2 Tier test system

[oitoitoi]

Top ICC official moots two-tier Test structure | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | Cricinfo.com

Damn good idea IMO, a good compromise to allow the likes of Bangladesh to keep test status, and to increase the frequency of interesting test series. Love the idea of India and England playing a 5 test series, especially in England. Just wish they'd done that for the last 4 or 5.

 

[andruid]

Top ICC official moots two-tier Test structure | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | Cricinfo.com

Damn good idea IMO, a good compromise to allow the likes of Bangladesh to keep test status, and to increase the frequency of interesting test series. Love the idea of India and England playing a 5 test series, especially in England. Just wish they'd done that for the last 4 or 5.

So long as it does not mean the outright scrapping of the Intercontinental cup as a place for the next best 8-12 cricketing nations that miss out on test nations to garner vaulable FC experience then I am all for it.

Hopefully the likes of Ireland, Kenya, Scotland and the Dutch benefit form such a system. Would probely put in a few more cracks in the glass ceiling between them and proper Full members of the ICC.

 

[atisha_ro]

not bad at all, lest it turns into a dividing stance like in European rugby between 6 Nations... nations and European Cup of Nations participants. There would have to be, like in rugby, regular opportunities for B-tiered teams to meet A squads from the better countries.

With three formats on hand, cricket has quite a lot to learn from rugby.

 

[Matt79]

That ceiling is imposed by the fairly concrete difference in quality, as opposed to being glass. Don't see the benefit of devaluing what should be the sport's premier level of
competition.

 

[steds]

I don't like it. Change confuses me.

 

[andruid]

That ceiling is imposed by the fairly concrete difference in quality, as opposed to being glass. Don't see the benefit of devaluing what should be the sport's premier level of
competition.

Then what do you do to make a system where there is a possibility for newer teams to bridge that diffrenece in quality?

 

[GIMH]

Would it mean the Ashes wouldn't be played when Australia were down in tier 2?

 

[andruid]

Would it mean the Ashes wouldn't be played when Australia were down in tier 2?

Seriously what are the odds of that?

 

[_Ed_]

Would it mean the Ashes wouldn't be played when Australia were down in tier 2?

Haha.

I think occasional exceptions would have to be made. As devoted a NZ fan as I am, I have to concede that we'll be spending quite some time in the lower tier, and I hope that doesn't completely eliminate traditional rivalries with teams like Australia and England while they're in the top tier.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

From a stats POV, would they all be given test status (bearing in mind I haven't read the article and am unsure if it was covered)?

I could only imagine the Warne v Muralitharan debates with Murali having 956 wickets @ 9.

 

[andruid]

From a stats POV, would they all be given test status (bearing in mind I haven't read the article and am unsure if it was covered)?

I could only imagine the Warne v Muralitharan debates with Murali having 956 wickets @ 9.

I reckon firstly that the lower tier would be assigned B Test status and be played over five days or something to that effect.


Secobdly Sri Lanka as a a top 8 nation would have played all their matched in the top tier, got more proper matches against real opposition, rather than having to put up with the max of 2 tests a series and playing Zimbabwe and bangladesh iso often in the desperate struggel to get test cricket of any kindlike they do now, and Murali would probably still have 650+ wickets so the debate would still be viable

 

[sanga1337]

Not too keen on the idea tbh. While it may make more games even contests it wouldn't allow great players in lesser teams to prove themselves against the stronger teams. It would be a pity not to see players like Lara for example not given a chance to play against really world class bowling.

 

[silentstriker]

I'll take that if it means better, more competitive games. It's nice to see Lara, but it's nicer to see a fifth day match with all three results possible, on a regular basis. It also means that countries that are perpetually ignored (like SL) get to play more top class opposition, and countries that shouldn't play top opposition at all (Bangladesh) will actually get to play competitive matches.

 

[Goughy]

I get all the reasons and on principle I agree with them all.

However, it is Test cricket. This it the elite. There is something counter-intuative about having two levels (if they keep the same name and stats).

At its core a 2nd tier of Test cricket isnt Test cricket.

Im all for games between nations having a new status rather than FC but I just cant see how Test cricket meshes with 2nd tier standard.

EDIT- In fact Im in favor of all FC games between nations being retropectively given a new classification. I started doing this once and spent a good day trying to figure it all out before surrendering to the fact that there are hundreds of them (Im including games such as the annual Ire vs Sco game, Intercontinental Cup games, games played by nations like Zim/Rhodesia before granted Test status, games then touring teams play Associates etc)

 

[silentstriker]

But the problem is that right now it's elite in name only.

 

[Uppercut]

That ceiling is imposed by the fairly concrete difference in quality, as opposed to being glass. Don't see the benefit of devaluing what should be the sport's premier level of
competition.

Bangladesh's test status is the killer to this line of argument, because there's no way there's a concrete difference in quality between them and the leading Associates.

Personally I'd have a system where the top tier contains all the main test nations and one or two Associates (10 is a reasonable number but 9 would probably be better for now). Every couple of years, the leading Associate and bottom test side could change places. Hence teams like Ireland and Bangladesh can play tests when they have a strong generation of players but won't make a mockery of the leading format when there's a major drop in standards (as Bangladesh are currently doing now).

The second tier would be something similar to the Intercontinental Cup, but taking place across different countries.

 

[silentstriker]

I would say seven countries in Tier 1. Seven more in tier 2, and top one moves up to tier 1 while bottom 1 moves down every three years. All should be full tours, in both tiers.

 

[morgieb]

Would it mean the Ashes wouldn't be played when England were down in tier 2?

Fixed.

 

[morgieb]

I like this idea. Gives the associaties a chance of playing international cricket and switching to test-playing nations.

 

[Flem274*]

I would say seven countries in Tier 1. Seven more in tier 2, and top one moves up to tier 1 while bottom 1 moves down every three years. All should be full tours, in both tiers.

NZ, who are eight, would get so, so bored of smashing up the likes of Zimbabwe. Come on, be nice