great in theory. But would obviously never happen due to the boards/players/Icc etc. making a **** load less money as a result.Would actually be kinda interesting HOWEVER I think that if it were implemented it'd be only fair if there were more uniform Test series in both groups i.e. if Bangladesh make tier 1, they should be able to play 3 away Tests per series against each of the other countries. I mean whens the last time they toured Australia? It would be wrong for them to make the top tier only to be relegated because the boards cbf giving them Tests and so they don't play as much/have as much chance to win a series if they're 1-2 Tests.
The only way it would kill cricket in those countries would be if they stay there for a long time. I mean if NZ were in the 2nd tier in the last 2 years, we'd have likely stomped on everyone in that division and then after being victorious against Sri Lanka/WI we'd have moved up to div 1.Need to see more details before come to a firm opinion, however would undoubtedly be great for top associate teams like Ireland.
The risk is killing test cricket in places like WI, NZ, SL, Bangladesh if in second division, as would be relying on the respective Boards' ability, and other countries' willingness, to continue scheduling test series (for interest and competition) and limited overs series (for money) outside of the division. If a smaller nation's team is on a down-ebb, as happens from time to time, then compounding that with reduced competition, reduced interest at home through lack of matches against bigger teams, and reduced income, could put that country in a hole that would be very difficult to climb out of.
Nevertheless will withhold judgement for now. Interested to see if any rules in place regarding lengths of series within a division - 3 tests minimum? Or two tests home, two tests away minimum? Or not specified.
Have the big 3 ever been ranked 8th?I can bet this proposal will never get through. The big three will never agree to the risk of relegation.
I am sure Australia was not. But I remember England and India at 7th place. Not sure of 8th.Have the big 3 ever been ranked 8th?
There was a time in the late 90's where England were last on the table (admittedly using a different system, but still)Have the big 3 ever been ranked 8th?
Exactly what I was thinking. It's a bad idea imo. Doesn't make sense to say all of them have test status and then split them into tiers. You're basically saying that the tests in tier 2 are less important /prestigious /important. Most people unfortunately see it that way already even with a single tier. No need to reaffirm their beliefs.There are also statistical considerations. Do records broken in the 2nd division get a star placed next to them?