ICC World Test Championship 2019/21 Final - General Discussions

Which team will win Test Championship Final?

  • India

    Votes: 5 23.8%
  • New Zealand

    Votes: 16 76.2%

  • Total voters
    21
  • Poll closed .

icyman

National Board President
Joined
May 17, 2004
Location
Hong Kong
Profile Flag
India
Absolutely! I mean, does this stat even matter now that ICC is hosting a marquee event for 3 consecutive years (2021 WTC; 2021 World T20; 2022 World T20; 2023 ODI WC)? By the end of the 2023 ODI WC, an ICC event would have become meaningless and not worthy of stats branding.

They have already become meaningless Sai. The illogical expansion in number of events with reduced number of teams doesn't bode well for any sport. Even the CWC lost some of its sheen with a reduced number of teams competing. If the idea is simply to limit the game among the top teams, then the CWC simply becomes an extension of the 8-team ICC CT.
Actually, ICC Knockout Cup was rebranded as ICC Champions Trophy in 2002
Yes, it was!

I'd still bat for the Knockout. The sheer madness,pressure and win at cost mentality of those games made for interesting viewing. South Africa won the first, NZ the second. Further editions of this could have seen the tournament being expanded to 16 teams , akin to FIFA's round of 16.

Would love to see this back in action!
Munaf Patel would be a better option
Dodda Ganesh, anyone ?:P
 

Parth D

Sorcerer Supreme
PlanetCricket Award Winner
Avengers
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
the only reason why icc wont allow knockout cup in 2021 is the number of matches. knockout cups have 7 matches and that is it. the broadcasters want atleast like 20 matches in a tournament to gain $$$
 

SaiSrini

Respected Legend
CSK
PlanetCricket Award Winner
Joined
Apr 26, 2003
Location
USA
Unadkat is just 29 years old.. Certainly not in the bracket for the "bring back Praveen Kumar; bring back Munaf Patel" trolls.

As far as I know, Unadkat gets most of his wickets through cutters or the angle that he uses to bowl. And I don't quite think that it does make a sense to play a bowler who hasn't played Test Cricket for more than 10 years now. Ishant, Shami, Bumrah & 2 spinners should be a good combination for Southampton. And Shardul does swing the red ball quite effectively from what I've seen of him.

Maybe that's more of a T20 perception on Unadkat. Honestly I haven't followed his domestic games live, but from what I read, 67 wickets in a Ranji season and that too bowling on batsman friendly pitches means he has the patience and the perseverance to slog it out. It doesn't matter when he played test cricket before. Doors cannot shut on you like that when you have a domestic system that is setup to give you another chance until you cross that threshold where its not possible anymore.

They have already become meaningless Sai. The illogical expansion in number of events with reduced number of teams doesn't bode well for any sport. Even the CWC lost some of its sheen with a reduced number of teams competing. If the idea is simply to limit the game among the top teams, then the CWC simply becomes an extension of the 8-team ICC CT.

Yes, it was!

I'd still bat for the Knockout. The sheer madness,pressure and win at cost mentality of those games made for interesting viewing. South Africa won the first, NZ the second. Further editions of this could have seen the tournament being expanded to 16 teams , akin to FIFA's round of 16.

Would love to see this back in action!

Dodda Ganesh, anyone ?:P

The sport has been all about money and now with India pumping in the money that it does, these guys are trying to milk the goose of the golden egg.

Cheeky man!! Yes, Dodda Ganesh was one of the guys who recently took up Unadkat's case for test selection (thats how the Unadkat test selection topic got media prominence in the past few weeks). But my argument was purely from a stats and the conditions where it was primarily achieved perspective. Its good to lengthen India's bench reserves and especially in a country like England where Bhuvi/Unadkat type bowlers can possibly thrive, I do feel a trick was missed.
 

icyman

National Board President
Joined
May 17, 2004
Location
Hong Kong
Profile Flag
India
we got that in the 2011 and 2015 world cups

Cricket has been the only sport where the format has consistently been tweaked every few years. The original format from 1975 remained the same until 1987, as the number of competing teams only increased by 2. 1992 saw changes owing to a last minute addition of SA. The 1996 CWC followed the simple, group-KO stage. In 1999 and 2003, they changed to the Super 6, then a Super 8 in 2007 and then back to the 1996 format.

No other sport has has so many changes over a period of time. In my opinion, the best is the one they use for the ICC U-19 CWC. However, this is least likely to be used given the concerns of 2007 (when India and Pak crashed out). If not, they ought to stick to the 1996/2011/2015 formats.

FIFA has increased the number of teams over the last few years, however, their formats havent undergone drastic changes. Neither has rugby

the only reason why icc wont allow knockout cup in 2021 is the number of matches. knockout cups have 7 matches and that is it. the broadcasters want atleast like 20 matches in a tournament to gain $$$

With the new FTP, its baffling enough to see 12 events in 12 years (I havent even counted the Women's or the U-19 ones). The CT has been put in as a filler, just cause the ICC intends to milk the cash cow! Sincerely hope the next edition sees the death of the said tournament!
 

Parth D

Sorcerer Supreme
PlanetCricket Award Winner
Avengers
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
And the common people will still watch everything and the viewership will instead increase because they are generalising it for everyone like women children etc and not just cricket enthusiasts to generate more viewership and in turn more $$$.
 

icyman

National Board President
Joined
May 17, 2004
Location
Hong Kong
Profile Flag
India
And the common people will still watch everything and the viewership will instead increase because they are generalising it for everyone like women children etc and not just cricket enthusiasts to generate more viewership and in turn more $$$.
Indeed!

This is what will hike up the commercial value of the broadcast rights. The last time round, there were fewer players in the market. But going by the trends seen for the BCCI rights/ IPL rights, one can expect the big bad boys of the Internet (Google, Facebook & amazon) to close the digital deals.

Surely going to be interesting in the days to come!
 

Bevab

ICC Board Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Location
India
Online Cricket Games Owned
  1. Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
Was reading an article on this recently, but I feel maybe BCCI missed a trick by not giving Jaydev Unadkat another chance at the test level, after his massively stellar Ranji season in 2019-20 where he picked up 67 wickets in Saurasthra's title run (and I hear most of his wickets were on docile non bowler friendly surfaces?). In the absence of Bhuvaneshwar Kumar, a good swing bowler and that too a left armer could've added good variety to the pace attack. England conditions are different from Australia and maybe an Unadkat could've been preferred over Shardul Thakur or Umesh Yadav. Most of our bowlers picked for the WTC final and the England tests are 'hit the deck' kinda bowlers. Unadkat could've given a nice dimension with his left arm and swing skills.

I've been a huge critic of Umesh Yadav on away tours but he's cleaned up his act and is the best Indian pacer over the last 2-3 years statistically if I'm right with most games at home on batting surfaces.

Unadkat's monster season was excellent given that he is also the captain but he is simply too slow in combination with doubts over his near 100% accuracy alongside being non-threatening in his stock deliveries. A bit harsh to call a Ranji star that but he shares the same problem that Matt Henry and to an extent Shami on away tours suffer from.
 

aitorita12

Club Cricketer
Joined
Feb 1, 2021
India's best XI for WTC final:
Rohit
Agarwal
Pujara
Kohli
Rahane
Kl Rahul (wk)
Vihari
Ashwin
Shami
Siraj
Ishant

If India don't select this XI, then they will lose. TBH any XI apart from this would mean that New Zealand have more quality in their side, so I'd support them if India don't choose this team.
 

NILAYSHAH60

TPCL management
India
NZ....
Mumbai Indians
DD.....
Avengers
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Location
Thane, India
Profile Flag
India
Ok let us comeback to the playing XI now. Things are a lot clear now.

:ind: INDIA​

  1. Rohit Sharma :bat:
  2. Shubman Gill :bat:
  3. Cheteshwar Pujara :bat:
  4. Virat Kohli :c::bat:
  5. Ajinkya Rahane :bat:
  6. Rishabh Pant :wkb:
  7. Ravindra Jadeja :ar:
  8. Ravichandran Ashwin :ar:
  9. Mohammed Siraj :bwl:
  10. Ishant Sharma :bwl:
  11. Jasprit Bumrah :bwl:

Since Rohit has played quite a few games ahead of this Final recently, I would have him ahead of Agarwal & KL. Gill scored a 50 in Sydney and a knock of 91 at the Gabba, definitely helps him a lot. The middle order of Pujara, Kohli, Rahane & Pant should remain unchanged. I would say this is the strongest middle order India has had over the last 7-8 years. I think Jadeja has massively improved with the bat in the last 3-4 years so he is a crucial no.7 for us and he is equally capable of delivering with the ball. Would be unfair to keep Ashwin out after the way he has bowled in Australia series. Also it does spin a lot at the Southampton by the time we move closer to Day 4. Siraj over Shami is an interesting choice but I look up to Siraj as a wicket-taking option in this format, if he move the ball in Australia then he can do wonders in England. It's a no-brainer that Ishant and Bumrah must always make our team irrespective of the team and conditions we are playing against. I think we are all set and prepared to play in the Final, we just need to get the momentum on our way early in the match.

:nz: NEW ZEALAND
  1. Devon Conway :bat:
  2. Tom Latham :bat:
  3. Kane Williamson :c::bat:
  4. Ross Taylor :bat:
  5. Henry Nicholls :bat:
  6. BJ Watling :wkb:
  7. Colin de Grandhomme :ar:
  8. Kyle Jamieson :ar:
  9. Tim Southee :bwl:
  10. Neil Wagner :bwl:
  11. Ajaz Patel :bwl:
Conway has truly been a great find for New Zealand which actually helps them get rid of Raval who has had his issues with consistency over the years, a double hundred on Test debut at Lord's makes it a must for NZ to play him. As long as I know, Kane Williamson has been rested as a precautionary measure so he would definitely play the final. Then comes to experienced middle order of Taylor, Nicholls and Watling which actually makes them a look a strong batting line-up. Grandhomme could be very handy for New Zealand as he could play some cameos in difficult situations with the bat and deliver with the ball which is helped by his lack of pace that he provides to the batsmen. Jamieson against India is a must considering that the Indians have struggled against him everytime they played. Southee after that India series is a revelation, so even he is a must. Wagner being a left-armer and New Zealand's best bowler in this format can't be kept out. I will make a bold move of playing Patel over Boult since we already have one left armer to trouble India along with the fact that there is no genuine spinner in the line-up.

I think both these line-ups look to be a lot realistic so I would back these sides to give us a great Final!!!!
 

NILAYSHAH60

TPCL management
India
NZ....
Mumbai Indians
DD.....
Avengers
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Location
Thane, India
Profile Flag
India
And leave out their best bowler?
Don't quite think Boult has been more effective than Wagner who looked the only option keeping out if we keep recent form in mind. They've got 3 genuinely good Test pacers so the 4th one is always going to be a luxury. If not Boult than it would be Southee who could be kept out. But given the recent England series it would be unfair on him.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top