four_or_six
Cricketer Of The Year
Day/night tests is an interesting one. It would be good for home tests because you could actually watch them on TV instead of being at work.
-
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.
How to improve test cricket
- Thread starter Jakester1288
- Start date
andruid
Cricketer Of The Year
***ist
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
But Hawkeye for Tennis works (when the system doesn't crash that is) because it is reporting on facts, not predictions...
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Some form of Test Championship which gurantees good teams decent lengthed series against each other.
Sri Lanka just now should definitely be getting 3 or 4 match series against the likes of Australia and South Africa.
End 2 match series. They're pointless.
Scale back the FTP and make it for Tests only. Create more room in the calendar, allows more tour games. If countries want to organise their own ODI series/tournaments outwith the FTP, then allow them to, within reason
Sri Lanka just now should definitely be getting 3 or 4 match series against the likes of Australia and South Africa.
End 2 match series. They're pointless.
Scale back the FTP and make it for Tests only. Create more room in the calendar, allows more tour games. If countries want to organise their own ODI series/tournaments outwith the FTP, then allow them to, within reason
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Strongly disagree with this particular suggestion. When you make a test championship, every other game becomes "not a championship match" and lose all value. You end up with a situation like that of ODIs, where everything revolves around building for one month every four years.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
What I'm advocating is similar to the current ranking system just now - the "Championship" is becoming the number 1 side.
However, what I'd like to see is guarantees for top ranked sides to have decent length series when they're playing each other. Sri Lanka are I believe 4th in the world just now, yet if they were to tour Australia or a hypothetically 2nd or 3rd placed England, they'd only get 2 or 3 match series. Or recently, if England had beaten South Africa at home, then the series vs India would have been 2nd vs 3rd, yet only competed over 2 Tests.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
To use a hypothetical future scenario, England are the number 1 side in the world, closely followed by Sri Lanka and New Zealand. Similar to what we have just now, where Australia and South Africa can't really be seperated, with India just behind them, and the gap small enough that any series between the 3 could go either way.
Australia are back to their mid 80s worst, and the West Indies have continued to stumble shambolically from series to series. The FTP sends Sri Lanka to England in an Ashes summer, and the following year sends New Zealand and the West Indies to England in the same summer.
From a historical perspective, the series against Australia and West Indies are the most prestigious, and would get top billing, when from a purely sporting point of view, it's the series against Sri Lanka and New Zealand which should receive the most focus.
My idea would see Sri Lanka and New Zealand guaranteed proper length series, instead of being relegated to being a side show.
Australia are back to their mid 80s worst, and the West Indies have continued to stumble shambolically from series to series. The FTP sends Sri Lanka to England in an Ashes summer, and the following year sends New Zealand and the West Indies to England in the same summer.
From a historical perspective, the series against Australia and West Indies are the most prestigious, and would get top billing, when from a purely sporting point of view, it's the series against Sri Lanka and New Zealand which should receive the most focus.
My idea would see Sri Lanka and New Zealand guaranteed proper length series, instead of being relegated to being a side show.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
How to improve Test cricket, eH...
1. Improve the pitches. Pitches are far too flat these days and although it is sometimes out of the hands of the curators and groundsmen, I refuse to believe that this is always the case. Improvement of pitches can help Test cricket, twofold. Firstly, a quick pitch, one which seams or one that takes spin assists the spectator aspect of the sport as aggressive bowling in Test cricket is good watching for the majority of fans. Slow, flat pitches seldom make for good viewing. Secondly, more bowler-friendly pitches will be more result orientated which is more spectator friendly than bore draw pitches. And, on the unexpected third hand, low scoring contests created by more bowler friendly pitches can draw teams closer together, lessening one sided contests which are always destined to bore.
2. Day/Night Tests. Day/Night Tests can provide an extra dimension to Test cricket without detracting from the roots of the game. The evening session, which will hopefully attract large crowds on weekdays, could be a battle for batsmen to survive in front of a great atmosphere.
3. Championship? I am personally against the creation of a two-tier system for Test cricket. I do not want to have Australia Vs West Indies series' eliminated from the foreseeable future nor do I wish to see Pakistan Vs India or, heaven forbid, England Vs Australia, eliminated from the schedule due to different divisions. Moreover, I do not see the credability of such a league system, as Test teams change in ability vastly over short periods of time and across venue. West Indies are quite a strong Test team at home, as are England but both can be weak, away from home, a two-tier system would struggle to take this into account.
However, I would be in favour of a one-tier championship system which should immediately eliminate Bangladesh from procedings due to them being simply too weak. At the beginning of each calendar year, the top three Test teams in the rankings should play each other in one country with the fourth Test match being a championship fixture between the top two of the group. Although this seems distinctly low on excitement, I cannot think of a more exciting solution which can utilise the championship. If such a championship series toured the country, I'm sure it could raise some excitement
4. Relaxing of bouncer rules. Although this is but an example, there needs to be more encouragement of aggressive Test cricket. Why don't you restrict it to two bouncers in a row, in an over? There is already strict policing of the head high wide rule and I think this sufficiently prevents obscene unskilful overuse of bouncers without the one bouncer per over rule.
That'll do for now.
1. Improve the pitches. Pitches are far too flat these days and although it is sometimes out of the hands of the curators and groundsmen, I refuse to believe that this is always the case. Improvement of pitches can help Test cricket, twofold. Firstly, a quick pitch, one which seams or one that takes spin assists the spectator aspect of the sport as aggressive bowling in Test cricket is good watching for the majority of fans. Slow, flat pitches seldom make for good viewing. Secondly, more bowler-friendly pitches will be more result orientated which is more spectator friendly than bore draw pitches. And, on the unexpected third hand, low scoring contests created by more bowler friendly pitches can draw teams closer together, lessening one sided contests which are always destined to bore.
2. Day/Night Tests. Day/Night Tests can provide an extra dimension to Test cricket without detracting from the roots of the game. The evening session, which will hopefully attract large crowds on weekdays, could be a battle for batsmen to survive in front of a great atmosphere.
3. Championship? I am personally against the creation of a two-tier system for Test cricket. I do not want to have Australia Vs West Indies series' eliminated from the foreseeable future nor do I wish to see Pakistan Vs India or, heaven forbid, England Vs Australia, eliminated from the schedule due to different divisions. Moreover, I do not see the credability of such a league system, as Test teams change in ability vastly over short periods of time and across venue. West Indies are quite a strong Test team at home, as are England but both can be weak, away from home, a two-tier system would struggle to take this into account.
However, I would be in favour of a one-tier championship system which should immediately eliminate Bangladesh from procedings due to them being simply too weak. At the beginning of each calendar year, the top three Test teams in the rankings should play each other in one country with the fourth Test match being a championship fixture between the top two of the group. Although this seems distinctly low on excitement, I cannot think of a more exciting solution which can utilise the championship. If such a championship series toured the country, I'm sure it could raise some excitement
4. Relaxing of bouncer rules. Although this is but an example, there needs to be more encouragement of aggressive Test cricket. Why don't you restrict it to two bouncers in a row, in an over? There is already strict policing of the head high wide rule and I think this sufficiently prevents obscene unskilful overuse of bouncers without the one bouncer per over rule.
That'll do for now.
Jakester1288
International Regular
I am fairly sure it's two bouncers per over in Test matches and one in limited overs games.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Word, i'm down with all this. Such a worrying time for world cricket, ICC incompetence is destroying this wonderful sport...
Jakester1288
International Regular
I'd love to see timeless tests back. Whoever scores the most runs, wins. Simple.
No. That'll just bore people.
The quality of Test cricket will improve, I feel, when the BCCI's monopoly (like the ECB's back in the early 20th century) ceases. That way, countries with limited funds (like NZ) will not feel moved to produce utterly flat decks and play into the hands of the Indian batsmen just to avoid bankruptcy.
Day/night Tests would be a decent idea if they could find a suitably-coloured ball. But such an idea was tried before, in the Sheffield Shield and never really gained traction.
Relegation of teams like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe (hey, it's better than seeing them both get pounded continually) would be a good move, for it would improve the standard of Test cricket and attract viewers, but that shouldn't apply to any other team. Tradition still has an integral place in Test cricket (look at The Ashes, for instance).
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
Pitches, pitches, pitches.
And to counter the weather problem, 6th day to make up for missed overs, as PCB suggested in 2005.
All that's needed IMO.
And to counter the weather problem, 6th day to make up for missed overs, as PCB suggested in 2005.
All that's needed IMO.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
And what if it rains to lose 2 days play, a 7th or 8th day?
5 is the match length, if there's rain, then it's just tough.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
County games last four days and it works for them, so in one sense the fifth day is the reserve day.
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
Obviously a seventh or eighth day would be too much. The sixth day suggestion from PCB was meant for countries where Test matches are held in October and such and only 70 odd overs are bowled everyday. I don't see the problem with adding an optional 6th day in such conditions to try and get as many of the 450 overs in as possible. Of course the optional sixth day would be utilized only if a certain amount of overs were lost. Would be ridiculous to have an extra day for 5 overs for example.
Welcome back btw.