4 Day Tests The Way To Go

[stephen]

The problem with all of the reasoning offered for 4 day tests in this thread is that it makes the absurd implication that shortening test matches will somehow make them more accessible and draw bigger crowds.

There has been no explanation of why 4 day tests will be more popular. Just an absurd belief that they will be.

The fact is that the shorter formats are already there to cater to those crowds. Tests are supposed to be the pinnacle of cricket. Stretching the days to 110/120 overs is just going to wreck bowlers. You'll not see less batsmen, you'll see more overs from batsmen who can roll their arm over. You'll see more fast bowler injuries due to captains over bowling their top bowlers. You'll see fast bowlers bowl more within themselves to get through their overs.

Let's say a bowling side bowls a team or for 600 on a flat deck. The batting side strikes at 50. That requires 200 overs. Right now that ends half way through day 3. That ends around dinner on day 2 in the second format.

In reality though it's worse than that. Because the bowlers are now bowling 30 extra overs at the end of their first day. Even if 10 of those extras are bowled by a part timer (bringing the total to 20 for the day), your main bowlers each have to bowl an extra 30 balls each on day 1.

So now you have 20 part time overs instead of 10, your fast bowlers have now bowled 22-25 overs instead of 17-20 (25-30% extra load) and you've gained nothing.

The rest day in the middle idea means you can't even do the one thing that this format could give - 3 tests in 3 weeks.

Truly a poorly thought out idea that would do nothing to help the game and make it objectively a worse exhibition of skill.

 

[TheJediBrah]

The problem with all of the reasoning offered for 4 day tests in this thread is that it makes the absurd implication that shortening test matches will somehow make them more accessible and draw bigger crowds.

There has been no explanation of why 4 day tests will be more popular. Just an absurd belief that they will be.

The fact is that the shorter formats are already there to cater to those crowds. Tests are supposed to be the pinnacle of cricket. Stretching the days to 110/120 overs is just going to wreck bowlers. You'll not see less batsmen, you'll see more overs from batsmen who can roll their arm over. You'll see more fast bowler injuries due to captains over bowling their top bowlers. You'll see fast bowlers bowl more within themselves to get through their overs.

Let's say a bowling side bowls a team or for 600 on a flat deck. The batting side strikes at 50. That requires 200 overs. Right now that ends half way through day 3. That ends around dinner on day 2 in the second format.

In reality though it's worse than that. Because the bowlers are now bowling 30 extra overs at the end of their first day. Even if 10 of those extras are bowled by a part timer (bringing the total to 20 for the day), your main bowlers each have to bowl an extra 30 balls each on day 1.

So now you have 20 part time overs instead of 10, your fast bowlers have now bowled 22-25 overs instead of 17-20 (25-30% extra load) and you've gained nothing.

The rest day in the middle idea means you can't even do the one thing that this format could give - 3 tests in 3 weeks.

Truly a poorly thought out idea that would do nothing to help the game and make it objectively a worse exhibition of skill.

Nah. Fred Tetanus is right and you are wrong because he's so intelligent and everyone else is an idiot who's not smart enough to understand his superior cognition

 

[Fred Tetanus]

Why are you persisting with this? You have not answered a single thing I said, about how four day Ashes matches will out self five day Ashes matches when the five day Ashes matches sell extremely well? Will I ever get an answer to this question. It is impossible! Even if you get 10% on a fifth day, you still would not possess that 10% if it was a four day test haha

You cannot accept the fact that Lord's and Oval are sell outs with absurd ticket prices

You cannot accept the fact that Headingley, Trent Bridge, Old Trafford and Edgbaston do extremely well.

You cannot accept any of the success of the five day Ashes.

Here is how successful the Ashes are? This proves it conclusively. Chester-le-Street, an inconvenient venue to get to, who traditionally picked up 'Zimbabwe in May' type scraps, made a resounding profit. No bigger proof of the Ashes success is needed, Chester-le-Street making a success of it (who normally couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery).

And you can't accept that the most popular series in the whole of test cricket is literally the only one that sells out. The rest of them in the main are terrible. You simply have no cogent argument, it's embarrassing.

And sorry but an explanation why 4 days will get bigger crowds than 5 days HAS been provided. Multiple times actually. Sad that you have read and replied to the explanation but can't seem to remember. Says a lot about your ability to critically think. Sad.

 

[stephen]

And you can't accept that the most popular series in the whole of test cricket is literally the only one that sells out. The rest of them in the main are terrible. You simply have no cogent argument, it's embarrassing.

And sorry but an explanation why 4 days will get bigger crowds than 5 days HAS been provided. Multiple times actually. Sad that you have read and replied to the explanation but can't seem to remember. Says a lot about your ability to critically think. Sad.

You really need to learn the difference between your imagination and facts.

It costs little more to play 5 day tests than it would to play 4 day ones. Players will still need the same accommodation/airfares etc... but now your revenue opportunities are less, particularly in the big series.

Besides that, I've explained why the quality of the cricket would be less and that is the most important thing.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

The proposed (theoretical) 100 overs a day for four days would lose 50 overs compared to 90 over five. Would this make results more or less likely? Would this change make people more likely to pay for a ticket if there is rain predicted, as in Australia it seems we been go off at the slightest shower?

I've also noticed that commentators (or at least, the Channel 9 ones) seem to think that it would make captains more aggressive (#intent, again). However, negativity and defensive tactics are not alien to one-day cricket, and I reckon that defensive captains would simply become commensurately defensive for four days instead of five. I'd also ask whether or not this idea is really accomodating to slower-scoring batsmen (Renshaw, anybody?).

Furthermore, we would need to find a way to speed changeover times between overs, the constant dawdling, field changes, sight screen adjustments (or failure, as at Perth), batsmen pulling out of facing deliveries, etc. or we would be looking at some long days in the field. (After all, just how often is the extra half-hour taken, now?)

 

[honestbharani]

The Wankhede has never looked that full on a Test match since before the IPL. A glorious sight. Agreed about the rest of the venues: very disappointing. But with Kohli, unlike MS Dhoni, showing that he is every bit passionate for this format, and with the mere aspect that India are winning (people tend to be more interested when you are winning), there is cause for optimism.

I dont think we had bad attendances even in MSD's time. And I think this past series we had great crowds at Vizag, Mumbai and Chennai. Remember the team taking lap of honors in both Mumbai and Chennai and they wont do that if there was no crowds. Remember, Chennai was at 60% capacity but was pretty full inspite of the cyclone, esp. on the weekends. Ditto Mumbai and Vizag. The issue with Mohali and Rajkot is that both stadiums are a bit away from the city AFAIK. You always get good test match crowds in both the traditional centres as well as the new ones where the ground is accessible enough in India.

 

[TheJediBrah]

. I'd also ask whether or not this idea is really accomodating to slower-scoring batsmen (Renshaw, anybody?).

167* in a day is too slow scoring?

 

[OverratedSanity]

I was actually very encouraged by the crowds for the recent India home tests. We're obviously never going back to the days where even the massive eden gardens would be packed, but there've been very decent turnouts recently.

 

[Red]

They will probably just follow what the other minnows will do and pick up the odd test. (Big) teams touring England will probably use Ireland as a two-Test dress rehearsal for England.

I could actually see a smallish test series between England and Ireland selling, on account of the proximity, rivalry and Irish expat community in England.

They could be - or could have been as these players are old - quite competitive if they maintain their internationals (Joyce and Porterfield) and pick up Aussies (etc) who cannot get into the Australian teams and suddenly discover they have an Irish grandparent!

I have long been an advocate of allowing test minnows to recruit two or three players each from the big three/four who are excellent FC cricketers but unable to get a test for their home nation. Especially guys in their early 30s.

Would generate a lot more interest from the big three/four countries in minnow cricket.

 

[S.Kennedy]

I dont think we had bad attendances even in MSD's time. And I think this past series we had great crowds at Vizag, Mumbai and Chennai. Remember the team taking lap of honors in both Mumbai and Chennai and they wont do that if there was no crowds. Remember, Chennai was at 60% capacity but was pretty full inspite of the cyclone, esp. on the weekends. Ditto Mumbai and Vizag. The issue with Mohali and Rajkot is that both stadiums are a bit away from the city AFAIK. You always get good test match crowds in both the traditional centres as well as the new ones where the ground is accessible enough in India.

Well I'm all for an India into their test cricket. Encouraging signs that Kohli takes it so seriously.

 

[S.Kennedy]

There is no compelling reason why four day tests would increase crowds. A four day test series is still going to be eleven sessions too long for the ram slam bam fans of twenty20 Macdonald's cricket so if you are hoping to draw them in, forget about it. Further, it will still be played in flannels and not consist of cheer leaders and the types of garish bells and whistles T20 fans prefer. Fans of Test cricket tend to be purists who appreciate the epic encounter and you risk ostracising those by shortening the format, i.e., in effect making Test Cricket less epic. Heck, you could even see a (sales) back clash from Test cricket's diehard supporters. You will certainly see a vociferous war over the issue as whenever this 'four day' thing is raised among ex-players/media pundits (etc) it has proved (at best) divisive.

 

[Immenso]

The increased crowds 'argument' is a red herring.

Talk of 120 over days should be moved to the joke thread, or maybe this is the joke thread?

4 day tests is about ease of scheduling.

Eg fitting in a 5 test series in 5 weeks becomes feasible.

A sensible discussion would be how that can be achieved (a 100 over day, or 105 overs 7 hour day?) and whether it is worth it.

I'm ok with it, but this tempered by realisation that my country's board would just see it as a way to squeeze in more white ball cricket, rather than get a balance and restore substance to test series.

May require a Pol Pot cull of all former batsmen from administration and grounds keeping.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

Why would "traditionalists" be super upset about 4 day tests? Cricket has evolved for 140 years and we have seen 3,4,5,6 and 10 day test matches, day night games, DRS, huge lbw changes... where is the "tradional" line being drawn?

 

[S.Kennedy]

Why would "traditionalists" be super upset about 4 day tests? Cricket has evolved for 140 years and we have seen 3,4,5,6 and 10 day test matches, day night games, DRS, huge lbw changes... where is the "tradional" line being drawn?

You are going to have to expect a (negative) reaction! Vaughan on the BT couch recently (who supports four day tests) got 'no' and 'no' from his fellow pundits/ex-players. That is just one small example.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Related to low attendance, Boycott proposes this,

Why doesn’t the ECB do the same? Tell television you have to black it out within a 50-mile radius of where the match is played. Then you get the best of both worlds: TV for people who live a long way away and bums on seats at the ground.

Michael Vaughan and Geoffrey Boycott round table: 2017 is the most important year ever for English cricket

Holly mother of god, Geoff!! Getting dottery in his old age.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Related to low attendance, Boycott proposes this,



Michael Vaughan and Geoffrey Boycott round table: 2017 is the most important year ever for English cricket

Holly mother of god, Geoff!! Getting dottery in his old age.

Pretty sure they did this in Melbourne when I was a kid. Local Tests weren't on tv.

 

[DriveClub]

Boycott is an absolute a******e, hate him to the core

 

[DriveClub]

Test cricket in Eng and Aus don't even need to be discussed, it's in really good health. But how long can countries like WI, SL, BD keep going in test cricket? Theres no money nor interest in tests there, there is no proper infrastructure, facilities, enough support in grass roots. They can't realistically compete with other richer countries. Why would the players want to keep playing tests? They will always look for greener pastures.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Why would "traditionalists" be super upset about 4 day tests? Cricket has evolved for 140 years and we have seen 3,4,5,6 and 10 day test matches, day night games, DRS, huge lbw changes... where is the "tradional" line being drawn?

I wouldn't call myself a traditionalist. I've found a lot to like about various innovations over the years, especially the 3rd umpire. On the other hand I don't particularly like T20, or rate Hawkeye and the fiddly rules around it. I think day/night tests will lose their lustre, but remain a thing.

I wouldn't want a reduction to four days in tests, because for me the crucial element of a five day match is its exclusivity. Most first class cricket is played over four days, but only the elite get to play a fifth.

 

[Burgey]

Pretty sure they did this in Melbourne when I was a kid. Local Tests weren't on tv.

Yep was Australia wide, unless sold out you only got the last session. In Odis you only got the first two hours.