Being Sri Lankan we never have played a 4 or 5 test Series so i was wondering what the forum thinks of the adequte "qualification" is. I would say Sri Lanka have to beat South africa in South Africa and win in Australia first? but that didnt apply to sides like New Zealand.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
When is a country good enough to play more than 3 test series?
- Thread starter Nishan
- Start date
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
When they can generate enough $$. Obviously, this shouldn't be the case - but the subcontinent spectators want ODIs and unlike India, SL can't generate any revenues from Tests so other countries don't really benefit from a long series against them and since SL public really wants ODIs anyway, SL doesn't push for more.
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
Post deleted now that the thread title has been corrected to Country instead of County.
Last edited:
Days of Grace
International Captain
I would back the glory of Yorkshire to beat Sri Lanka over 3 tests.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Well, let's see how England do first TBH.
Shaggy Alfresco
State Captain
Yorkshire would probably give Bangladesh a run for their money, but Sri Lanka?
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
No chance in Sri Lanka..
Sri Lanka are good enough to play in 3 Matches for sure. It's a joke that they are only playing in 2 test series against quality teams.
Shaggy Alfresco
State Captain
They're going to play 3 tests against England in December...
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah, I agree. It's a money thing and a 5 test series against Sri Lanka in Oz wouldn't generate the cash.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
Didn't know they were playing 3 Tests against England.
I think they should be playing 3 in Australia also.
2 isn't enough. You can't have memorable series (just memorable individual performances) in a 2 Test Series.
Also I love watching personal duels between players during a longer series.
I think they should be playing 3 in Australia also.
2 isn't enough. You can't have memorable series (just memorable individual performances) in a 2 Test Series.
Also I love watching personal duels between players during a longer series.
biased indian
International Coach
ICC should make sure that every second series between teams is atleast 3 test one's
Days of Grace
International Captain
Why wouldn't it? Only South Africa and Australia would arguably be better sides than Sri Lanka. So you're saying that only England (by tradition alone) and South Africa would get three test series in Australia??
India will get three tests, why not Sri Lanka, who are arguably the better side now and have the best bowler in the world.
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think India will generate more interest than SL and the one-day series in India with all its tension will guarantee the crowds come along. India vs Australia has become a big thing these days.
I'm not saying SL shouldn't get three tests or more. I'm certainly not one to put money over quality of cricket. Unfortunately, though, that's the way it is. They're a good team, but if it was financially viable then they'd be getting more tests. 3 tests each would make sense.
biased indian
International Coach
india is garunteed minimum 3 test and 5 odi i think ..its not based on the quality of us..but the tv companies require a minumum days of cricket and this is the only way to full fill that
archie mac
International Coach
I would prefer all series involving Aust are 5 Test series, except when we play Bangas
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Never, ever been a fan of two-Test-series, too short.
These days pretty well no-one plays a series of more than three Tests other than an occasional four-gamer in England, and also England vs Australia (still five), Australia vs South Africa (six, three each home-and-away) and usually England vs South Africa.
I'm happy enough with everything else being three, though it'd be nice if we could get five-Test India-Pakistan series up and running again sometime in future. Three games is enough, but two isn't.
These days pretty well no-one plays a series of more than three Tests other than an occasional four-gamer in England, and also England vs Australia (still five), Australia vs South Africa (six, three each home-and-away) and usually England vs South Africa.
I'm happy enough with everything else being three, though it'd be nice if we could get five-Test India-Pakistan series up and running again sometime in future. Three games is enough, but two isn't.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
$$$
It's nothing to do with wether the country in question is good enough - its because of the bulging fixture lists. Sadly (IMO) SA v England 2004-05 might well be the last non Ashes 5 Test series ever. Had SL been playing Test cricket in the 50s and early 60s they would have got a 5 Test series in England as everyone did (Even Pakistan got a 4 Test series on their first Test tour of England in 1954 which hasn't happened before or since) and NZ and India got five Test series in the late 50s although both were overwhelmed. But the ICC MUST make it three Tests minimum. Two Test series are ridiculous...