ICC News: Restructuring the ICC, BCCI Influence & more

[sifter132]

Martin Crowe: Two-tier Test system, my foot | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo
Martin Crowe has always been a thinking man, he lets not forget was the man the created cricket max format in NZ, that lead to the idea of T20 cricket starting in England.

I like this basis of this idea of having a 4 quarterfinals knockout test matches that leads to a semi's & finals.

I actually really like the basis of Martin Crowe's idea Mainly because it gives relevance to the Test series' that are happening right now. There is no 'wait for 4 years and see who's ahead in the rankings' type stuff. It's simple - if you win this year, you play off for the championship this year.

You could do it like this...give IPL their blessed window in April, early May - no more. Then starting from mid-May, every Test series counts towards a final championship series of 3 Tests to occur each mid March-early April. The two teams who've won the most series' during that 10 months get to play each other for the annual title. Simple. There would be arguments over scheduling eg. teams might try to stack their schedule with 'easy' series, but the basic idea of the best teams of the year playing off appeals to me.

 

[surendar]

If you leave BCCI to have a control, they might even announce "IPL winner qualifies 1st tier while runner up qualify in 2nd!". Because, they don't know anything other than money & they will even allow football as substitute of cricket ball if you show the money!

 

[War]

ICC | NZC Slammed For Support Of Takeover | Stuff.co.nz

Wow this sounds really concerning, its sad that we just have to do everything the big dogs say but thats like most of life I guess..

Can't be surprised at NZ taking this position given their financial situation. If the real financial powers ENG/AUS want to collude with the BCCI instead of fight them - can't expect NZC/WICB/SCB/CSA/PCB/BCB to fight the BCCI.

 

[War]

I actually really like the basis of Martin Crowe's idea Mainly because it gives relevance to the Test series' that are happening right now. There is no 'wait for 4 years and see who's ahead in the rankings' type stuff. It's simple - if you win this year, you play off for the championship this year.

You could do it like this...give IPL their blessed window in April, early May - no more. Then starting from mid-May, every Test series counts towards a final championship series of 3 Tests to occur each mid March-early April. The two teams who've won the most series' during that 10 months get to play each other for the annual title. Simple. There would be arguments over scheduling eg. teams might try to stack their schedule with 'easy' series, but the basic idea of the best teams of the year playing off appeals to me.

The problems you raised is why i have slight issue with Crowe's idea.

When he first spoke about this topic with Harsha Bhogle & Sanjay Manjrekar in 2010 - Time Out : Time Out with Harsha Bhogle | How will a Test championship work? | Cricket videos, MP3, podcasts, cricket audio | ESPN Cricinfo, there was suggestion that 4 years to crown a champion is too long & thus Crowe's new idea got traction. I don't believe crowing a test champions every year is correct nor 4 years is too long.

The beauty of test cricket to become a champions is play everyone home/away, show versatility & beat everyone or win a large percentage of your home/away matches.

In 1 year all 8 nations can't play each other home/away & if you do it that way - i believe the test championships would have similar question marks to how some teams have become # 1 based on the faulty ranking system.

This is just a random draft i did, so don't hold me to accuracy, but lets say we had scrapped the already incoherent FTP & starting from scracth this january 2014. Every team started fresh playing each other home/away - until we had a semi-final knockout & 3 test match finals. As you can see in the draft i'm averaging it will take 4 years for all teams to play home/away before we get to this final.

2014:

SRI in WI (3 tests) (Jan/Feb)
PAK in NZ (3 tests) (Jan/Feb)
IND in SA (3 tests) (Jan/Feb)


ENG in WI (3 tests, 3 ODI/T20s) (Mar/Apr)
AUS in IND (3 or 4 tests, 3 ODI/T20s) (Mar/Apr)
SRI in PAK (3 tests, 3 OD/T20) (Mar/Apr)

NZ in ENG (3 tests, 3 O/T) (May/June)
AUS in ENG (5 tests, 3 O/T) (July/AUG/Sep)


SA in Sri (3 tests, 3 O/T) (Aug/Sept)

PAK in IND (3 tests, 3 O/T) (Oct/Nov)
NZ in AUS (3 tests, 3 O/T) (Oct/Nov)
WI in SA (3 tests, 3 O/T) (Sept/Oct)

PAk in SRI (3 tests, 3 O/T) (Dec/Jan)
SA in AUS (3 or 4 tests, 3 O/T) (Dec/Jan)
IND in NZ (3 tests, 3 O/T) (Dec/Jan)


2015:

ENG in IND (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar
AUS in PAK (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar
WI in NZ (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar
Sri in SA (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar

NZ in SRI (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Apr/May
AUS in WI (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Apr/May

PAK in WI (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Jun/Jul
SRI in ENG (3 tests, 3 O/T) - May/June

SA in ENG (4 test, 3 O/T) - July/Aug/Sep

IND in SRI (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Sept/Oct

SA in PAK (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Oct/Nov


NZ in SA (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Dec/JAN
IND in AUS (3 or 4 tests, 3 O/T) - Dec/Jan



2016:


AUS in SA (3 or 4 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar
SRI in NZ (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar
ENG in Pak (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar
IND in WI (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Mar/Apr


PAK in ENG (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Jun/Jul
IND in ENG (3 tests, 3 O/T) - July/Aug


AUS in Sri (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Aug/Sep
SA in Ind (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Sep/Oct
WI in Pak (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Oct/Nov

ENG in AUS - (5 tests, 3 O/T) - Nov/Dec/Jan
PAk in SA - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Dec/Jan


2017:

ENG in NZ - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar
Ind in Pak - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Feb/Mar

NZ in WI - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Mar/Apr
SA in WI - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Apr/May


SRI in AUS - (2 tests, 3/2 - O/T) - July/Aug
WI in Ind - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Sep/Oct
NZ in PAK - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Sep/Oct

NZ in Ind - (2 or 3 tests, 3/2 - O/T) - Nov/Dec
WI in AUS - (3 test, 3 O/T) - Nov/Dec
Pak in AUS - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Dec/Jan


2018:

AUS in NZ - (3 test, 3 O/T) Jan/Feb
Eng in SRI - (3 tests, 3, O/T) Jan/Feb


SRI in IND - (3 tests, 3 O/T) Feb/Mar

SA in NZ - (3 test, 3 O/T) Mar/Apr
AUS in SA - (3 tests, 3 O/T) Mar/Apr
Sri in WI - (3 tests, 3 O/T) - Apr/May

SEMI-FINALS (England):

1 VS 4 - May/June
2 VS 3 - May/June

FINALS (England): 3 tests (July/Aug)

 

[SaiSrini]

I have a strong feeling that the new idea might not get implemented, and if it goes through, could erupt into an ugly incident in the cricket world.

I just don't support this nonsense. As one of the Cricinfo author has said, cushioning India/Australia/England from not being relegated in the proposed tier system amounts to "organized fixing", just like "organized crime". If things like this happen, cricket would become like wrestling where everything is organized.

If things have to change in world cricket, a revolution within the BCCI has to happen that removes the current corrupt administration and people with knowledge of cricket and non-greedy people must takeover BCCI. Once that happens, world cricket will take care of itself.

 

[Papa_Smurf]

CSA and PCB oppose ICC changes

Good to see. Hope SLC, BCB and WICB follow suit.


ICC's revamp plans : CSA demands ICC proposals withdrawn | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo


PCB set to oppose changes ICC's governance model - Rediff.com Cricket

 

[ferg512]

Good to see. Hope SLC, BCB and WICB follow suit.


ICC's revamp plans : CSA demands ICC proposals withdrawn | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo


PCB set to oppose changes ICC's governance model - Rediff.com Cricket

Good on CSA and PCB, at least those boards have a bit of a backbone unlike the disgrace that is NZC. They are fine to let everyone trample all over them as long as they get a bit of cash for it.

 

[War]

Proposal for ICC re-vamp bad for WI says director | The Trinidad Guardian Newspaper

WICB haven't officially denounced it - but a board director has at least called it bad.

----------

I have a strong feeling that the new idea might not get implemented, and if it goes through, could erupt into an ugly incident in the cricket world.

I just don't support this nonsense. As one of the Cricinfo author has said, cushioning India/Australia/England from not being relegated in the proposed tier system amounts to "organized fixing", just like "organized crime". If things like this happen, cricket would become like wrestling where everything is organized.

If things have to change in world cricket, a revolution within the BCCI has to happen that removes the current corrupt administration and people with knowledge of cricket and non-greedy people must takeover BCCI. Once that happens, world cricket will take care of itself.

Ye i hope your right & i do sort of suspect the condemnation the ICC will get from this - will probably scuttle this proposal.

And yes indeed, the BCCI needs to clean up its act - can't have those corrupt politicians involved & BCCI apologist Ravi Shastri, Sunny Gavaskar (sad that he has become this) - become part of the BCCI. They are clearly good India officials around...

 

[CG123]

Good on CSA and PCB, at least those boards have a bit of a backbone unlike the disgrace that is NZC. They are fine to let everyone trample all over them as long as they get a bit of cash for it.

Yeah, I like to think that we've always been a place who isn't afraid to stand up to much bigger countries (anti-nuclear stance etc), so it's a bit of shame if NZC aren't going to.

 

[SaiSrini]

Proposal for ICC re-vamp bad for WI says director | The Trinidad Guardian Newspaper

WICB haven't officially denounced it - but a board director has at least called it bad.

----------



Ye i hope your right & i do sort of suspect the condemnation the ICC will get from this - will probably scuttle this proposal.

And yes indeed, the BCCI needs to clean up its act - can't have those corrupt politicians involved & BCCI apologist Ravi Shastri, Sunny Gavaskar (sad that he has become this) - become part of the BCCI. They are clearly good India officials around...

Gavaskar and Shastri might be toeing the line of the BCCI due to various other reasons. But both these guys in reality are known to be sensible and decent. Its the other goons who need to be evicted. If Gavaskar or Shastri can assume a position in the BCCI, they would actually do good. Right now, they are just used as mouthpieces for the BCCI where the BCCI throws money at them and asks to bark for them.

People like Ganguly, Dravid, Kumble, Srinath, etc need to get into BCCI administration. These guys can actually do good for Indian cricket. But how they can take on the current setup is something that no one knows. When Dalmiya was ruling, the Pawar group came in and gave a bitter fight to upstage the Dalmiya group. But right now, there is no rival group to challenge the current BCCI administration. Seems like they have done everything to trampoline on any idea of giving rise to a rival group.

 

[sifter132]

The problems you raised is why i have slight issue with Crowe's idea.

When he first spoke about this topic with Harsha Bhogle & Sanjay Manjrekar in 2010 - Time Out : Time Out with Harsha Bhogle | How will a Test championship work? | Cricket videos, MP3, podcasts, cricket audio | ESPN Cricinfo, there was suggestion that 4 years to crown a champion is too long & thus Crowe's new idea got traction. I don't believe crowing a test champions every year is correct nor 4 years is too long.

The beauty of test cricket to become a champions is play everyone home/away, show versatility & beat everyone or win a large percentage of your home/away matches.

In 1 year all 8 nations can't play each other home/away & if you do it that way - i believe the test championships would have similar question marks to how some teams have become # 1 based on the faulty ranking system.

This is just a random draft i did, so don't hold me to accuracy, but lets say we had scrapped the already incoherent FTP & starting from scracth this january 2014. Every team started fresh playing each other home/away - until we had a semi-final knockout & 3 test match finals. As you can see in the draft i'm averaging it will take 4 years for all teams to play home/away before we get to this final.

That's a nice schedule!

Personally, I think a 4-5 year running points table is too long if you are going to market it as a championship, and bring the prize down to one month of play in that cycle. It's a lovely idea in theory, but teams fluctuate too much within that time frame ie. winning a series for the Test championship in 2018 probably wouldn't have much relevance to past form, even from what happened in 2016. It might get problematic too late in the cycle when teams down the bottom can't make the semis. They will want to cancel series, maybe play their 2nd XI, an irrelevant series would be difficult to promote etc. There would be more anguish about big name players retiring mid-cycle too eg. if Michael Clarke retires in 2016/2017 and Australia starts a downward slide in the last year or two.

Other ideas? Just shorten the point scoring cycle and have a semi-final and final every 2 years. Make it more current in other words. Schedule won't be balanced, but it will NEVER be balanced anyway under the current political climate.
Maybe we just play the #1 and #2 ranked teams off with each other every March/April for 3 Tests. Don't have to make a big deal of it, but the cricket itself should be compelling enough to attract TV, sponsors etc.
Or if the #1 team is dominating every year, try the World XI concept again. Statisticians hated that 2005 'Super Series', but there was a lot of interest in the series. And that's what this championship idea is about at it's core, getting more interest in Test cricket.

 

[isrararrafi]

I do not see this draft getting approved at all. Whoever "leaked" the draft did a lot of good for cricket. The amount of universal hate this draft got, I do not see either BCCI, CA or ECB to go forward with this. At least not without drastically changing the draft.

Regarding test championship, I prefer the test championship every 2 years rather than 4 years. It makes sure the teams have not changed much over the course of the "season" due to retirements. Regarding how it should be scheduled, i believe the ranking system should be used to determine who will play who and where. For example no 1 team needs ro play away against the no 8 team giving the no 8 team an advantage.

Also I do think champions trophy should be brought back. It should include the top 8 team in nothing but knockout matches. People tend to like the "lottery" surrounding this format.

3 teams odi tournaments should be brought back too to generate interest back to the odi games. Also 3 teams tournament gives chances for associate teams to get invited to play with the the big teams. Better if ypthey can arrange the tournament in the associates country to generate interest. The first champions trophy was organized in BD where BD did not even play. But people flocked to the stadium to see the likes of waughs, dravids, rhodes etc

And lets just drop the internation T20. Shall we? Cricket wasnt dying before (correct me if I am wrong). The talk of odis and tests dying only came into the discussion once t20 got introduced in the international level.

 

[MattW]

If you came up with a decent solution to the problem of players who are on multiple teams (besides letting the IPL team keep everyone) and the extreme bias towards the IPL/Big Bash, the Champions League T20 really should be the pinnacle of that form of the game.

The players really don't seem to take international T20 matches with any degree of importance, especially as it seems to be 1 or 2 matches at the end of a tour when all the important matches are over; and is anyone really fussed if they don't win the World T20?

 

[blockerdave]

I would have a four year 10 team FTP with min 3 test series, then the 5th year would be the championship year - so the top 8 play a series of 3 match knock-out series, in the home of the lower ranked team with the final maybe neutral?

maybe you could have the bottom two play off against the intercontinental cup finalists in a promotion/relegation thing

Then in year six it starts again.

I would keep international T20, and scrap international 50 overs. Most corruption comes in e 50 over format, because there are so many meaningless matches and meaningless overs throughout the game just ripe for spot fixing.

----------

Oh, and i would put Giles "I love Allen Stanford" Clarke's head on a spike.

 

[karolkarol]

Good to see. Hope SLC, BCB and WICB follow suit.


ICC's revamp plans : CSA demands ICC proposals withdrawn | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo


PCB set to oppose changes ICC's governance model - Rediff.com Cricket

As you say, nice to see boards standing up to the BICCI*
*see what I did there