Correct Length for International Series

[deeb]

I wondered what people thought was the correct amount of games in a series between two international sides.

Tests
I get fed up with 2-test series. The Eng v Bang series is a good example. If Bang were able to pull off a win, we'd have a good 3rd Test to look forward to - winner takes all. As it is, what's the point of them playing for a draw when they'll lose the series. (I'm not saying they will do that) Similarly, England would have a real incentive to go for the win on the final day to secure the series, rather than leave it to chance for the final match.

I miss the 5-match series against any nation, we only seem to do that against the Aussies. We're playing 4 against Pakistan this summer. Why not 5? We only seem to play 4 against India West Indies and South Africa at home now.

ODI
Last year, we had to put up with a boring 7-match ODI series with Australia. I don't even think if we'd put up more of a fight,would I have got interested in it all throughout. 7 games is just too long. Now we have another 5 matches to look forward to this summer.

20/20
We seem to have some ridiculous 2-match series to look forward to. What's the point in having an even number when there will be a result in each match? At least with a 4-test series, there could be a 1-0 result or 2-1, but not in 20/20.


Anyway, just some of my thoughts, what does everyone else think?

 

[pcfan123]

2 Test series should be banned (unless playing Bangladesh)

Ie India vs South Africa this year where it finished 1-1 and both teams won by an innings.

 

[Dare]

2 Test series should be banned (unless playing Bangladesh)

3 test series should be minimum no matter who you are playing. Bangladesh just like any other side deserve to play 3 test series.

 

[pcfan123]

The financial implications are too much for a country like England to dedicate 3 of their home summer tests to Bangladesh.

 

[Dare]

The financial implications are too much for a country like England to dedicate 3 of their home summer tests to Bangladesh.

They are a test nation like all the others. We cant say everyone has to play 3+ test series unless they are playing Bangladesh. Its not fair to Bangladesh cricket and the money they can make from that one test can do allot of good for their cricket.

 

[khalek]

3-5 tests, 3-5 ODIs and 0.00 T20s.

 

[sifter132]

They are a test nation like all the others. We cant say everyone has to play 3+ test series unless they are playing Bangladesh. Its not fair to Bangladesh cricket and the money they can make from that one test can do allot of good for their cricket.

I agree with this. As long as everyone holds their end of the deal and plays the 3 match series. They got voted in and they deserve to get treated like a member.

20/20
We seem to have some ridiculous 2-match series to look forward to. What's the point in having an even number when there will be a result in each match? At least with a 4-test series, there could be a 1-0 result or 2-1, but not in 20/20.

I think the main reason is that they don't want T20 cricket to need a series. I personally think T20 should be just for exhibition games and purely for publicity. I can handle a World Cup I guess, but any attempt to have regular 3-5 game series of T20s would annoy me greatly because it would force the other series to be shorter. Leave it to states and franchises IMHO.

 

[Robelinda]

3 tests minimum, but it wont happen.

 

[RoboRocks]

Thread moved to Cricket Discussion.

 

[Cricketman]

3-6 tests
3-5 ODIs
0 T20s (1 if you insist)

 

[Dare]

20/20s cant be excluded. They are here to stay so one should be payed but no more then one.

3-5 tests
3 ODI
1 20/20

There needs to be a ban on long ODI series and the most there should be is 5.

 

[shravi]

3-5 tests. Only the closest and most important series should have 4 or 5 test match series'. 3 ODI matches if it's a 4/5 match series and 5 if it's a 3 test series. However, there should only be 3 ODIs in both scenarios (3 tests or 4/5 tests) against Bangladesh, West Indies and Pakistan for the time being as 5 ODIs would just be a drag. If T20s are to be played then there should either be 1 or 3, 2 is just silly. 1 means it's just a friendly. 3 means it's a T20 series, but 2 is just unimportant matches (in theory and in practice) masquerading as a series. It really bugs me when the T20 series is declared a tie (1-1). If T20s are going to replace ODIs (looks like it might happen in 10-15 years) then a little significance has to be attached to them outside the T20WC. I mean, England traveled all the way to play a 2 T20 series in Dubai vs Pakistan. Why would anyone travel that far for what are essentially 2 friendlies. I know they were on their way to Bangladesh, but still...

 

[drainpipe32]

I'll contribute nothing by giving my vote for 3-5 tests and 3-5 ODIs. T20I's should be 1-2.

 

[CG123]

I would go with:

3 Tests
5 One Day Internationals
1 Twenty 20 International

Three tests is a good amount, has to either be 1 or 3 T20's, and 3 is way too many.

 

[Varun]

3-5 Test matches , 5 ODI's (yup!), and 3 T20's that all ! And the time between two one dayers or two tests should be reduced. I have seen many series in which the second One day or second test happens after 4 days which does not make any meaning.