ICC considers a Relegation and Promotion system for Test Cricket

[Watson33]

I think two divisions could work if tours across the two divisions were allowed. i.e within the same division you must arrange a series for a minimum of 3 Tests (preferably 5), but you should still play series against teams in the 2nd tier - either one-offs or two test series. I'd like to think that the English fans at least would be disappointed to miss out on their jollies to the Caribbean, Sri Lanka or NZ.

I get where you're coming from with that, but isn't that kind-of what we have now? South Africa, Australia, England and India all play each other more frequently then they do the likes of WI, Pak, SL, NZ. I think if they were to implement it, then they'd have to go with matches against your own league.

Has anyone watched the cricinfo video with Ian Chappell? He talks alot of sense when he says 'either play 3 test matches or don't play the bloody thing!'

 

[hendrix]

Not sure about NZ but WI hasn't cared about it for years, so its hardly something new. Players care about it because its the most rewarding (and toughest) format for skill, (and its still the same format whether you play Zimbabwe or Australia, the spectacle doesn't change that much) plus the oldschool fans and cricket geeks like us. I don't see how this would change if you introduced this system.

It might be a bit harsh on NZ or WI but lets be honest, it wouldn't be that much worse than the current system for them, and it would be a HUGE boost for the lowest ranked teams, which is what I care about.

I don't know why NZ fans are so pessimistic about their chances either. I'd give them good odds to make the top six sides. Big supporter of their current set up. I'd be more worried about SL and WI.

Yeah I'm not pessimistic about this teams chances, but inevitably there's an ebb and flow, and in an ebb it could be absolutely disastrous for us given that basically no one cares about domestic cricket here - unlike in Aus, England or India.

 

[straw man]

I think two divisions could work if tours across the two divisions were allowed. i.e within the same division you must arrange a series for a minimum of 3 Tests (preferably 5), but you should still play series against teams in the 2nd tier - either one-offs or two test series. I'd like to think that the English fans at least would be disappointed to miss out on their jollies to the Caribbean, Sri Lanka or NZ.

That's a related point, which is that whatever system they come up with must be stronger on enforcing a minimum number of series between sides than the current one is. If not, and the rules/enforcement for minimum test series within each tier are as weak as the current ones, and teams are still allowed to play teams from other tiers too (they're not going to prevent the Ashes from occurring if Eng/Aus are in different tiers, so this must be allowed), then functionally there is no difference to what we have currently. Boards, especially the more powerful ones, will just schedule whatever they like and the tier system would be nothing more than window dressing.

Interested to see what the ICC come up with that will make India and Australia (in particular) conform to minimum requirements.

 

[Challis]

I do seriously wonder how England would go against Bangladesh in Bangladesh at the moment. And this will probably be a bigger challenge for them in the future, too.

I love your optimism. BD are getting rated higher, the less they play Tests. BD don't have a bowling line-up to take 20 wickets against a decent side. The batting whilst much improved still would be capable of a collapse against a good bowling side.

As if England wouldn't win in Bangladesh.

England definitely wouldn't lose but I don't think it's out of the question that BD might be able to sneak a draw or two given the flat batting tracks, decent BD batting line-up and the uncertainty/lack of quality English spin bowlers.
However I'd back BD to win a ODI series.

 

[silentstriker]

ICC Test championship please.

I like PEWS idea about combining sides as well.

 

[straw man]

Combined sides idea is yuck... just sayin.

Instead throw away the idea that every team must play every other team with test status a similar number of times over a cycle. Give promising associates test status and guide everything using the principle of:
Teams play other Teams of a similar level more frequently, and teams of a higher or lower level less frequently.

... to work out which series need to be played and create a balanced schedule for each country (while still allowing Boards some leeway).

 

[theegyptian]

ICC news : ICC plans to delink from FTP, make it bilateral | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo England v Australia v India ad nauseam then - and no other test series'

 

[Furball]

Interested to see what the ICC come up with that will make India and Australia (in particular) conform to minimum requirements.

Hold up, India in 2010 scheduled 4 additional Tests above and beyond the FTP, and scheduled 2 additional Tests last year vs the West Indies. India and Australia also commit to 4 Test Border-Gavaskar series; Australia and England compete for the Ashes over 5 Tests and Australia (IIRC) have agreed to go above and beyond the FTP for series against South Africa.

Meanwhile, West Indies, Pakistan and Sri Lanka have all cancelled Test series in the last 12 months because they cbf.

Which group of boards do you think are damaging Test cricket more?

 

[Slifer]

Hold up, India in 2010 scheduled 4 additional Tests above and beyond the FTP, and scheduled 2 additional Tests last year vs the West Indies. India and Australia also commit to 4 Test Border-Gavaskar series; Australia and England compete for the Ashes over 5 Tests and Australia (IIRC) have agreed to go above and beyond the FTP for series against South Africa.

Meanwhile, West Indies, Pakistan and Sri Lanka have all cancelled Test series in the last 12 months because they cbf.

Which group of boards do you think are damaging Test cricket more?

WICB are morons or didn't u get the memo

 

[Flem274*]

I'll post this again here in a relevant thread.

When detailing Test match promotion and relegation, the document states that "relegation exceptions" will apply to India, England and Australia.

****ing lol.

 

[uvelocity]

there would be a promotion exception for nz, but there'd be no danger of them being promoted anyway

 

[TimAngas]

Relegation exceptions will just defeat the entire purpose of the tier system: to increase interest in the game based on the promotion/relegation aspect of Test Series. Exceptions will essentially just kill development of Test Cricket in lesser nations at the really high level we want to see. Who cares if SL or WI improve if there's almost no chance of them reaching the top tier. The tier system has to be completely free moving and the three big boards just have to run with the risk otherwise kill all test cricket in nations other than theirs.

The three big boards I believe also need the other nations playing Tests to survive. If an Ashes or Border-Gavaskar is payed every year running people will quickly lose interest. I believe that the BCCI, ECB and CA have a right to take on a more leading role considering the dysfunction of almost all the other boards but only if they drive growth in five day cricket in other nations. That's a bit of a big ask though considering normal behaviour of the boards focusing on short and sharp booms of interest rather than the longer term health of the game. If more series between the big three are played I can almost guarantee interest will increase... only for it to return to the current level, a time when weaker nations are still at the very least, unsustainably touring.