ICC consider revised Test programme

Rangeela

International Coach
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Online Cricket Games Owned
Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, Test cricket's two weakest nations, could be limited to home appearances only across a six-year cycle, as the ICC considers adopting a two-tier system to combat the twin problems of fixture overload and uncompetitive matches.

Last month, Bangladesh finally won a Test match at the 35th time of asking, after 31 (mostly comprehensive) defeats in their first four years as a senior nation. That victory came at Zimbabwe's expense, however, which merely highlighted the extent to which these two nations have slipped away from the pack.

Under the current provisions of the ICC ten-year plan, all nations are obliged to play each other in home-and-away series of at least two Tests and three one-day internationals at five-year intervals. The new plan which, according to a report in Thursday's Daily Telegraph, is likely to be agreed when the ICC's executive board meets in Delhi next month, would require the eight leading nations to play each other over four-year cycles, with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe matches being spread over six years.

Speaking to Cricinfo, an ICC spokesman confirmed that this option was one of several being tabled, although it was stressed that there has been no clarification as yet, and a final decision could be deferred until the next meeting at Lord's in June. Since the concerns were first raised in 2003, the ICC has been undergoing a comprehensive review of the current model, and there is scope for an eight-plus-four model, in which the two weaker nations would complement their fixture list with first-class matches against the strongest associate-member nations, which at this stage would be Kenya and, perhaps, Holland.

"The ICC programme is one that has evolved organically over many years, but we are now looking to review it scientifically," added the spokesman, "There are a whole range of factors to take into account." In addition to an analysis of the playing conditions for each nation, the financial implications of unprofitable tours will also be taken into account, for the ability for each series to generate revenue is paramount. The ICC stressed, however, that no team's current status ? be it Test- or associate-member ? would be under discussion in this round of talks.

? Cricinfo
 
This is a great idea, but whoever wrote this article obviously has no idea about who the strongest assoicate nations are. Kenya have been absolutely pathetic since the World Cup, and Holland? They came bottom of the European group in the Intercontinental Cup. If any two teams deserve this enhanced status, it would be Canada and Scotland. At full strength, they'd be more than a match for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.
 
but canada is all made up of former windies players.

might slow down there progress imo
 
The Kenyan team is in tatters as is their administration. Giving Kenya such a privilege would show that the ICC has the confidence that Kenya will recover but it will be a very stupid decision, in my opinion. Whatever they do, they have to take away Bangladesh and Zimbabwe's test status, or perhaps divide the test teams into Class A Test Status and Class B Test Status. If two other developing countreis then come into the foray, they can also be given Class B Test Status.
 
Approval

I like this idea, cricket seems to finally be evolving. Smaller countries e.g Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, enjoy playing top teams as it brings their supporters paying for the trip e.g England's Barmy Army. I agree with a 'Class A' and 'Class B' status for test teams, so Australia, England and India would be Class A and others Class B. I do think that Test nations are overplayed and overworked. I think no tours should take place over Christmas time. I know I would like to be at home with my family, not in the hot sun. Let's make Cricket a little more traditional, let's not let money take over. :cool:
 
I think separating it so distinctly would not be good, (Australia, India, England), as apart from Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, most other international teams are in the same range. My Class 'A' would consist of Australia, India, England, Pakistan, South Africa, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and West Indies and Class 'B' would consist of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Or alternatively New Zealand and West Indies could move down to Class 'B' and then the worst team in Class A would be exchanged with best in Class B, just like EPL. But I think this would make matters a little bit more complicated so I'm happy with just hte current division, and the addition of a few more associate members into the Bangla-Zim division.
 
in my view its a good thing for the game and i would say classify the teams as:

Group A : Aus, Eng, Ind, Pak, WI, SL, NZ, SA

Group B : Bang, Canada, Zim, Scotland

Let them play within their groups for a long period of time - say three years then promote the best one from B to A and demote the worst from A to B...then the cycle continues again...
 
I wouldn't go automatic promotion/relegation, it would have to be a play off.

I've actually got a fully formed idea for a massive 4 tier system, if anybody's interested......
 
I am certainly interested to hear it - maybe start a new thread so its easy to find
 
hey sachinisgod how about adding another 4 to class b - like holland, an arab country, kenya and ireland or even better have established 'a' teams in the b list and add the rest of the minnows and set up a system like rugby 7's with 16 teams - that way the minnows could improve while playing decent teams - god this is getting as confusing as d/l method. Only cricket can be so confoundng.
 
I've actually got a fully formed idea for a massive 4 tier system, if anybody's interested......

I would love to hear it.
 
in my view its a good thing for the game and i would say classify the teams as:

Group A : Aus, Eng, Ind, Pak, WI, SL, NZ, SA

Group B : Bang, Canada, Zim, Scotland

Let them play within their groups for a long period of time - say three years then promote the best one from B to A and demote the worst from A to B...then the cycle continues again...

I dont think that would be a wise idea since the team that would drop from Tier 1 to Tier 2 will have a long and a rather boring time in the lower league. It would be better if we divided the current 10 test teams into two tiers of five teams each, with the top 5 test teams (according to ICC Ratings), competing in Div 1 and the remaining 5 in Div 2.

In Each Div, each team will play the other teams in a home and away series (minimum of 2 tests) once, in a period of 3 years. So basically each team plays 4 series in about 18 months. Then according to the ratings, the last team of Div 1 at the end of the 3rd year, will be relegated while the team that tops Div 2 gets promoted to Div 1.

One Day and Twenty20 competitions should support this main test format in the various series that will be played.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top