Revised LG ICC Test Championship Table

[Turbinator]

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/302219.html

Pakistan and India both have dipped by quite a lot. While South Africa and Sri Lanka go ahead of them. Australia stretched their lead and are 26 points ahead of England now, while Zimbabwe has been left out.

Interesting...

 

[GIMH]

I thoguht we were going to suffer a drop this time round, with some good results from 04 taken out. Still, I guess the Ashes win counts for two more years?

 

[brockley]

India face a hard time in england and australia could well drop lower.
India can no longer be seen as the possible 2nd side they are well behind england,too many draws from india.
Australia so far ahead in rankings its not funny high % win rate.
Pakistan and india have rested on their laurels.
Be interested how srilanka and south africa go this season and can they maintain their ranking.
Sangakarras' 200 vs bangladesh have risen him in the test rankings to 3rd how funny.

 

[chaminda_00]

1 v 3 in the world = 2 Tests. Great work by Cricket Australia, money over competition and people have a go at ICC for only being interested in money. Most cricket boards around the world are as bad really.

 

[silentstriker]

1 v 3 in the world = 2 Tests. Great work by Cricket Australia, money over competition and people have a go at ICC for only being interested in money. Most cricket boards around the world are as bad really.

They are all the same way. ICC = the boards. The ICC is money hungry because the boards that comprise it are that way. ICC isn't an entity that is separate and independant from the Test boards. It is a neutral entity, but it is still formed by the combination of all the nations..

If the boards wanted the ICC to be less money hungry and focus more on some other issues, they could very easily do that.

 

[Burgey]

1 v 3 in the world = 2 Tests. Great work by Cricket Australia, money over competition and people have a go at ICC for only being interested in money. Most cricket boards around the world are as bad really.

Well put.

 

[Perm]

New Zealand have played less Test matches in the last two years than Bangladesh, **** that's poor.

 

[NZTailender]

New Zealand have played less Test matches in the last two years than Bangladesh, **** that's poor.

It disgusts me tbh. Nothing against Bangladesh but ffs, it's just insulting. We really don't have many people to blame but ourselves, either.


By ourselves I mean New Zealand "no tests please we don't have an attention span that extends tha" Cricket Board.

 

[brockley]

Its not only down to the CA.
Look at the programming.
Look at the programming india and pakistan get then look where they are ranked.
The bcci from a money and marketing point of view overides someone like srilanka,despite srilankas' good perforamances.
I would also look at the srilnakan board they go through upheavel up to upheavel,and are not organised,they need to be united and get a better deal for srilanka.
Australia,england,south africa,pakistan and india get a good deal from the icc much better than anyone else.
Before you ask why hasn't srilanka has only 2 tests,then pinch yourself and wask why has india who is ranked below srilanka got a better deal.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

1 v 3 in the world = 2 Tests. Great work by Cricket Australia, money over competition and people have a go at ICC for only being interested in money. Most cricket boards around the world are as bad really.

Why would it surprise anyone. Sri Lanka are not a big money nation whereas India are. Its logic on behalf of CA to play more tests against India - even if they aren't as good as Sri Lanka.

I can't believe someone can have a go at them for doing it.

 

[short shorts]

How does India being a moneyed nation affect how many tests Australia host them for? It boils down to which team the Australian public want to see more of.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

How does India being a moneyed nation affect how many tests Australia host them for? It boils down to which team the Australian public want to see more of.

I'd hazard a guess that you'd get bigger crowds against India than Sri Lanka - so you can't blame CA for wanting to play more games against the nation that will bring more money.

 

[Poker Boy]

I thoguht we were going to suffer a drop this time round, with some good results from 04 taken out. Still, I guess the Ashes win counts for two more years?

Test series completed before August 1 2004 drop out, so we keep the 2004 4-0 v Windies and the away win v SA in 2005 which must help (especially the latter) and we drop some not good results - the home 2-2 v SA and the 2003 away defeat in SL.

 

[silentstriker]

Australia also gets paid more for Indian games being telecast. The Indian telecaster has to pay the board that is hosting the game a certain percentage, which is why people are keen on India touring.

 

[chaminda_00]

Why would it surprise anyone. Sri Lanka are not a big money nation whereas India are. Its logic on behalf of CA to play more tests against India - even if they aren't as good as Sri Lanka.

I can't believe someone can have a go at them for doing it.

I never said i was surprised i just think its a joke that the amount of matches that are scheduled are based on who bring more money then who is more competitive and more likely to push them over 4 or 5 Tests. I just think Test Cricket should be about the competition and game, not about the money. Thats what One Day Cricket is for. If you get good even cricket you will get sell out crowds. Surely the good cricket brings the crowds not the name of a side or a couple high profiled players. Fans in Australia have been crying for some good even cricket and they prefer to play more Test against worse performing sides.

 

[asdfg]

India was ranked 4th a few months back, ahead of S. Africa and Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka is an excellent one day team but in Tests, it is approximately equal to India.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

I never said i was surprised i just think its a joke that the amount of matches that are scheduled are based on who bring more money then who is more competitive and more likely to push them over 4 or 5 Tests. I just think Test Cricket should be about the competition and game, not about the money. Thats what One Day Cricket is for. If you get good even cricket you will get sell out crowds. Surely the good cricket brings the crowds not the name of a side or a couple high profiled players. Fans in Australia have been crying for some good even cricket and they prefer to play more Test against worse performing sides.

Eh, that's life. Its the same for every sport - and its not viable for Australia to play four or five tests against Sri Lanka. They just don't draw big enough crowds.

 

[chaminda_00]

Eh, that's life. Its the same for every sport - and its not viable for Australia to play four or five tests against Sri Lanka. They just don't draw big enough crowds.

So the fact that in the past we get sell out crowds in ODIs mean nothing interms for crowd pulling ability. As i said before its the quality of cricket thats pulls crowds not the name of team or some pansy who call themselves superstars.

 

[short shorts]

Then why do some teams pull in more crowds in Australia than SL does?

 

[chaminda_00]

Then why do some teams pull in more crowds in Australia than SL does?

We haven't played a Test in the proper summer in Australia in more then 10 years. The last time we played we pulled in decent crowds. Every time we play in ODIs we usually get sell outs. Its not like we Australia will get empty stands when Sri Lanka plays. I can't see the crowds being that much difference interms of what usually crowds you get in Brisbance and Hobart.

The only reall difference is the TV money India brings. But Test cricket, should never be amount money. It should always be about the quality of teams. If we were playing as bad as say West Indies, then 2 test would be fine. But we have been near the Top 3 for the last five years. Since we had that streaks. Yeah we might not be great away from home but you can't really get used those conditions in three matches (1 tour and 2 Tests).

Its an absolute joke that we have to play 2 Tests, especially consideing we haven't played a series in the Australia summer in 10 years. It should not matter who brings in more money, you should get 3 Test min, unless your playing crap cricket.

The view that money is greater then the cricket, is going to kill Test Cricket one of these days. Just look at NZ, they don't play Test Cricket cus it makes no money for them. Look at Bangladesh they didn't play Test Cricket for like 18 months.