Test cricket Tiers?

[pcfan123]

This seems to be an oppertune time to tier Test cricket, for proponents of the Two tier system.

Few would argue that the top four teams are England, India, South Africa and Australia. (Australia's place might be debatable too)

and that the bottom teams are Sri Lanka, Pak, Windies, NZ and Bang, there seems to be a discernible gap in skill level between the two groups.

Since the end of Aussie dominance, the playing field has leveled immensely, but only at the top 4. The rest are still a notch below.

Time to tier? and structure relegation and a championship?

 

[Collingwood50]

I think it's a good idea in theory, but it does make the number of tours a side can go on very limited and possibly boring if you limit matches to the same tier

 

[MUFC1987]

Seems utterly pointless to me. Not only do the 'weaker' teams have less chance to improve, but we'd have a system where you only play 3 or 4 teams ever, which would be boring. Teams like Pakistan and West Indies have potential to be seriously good, why destroy that by bot letting them challenge the big names?

That grouping is also bizarre, I have issues with anyone calling certain Test teams weak, but Sri Lanka? Are you kidding me?

----------

At the moment, Australia are the 5th strongest in the rankings. Want to get rid of the Ashes, so they can go and play Pakistan twice as often? No, didn't think so.

 

[pcfan123]

Good points, especially the lack of an Ashes if Australia were to fall into the second tier.

I don't think the tiers should be permanently kept seperate. But scheduled so that Tier one teams play Tier 1 teams twice as often as Tier two teams. to avoid the overkill of mismatches and have more competitive Test cricket

 

[Themer]

Don't think that Tiering will ever work due to aforementioned reasons, the Pakistan versus England test series this summer was one of the best to watch (off field stuff aside) I've seen in years even if you think that Pakistan are a notch below England.

 

[MUFC1987]

Exactly, you'd lose too many rivalries and so many possible great results. I for one, love seeing teams like the West Indies giving Australia a decent series away from home, even if they do come up short.

 

[Papa_Smurf]

Test cricket is thriving atm. Even mis-matches are producing exciting series (take NZ in IND recently). There's no need for change.

 

[Brook]

Test cricket is thriving atm. Even mis-matches are producing exciting series (take NZ in IND recently). There's no need for change.

LOL, that series was two high scoring draws and the India smashed NZ. That's not excitement

 

[Sureshot]

I think if you create a tier system, it'll be very hard for the weaker teams to regain strength. Tiered systems don't work well in international events imo due to the lack of player movement between sides.

I don't see it happening either, I like playing the likes of Sri Lanka, West Indies, New Zealand, even if they aren't as good as others.

 

[Papa_Smurf]

Not the best example I know, but was merely trying to prove a point. NZ were expected to be thrased 3-0, but managed to get the indian batting line-up reduced to 15/5 for at one stage.

Better example would've been Pak this summer in Eng, but refrained from using it for obvious reasons.

 

[harrisb]

How about the two tiers are in different 'leagues' but they still continue to play each other, then a scoring system could be introduced, something along the following,

Top-Tier,

- Beating another Top-Tier team in 1 Test-match, 2 points
- Beating another Top-Tier team in a Test-Series, 5 points
- Beating a Lower-Tier team in 1 Test-match, 1 point
- Beating a Lower-Tier team in a Test-Series, 3 points.

Lower-Tier,

- Beating a Top-Tier team in a Test-match, 2 points
- Beating a Top-Tier team in a Test-Series, 5 points
- Beating another Lower-Tier team in a Test-match, 1 point
- Beating another Lower-Tier team in a Test-series, 3 points

Then after a certain period of time, maybe 18 months, the bottom team in Tier 1 is relegated, the top team in Tier 2 is promoted. And the bottom team in Tier 2 is replaced by the winner of the most recent Intercontinental Cup, this would still allow associates to earn Test Status.

 

[ferg512]

I would hope not as it seems the only teams we play are West Indies, Bangladesh, Pakistan etc. I could understand the top teams not want to play us that often, but if you want to grow the game give everyone a chance to play everyone. The tests I go to in NZ are to watch the other team play really, so I would be disappointed if I didn't get to see any of the top teams play.

----------

Although if it to work as a promotion relegation, maybe then. Our test side at the moment just doesn't care as it is just series after series. If we were not to play any of the top sides I think there would be a lot of pressure on them to make that top tier, so it could be good in that way.

 

[CG123]

The top teams already don't play us as often.
When was the last time we versed South Africa, while we play Bangladesh and Pakistan most years.

 

[angryangy]

The issue for me is the grey area. Sure Pakistan played some poor cricket in the past year but they also drew series with Aus and SA. As much maligned they were for the England series, they still pinched a game off them and with all their issues, if rock bottom means to go 2-2-6 in 2010 against this apparent top tier, then there's a lot of hope for them.

Every team is guilty of poor performances. All bar Sri Lanka have been bowled out for under 200 at some point in the last two years (and most of them more than once), but Sri Lanka in turn have conceded 700 3 times in that period.

I think it's not so much a matter of who plays who, but how often and for how long. Obviously, you can't just change a tour based on who will be picked, but sometimes it wouldn't be so difficult to make intelligent adjustments. The two match India vs Australia series was not ideal, but it shows how much flex is in a given calendar. With that in mind, there's probably no valid argument that England vs Pakistan should be a longer series than South Africa vs India at the moment, aside from how much more money English grounds make from the games. Improved management of the schedule would be a great step forward.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

how are australia better than sri lanka right now?

hell, it's only ODIs but sri lanka went to australia and beat them. would like to hear this.

----------

in fact, my point is moot, because the ICC rankings would argue sri lanka are better than australia.

so any tier system implemented would have to put them in the top tier and australia in the second tier. there would be no justification for doing it any other way.

aaand, if you were going to have promotion and relegation, you would inevitably end up with one of the bottom tier teams in the top 4 after a year anyway, so unless one of india, england, australia, south africa is happy only playing the lesser teams it wouldn't work. would also put marquee series like the ashes and india v australia at risk making cricket less appealling world wide.