crying:crying
I think the point is that Australia gets those games every year. I may have misread the article, though. And the fact that a tour of Australia is so bloody long means that the perfect home season for the touring country (more times than not) gets completely used up.
It is not that long, the West Indies came for 3 tests two years ago, and then left without an ODI being played. Teams can simply come over for a month or two, play some tests then leave, and we'll get New Zealand to cover for them or someone else like Zimbabwe or Bangladesh who want to play in Australia to get some good ODI practice.
Of course, but when you have bigger or more popular teams tour, I doubt CA would settle for anything but a full series, especially if the alternative is to host Zimbabwe or Bangladesh. How come Australia don't invite Bangladesh and Zimbabwe to play during these traditional tests?
Many would, but Cricket Australia wouldn't consider Bangladesh an exactly profitable replacement to South Africa, would they? Besides, the argument is that Australia get to have their home series in their best season every year whereas the team that has to tour them will lose out on this opportunity.
Good old Sohum, always the voice of reason, but what I'm saying is that it's arrogant to refuse to play during the home side's preferred season, when there are plenty who would, not just Bangladesh or Zimbabwe!
But that is precisely what Australia are doing for most of the other countries! If South Africa or India someone else were to call Australia for a tour in their winter, Australia would refuse because that would collide with their preferred season.
