The Inaugural World Test Championship

[cnerd123]

the obvious problem wit the WTC is not the points system. That's a symptom. The problem with the WTC is that the boards still want to maximise the money they earn from each tour rather than play a 'proper' itinerary where everyone plays each other an equal number of times.

Imagine a World Cup where the group stage had India play Australia play five times, Pakistan once and New Zealand never. Naturally you would need some convoluted points system in order to make sense of all that.

That's basically what we have here. Some sort of workable compromise between letting boards do their thing and having an actual WTC. I do hope it backfires on the boards tbh, and that a side like NZ or SL that only gets 2-Test series everywhere ends up making it to the final.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Had to be done though. It would have been a joke for Australia v England series to be the same number of matches as Australia v Bangladesh. You can't treat it like a group stage of a world cup.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Anything less than 5 tests in an Ashes series is sacrilegious

 

[marc71178]

the obvious problem wit the WTC is not the points system. That's a symptom. The problem with the WTC is that the boards still want to maximise the money they earn from each tour rather than play a 'proper' itinerary where everyone plays each other an equal number of times.

Imagine a World Cup where the group stage had India play Australia play five times, Pakistan once and New Zealand never. Naturally you would need some convoluted points system in order to make sense of all that.

That's basically what we have here. Some sort of workable compromise between letting boards do their thing and having an actual WTC. I do hope it backfires on the boards tbh, and that a side like NZ or SL that only gets 2-Test series everywhere ends up making it to the final.

Bit harsh to include NZ in with SL there. Haven't you heard they're the best team in history with players like Kane Bradman, Henry Tendulkar, Jimmy Sobers, BJ Gilchrist, Neil Ambrose and Trent McGrath in their side?

 

[Adders]

There should be a minimum of 3 tests for every series, if India has to host NZ for 3 tests they should be made to do so
and cop the losses. They can make it up by having 5 tests against Eng or Aus or whoever else they see as a cash cow.

The Ashes has to be 5 tests, that just can't be ****ed with. Beyond that if everyone is not playing everyone accross the cycle the whole thing becomes meaningless.

 

[cnerd123]

Bit harsh to include NZ in with SL there. Haven't you heard they're the best team in history with players like Kane Bradman, Henry Tendulkar, Jimmy Sobers, BJ Gilchrist, Neil Ambrose and Trent McGrath in their side?

doesn't matter, they're boring and no one cares enough to watch them. That's why they weren't given the WC.

ya hear that Flem

 

[cnerd123]

There should be a minimum of 3 tests for every series, if India has to host NZ for 3 tests they should be made to do so
and cop the losses. They can make it up by having 5 tests against Eng or Aus or whoever else they see as a cash cow.

The Ashes has to be 5 tests, that just can't be ****ed with. Beyond that if everyone is not playing everyone accross the cycle the whole thing becomes meaningless.

We have 12 nations and you can easily schedule three 5-Test series each year for each team.

I reckon it's possible to do two divisions of 6 teams, and have them play each other home and away in 5-Test series. You could finish the whole thing within a 4 year cycle, with a 'Finals' series for the top two teams in each division to end it. So every 4 years you have a new Test Champion, with one team promoting/relegating.

The reason this won't happen is primarily $$$

 

[vcs]

I think NZC are the ones who've basically given up on Test cricket in recent years, aren't they? Can't blame the Big 3 cartel for that. I'm sure India wouldn't mind hosting them for a 3 match series.

 

[vcs]

We have 12 nations and you can easily schedule three 5-Test series each year for each team.

I reckon it's possible to do two divisions of 6 teams, and have them play each other home and away in 5-Test series. You could finish the whole thing within a 4 year cycle, with a 'Finals' series for the top two teams in each division to end it. So every 4 years you have a new Test Champion, with one team promoting/relegating.

The reason this won't happen is primarily $$$

That's simply not possible. Who apart from England play 15 Tests in a year? This is before the logistics and the playing seasons for different countries etc. is taken into account.

 

[TheJediBrah]

We have 12 nations and you can easily schedule three 5-Test series each year for each team.

I reckon it's possible to do two divisions of 6 teams, and have them play each other home and away in 5-Test series. You could finish the whole thing within a 4 year cycle, with a 'Finals' series for the top two teams in each division to end it. So every 4 years you have a new Test Champion, with one team promoting/relegating.

The reason this won't happen is primarily $$$

Your really think 5 Test series between everyone is going to happen? Ridiculous.

 

[cnerd123]

It's not going to happen because it's not worth happening

Logistically - we're talking 2 months each series, 6 months in the whole year. It's possible.

But why it doesn't happen is because there is no market for, or desire to, make an entire schedule revolve around 5-Test series against the likes of Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and New Zealand.

 

[Adders]

Who's asking for all series to be 5 tests though? No one really wants or expects that........min of 3 and they can do 5 where the series warrants it.

 

[cnerd123]

If we're arguing for consistency, and claiming that this point structure is stupid, then having random 5-Test series amidst a calendar of 3-Test series does not actually solve anything. Because as soon as you have inconsistent series lengths, you're going to have this same points system in place. There is no way around it.

Which is why I said that the only way to get a 'proper' WTC -one where every team faces each other for an equal number of home and away games- is to have 2 divisions of six, and have every team play 10 5-Test series across 4 years.

Or cut all series, include the Ashes, down to 3-Tests.

 

[trundler]

Have 3 test series with the first 3 tests of the Ashes counting in the WTC.

 

[DriveClub]

Easy solution is to not count Ashes towards WTC

 

[DriveClub]

Anyway this is a last ditch attempt to make test cricket accessible to everyone but don't see this working. Test cricket is an elitist game, only rich countries can afford to watch and follow test cricket. People making ends meet day to day can't follow test cricket.

 

[cnerd123]

Anyway this is a last ditch attempt to make test cricket accessible to everyone but don't see this working. Test cricket is an elitist game, only rich countries can afford to watch and follow test cricket. People making ends meet day to day can't follow test cricket.

That's just blatantly untrue. Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan have massive followings for Test cricket and are not rich countries.

It's an impractical sport to follow live on TV, or at a ground, but it's easy enough to consume day to day via scores, highlights, reports, etc.

 

[aussie tragic]

You forgot Ireland when they just skittled the Poms lol

 

[cnerd123]

Is Ireland considered a poor country?

 

[aussie tragic]

Well it was when I was there in 1990...might have changed?