How to make Test Cricket more interesting?

[deathrevenge9]

What do you think of this Idea
If a test match ends in a Draw,the team with most boundaries should be declared as the winner of the match.

 

[pcfan123]

What do you think of this Idea
If a test match ends in a Draw,the team with most boundaries should be declared as the winner of the match.

I hope you are joking.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

toss is only had on the first test, then it alternates to the other team.

stops rubbish series where the captain of the better team just happens to call correct and manages to finish off the weaker oppositions hopes before we're even finished day 3 (the england in the west indies series was seen as super boring for all the draws, but the windies never had a chance in any match to mix things about because they lost every toss, australia too had a pretty good run of it against south africa)

 

[pcfan123]

^ that is an interesting idea but not practical. Especially since most series are an odd number of test matches and it would give an unfair advantage to the first toss winner.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

I think they should turn up the stump mics so we can hear everythign that goes on. Id much rather hear Straussy setting his fields and the banter than the commentators droning on about pointless stuff. They should also mic the umpires so we can hear them deliberating.

Turn the stump mics off in the subcontinent. If I have to hear Akmal appeal once more ,my ear drums will explode.

Good enough reason to crank them up to full volume IMO.

 

[sifter132]

^ that is an interesting idea but not practical. Especially since most series are an odd number of test matches and it would give an unfair advantage to the first toss winner.

This is where the auction system I proposed a couple of pages back would work. Bid with runs or overs to field without one fielder and see which captain wants to give up the most for the right to choose first.

 

[deathrevenge9]

I hope you are joking.

I am serious

 

[chainsnatcher]

You can have such rules in street cricket but at the international level it would just take away the novelty of the game and would look ridiculous.

 

[Jack Sparrow]

Focus 22 High Definition Cams, one on each of the players on field or off field. Allow users to follow their favorite players during the boring part of the match:banana2:banana2....

 

[manee]

How to improve Test cricket, eH...

1. Improve the pitches. Pitches are far too flat these days and although it is sometimes out of the hands of the curators and groundsmen, I refuse to believe that this is always the case. Improvement of pitches can help Test cricket, twofold. Firstly, a quick pitch, one which seams or one that takes spin assists the spectator aspect of the sport as aggressive bowling in Test cricket is good watching for the majority of fans. Slow, flat pitches seldom make for good viewing. Secondly, more bowler-friendly pitches will be more result orientated which is more spectator friendly than bore draw pitches. And, on the unexpected third hand, low scoring contests created by more bowler friendly pitches can draw teams closer together, lessening one sided contests which are always destined to bore.

2. Day/Night Tests. Day/Night Tests can provide an extra dimension to Test cricket without detracting from the roots of the game. The evening session, which will hopefully attract large crowds on weekdays, could be a battle for batsmen to survive in front of a great atmosphere.

3. Championship? I am personally against the creation of a two-tier system for Test cricket. I do not want to have Australia Vs West Indies series' eliminated from the foreseeable future nor do I wish to see Pakistan Vs India or, heaven forbid, England Vs Australia, eliminated from the schedule due to different divisions. Moreover, I do not see the credability of such a league system, as Test teams change in ability vastly over short periods of time and across venue. West Indies are quite a strong Test team at home, as are England but both can be weak, away from home, a two-tier system would struggle to take this into account.

However, I would be in favour of a one-tier championship system which should immediately eliminate Bangladesh from procedings due to them being simply too weak. At the beginning of each calendar year, the top three Test teams in the rankings should play each other in one country with the fourth Test match being a championship fixture between the top two of the group. Although this seems distinctly low on excitement, I cannot think of a more exciting solution which can utilise the championship. If such a championship series toured the country, I'm sure it could raise some excitement

4. Relaxing of bouncer rules. Although this is but an example, there needs to be more encouragement of aggressive Test cricket. Why don't you restrict it to two bouncers in a row, in an over? There is already strict policing of the head high wide rule and I think this sufficiently prevents obscene unskilful overuse of bouncers without the one bouncer per over rule.

That'll do for now.

 

[chainsnatcher]

How about playing the overs lost due to rain/badlight in a drawn test match after Day5 ?

 

[Jack Sparrow]

It is surprising to see that most of the users voted for the Bodyline rule to be removed if we exclude the Test cricket should remain as it is rule.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

^ that is an interesting idea but not practical. Especially since most series are an odd number of test matches and it would give an unfair advantage to the first toss winner.

it doesn't really if you think about it. you win the first toss and you have a fifty, fifty chance of winning the next two. if you win the first you're still on average going to win one of the next two.

removing the toss from all but the first test means that at least you cannot win all of them and if the matches go the way of the toss it keeps the series live until the end.

The other option is to remove the toss altogether and have the tourists choosing first, this fits in with the gentlemanly heritage of cricket (welcome to our country, you may choose which you would like to do) and would mean at least the team with home advantage did not get the batting first advantage. OR just have it the loosing team gets it, and retains it if there is a draw.

the only problem is in the incredibly ungentlemanly reality of modern cricket (which saw the west indies make sure all their pitches were dead and flat to ensure a series victory over england recently) is that once the the order is established boards could have pitches that would crumble quickly meaning batting first was a massive advantage and prepare either very flat or very green wickets for the ones where the opposition gets to choose.

 

[pcfan123]

I am serious

Then I am really really glad no one at the ICC gives a ████ about what you have to say. Go watch 2020 and leave Test Cricket for the big boys.

For those who dont know what I am on about, this lad thinks a drawn test match should be won by the team who hit the most boundries.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

How to improve Test cricket, eH...

1. Improve the pitches. Pitches are far too flat these days and although it is sometimes out of the hands of the curators and groundsmen, I refuse to believe that this is always the case. Improvement of pitches can help Test cricket, twofold. Firstly, a quick pitch, one which seams or one that takes spin assists the spectator aspect of the sport as aggressive bowling in Test cricket is good watching for the majority of fans. Slow, flat pitches seldom make for good viewing. Secondly, more bowler-friendly pitches will be more result orientated which is more spectator friendly than bore draw pitches. And, on the unexpected third hand, low scoring contests created by more bowler friendly pitches can draw teams closer together, lessening one sided contests which are always destined to bore.

I think pitches are not too bad, agreed some are ridiculous, the ones in pakistan for sri lanka were humiliating and it's only because other tragic events unfolded there this is forgotten. the problem is how to implement a consistent standard. you need actual guidelines, also some awful pitches have yielded exciting results and conclusions (cardiff a prime example) and a pitch too difficult to bat on is unsatisfying. I would suggest a ground rating scheme in that the closeness of games, the runs per wickets etc, is evaluated and given a rating, (5 stars for a 4-5 day result wicket, 1 star for 2 or 3 innings draw or even a pitch that yields a result in almost 2 days, but opinions can be used) and if the ground gets below 2 star territory it is banned from hosting tests for a year, or something. This would prove effective because largely, the tests with bad wickets are the ones with the biggest grounds so that the hosts can get the most money (5 days at lords brings more than 5 days at the rose bowl) but this way england, for example, would have to make a good wicket on lords or else they would eventually be told they couldn't host tests for a year there. Also I wonder if a grounds groundsman would be instructed to make a 5 day bore wicket if the administrators knew they could lose test hosting privelage? I doubt it.