Sweeping changes ahead for Austalia.

[Richard]

I don't understand this "T20 cricket thriving automatically means it's bad for Tests" stuff. There is the example of India where proliferation of T20s have actually led to better performances in test matches and increase in public interest in that game.

Short-term considerations. The concern over Twenty20 damaging Test cricket all relates to long-term matters which will take a generation or two to unfold. No-one attempting to scaremonger or talk down the dangers has any ground to stand on.

 

[brockley]

I think we have the 6 states.
Plus a canberra and northern territroy side,add 2 kiwi sides.
We can have a transfer pool for players who want to transfer,so states get to keep players they want.
in the first year have a nz side then a canberra side.
A few years later a nt side plus another kiwi side.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah, baffled as to why you'd want to change the Big Bash, when it's just been such a roaring success.

The insertion of international/gun players has been a big reason for its success, though.

Don't buy this whole 'has to be state based for it to mean anything' when it comes to T20. I mean, if Nannes was paid enough to turn out for the Adelaide Awesome, **** me I'd be running to the gate to see he and Tait opening the bowling. I'd suggest I'm not alone, either.

 

[Julian87]

I'm actually for the city based franchises. Especially if the players in the Australian side can come back and play, which should allow for an additional two sides IMO without draining the player pool or ruining the quality too much.

There is pretty much an extra classy NSW side barring Aus selection and injuries as it is atm.

 

[NUFAN]

Yeah fat chance of the Aussie players playing unless the Big Bash is the first cricket of the summer in say October.

I'm not for the franchises at all, I wouldn't be against an additional 7th team though, to make it a 6 round comp, 3 matches home and 3 away.

 

[Redbacks]

Having all the players up for grabs seems a bit soulless tho; would seem weird that a bloke like (say) Symonds who's played for QLD all his domestic career could end up in Perth or Adelaide. Would make more sense if the bigger states with two city teams in divided their playing rostas up between them to me.

Copy the IPL model of having a batch of "Icon" players who can be pre-selected by the franchise based in that state and be paid a top dollar sum of money so as to not restrain their earning capacity unfairly.

 

[Burgey]

Hate the City-based concept. They finally get something right, and they have to go and change it. I mean, what history does Brisbane have? Absolutely none.

Fix'd

 

[Redbacks]

They win the state of origin every year don't they

 

[silentstriker]

There is the example of India where proliferation of T20s have actually led to better performances in test matches

[citation needed]


How in the world can you make that claim?

 

[Sir Alex]

Short-term considerations. The concern over Twenty20 damaging Test cricket all relates to long-term matters which will take a generation or two to unfold. No-one attempting to scaremonger or talk down the dangers has any ground to stand on.

I don't buy into that. As long as T20 Internationals are regulated, I don't think there is any particular danger to test cricket. In fact the proliferation of ODIs in the 1990s in the subcontinent was what almost threatened to kill off tests there. Talking about test cricket being dead as a result of T20s alone in a generation or two is convenient because it requires very little proof apart from a good imagination.

 

[Sir Alex]

[citation needed]


How in the world can you make that claim?

Actually I should have worded it bit more clearly. I didn't intend to connect the two but wanted to just say that on one hand while T20s achieved critical mass in India, test cricket also thrived on the other hand. we were scheduled to play only 3 tests this year, now thanks to BCCI, we are looking at no less than 8 test matches which is fantastic for the sport.

 

[Sir Alex]

Haha I love it.

India's fault for all the ODIs, and then Aust vs. England play a 7 ODI series.

India's fault for the IPL, and now T20 league in Aust is going to likely have auctions and possibly franchises.

Add to that India scheduling two out of the way test series' this year, which is a first for any team when other countries are reducing the no. of tests they are scheduled to play.

 

[Redbacks]

Actually I should have worded it bit more clearly. I didn't intend to connect the two but wanted to just say that on one hand while T20s achieved critical mass in India, test cricket also thrived on the other hand. we were scheduled to play only 3 tests this year, now thanks to BCCI, we are looking at no less than 8 test matches which is fantastic for the sport.

Surely avoiding giving up the no 1 ranking due to not playing enough was an even bigger factor. All the effort to reach No.1, it isn't worth losing without a fight.

 

[Sir Alex]

Surely avoiding giving up the no 1 ranking due to not playing enough was an even bigger factor. All the effort to reach No.1, it isn't worth losing without a fight.

No. 1 ranking was not exactly gifted to them right? It is the result of the BCCI, selection committee and the players' efforts that India are No.1. When India became T20 champions in 2007, the BCCI did not pressurise ICC to remove the cap on T20 Internationals every year did it?

 

[Richard]

I don't buy into that. As long as T20 Internationals are regulated, I don't think there is any particular danger to test cricket.

Naive idealism. The reality is that it is very possible that in 20 years' time the next generation of players will have grown-up prioritising their Twenty20 skills over their Test skills, because there is such a vast amount more money in Twenty20. In this outcome, the quality of Test cricket will suffer and the will to even keep playing it at all will reduce.

Whether that possibility becomes reality is not something anyone can know - some think it's likely, some think it isn't - we will simply have to wait and see.

 

[stephen]

I just hope that the Brisbane administrators realise that David Hussey should be the first player they pick.

 

[Furball]

Naive idealism. The reality is that it is very possible that in 20 years' time the next generation of players will have grown-up prioritising their Twenty20 skills over their Test skills, because there is such a vast amount more money in Twenty20. In this outcome, the quality of Test cricket will suffer and the will to even keep playing it at all will reduce.

Whether that possibility becomes reality is not something anyone can know - some think it's likely, some think it isn't - we will simply have to wait and see.

The best paid players in the IPL are almost exclusively proven Test players - either the Indian icon players, or proven internationals like Pietersen and Flintoff.

Tendulkar, Dravid, Kumble and Laxman didn't become icon players through playing T20, they became icons via Test performances.

 

[Richard]

Yup, and that's why the IPL isn't an immediate threat to the real game. If at some point down the line however Twenty20 games - be they IPL ones or Twenty20 Internationals - gain bigger profile than Tests (and such an outcome is obviously far from OOTQ) then that's clearly not going to last.

Also there are some obvious inbalances even now - a Sydney club cricketer who isn't even good enough to play First-Class cricket for NSW can earn an IPL contract; two proven Test openers for England cannot, and rightly so on both counts; Warner is far better at the Twenty20 game than Strauss and Cook. However much more high-profile they may be, skillsets are also important.

 

[Furball]

Yup, and that's why the IPL isn't an immediate threat to the real game. If at some point down the line however Twenty20 games - be they IPL ones or Twenty20 Internationals - gain bigger profile than Tests (and such an outcome is obviously far from OOTQ) then that's clearly not going to last.

Also there are some obvious inbalances even now - a Sydney club cricketer who isn't even good enough to play First-Class cricket for NSW can earn an IPL contract; two proven Test openers for England cannot, and rightly so on both counts; Warner is far better at the Twenty20 game than Strauss and Cook. However much more high-profile they may be, skillsets are also important.

If Strauss or Cook suddenly became amazing T20 players though, I'd back them to earn bigger contracts than Warner.

 

[Richard]

But that isn't going to happen, because Strauss and Cook aren't as good as Warner at the Twenty20 format. Twenty20 is where all the money is, despite the fact that it's recognised by fans of Test cricket, who identify themselves as the true fans of the game, as of a much inferior nature to Tests.

The danger is that the current generation, growing up, are going to want to be David Warner before they want to be Andrew Strauss or Alistair Cook. This goes completely against the grain of what cricket has been for a century and more.