Page 1 of 2

It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with it.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:20 am
by The Professor
Lot of buzzing around on Twitter off the back of this article in The Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2017 ... ecb-plans/

Been discussed for a bit but sounds like it's more of a when rather than an if now.

What are our opinions?

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:30 am
by Aidan11
Just another way of getting in more T20 cricket.

Next it will be a reduction in the number of tests in a season followed by more cuts to the CC. Eliminate the 50 over comp altogether and before you know it the English summer can fit in 180 days of T20 cricket.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 4:54 pm
by Durhamfootman
they'd need to start at 10.30 just to get test teams to bowl the current allocation of overs

I have no faith in their ability to bowl more overs in a day

we'd have to start at 10.30 and schedule the close for 8pm

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 4:55 pm
by Durhamfootman
good luck playing 4 day tests, should pakistan ever be allowed to play at home again.... they lose a whole day in every 5 day test because it goes too dark, too early

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:00 pm
by Durhamfootman
how many overs a day are they suggesting gets played?

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 10:03 pm
by Dr Cricket
105, only benefit of this idea is that it put ICC overrates problem in the spotlight.
"But if the ICC get tough on slow over-rates – a promise they repeatedly make but never fulfil – the idea could be workable. "
this comment is gold.
t

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 1:38 am
by Alviro Patterson
Not sure how 4 day test cricket can be feasible in England when the British weather is unpredictable and matches delayed to bad light are common, even in peak summer if it's overcast.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 4:54 am
by bigfluffylemon
Alviro Patterson wrote:Not sure how 4 day test cricket can be feasible in England when the British weather is unpredictable and matches delayed to bad light are common, even in peak summer if it's overcast.


I think the increasing use of floodlights at grounds is supposed to compensate. Every test ground can host D/N ODIs, so should be able to turn the lights on if it gets dark.

If you allocate 105 overs a day, then you get 420 in 4 days, which is only 30 (or one session) less than the current 5 day allocation. Obviously it would make it slightly easier, both technically and psychologically, to play out a draw, but in the modern era where draws are becoming increasingly rare, I am not sure that's a bad thing.

My concern is the same as others have expressed - something needs to be done about over rates. If they can start at 10.30 and bowl the full allocation of 105 by 6.30, that's fine. It also makes D/N test scheduling tougher, if we continue down that road. A match finishing at 9 (well, 9.30 once the extra time was used) at Edgbaston was half empty by 9.15, as everyone was worried about the crap availability of public transport in the evening.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 4:57 am
by bigfluffylemon
Aidan11 wrote:
Next it will be a reduction in the number of tests in a season followed by more cuts to the CC.


Not sure if reducing the number of tests in a season is a bad thing. It's always been a squeeze to fit 7 in, and you end up playing in either May or September (or both), when conditions are pretty dodgy. After the 2006-07 whitewash one of the recommendations was to cut the number of tests in the English summer to 6, to give players more time to play in their CC sides and recover their form, or to rest and help stop injuries (especially fast bowlers breaking down). It was roundly ignored.

Next summer England and India are playing a 5 day test squeezed into 7 weeks. That's insane. I reckon both sides will be well through their bowling stocks by the end, and both sides will be too worn out by the end to play quality cricket.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 6:44 am
by Aidan11
105 overs in a day. So presume that would mean an extra hour in the day. Start at 10.30 so scheduled close is at 6.30.

Overs never get bowled on time so we'd probably go on till 7pm. If there is over an hour's delay for rain during the day that would have us going on till 8pm. Therefore the players and spectators could be at the ground for around 10 hours allowing for a bit of time before and after the game.

I can't see it working.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:29 am
by bigfluffylemon
Aidan11 wrote:105 overs in a day. So presume that would mean an extra hour in the day. Start at 10.30 so scheduled close is at 6.30.

Overs never get bowled on time so we'd probably go on till 7pm. If there is over an hour's delay for rain during the day that would have us going on till 8pm. Therefore the players and spectators could be at the ground for around 10 hours allowing for a bit of time before and after the game.

I can't see it working.


Spectators stay for 100 overs in an ODI. 105 is only 20 minutes more (in theory).

The trick is enforcing the rules about getting overs bowled on time.

I do wonder if the rise of commercial television covering the cricket has led to a reduction in over rates, as the broadcasters need to squeeze an ad between every over, and in every other break in play. It makes me think that players are instructed not to start bowling a new over too quickly after the last one finishes.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:56 am
by Arthur Crabtree
Agree with Aidan that 7.5 hour day is already a long one. I wonder if extending it might mean the experience of Test cricket becomes even more intimidating for many.

The five day Test has a long history and it works. Is there another sport with such a rich tradition that is so careless in preserving it? The game's continuity is one of its strengths.

I might wonder if the national and international cricket boards are actually trying to devise ways of alienating me from the game. It so much seems like that.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 11:05 am
by Arthur Crabtree
I wonder why these ideas don't come from the retired greats of the game seeking to improve the sport they spent their youth playing. But former supermarket owners and business deal brokers.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:44 pm
by alfie
My sympathy with the players if this ever happens . It is a tough job already , International Cricket : now the unfortunate fellows who find themselves bowling on a flat pitch to a good batting lineup are facing eight hours ( with delays) in the field ...and maybe supposed to come back next morning and continue...

Way to kill off pace bowling.

Re: It's not the length of the Test, it's what you do with i

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:21 pm
by Durhamfootman
Arthur Crabtree wrote:Agree with Aidan that 7.5 hour day is already a long one. I wonder if extending it might mean the experience of Test cricket becomes even more intimidating for many.

The five day Test has a long history and it works. Is there another sport with such a rich tradition that is so careless in preserving it? The game's continuity is one of its strengths.

I might wonder if the national and international cricket boards are actually trying to devise ways of alienating me from the game. It so much seems like that.

Don't worry Arthur. As I understand it, Labour are planning to announce at conference a return to timeless tests, once they get back into power ;)

fully costed, apparently :halo: