I think the groundsman knowing beforehand that the home team was picking could see some really bull**** pitches.Just read that India has won every single Test where Kohli has won the toss. In the recent Aus series I thought the toss was pretty crucial as well.
Kinda lame that test cricket sometimes hands a side an advantage before a ball is bowled. This is nothing new and yes it doesn't happen all the time, but often enough to be annoying imo.
I don't have a proper solution. The half baked idea is leaving the first match in the series down to the toss and then alternating who gets to pick.
i kinda like this actuallyAwarding all tosses to the away team is too much.
Awarding alternating tosses and removing all randomness leaves room for pitch doctoring.
I like the idea of flipping a biased coin so that the visiting team has say 2/3 chance to win, but noone's ever going to bother implementing that.
Instead I think the best proposal is the following:
Retain the toss, but the visiting captain gets one veto per series, that they may choose to use before the toss. Similar to a DRS review, so there's already precedent.
So, the captains rock up on the first morning of the series and if it looks like a clear bat-first or bowl-first pitch the visiting captain will use their veto and do that. If they're unsure or want to save it, they'll flip the coin instead.
This slightly tilts the playing field in favour of the visitors, likely at the start of the series, and avoids the two problems at the start of this post.
There's still some potential for pitch doctoring later in the series, but the start of the series is the more critical time for the visitors to get a boost, I expect.
More than slightlyAwarding all tosses to the away team is too much.
Awarding alternating tosses and removing all randomness leaves room for pitch doctoring.
I like the idea of flipping a biased coin so that the visiting team has say 2/3 chance to win, but noone's ever going to bother implementing that.
Instead I think the best proposal is the following:
Retain the toss, but the visiting captain gets one veto per series, that they may choose to use before the toss. Similar to a DRS review, so there's already precedent.
So, the captains rock up on the first morning of the series and if it looks like a clear bat-first or bowl-first pitch the visiting captain will use their veto and do that. If they're unsure or want to save it, they'll flip the coin instead.
This slightly tilts the playing field in favour of the visitors, likely at the start of the series, and avoids the two problems at the start of this post.
There's still some potential for pitch doctoring later in the series, but the start of the series is the more critical time for the visitors to get a boost, I expect.
Yeah that's not bad either, though could lead to tarmac preparation for the first test.i kinda like this actually
Or just straight up let the Away team pick what they want to do on the first Test of the series, and have tosses for the remaining games.
Same as I suggested though I reckon just once a series, or maaaaybe twice for a five test series. More tilts it too much.Let the away team pick what they want to do for half the Tests, but they can choose which Tests right before play. Prevents the home team doctoring pitches if they know which games the away team can choose.
I make it 75%, but Good!More than slightly
73.3% of the time the visiting captain would "win"/veto at least 2 of the 3 tosses in a 3 match series.
I like this, but I think it'd get predictable because away teams would always choose what to do in the first half of the series. It's rare for teams to be able to come back into a series once they've conceded the lead.Let the away team pick what they want to do for half the Tests, but they can choose which Tests right before play. Prevents the home team doctoring pitches if they know which games the away team can choose.
Works out well enough for the visiting team though - some time in the middle against the opposition, probably won't start the series with a loss, let's them get warmed up and acclimatized to the country.Yeah that's not bad either, though could lead to tarmac preparation for the first test.
If you get some decent wickets in the first few Tests where the Toss wouldn't be that big a deal (eg. Adelaide & Perth Tests this year) you can just let the toss happen and save your picks for later in the series.I like this, but I think it'd get predictable because away teams would always choose what to do in the first half of the series. It's rare for teams to be able to come back into a series once they've conceded the lead.
That would be a die.I like the idea of flipping a biased coin so that the visiting team has say 2/3 chance to win, but noone's ever going to bother implementing that.
I like this.At the toss, both teams play a super over that end after one over or a wicket. The highest score gets to choose.
You know TV would love it because it has the word super in it.
If the grounds played as per theory, there should be something in them to aid the bowling side on the first day. If there's not, allow the loser of the toss an official bit of sandpaper.
Play a Test match to decideI like this.
But one question, who gets to choose to bat/bowl in the Super Over?
We can have a SuperBall to decide that..
And who gets to choose to bat/bowl first in the SuperBall?
Damn.