every touring team has to play at Lord's. Well I do...it's down to money. Lord's can virtually guarantee a full house for a team like SL whereas the North struggled.

If two teams tour then only one should go to HQ. A six test summer would mean that Lord's, The Oval & Headingley (who have long term staging agreements) will get one each summer with the remaining three tests being fought over by 6 test grounds.

Aidan11 wrote:

bhaveshgor wrote:if England host 6 test a summer with 2 touring teams, tough ask giving 3 test to london.

I never understand why every touring team has to play at Lord's. Well I do...it's down to money. Lord's can virtually guarantee a full house for a team like SL whereas the North struggled.

If two teams tour then only one should go to HQ. A six test summer would mean that Lord's, The Oval & Headingley (who have long term staging agreements) will get one each summer with the remaining three tests being fought over by 6 test grounds.

The touring team that misses out on Lord's wouldn't be happy then. Place has a mystique for a lot of visiting cricketers (certainly for Australians - OK , Australia would never be the tourists to miss out , but still ) and lots of players may only get one chance to play there...

Plus as you say : The Money.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... are_btn_tw
Reports that Lord might host any final they play in the Test league.