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

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/cont ... 05371.html

gonna be hard to balance this imo

few weird things

as far as scoring points is concerned only three tests will be counted in a series but teams can play 4 or 5 test series if they want but the extra tests wont count towards the league. so will it be the first three tests, that last three and will we end up seeing the "friendly" tests not being treated as seriously by boards ?

teams can also schedule series outwith the league schedule if they want

same applies to ODIs i believe

looking at england's proposed schedule we dont play NZ away or SL at home within the timeframe, all other teams will also have one country they will not play at home and one they dont play away during the timeframe, this could lead to credibility issues if a team finishes in the top 2 on points and didn't play one or two of the best teams

as far as points are concerned all series will be 2 or 3 games, will you get more points for winning a 3 test series than a 2 test series, will you get more points for winning a 2 test series 2-0 as opposed to a 3 test series 2-1

lastly as an england fan i'm not happy looking at 2021/22 where it looks like we will play just 2 series, so possibly only 6 tests and in a non-World Cup year as well

I'm not thrilled with this....

I see that Zimbabwe, Afghanistan and Ireland are excluded from this schedule. I would prefer to see the West Indies playing Tests against teams they are likely to win against. Instead, this schedule has the Windies at home to India and away to NZ in 2019-20, both series we are bound to lose. I really don't see the point in losing Test after Test. If you're going to have a Test schedule, those three teams should be in it as well.

Those three teams appear to be the start of the Level 2 test league.

yuppie wrote:Those three teams appear to be the start of the Level 2 test league.

I'm not against this....

Top Six tier - India, England, Australia, South Africa, Pakistan, New Zealand.

Bottom Six tier - Sri Lanka, West Indies, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Ireland.

Arthur had a great suggestion. Each six play home and away amongst themselves. However, while the Bottom Six don't tour the Top Six (who wants to watch that slaughter?), have the occasional series where a member of the Top Six tours the Bottom Six...that's where the surprises can occur.

rich likely to be 10 test that year, 5 against india and 5 against Australia.
although it has to be seen if the last 2 test seems important since they will basically be money exercise and not really mean much.

I like the principle, but this implementation leaves something to be desired. I really think that test cricket needs a more formalised structure and more context to the series in order to continue to be relevant. At the moment, outside of the home summer and a few marquee overseas series (like the Ashes), test cricket does not command public attention.

I agree with the above that a split into 2 tiers seems to be the only way to manage the format, otherwise the calendar is too crowded, and doesn't make sense. But I can see that none of the major boards are going to sign up to it, because they're afraid theirs is going to be the team that falls out of the top six. What if England managed to be ranked 7, and then would there be no Ashes?

There is also the argument that it is unfair on the tier 2 sides, as they won't get the opportunity to play the big boys very often, which improves their profile and gives them a chance to develop their skills against the very best. But that argument ignores the current reality that the top sides don't play the low ranked sides anyway - England's trip to Bangladesh this year was the first time they've played that team in 7 years, they haven't played Zimbabwe since about 2003. Australia don't play Bangladesh at all. And there is no interest in series between hugely mismatched opposition - West Indies trip to Australia last year was atrocious as the teams were so mismatched, and nobody watched as a result.

If you want to find some room in the calendar, I would be strongly in favour of limiting ODI series to 3. No-one needs 5, or worse, 7 match ODI series. They're rarely compelling and drag on far too long.

I'd go for a 2 tier format of six teams. Each side in the tier plays each other side home and away once over a 4 year cycle (there will be some years when a side has only one home or away series, but they can use the time to schedule 'friendlies'). At the end of the cycle, the top 2 teams of league 1 play a 3 test series at the home venue of the side who finished top, to determine the test champion. Meanwhile, the bottom ranked team of league 1 plays off in a 3 test series against the top team of league 2 for the right to win promotion (with a drawn series favouring the lower ranked team, to add a bit of spice).

Can't say I am keen on the proposed schedule where all host country plays different teams in Tests and ODIs. It might work with Southern Hemisphere and Sub-Continent sides who play a bulk of their matches between October and March, but not so in England due to a smaller window of good cricket playing weather (late May to early September) and unique conditions that go with it. Touring sides playing test cricket are going to be further disadvantaged if they don't get chance to acclimatise and get some time in the middle.

If test matches are to get context, then at least allow touring sides to play meaningful warm up matches or at least play ODIs prior. I feel Sri Lanka won a test series in England because the tour began with ODIs and Sri Lankan players got to grips with English conditions.

Also in Winter 2019/2020, England are to play tests in India AND South Africa after a home summer of World Cup and Ashes cricket. I suspect there will be a World T20 penciled in during March as well, so the England players are going to be burnt out after playing five marquee fixtures in 10 months.