Test cricket is 'not sport'

[chaminda_00]

http://aus.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2005/APR/232303_AUS_15APR2005.html

Australian again complaining about the lack of competition for them in Test Cricket. IMO they should enjoy it while it lasts cus i can't see them dominating as much as they do now after this generation retires.

In saying that they do have some points when it comes to cheap wickets and runs and calls for a two teir competition. I think Bangadesh, Zimbabwe and the A Teams would improve the standard of cricket below the top 10 if they dropped down. With 16 teams taking part in the next world cup we could have records flying left, right and centre.

 

[howardj]

As Steve Waugh states, there are not enough Test teams for two divisions. You'd just be playing the same folk every year. I think the big concern is not so much Austrlia's dominance - that will pass when McGrath and Warne retire - but the lack of good bowlers. There are some shocking pace attacks around.

 

[Mr Casson]

I do think that the 'A' sides getting more exposure can only be a good thing for all involved though.

 

[Natman20]

Why don't they just make there players play useless then it will make it more competitive. They should stop complaining. Half there domestic players will probably join overseas teams

 

[tadeusz]

I was thinking whether or not a system similar to that of English soccer, with different divisions, might work for cricket? In the top division would be the 10 test playing nations, who would play each team twice over two or three years, (in both tests and one-dayers) home and away. Everyone plays in each country, in the same conditions, equally as often as each other.
The next level down could have teams like Holland, Namibia, etc, who would do the same thing, except with 3 or 4 day games instead of tests. And so on with the even lesser established nations in lower divisions. The more these teams play, the better I reckon.
Points would be kept in separate tables for tests (3 for a win and 1 for a draw) and one-dayers.
After everyone's played each other, whoever's top of the table wins that particular division, and plays the loser of the next division up in, say, a 5 day match for div 1 and 2, 3 or 4 day match for div 2 and 3 etc, and if the lower division team beats the higher division team, they get promoted.
Instead of a World Cup in its current format, an FA Cup-style comp where every team in the world can enter can be played over the 2 to 3 year period. That way a team has to be consistent over a longer period to be the best, rather than over a month.
This system is probably full of flaws, I haven't given it heaps of thought, but what do people think?

 

[JASON]

Drop in Umpiring standards in the last 2 years (some times very questionable deliberately poor umpiring favouring one Team over the other ) is also contributory towards some games that should be close becoming one sided !! We all know how Umps have favoured one particular Team in the past couple of years in Test series involving that country and others, where all close decisions are going their way !!

So then hardly a surprise that Tests that could have been close becoming one sided !!

IMO, there should be a clear out of the aging, the disabled, the unfit, visually impaired, Auditory impaired Umpires (such as Hair, Buchnor ) and a total new generation of open minded fresh young umpires who are more in tune with current umpiring trends (such as Simon Taufel, Billy Bowden, Aleem Dar etc.) .

Test Cricket will become a better spectacle because, umpires will not be turning up to Test Matches with a pre formed notion of giving a decision to one Team , whenever there is a close appeal !! ( Because the current set up is deliberately intended to rob some countries of justifiable results !!)

That's my honest opinion.


Chaminda BTW, you were due to come out with some stats on Darrel Hair , could you post them and your discussion on these stats for us to consider !! (without bringing the "R" word into it please )

 

[Swervy]

Drop in Umpiring standards in the last 2 years (some times very questionable deliberately poor umpiring favouring one Team over the other ) is also contributory towards some games that should be close becoming one sided !! We all know how Umps have favoured one particular Team in the past couple of years in Test series involving that country and others, where all close decisions are going their way !!

So then hardly a surprise that Tests that could have been close becoming one sided !!

IMO, there should be a clear out of the aging, the disabled, the unfit, visually impaired, Auditory impaired Umpires (such as Hair, Buchnor ) and a total new generation of open minded fresh young umpires who are more in tune with current umpiring trends (such as Simon Taufel, Billy Bowden, Aleem Dar etc.) .

Test Cricket will become a better spectacle because, umpires will not be turning up to Test Matches with a pre formed notion of giving a decision to one Team , whenever there is a close appeal !! ( Because the current set up is deliberately intended to rob some countries of justifiable results !!)

That's my honest opinion.


Chaminda BTW, you were due to come out with some stats on Darrel Hair , could you post them and your discussion on these stats for us to consider !! (without bringing the "R" word into it please )

there is no proof though that umpire standards have dropped....umpires are under a lot more pressure due to things like snicko, and hawkeye,and any decision is scrutinised
a lot more than years ago..dodgy decisions have always been made, we just know about them alot more these days

 

[Josh]

Bad umpiring decisions are apart of EVERY sport. That's right, EVERY sport. We need to stop criticising umpires and their decisions, because it is not an easy job.

We've lived with bad decisions this long, why does everyone have to stop now and say all of the sudden that mistakes cannot be tolerated??

Dodgy decisions are part of the game. If you haven't learnt to live with that by now then you shouldn't be a cricket fan.

 

[Pratters]

Its an extremely one sided view from an Aussie point of view.

Some very good test series in the past year and half :-

India vs Pakistan in Pak, Ind
RSA vs England
Aus vs Pak - Australia played good cricket 3/3 sessions, Pakistan 2/3 sessions every day and thus Pakistan lost in the end.
Even the recent Srl vs Nzl series wasnt boring. The second test was one sided but it was never a foregone concusion that Sri Lanka would lose the series specially after the first test.

There are two teams Zimbabwe and Bangladesh who should not be playing cricket atm.

Apart from that most teams compete fairly well. India vs Australia last year was close as was the series in Australia.

Australia is a better team atm than other teams. But Federer is dominating every one in tennis. It doesnt make test cricket or tennis less of a game.

Test cricket is the real cricket. Shame on the Aussies Hogg included who feel it isnt atm because of being one sided. And yes, some thing has to be done about Zmb, Bng to stop the assault on them for the time being.

 

[Josh]

There are two teams Zimbabwe and Bangladesh who should not be playing cricket atm.

Every team has to start somewhere. Sri Lanka started similarly & slowly. Look at them in the last decade. They have really improved. Give these teams some time to develop, maybe not Zimbabwe, they're just buggered... lol

 

[SJS]

As Steve Waugh states, there are not enough Test teams for two divisions. You'd just be playing the same folk every year. I think the big concern is not so much Austrlia's dominance - that will pass when McGrath and Warne retire - but the lack of good bowlers. There are some shocking pace attacks around.

Absolutely. Bowling standards have touched rock bottom.

This is absolutely no good for the long term health of the game though the new fans, fed on a diet of limited overs games, seem to think cricket is all about sixes and fours but it needs to be set right. Is anyone concerned? Doesnt look like it since the money keeps pouring in from the one day game.

ICC has lost all sense of responsibility. Sometimes I feel, maybe MCC was better to run the game. Just shows how bad ICC is

 

[Pratters]

Absolutely. Bowling standards have touched rock bottom.

Totally agreed. Test matches in New Zealand atm have given some thing to the bowlers and even a quality team like Australia raised concern over the pitches in Nzl before touring this year.

The game should be evenly balanced or else the bowlers will go into a negative mode and wont attack as much. One day cricket played right now supports that mind set and it is carried into tests too which are on much better pitches than even 10 years ago in 1995-1996.

Bowlers had much more of a say 10 years ago. The difference in just 10 years of the attackng nature of bowling is not to do with the batting standards improving. Play on a turner and the teams collapse. The same goes on a pitch with a bit of grass.

 

[Swervy]

Totally agreed. Test matches in New Zealand atm have given some thing to the bowlers and even a quality team like Australia raised concern over the pitches in Nzl before touring this year.

The game should be evenly balanced or else the bowlers will go into a negative mode and wont attack as much. One day cricket played right now supports that mind set and it is carried into tests too which are on much better pitches than even 10 years ago in 1995-1996.

Bowlers had much more of a say 10 years ago. The difference in just 10 years of the attackng nature of bowling is not to do with the batting standards improving. Play on a turner and the teams collapse. The same goes on a pitch with a bit of grass.

teams collapsed 10 20 years ago on green tops, teams struggled on turners as well.

The quality of spinner in the world as far as I am concerned is pretty high at the moment...and as I said in another thread,I am not entirly convinced that the standard of fast bowling is all that terrible right now....in the 80's, you had the WI's, but outside them, you had Imran,Hadlee who were outstanding...later on Waqar and wasim (mostly after Imran and paddles had gone though)...at any one time throughout history there hasnt been to many really great fast bowlers..at the moment we have McGrath, Pollock (who is still a great bowler in my opinion),and a few others who can perform up to a standard that would exceed maybe 90% of quicks (outside the WI's) of 20 years ago.

The standard of batting has improved since then in that batters know how to take advatnage of the opportunities presented to them..I am not sure that many of the batsmen back in the day did take full use of opportunities given to them....bad balls on the whole get punished now a lot more than they used to...hence an increase in run rate...victory is the goal these days, not losing was the goal a lot of the time in the 80's.

It is easy to have a go at current cricket, but for me, the reality is that bowlers arent too bad now, pitches are better, and batsmen are more aggressive, giving the impression that the bowlers arent too hot

 

[Pratters]

teams collapsed 10 20 years ago on green tops, teams struggled on turners as well.

There were more random pitches and players were more equipped to handle different conditions.

at any one time throughout history there hasnt been to many really great fast bowlers..at the moment we have McGrath, Pollock (who is still a great bowler in my opinion),and a few others who can perform up to a standard that would exceed maybe 90% of quicks (outside the WI's) of 20 years ago.

Read the post again. I said compared to 10 years ago. In the 90s we had Ambrose,Walsh, Akram, Younis, Akthtar for 2 years(may not consider him), Srinath, Kapil (not fast but excellent swing bowler), Cairns, Vaas in Sri Lanka, Brandes, Streak in Zimbabwe, Pollock, Donald in Sourh Africa.

Only Australia and England have quality fast bowlers at the moment apart from Akhtar and Vaas, some kiwi here and there.

The standard of batting has improved since then in that batters know how to take advatnage of the opportunities presented to them..I am not sure that many of the batsmen back in the day did take full use of opportunities given to them....bad balls on the whole get punished now a lot more than they used to...hence an increase in run rate...victory is the goal these days, not losing was the goal a lot of the time in the 80's.

I am not sure these very batsmen who will smash bowlers who have negative mindsets, most of them, would fair well against average pace bowling side on a winging/seaming wicket.

The cricket has become much more entertaining for many as more shots are played and the game is result oriented now. But I doubt the standard is excellent because of the batting. It has more to do with one day cricket making a huge impression in the style of the batsman's play coupled with bowlers bowling with much more negative mindsets on flat pitches.

 

[Pratters]

Every team has to start somewhere. Sri Lanka started similarly & slowly. Look at them in the last decade. They have really improved. Give these teams some time to develop, maybe not Zimbabwe, they're just buggered... lol

I certainly feel playing versus A teams would do more good to them than getting squashed by other teams.

Losses bring a huge negative impact and it over rides you after a while. That is worse for development than any other thig and very difficult to come out of.

 

[honestbharani]

One of the main reasons the Aussies are so successful is that they have a wide variety of pitches in Australia and therefore, their players are better equipped to handle the different conditions and pitches they get around the world. India has similar variety in pitches, if only we could use it better.

 

[slugger]

*reduce test games to 4 day matches. (replicates domestic level) Touring team always chosers what to do field/bat (no coin toss needed) and 3rd umpire can over rule umpires decision or either technology be made available to umpires.

*another option (a bit left field) a team has only 7 wickets available to them in the 2nd innings. (wicket keeper must bat).

 

[JASON]

Bad umpiring decisions are apart of EVERY sport. That's right, EVERY sport. We need to stop criticising umpires and their decisions, because it is not an easy job.

We've lived with bad decisions this long, why does everyone have to stop now and say all of the sudden that mistakes cannot be tolerated??

Dodgy decisions are part of the game. If you haven't learnt to live with that by now then you shouldn't be a cricket fan.

Its easy for an Aussie to try and preach to others, since the decisions are flowing your way almost all of the time and where it matters !!

Its not acceptable to tolerate decisions when they are going one way towards one country or some countries, OK ?

 

[JASON]

there is no proof though that umpire standards have dropped....umpires are under a lot more pressure due to things like snicko, and hawkeye,and any decision is scrutinised
a lot more than years ago..dodgy decisions have always been made, we just know about them alot more these days

Agree they are under greater scrutiny WRT each decision, but that's why you need sharper, younger Umpires with better vision , better hearing and better physical fitness than some of the current blodgers !! (like the visually impaired, hearing impaired Buchnor or the Obese slow and struggling to cope with the LBW law Hair !! )

Because they are under greater scrutiny you need umpires who are sharper than some of the current ones who have sat on the International panel Gravey train for long !!

Their performances should be thoroughly scrutinised and you will find they are making errors only against some countries and only in some situations !! (And getting away with it ). Its time for some fresher Umpires IMO .

BTW why is it acceptable when Hair makes a blatant error but not acceptable when Asoka De Silva makes one ?

 

[Zinzan]

there is no proof though that umpire standards have dropped....umpires are under a lot more pressure due to things like snicko, and hawkeye,and any decision is scrutinised
a lot more than years ago..dodgy decisions have always been made, we just know about them alot more these days

Exactly Swervy...therefore why not have the decision's taken out of there hands if the likes of snicko and hawkeye keep making them look like idiots. Even my G.friend who knows bugger all about cricket can see from the replay's that the umpire has got it wrong.

Who'd want to be an umpire these days?.....Good and correct decisions are hardly ever praised and bad ones are always highlighted. You are right in thats the level probably hasn't dropped at all....the only thing that has changed is that their mistakes are exposed to all.