Ideal tour lengths

[Richard]

I think that Zimbabwe and Bangladesh need to be dropped from the test calendar. This would free up more time and allow 3 test series to be played.

This is a vital thing in our discussion that Craig didn't mention above.
Bangladesh and Zimbabwe playing Tests has more ramifications than simply the cheapening of the game.

 

[Richard]

I thought 2 match series only started a couple of years ago?

Yeah, but NZ have hardly ever played 5-Test-series, have they? It was presumably just mostly 3 and sometimes 4 Test-series before the 2001 ICC Fixture Plan.

 

[Richard]

i remember reading some where that cricket australia has decided that in future Aus will be playing test series with more than 3 test aganist india and england only

Plus, of course, the 6-match home\away South Africa series which makes sense.

 

[Richard]

two warm up matches before test and 2 50 over games before ODI
3 test and 5 ODI's

if all three are good teams i prefer a 10 match tri-series

This is another thing.
Tri-series are almost invariably more fun than bilateral series and while it's obviously only possible to have a few every year I still think there should be more than there currently are (and sadly many of the recent ones have involved substandard sides, and they're even worse than bilateral series - next summer's NWS will be the same).

 

[Richard]

If it means fewer tours, so be it.

That, of course, is the central issue: it's simply ridiculous for ICC to have a 4-year home-and-away programme for 10 teams - the amount of cricket you have to cram in to do that is quite absurd.
A better idea would be to have a 8 Test-teams on a 5-year plan - then you can have more Tests per series and more warm-up games, plus more time for tri-series and one-day warm-up games.
There is too much international cricket ATM, that is recognised seemingly everywhere but ICC.
I'd also like a biennial World Cup with plenty of preparation time, but that's another story.

 

[Beleg]

I thought you guys always argued that this one was a 3-Test series and Pakistan won 2-1!

Nah, we just beat them twice in two different series.

 

[biased indian]

Nah, we just beat them twice in two different series.

no u beat us once in two different series

 

[C_C]

i think the ideal setup is to have two 3-match series and one 5-match series a year.

 

[nikhil1772]

Ideal length should be 3 tests and 5 ODI's I think...

But if they are playing Tri-series ODI's,better make it quadrangular series wherein you can bring a fourth weaker team so that,that team might get international exposure and the stronger teams can test their bench strength more often

 

[Craig]

The other thing we have to try and work out is trying to keep the same amount of umpires for all/if not most of a Test series if possible.

 

[Slow Love™]

In a perfect world, I'd like to see four-test series more globally. Not a big fan of the three-test series, and I HATE the idea of two-test series between established cricketing nations. These should be reserved only for series where minnows are concerned (I guess an argument could be made that you could run to three where a series between two minnows is concerned, if it has interesting potential).

Old rivalries are very difficult to handle though - once upon a time Aus vs WI was a cert for a five-test series (at least, in Australia) - now it seems like a terrible idea. And because these itineraries are planned out so many years in advance, it makes it very hard to judge which ones are necessarily going to be "big" series and which ones aren't, in some cases.

If there was a potential for not planning these tours so far ahead, I'd be in favor, if we must choose the odd three-test or two-test series here and there.

As far as ODIs go, I like the idea of five. You could go to best of seven if you didn't play the dead rubbers though.

 

[Richard]

In a perfect world, I'd like to see four-test series more globally. Not a big fan of the three-test series, and I HATE the idea of two-test series between established cricketing nations. These should be reserved only for series where minnows are concerned (I guess an argument could be made that you could run to three where a series between two minnows is concerned, if it has interesting potential).

You see, I just prefer the idea that Bangladesh and Zimbabwe don't play Test-cricket and only play ODIs very occasionally.
There's no reason why you can't have more regular competitions along the lines of the Intercontinental Cup, though - that's certainly an intreguing possibility.

Old rivalries are very difficult to handle though - once upon a time Aus vs WI was a cert for a five-test series (at least, in Australia) - now it seems like a terrible idea. And because these itineraries are planned out so many years in advance, it makes it very hard to judge which ones are necessarily going to be "big" series and which ones aren't, in some cases.

If there was a potential for not planning these tours so far ahead, I'd be in favor, if we must choose the odd three-test or two-test series here and there.

As far as ODIs go, I like the idea of five. You could go to best of seven if you didn't play the dead rubbers though.

I don't mind three-Test series too much; four is more ideal, obviously - but there's clearly limited time.
For South Africa, Australia and sometimes New Zealand it's 6 Tests per season, and sometimes 5. For England and West Indies it's generally 7 - for West Indies sometimes 6.
Which isn't really an ideal number, 6 - you've either got to have one of these two-Test rubbers which just about everyone seems to hate (except ICC) or you've got to have a couple of three-Test series.
In England, obviously, you end-up having to have a 2-Test series if you're also having a 5-Tester (so far it hasn't been too much of a problem - only Pakistan in 2001 had a claim to more matches than they were given).
In the subcontinent it's a bit different - though I can't tell you how far I am against the idea of having Tests in Pakistan and India in April and May, it's incredibly dangerous given the heat and humidity around then. Not quite as dangerous as it was in Sharjah for those Pakistan-Australia games, but still a stupid, thoughtless idea.
I don't like these "top-end" Australia series, and without Bangladesh and Zimbabwe I don't see that they'd be neccessary, nor the indoor ODIs during the off-season - I don't really think anyone in West Indies thinks it's wise to play during June, the chances of escaping rain are slim. I've never really liked them playing in Sri Lanka in July and August either. We're playing too much in England too - we had a nice rhythm with 7 Tests and a 10-match NWS, now this NWC has spoilt it, and The Champions Trophy didn't help last "summer", either.
That's another thing - if that event is going to have any credibility, it needs to be better planned and you need a bit of time off before it.
All points to the simple fact that you need a more assauged schedule and less teams who damage the credibility of ODI and Test-cricket.

 

[Richard]

The other thing we have to try and work out is trying to keep the same amount of umpires for all/if not most of a Test series if possible.

You see, for that I liked the old system of a different pair of Umpires for every Test. Clearly that's tricky with so few Umpires and so many back-to-back Tests.
Another thing I'd like to see is less back-to-back Tests - they're good once in a while, but not every series.

 

[Richard]

no u beat us once in two different series

A single Test-match is a series?
Not in my book.