New Zealand in South Africa - Dec - Jan 2012/13

[vorgaphe]

How do NZ even have test status? Get Ireland and Afghanistan in to give them some decent matches!

 

[Epic]

How do NZ even have test status? Get Ireland and Afghanistan in to give them some decent matches!

Just another example as to why Cricket needs a switch to the tiers system.

 

[ferg512]

How do NZ even have test status? Get Ireland and Afghanistan in to give them some decent matches!

Think thats a little bit harsh tbh, that batting performance was a disgrace I will admit but we are missing our best bowler and two best batsman, we simply do not have the depth to replace those guys. Most teams would struggle missing key players like that.

----------

Just another example as to why Cricket needs a switch to the tiers system.

If anything you need the weaker teams playing the stronger teams more often, there are barely any countries good at cricket anyway for a tier system to work.

 

[cerande]

New Zealand have bounced back from great defeats in the past.Hobart and the current test in Sri Lanka is a proof of that.But here,they are missing their best batsman and their best bowler.It would take some thing extra ordinary from kiwis to bounce back in the series.

 

[Aalay]

LOL NZ. Philander was just unplayable and i don't think Taylor would have made much difference to the scorecard. It was just brilliant bowling from SA.

 

[Epic]

If anything you need the weaker teams playing the stronger teams more often, there are barely any countries good at cricket anyway for a tier system to work.

As much as that would help the weaker teams, it just doesn't make for good viewing for the general public and I personally think a tier system would just about sort all that out, competition is best where in it's actually competitive.

Tier 1

Australia
England
India
Pakistan
South Africa
Sri Lanka

Tier 2

Afghanistan
Bangladesh
Ireland
New Zealand
West Indies
Zimbabwe

Perfect.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

india in the top tier?

if any side as been guilty of making series' boring due to being utterly incapable of competing with their oppenents, it's india.

 

[Aalay]

india in the top tier?

if any side as been guilty of making series' boring due to being utterly incapable of competing with their oppenents, it's india.

Well if you are putting India in 2nd tier just concentrating on India's post WC phase then I would also drag Sri Lanka to that list.

 

[War]

If anything you need the weaker teams playing the stronger teams more often, there are barely any countries good at cricket anyway for a tier system to work.

Yea exactly. I don't understand why people are quick to call for tiers when essentially we only have 8 solid test teams.

As bad as it is the NZ got bowled out for 45, lets not forget the this same proteas attack rolled australia over for 47, just a year ago. Plus of course NZ are missing their two best first team batsman, which means things have to be put into perspective.

 

[War]

As much as that would help the weaker teams, it just doesn't make for good viewing for the general public and I personally think a tier system would just about sort all that out, competition is best where in it's actually competitive.

Tier 1

Australia
England
India
Pakistan
South Africa
Sri Lanka

Tier 2

Afghanistan
Bangladesh
Ireland
New Zealand
West Indies
Zimbabwe

Perfect.

No way should an improving Windies be a tier below. Them and Pakistan are around the same level.

But as aforementioned tiers can't work for test cricket. All this talk of tiers & if we actually gauge the pulse of world test cricket now:

- essentially south africa & england are the only two complete test teams.

- Australia are a level behind them because of weak batting, although their fast-bowling fairly even to that of the proteas & 3 lions.

- Pak & Windies are the improving teams.

- India & SRI are in decline because of an ageing team.

- While NZ are essentially suffering from not having taylor & ryder around and the lack of strong back-up (which most teams dont have behind their first XI) don't. Their bowling has been impressive enough secure long standing wins in australia & sri lanka in the last year - so a full strength nz would be fairly close to pakistan and windies as "improving teams".

So if we were to put cricket into tiers right now based on this, you should technically only have s africa, england & australia in tiers 1 - which obviously won't make any sense.

Fans need not forget how hard it is for teams to become good @ test cricket.

Except for sri lanka all the top 8 nations having been playing test cricket for more than 75 years & all of them (except for england & australia) took at least 15+ years to become solid test nations, and also for the citizens of the country even in this modern age of fast sports to still appreciate test cricket & go the ground every year to watch it.

So it not going to be a simple case of you relegating the weaker of the sides to play ireland's etc, since they still are miles ahead of bangladesh/zimbabwe & associates nations when it comes to a first class game/test match.

Really those associates plus bang/zim who i don't think should be playing test cricket, have to earn the right to play test through their performances in odi & t20 cricket. While instead of tiers for tests, i'd say big nations like australia, england, india, south africa should send their "A" teams on 3-day/4-day match tours to zimbabwe, bangladesh, kenya, ireland, in uae to play afghanistan, scotland, holland. In this way we could gauge their readiness for potential test cricket, while they show improvement as a cricket nation in odi/t20 tournaments.

While the ICC should be having a more hands on approach to aiding weak financial boards to improve the standard of first-class cricket in pak, wi, sri, nz - instead of trying foolishly to get america or china to play cricket.

 

[ferg512]

As much as that would help the weaker teams, it just doesn't make for good viewing for the general public and I personally think a tier system would just about sort all that out, competition is best where in it's actually competitive.

Tier 1

Australia
England
India
Pakistan
South Africa
Sri Lanka

Tier 2

Afghanistan
Bangladesh
Ireland
New Zealand
West Indies
Zimbabwe

Perfect.

Sorry mate but thats far from perfect very questionable that you have both Sri Lanka and India in the 1st tier. We just beat Sri Lanka in SL and now they are getting absolutely obliderated by Australia a place where we actually won a test this time last year. Sri Lanka are spiraling downwards and although I think they are slightly better than us atm, they are definitely not better tahn WI.

----------

Don't forget that SL test too quickly, if we could get that kind of team on the park with Ryder we would definitely have a team good enough that could sit midway through the test rankings.

 

[CG123]

We were right for the slaughter without our three best batsmen, our best pace bowler, and our best spinner. On paper it's just a total mismatch, with South Africa having without doubt the five best batsmen and the three best bowlers.

Tbh there's already a sort of tier system in place, because we only ever play two test series' away from home, while England etc. will always play at least three test series'.

 

[Epic]

india in the top tier?

if any side as been guilty of making series' boring due to being utterly incapable of competing with their oppenents, it's india.

As much as I agree with that, we're still not down to the level of New Zealand or West Indies(no disrespect intended).

Sorry mate but thats far from perfect very questionable that you have both Sri Lanka and India in the 1st tier. We just beat Sri Lanka in SL and now they are getting absolutely obliderated by Australia a place where we actually won a test this time last year. Sri Lanka are spiraling downwards and although I think they are slightly better than us atm, they are definitely not better tahn WI.

----------

Don't forget that SL test too quickly, if we could get that kind of team on the park with Ryder we would definitely have a team good enough that could sit midway through the test rankings.

Far from perfect for a start maybe, but with a tier system a start shouldn't matter because it will sort it all out on it's own. The bottom sides would eventually get replaced, so theoretically the teams in decline would end up in tier 2, where they belong.

We were right for the slaughter without our three best batsmen, our best pace bowler, and our best spinner. On paper it's just a total mismatch, with South Africa having without doubt the five best batsmen and the three best bowlers.

Tbh there's already a sort of tier system in place, because we only ever play two test series' away from home, while England etc. will always play at least three test series'.

True, but that has more to do with money than anything else.

----------

No way should an improving Windies be a tier below. Them and Pakistan are around the same level.

But as aforementioned tiers can't work for test cricket. All this talk of tiers & if we actually gauge the pulse of world test cricket now:

- essentially south africa & england are the only two complete test teams.

- Australia are a level behind them because of weak batting, although their fast-bowling fairly even to that of the proteas & 3 lions.

- Pak & Windies are the improving teams.

- India & SRI are in decline because of an ageing team.

- While NZ are essentially suffering from not having taylor & ryder around and the lack of strong back-up (which most teams dont have behind their first XI) don't. Their bowling has been impressive enough secure long standing wins in australia & sri lanka in the last year - so a full strength nz would be fairly close to pakistan and windies as "improving teams".

I thought if I went by the ICC Test rankings it would cut down the disputes, but hey, I thought wrong...

So if we were to put cricket into tiers right now based on this, you should technically only have s africa, england & australia in tiers 1 - which obviously won't make any sense.

I don't see why that is. I hate to bring Football in to the discussion, but that's the only sport of any prominence that goes about it with tiers(that I know of). Anyway, are all teams in a said top league "complete teams"? No, they're not, you've got your fair share of good, average and bad teams jumbled up together.

Fans need not forget how hard it is for teams to become good @ test cricket.

Except for sri lanka all the top 8 nations having been playing test cricket for more than 75 years & all of them (except for england & australia) took at least 15+ years to become solid test nations, and also for the citizens of the country even in this modern age of fast sports to still appreciate test cricket & go the ground every year to watch it.

Bangladesh have had Test status for 12 years, any improvement? Uhm, don't think so...

So it not going to be a simple case of you relegating the weaker of the sides to play ireland's etc, since they still are miles ahead of bangladesh/zimbabwe & associates nations when it comes to a first class game/test match.

New Zealand/West Indies are miles ahead of Ireland/Afghanistan, I'll give you that, but Bangladesh/Zimbabwe are not miles ahead of Ireland/Afghanistan and that's my whole point...

Really those associates plus bang/zim who i don't think should be playing test cricket, have to earn the right to play test through their performances in odi & t20 cricket. While instead of tiers for tests, i'd say big nations like australia, england, india, south africa should send their "A" teams on 3-day/4-day match tours to zimbabwe, bangladesh, kenya, ireland, in uae to play afghanistan, scotland, holland. In this way we could gauge their readiness for potential test cricket, while they show improvement as a cricket nation in odi/t20 tournaments.

Bangladesh/Zimbabwe(along with the associates) shouldn't be playing Test cricket, agreed, but they should be playing Tier 2 Cricket with teams of their level.

Do like your idea on A tours between the top nations and associates though, exposure always helps.

While the ICC should be having a more hands on approach to aiding weak financial boards to improve the standard of first-class cricket in pak, wi, sri, nz - instead of trying foolishly to get america or china to play cricket.

Now that's something we can all agree on.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

the point wasn't seriously suggesting I think india would be a tier 2 team in a tier system. I just disagree with any sort of tier system on the basis that most people just end up organising it by status anyway because india/england/australia regardless of whether they have a decent team or not will always be big teams whom people want to see play test cricket against each other.

Bangladesh have had Test status for 12 years, any improvement? Uhm, don't think so...

check the history books, come back and tell me what every other test team was like after 12 years of playing test cricket.

 

[Epic]

check the history books, come back and tell me what every other test team was like after 12 years of playing test cricket.

Obvious sarcasm is not so obvious I suppose...