ICC considers repackaging Tests!

[silentstriker]

What about India/Pakistan Test series? Would be interested.

Empty house.

India-Pakistan ODI series? Full house.

India-Pakistan Test series will receive perhaps 1\10th (if they're lucky) of the fan-involvement of an India-Pakistan ODI series.

Yup.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

You're probably right. All I've got to draw on is the climate of Test cricket in Australia, which in fairness skews my vision somewhat.

Every team has an agenda when they play down under.

 

[Goughy]

An Australian perspective on why Tests are dull.

One of the responses to the letter included

Overlooking the whole Hogarthian scene, the neo-feudal barons of business, ensconced in their corporate boxes, waited upon with suitable subservience by armies of lackeys. In short the public institution of cricket has been privatised, turned over to the crude simplicities of Market greed, and profit maximisation, and hence has followed the familiar descent into the gutter

er, ok.

 

[silentstriker]

'Why are Tests dull?' is like the question 'When did you stop beating your wife?'

 

[The Masterplan]

As a rule, I do NOT like any attempts to repackage Test cricket. The line about increasing scoring rates is especially ominous, as the scoring rates in Test cricket have really never been higher, and the vast majority of Tests yield a result, which should be the goal.

Agreed!

 

[swede]

why the hostility towards attempts to increase scoring rates? surely the easiest way to achieve that would be to make changes to the ball or bring life back to pitches, anything to give bowlers a chance and thats what the game desperately needs.

The ashes 05 was a rare recent example of a bowler-dominated series. Batsmen had to attack and the cricket was sensational.
T20 is no threat to test cricket. flat pitches are.

 

[silentstriker]

why the hostility towards attempts to increase scoring rates? surely the easiest way to achieve that would be to make changes to the ball or bring life back to pitches, anything to give bowlers a chance and thats what the game desperately needs.

The ashes 05 was a rare recent example of a bowler-dominated series. Batsmen had to attack and the cricket was sensational.
T20 is no threat to test cricket. flat pitches are.

Because lively pitches do not mean higher scoring rates...flat pitches are the ones with higher scoring rates.

 

[slugger]

they could reduce it down to 2 years.. by making 2 pools headed by the current test leaders India and Australia with a final 5 series at the end of the period between the winning teams of each pool.


All 3 match seris..home and away.
pool A
Australia
England
Sri Lanka
New Zealand
Bangladesh

Pool B
India
South Africa
Pakistan better
West Indies
Ireland/ replace Zim.


after the final the two top teams head a pool each for the next 2 years with the other teams re distrubuted based on their points at the end of the previous period. evenly place between pool A and pool B.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

they could reduce it down to 2 years.. by making 2 pools headed by the current test leaders India and Australia with a final 5 series at the end of the period between the winning teams of each pool.


All 3 match seris..home and away.
pool A
Australia
England
Sri Lanka
New Zealand
Bangladesh

Pool B
India
South Africa
Pakinstan
West Indies
Ireland/ replace Zim.


after the final the two top teams head a pool each for the next 2 years with the other teams re distrubuted based on their points at the end of the previous period. evenly place between pool A and pool B.

 

[Top_Cat]

I believe it's actually spelt 'Panic-stan'.

 

[Furbag]

You needs to panic more? NZ or Pakistan?

 

[slugger]

It's a damn poor mind that can only think of one way to spell a word.
Andrew Johnson

 

[Richard]

why the hostility towards attempts to increase scoring rates? surely the easiest way to achieve that would be to make changes to the ball or bring life back to pitches, anything to give bowlers a chance and thats what the game desperately needs.

The ashes 05 was a rare recent example of a bowler-dominated series. Batsmen had to attack and the cricket was sensational.
T20 is no threat to test cricket. flat pitches are.

The Ashes 2005 is not a typical example of a bowler-dominated series. It was an exceptionally rare case of bowlers being able to bowl with great waywardness yet still manage to conjure the extraordinary delivery with great regularity. You will not see that again any time soon.

Generally, the more the ball does = slower and lower scoring. And I have no problem at all with that - scoring-rates at the current time are far too fast for my liking, the balance of the game is skewed towards batsmen. And the situation in that regard currently is better than it was 3 years ago, to boot.

 

[swede]

The Ashes 2005 is not a typical example of a bowler-dominated series. It was an exceptionally rare case of bowlers being able to bowl with great waywardness yet still manage to conjure the extraordinary delivery with great regularity. You will not see that again any time soon.

Generally, the more the ball does = slower and lower scoring. And I have no problem at all with that - scoring-rates at the current time are far too fast for my liking, the balance of the game is skewed towards batsmen. And the situation in that regard currently is better than it was 3 years ago, to boot.

well I disagree, generally the scoring rate goes up if the bat isnt in complete control. In the recent AUS v IND series the scoring was faster in perth than adelaide. why would a bat take the slightest chance if he knows he is safe.

I dont understand what you consider exceptional about the ashes 05 if not the fact that bats attacked because they knew they werent safe enough to turn games into blockfests.

 

[Richard]

Bats attacked because bowling allowed them to, simple as. The bowling was wayward, the scoring was fast. Simple equation. Bowlers control the game, if they bowl in the right areas the batsmen can't play attacking shots (unless they go completely unconventional which only ever happens in Tests in non-standard circumstances, which did happen on at least a couple of occasions in 2005 admittedly - the two that come to mind are Flintoff swinging out with the tail at Edgbaston and Strauss, Bell and Geraint Jones doing likewise just pre-declaration at Old Trafford).

If the bowling in 2005 had been tight as well as penetrative (and if more catches had been held), scoring-rates would have been far lower. But it wasn't, and didn't need to be.

 

[Manee]

Because lively pitches do not mean higher scoring rates...flat pitches are the ones with higher scoring rates.

Yes and no. A quick, bouncy pitch will often promote faster scoring than a dead, very slow one.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yes and no. A quick, bouncy pitch will often promote faster scoring than a dead, very slow one.

True but teams have generally scored a quick 300+ on quick pitches, rather than piling on 500+. Even if the bowlers are going at 4+-per-over, the bowlers are still in with a chance.

 

[Manee]

Was just replying to the comment of higher scoring rates, tbh...

I believe that Test cricket could benefit from the adverts which I heard that Packer employed in World Series Cricket in which the symbolical 'battle' between bat and ball was exaggerated and really emphasised as almost a war in the form of adverts and the like. Of course, there is the risk of it being percieved as very cheesy, but I think it is a risk worth taking.

 

[Top_Cat]

Was just replying to the comment of higher scoring rates, tbh...

I believe that Test cricket could benefit from the adverts which I heard that Packer employed in World Series Cricket in which the symbolical 'battle' between bat and ball was exaggerated and really emphasised as almost a war in the form of adverts and the like. Of course, there is the risk of it being percieved as very cheesy, but I think it is a risk worth taking.

Yeah but you're both right; SS is claiming flat pitches often result in higher scores, which is often true, and you're claiming fast pitches result in higher scoring rates which is also often true.

 

[Richard]

Of course, faster pitches tend to encourage faster scoring. The point is, though, that seaming pitches (and swinging balls) don't. Quite the opposite.

Pitches can be seamers without having much bounce. Equally, not all bouncy pitches offer seam. Swing, though, is of course independent of this.