• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Can Test Matches Get Even Better?

James

James

Cricket Web Owner

Guest writer Tony Wadsworth has been pondering some ideas he has formed for Test matches about imposing a maximum number of overs to be received by both sides in their first innings. Here he puts these to the test, before outlining their beneficial implications for the spectating public.

To introduce Tony to those who don’t yet know him, he is a former Essex Young Amateur wicket-keeper and opening batsman who faced up to the likes of John Snow and Richard Jefferson in their respective Young Amateur sides.

Tony then went to Cambridge University, starting his cricket in 1962 when Tony Lewis was Captain and Mike Brearley was Secretary of the team. Tony played in the Freshmen’s Nets and two-day Trial Match, doing so alongside future Test all-rounder Richard Hutton, Ray White later of Gloucestershire and Transvaal, and Anthony Pearson later of Somerset.

Tony’s cricket career includes spells in England, Kenya and Argentina before settling in South Africa. He currently resides in Port Elizabeth and maintains close contact with other “cricket nuts” in that great sporting country.
 
Coronis

Coronis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Interesting article.

Not sure that this is a solution - its essentially the beginnings of reducing tests into limited overs - and thus the end of test cricket altogether.

The big issue with tests has always been (from a casual fan’s perspective imo) draws, rather than one sided victories. In all sports there’s going to be domination by some teams, and in fact is an attraction for many. Test cricket itself is already currently at its most result oriented in history, and arguably the most entertaining - for fans of fast run scoring. I’m also doubting very much that the level of one sided victories/losses is any higher than historically.

I’m just not sure there’s that much more that can be done right now? It feels more of a sign of the times of shorter attention span and a fast paced world that the longer format might become more niche.
 
S

swede

U19 12th Man
a terrible solution to a problem that does not exist. you need to take wickets to win or its not FC cricket. It would bring all the boredom of 50 over cricket and is frankly a baffling idea. The game on the field hasnt been better in at least 100 years.

The problem is off the field. The lack of context. Imagine all the best players removed from premier league football teams because England was playing a two-match international football series against Peru for no reason. Cricket may be different but perhaps not so much anymore. Franchise cricket is not just about the format but has also "normalised" the sport as being about leagues and cups and championships.

The WTC final was a phenomenal high-stakes game, probably the greatest day in south african test cricket history with half the players in tears afterwards. Expand that concept. Add semis and possibly quarters and qualifying series.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top