CA foresees complete Twenty20, Test split

[aussie1st]

AUSTRALIA would have separate Test and Twenty20 sides playing concurrently in a radical vision of the future predicted by Cricket Australia boss James Sutherland.

As the shortest format of the game continues to grow and international calendars are squeezed, Sutherland believes that within the next decade Australia could host a Test series while competing in a Twenty20 competition in another part of the world.

''Twenty20 has come on, it has changed the environment,'' Sutherland said. ''If you project forward 10 years, you've got to ask yourself, 'What does the game look like?' You've got more players playing the game. Is it possible that a player becomes more of a specialist in Twenty20 cricket and is less of a specialist in a longer form of the game, whether it's one-day or Test cricket, and does that create a whole new marketplace for Australian teams?

Cricket Australia Twenty20, Test split

Interesting vision by CA. Main problem with this is all the stars that gather the people in for T20 won't be there. You might have some like Tait and Warner but you miss guys like Watson, Dhoni, McCullum, etc. However it'll probably work for us since only a few players play Test but if that is extended to ODIs then we start getting some overlapping.

 

[War]

Nah i dont like the sound of this. Since for AUS a man like Watson would/will be a important player in all 3 formats - no way would it work. England would have KP - India Sehwag etc etc.

But when you see people bringing up these odd ideas, it always circles back to underlying problem with world crickets administration - which is the ICC is not proper governing body. It needs revamping or else we will never find a way accomodate tests, ODI & T20s - players will continue to complain about burnout - they will become T20 freelancers & test crricket will die . The perfect solution for all tours really is a minimum of 3 tests, 3 ODIs, 3 T20s - while the Ashes & England vs SA would be the only test series with 4/5 tests.

Plus a decision needs to made on whether both the IPL & Champions League can survive on the international calendar.

 

[pcfan123]

I think its a dangerous precedent especially since the big bucks are made in Twenty20. You don't want to give youngsters a decision to go one route or the other since most will probably choose Twenty20

 

[kirby]

I've always said the best direction for Twenty20 is to become like Rugby 7's, where it's pretty much a travelling circus, and the players very, very rarely represent their full international sides so there's no clash.

 

[sifter132]

Agree with ya Kirby. I think there should be a short World Cup every 2 years (basically for TV money), but that should be all for international T20s.

If they keep going the way it is, trying to fit extra T20Is into the schedule I think that the selectors shouldn't allow a player to play all 3 formats. So for Australia that would be Watson, Clarke, Hussey, Haddin, Johnson and Hauritz all barred from T20s, while Ponting's already retired from T20. You'd still be left with a decent side (Warner, Paine, Marsh, D.Hussey, White, Birt/Voges/Ferguson, S.Smith, Christian, Lee, Nannes, Tait) and it means you're not overtaxing your most valuable players.

 

[aussie1st]

Too late to make it like the Rugby 7s. With all the craze around T20 and the fact its probably the money generator, taking out the star attractions won't appeal to many boards especially India's one. If they did it from the start then it could have followed that road but it probably wouldn't have made the impact it has.

 

[drainpipe32]

I wouldn't mind seeing Australia pick an U-25 side for T20I games.

 

[kirby]

You'd still be left with a decent side (Warner, Paine, Marsh, D.Hussey, White, Birt/Voges/Ferguson, S.Smith, Christian, Lee, Nannes, Tait) and it means you're not overtaxing your most valuable players.

I think you'd be left with a better side because all the players will have played a lot of Twenty20 in the Big Bash, and will be free to play full seasons in the IPL because they're not tied up with Australia commitments. The Aussie players that play all 3 forms, however, only ever play Twenty20 as a true hit-and-giggle in a couple of exhibition matches at the end of a tour/summer.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

I've always said the best direction for Twenty20 is to become like Rugby 7's, where it's pretty much a travelling circus, and the players very, very rarely represent their full international sides so there's no clash.

this makes sense but I think it's a dangerous road to go down. For one, twenty20 is very popular and there is potentially more money in it than tests.

Rugby 7s is the marginal form of rugby because it's Union or League that packs stadiums and provides more lucrative careers for players, maybe not initially but in the longterm, more of the best players might choose to devote themselves twenty20 the team where they can make more money than playing test.

Further more, public perception is key in who the real sports stars are, athletes in minority sports like handball or floorball or whatever are not seen to be as talented as athletes in extremely popular sports like football and basketball, so, if it's twenty20 getting the audiences and filling the stadiums and being written about you could find yourself in a situation where David Warner, Tait, Yusuf Pathan, Shahid Afridi, Malinga and Umar Gul are seen as the elite cricketers and tests are just some odd format where less talented players like ponting, tendulkar, kallis, Steyn and muralitharan ply their trade.

If all teams copy CAs lead then you're going to get in a right mess, twenty20 is already making stars of players from nowhere, at least now we get to see their true talent when they move into the test sides, if this move doesn't happen, then the next generation of players that really excite people might be twenty20 specialists.

Right now, Test cricket needs to be cultivated and supported, fortunatly because players are generally real cricket lovers they will remain dedicated to playing tests, but you do not want to create a seperate faction who have no interest in tests and actually see it as a rival.

 

[kirby]

Right now, Test cricket needs to be cultivated and supported, fortunatly because players are generally real cricket lovers they will remain dedicated to playing tests, but you do not want to create a seperate faction who have no interest in tests and actually see it as a rival.

Thankfully most players do. But there are a select few that see Twenty20 as the better option. Chris Gayle is one. And Dwayne Bravo recently said his order of importance was Trinidad & Tobago 1st, Mumbai 2nd, and the West Indies 3rd. That makes me very sad.

 

[formula1man]

ive always thought T20 should be treated as a separate sport

 

[Iridium]

I quite like the idea of turning T20 into something like Rugby 7s. But I doubt it would work because people come to watch T20 to see explosive players eg McCullum, Sehwag etc and they would most likely be too busy on international commitments to participate in any sevens-esque tournament. T20 is a big money maker and without crowds and revenue coming in, the idea would flop.

 

[Cricketdude]

T20 is a big money maker and without crowds and revenue coming in, the idea would flop.

Wow, didn't realize that...

This idea may work. Australia might think that the test team to just focus on test matches and same thing with the ODI and T20.

 

[angryangy]

The way I see it, it would make the most sense to simply alter the way Australia A works. Just name a T20 squad and ensure broadcasting for it. It may not catch on immediately, but for an independent T20I side, I would think they would have to grow the brand anyway. A new team would not be considered the real team by fans, although if its purpose is to reap profits from other countries, then it would be interesting to see whether that alone is enough (it works for Fosters).

 

[Owzat]

They may well overdo it, supply more than is in demand. There will be a saturation point, I think they're better off leaving it as it is and keeping T20 more domestic than international.

And who cares that much if the best cricketers sell their souls for $$$, move on and bring through those who appreciate and want to play proper cricket