What's new

4-day or 5-day Test cricket?

4-day or 5-day Test cricket?

  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .
Forget adding days or subtracting, let countries who cannot afford to play to opt out.

Cutting it to 4 days is only going to push the traditionalists and others who were following their country's summer out.

Test cricket dying and being played by a handful of teams is inevitable. Seeing the writing on the wall, the smart teams/boards will opt out before this happens.
 
MMHS said:
Test cricket MUST be scheduled for 5 days ..... for PAK's case, in winter, if not six days. A Test match might end in 3 days and I don't mind players enjoying paid vacations for 2 days, showcasing their golfing skills, but it MUST have to be scheduled for 5 days. AND Asian countries MUST enforce this.

There are three reasons, it's imperative that Asian countries must stick together and make sure that Test cricket is played for 5 Days, at least. First one - a soccer game lasts for 2.5 hours max., including extra time & tie-breakers. A T10 game lasts almost equal to that, means number of days actually has absolutely nothing in it - making it even 2 days Test, won't serve that purpose. And, that (duration) isn't the real reason behind it either - we'll see later why.

Second one is logistical - ENG/AUS/SAF/NZ plays cricket in summer, with longer day light and clear weather (without dew & haze). They can schedule 4 Day Tests, or even D/N Tests and play for 105 overs/Day (almost 8 hours playing time); in South Asia, maximum we can get is 6.5 hours playing time in a sunny day, which often isn't enough for 90 overs, means most of the 4 Day Tests in winter/autumn/spring here will become a 350 overs contest. This actually will make the game defensive, monotonous (very little chance for a come-back means most games will hang into one sided contest from Day 1 - either team in advantage wins or a boring draw), which will make the game even more unpopular here. D/N Test isn't a solution either because of the winter condition, wet ball and visibility issues for 7.5 hours play/day. Many Tests these days are finishing in 4, even 3 days, but one reason being that team behind knows they can't avoid eventual defeat over 5 days, so they play positively/normal and game ends earlier. May of these games will become a farce of gamesmanship, if Test starts with a limitation that 350 overs is max duration and there is no time to make-up. This is without considering any weather intervention - couple of hours rain or a little delay for winter fog .......

Third reason is tactical and for this one EVERY Asian team MUST force ICC to abandon this stupid idea. The unique strength of Asian teams are their spin attack and their batting skills against spin with flexible wrists. Non Asian teams can't match the spin playing skills of Asian sides either with bat or ball. At present Indian and in past PAK attack was among best in world not because they had quality pacers, rather because they had spinners to back that quality pace attack - something apart from AUS, no other non Asian team can hardly find.

4 Day Test will limit the spin skills considerably either way. Aging of the wicket has a major factor on the extract of spin on a wicket - that's not only from duration perspectives, but also the rolling on the track, one less day means the last day of a Test will be what is now 4th day of a Test. For a complete attack, based on 3 pacers and 1/2 wicket taking spinners, one needs a context where teams will pick spinner (s) purely on bowling merit - among non Asian sides, only AUS has/had that luxury. A 4 Day Test will limit the role of specialist spinner's role significantly.

The counter argument is that, Asian teams can put rank turners to counter short duration of the match, but that's a bigger trap. It reduces the skill gap of spin play with bat and the quality of spin attack, because instead of classical spinners, even average darters like Shantner or Moeen will be equally effective on those tracks (& their batting is a bonus) because batting becomes a lottery - teams with few bits & pieces spin all-rounders will be in massive advantage on such tracks. To explain the situation, I can give examples of last tours by AUS & ENG in India - on that Pune track, AUS won a vital toss, tail slogged with bat and that SLAO spinner guy (forgot name) took a 10 for!!!! But, IND-ENG series was played on good batting tracks, customary Asian slow turners - Poms were man handled despite winning most tosses & putting big scores in 1st innings. Australia, at one point won 6 tosses in India, but lost all six Tests - only Test they made a bit close (Laxman-Ishant Test), was again played on an under-prepared track.

I understand where ICC (SENA) countries are coming from - they are trying to make the game a fast-bowling shoot-out. They'll use 3 out & out pacers + 2 pace all-rounders and may be one like Moeen Ali or Glen Maxwell to manage over-rate (read, bowl spin), bring their power hitting and batting depth into equation to counter the Asian teams, in Asia as well. In this circus, the biggest gainers will be England - don't have any quality spinners, neither any batsman who can bat for 4-5 sessions, nor many express bowlers either. Be spin or green track, if we are to ensure results in 4 days, wicket has to favor average bowlers (low scoring games), and it'll brings bits & pieces all-rounders in play big time for their over-all contribution - a particular type of wicket that was used in PAK domestics for last few years .... and we definitely know which country will be benefited most with this tactics.

Test cricket's duration should be increased, rather than reducing it further- if not by days, but may be by overs, at least it must remain at current state - 6 hours + 30 minutes per day, 450 overs at least in 5 days. Play Tests for full 5 days, play on true, batting surfaces where ball comes on to bat; batsmen get value for their timing, placement and penetrative bowlers can get 20 wickets over 5 days - in short, those fantastic Australian wickets of olden days, or the old Eden/Chepauk/Chinmuswamy wickets.
Click to expand...
No offense but this is stupid.

Most boards are losing money and here you're talking about extending games to make those losses even greater.

This is neither sustainable or rational. You'd be sending most of the boards belly up as you'd need to cut down on the number of LOIs and pay more for an additional days cricket.
 
Aman said:
No offense but this is stupid.

Most boards are losing money and here you're talking about extending games to make those losses even greater.

This is neither sustainable or rational. You'd be sending most of the boards belly up as you'd need to cut down on the number of LOIs and pay more for an additional days cricket.
Click to expand...

Reducing the day doesn’t reduce cost, or other way you can say who is losing to arrange 5 day Test will keep losing for 4 day Test as well. In fact, reducing a day in some cases will increase the loss for south Asian boards because one less day means less broadcasting money and many cases lose of public interest because of the game turning into bore feast.

Prove me why the loss will reduce by reducing the day, I’ll accept that logic. Players are paid on Test match basis, not day basis; one extra day does cost additional accommodation, but it increases the endorsement money, and in many cases gate money as well. Only argument is that you can add couple of T20s within same time if you can reduce a Three Test series into 12 days instead of 15; but I don’t think eventually it’s great of the game for respective country - cricket by nature is a lengthy game; you master it by slow burning, not by slogging.

You can argue that Test cricket itself is not making money for many boards, and it could be scrapped all together for them, but that has absolutely nothing to do with number of days a Test is played. Those boards struggling to make money from Test cricket will struggle more if it’s reduced by a day.
 
MMHS said:
Reducing the day doesn’t reduce cost, or other way you can say who is losing to arrange 5 day Test will keep losing for 4 day Test as well. In fact, reducing a day in some cases will increase the loss for south Asian boards because one less day means less broadcasting money and many cases lose of public interest because of the game turning into bore feast.

Prove me why the loss will reduce by reducing the day, I’ll accept that logic. Players are paid on Test match basis, not day basis; one extra day does cost additional accommodation, but it increases the endorsement money, and in many cases gate money as well. Only argument is that you can add couple of T20s within same time if you can reduce a Three Test series into 12 days instead of 15; but I don’t think eventually it’s great of the game for respective country - cricket by nature is a lengthy game; you master it by slow burning, not by slogging.

You can argue that Test cricket itself is not making money for many boards, and it could be scrapped all together for them, but that has absolutely nothing to do with number of days a Test is played. Those boards struggling to make money from Test cricket will struggle more if it’s reduced by a day.
Click to expand...

ICC must allow 8 balls in an over instead of 6 balls to make same as 5 day cricket.
 
Last edited:
MMHS said:
Reducing the day doesn’t reduce cost, or other way you can say who is losing to arrange 5 day Test will keep losing for 4 day Test as well. In fact, reducing a day in some cases will increase the loss for south Asian boards because one less day means less broadcasting money and many cases lose of public interest because of the game turning into bore feast.

Prove me why the loss will reduce by reducing the day, I’ll accept that logic. Players are paid on Test match basis, not day basis; one extra day does cost additional accommodation, but it increases the endorsement money, and in many cases gate money as well. Only argument is that you can add couple of T20s within same time if you can reduce a Three Test series into 12 days instead of 15; but I don’t think eventually it’s great of the game for respective country - cricket by nature is a lengthy game; you master it by slow burning, not by slogging.

You can argue that Test cricket itself is not making money for many boards, and it could be scrapped all together for them, but that has absolutely nothing to do with number of days a Test is played. Those boards struggling to make money from Test cricket will struggle more if it’s reduced by a day.
Click to expand...
This was Michael Vaughan's argument in favor of 4 day cricket. He said it would cut down boards costs.

YN9YGHX.png


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket...ll-die-stays-five-days-move-four-day-matches/
 
Aman said:
This was Michael Vaughan's argument in favor of 4 day cricket. He said it would cut down boards costs.

YN9YGHX.png


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket...ll-die-stays-five-days-move-four-day-matches/
Click to expand...

My argument was exactly in the line of 2nd red line - an English cricketer will definitely wish to make it four day Test, why I have explained. Also, in English summer you can play eight hours in a day, but not in Asia. A little rain interruption, it’ll be a waste of four days.

As I said, a Test can finish in four, even three days but it must be scheduled for five. ECB can do that experiment for their home Tests, but it shouldn’t be made standard.
 
andy0204 said:
ICC must allow 8 balls in an over instead of 6 balls to make same as 5 day cricket.
Click to expand...

For many years (till 1977 I believe), Australian Tests had 8 ball overs and that actually helped the over-rate massively. I read an analysis somewhere that average change over costs almost 1/3rd of the minutes for an over - that’s almost 2 hours of a 6.5 hours day for 90 overs or around 1.25 minutes per over. For 90 overs (540 balls), equivalent 8 ball overs is 67.5~68. That’s an instant save of 30-35 minutes.

Even in 70s, in Australia, they bowled like 72-75, 8 balls overs in bang on 6 hours (365 minutes at max, considering last over starting on 360th minute) - that’s like 96-100, 6 balls overs in a day. Therefore 8 ball overs definitely can improve over rate. Only issue is, for daft bowlers, it could be physically challenging, specially if they bowl a no ball or two, an over can last for 9/10 balls, which is extremely demanding.

More than number of balls, I am more interested in ICCs efforts to crack down gamesmanship and slow over-rate - it has gone to shambolic level these days.
 
Last edited:
MMHS said:
For many years (till 1977 I believe), Australian Tests had 8 ball overs and that actually helped the over-rate massively. I read an analysis somewhere that average change over costs almost 1/3rd of the minutes for an over - that’s almost 2 hours of a 6.5 hours day for 90 overs or around 1.25 minutes per over. For 90 overs (540 balls), equivalent 8 ball overs is 67.5~68. That’s an instant save of 30-35 minutes.

Even in 70s, in Australia, they bowled like 72-75, 8 balls overs in bang on 6 hours (365 minutes at max, considering last over starting on 360th minute) - that’s like 96-100, 6 balls overs in a day. Therefore 8 ball overs definitely can improve over rate. Only issue is, for daft bowlers, it could be physically challenging, specially if they bowl a no ball or two, an over can last for 9/10 balls, which is extremely demanding.

More than number of balls, I am more interested in ICCs efforts to crack down gamesmanship and slow over-rate - it has gone to shambolic level these days.
Click to expand...

Ok then for pacers it should be 6 balls per over and for spinner 8 ball per over.
 
India captain Virat Kohli says he is "not a fan" of the proposal to reduce Test matches from five to four days.

A reduction in match length is likely to be discussed in January when the International Cricket Council considers the Test calendar beyond 2023.

But top-ranked Test batsman Kohli, 31, said: "I think the intent will not be right then because then you will speak of three-day Tests.

"Where do you end? Then you will speak of Test cricket disappearing."

The England and Wales Cricket Board has said it "cautiously supports" the proposal because it would reduce player workload.

India are the world number one Test side, having won five and drawn one of their past six series.

"I don't think that's fair to the purest format of the game," Kohli said when asked about four-day Tests.

"How cricket started initially, five-day Test matches was the highest test you can have at international level.

"It shouldn't be altered."

South Africa played a four-day Test against Zimbabwe in December 2017, while England also hosted Ireland at Lord's in a four-day match in July 2019.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/50992361
 
I can't believe I am typing this but the future and sanctity of test cricket depends solely on the BCCI, given that the cretins at CA and ECB are seemingly happy for it to disappear without even the slightest empirical evidence on whether 4-day tests are sustainable.

You just know that the extra days freed up by playing 4-day tests will not really ease up player workloads but be used to schedule more meaningless franchise tournaments.

When push comes to shove, I'd wholeheartedly support the BCCI in all its machinations against the ICC if the future of 5-day cricket is on the line.
 
Well said, Virat Kohli.

ECB and their chums, CA are being extremely petty in their thinking to free up 1 extra day so that they can play more T20s?

And people call BCCI greedy!
 
And it's not that people who matter most, the players are appreciative of this idea either. Quite a few current players have already voiced their disapproval of this pathetic ECB idea, what some trolls like Vaughan say, doesn't matter one bit.
 
As Kohli rightly says, today they're asking for 4-day tests, tomorrow they may ask for 3-day tests, so on and so forth. Where would they draw the line?
 
I prefer no test, but each to his own.
At this point ICC is trying to put a life support to keep this format going. Sooner or later has to realize that not a lot of fans even follows test, more and more players are retiring early from test to preserve their body for franchise cricket. No interest in test cricket will eventually dry up the ad revenue. It literally is on a life support at this point. Just kill it off already
 
MP2011 said:
As Kohli rightly says, today they're asking for 4-day tests, tomorrow they may ask for 3-day tests, so on and so forth. Where would they draw the line?
Click to expand...
What's wrong in that?
Game has to change according to times...why did it get changed from timeless tests then ?
 
cricket.mad said:
What's wrong in that?
Game has to change according to times...why did it get changed from timeless tests then ?
Click to expand...
There are enough connoisseurs of this format currently who are enough to keep this format alive which might not be the case during the times when timeless tests were being played.

And most importantly, most of the test players themselves consider test cricket in its purest form as the toughest test of a cricketer. What you and I think, doesn't matter.
 
And why does test cricket need to change as per whims and fancies of a few greedy administrators?
 
And Ganguly has done well to shut CA up when they were hoping that we'll play more than 1 DN test during our Australia tour later this year.
 
Why not limit the number of overs a team can bat in an innings. This will make test cricket more positive.
 
As long as bcci hold upper hand and kohli being indian captain, 4 day tests will not happen.
Big no for 4 day tests for top ranked teams.
Make two division test cricket with 6 teams each. For division one 5 day tests and for division two 4 day tests, that should be good idea going forward.
 
Former Australia captain Ricky Ponting is the latest leading voice to air his disapproval of four-day Test matches.

Ponting joins Virat Kohli in expressing their favour for the five-day game in the past 24 hours after the Indian captain said changes to the cricket's longest format should stop at day-night Tests.

Ponting fears a reduction in days from five to four would increase the number of drawn Tests, with one in five Tests resulting in a stalemate last decade.

However, in Australia between 2010 and 2019, 43 Test matches ended in a result, with 38 of those finishing inside 392 overs which would finish within a four-day Test.

Test greats Shane Warne, Mark Taylor and Michael Vaughan are advocates of four-day Tests, while current players Tim Paine, Travis Head and Nathan Lyon – who called the concept "ridiculous" – are not in favour of the shake-up.

But as far as Ponting is concerned, there is no need to change Test cricket which has seen record numbers come through the gates this Australian summer.

"I'm against it but I'd like to hear from the people who are pushing it what the major reason is," Ponting told cricket.com.au.

"I know we've had a lot of four-day games the last couple of years but what I've noticed in the last decade is how many drawn Test matches there have been, and I just wonder if they had have been all four-day Test matches through that period of time would we have had more drawn games.

"That's one thing I don't think anybody wants to see.

"I understand there is a commercial side to it, saving money and things like that and how they would start on a Thursday to finish on Sunday.

"I'd like to hear the other reasons behind it. I don't understand it enough and I'm very much a traditionalist, so if something's not really badly broken then why do we need to fix it or change it?"

Four-day Tests have been trialled by the ICC since 2017, with a four-day Test between South Africa and Zimbabwe in 2017 followed by England and Ireland last year at Lord's.

Cricket Australia chief executive Kevin Roberts said CA will "seriously" look at four-day Tests, with next summer's clash against Afghanistan a chance to be a four-day game.

Ponting is part of the MCC World Cricket Committee, a group of former international cricketers which meets biannually to discuss the state of the game and suggest changes to the laws of cricket to remain fresh and keep in touch with advancing technology.

But Ponting says four-day Test cricket has previously been raised among the committee and was voted down.

"Let's wind the clock back two, three years ago, it was being discussed then," Ponting said.

"I know we had a vote at one of the meetings about putting a proposal forward to changing it and the overriding decision there was that we wanted to keep it as five days.

"Everyone will say the Test match game is badly broken because a lot of countries around the world aren't getting much attendance to the games.

"We're certainly lucky here in Australia and England that we do get good solid crowds for the Test match games played over five days.

"My overall opinion is leave it the way it is and it seems to be working pretty well at the moment."


https://www.cricket.com.au/news/ric...ralia-new-zealand-kohli-lyon-paine/2020-01-05
 
MenInG said:
Former Australia captain Ricky Ponting is the latest leading voice to air his disapproval of four-day Test matches.

Ponting joins Virat Kohli in expressing their favour for the five-day game in the past 24 hours after the Indian captain said changes to the cricket's longest format should stop at day-night Tests.

Ponting fears a reduction in days from five to four would increase the number of drawn Tests, with one in five Tests resulting in a stalemate last decade.

However, in Australia between 2010 and 2019, 43 Test matches ended in a result, with 38 of those finishing inside 392 overs which would finish within a four-day Test.

Test greats Shane Warne, Mark Taylor and Michael Vaughan are advocates of four-day Tests, while current players Tim Paine, Travis Head and Nathan Lyon – who called the concept "ridiculous" – are not in favour of the shake-up.

But as far as Ponting is concerned, there is no need to change Test cricket which has seen record numbers come through the gates this Australian summer.

"I'm against it but I'd like to hear from the people who are pushing it what the major reason is," Ponting told cricket.com.au.

"I know we've had a lot of four-day games the last couple of years but what I've noticed in the last decade is how many drawn Test matches there have been, and I just wonder if they had have been all four-day Test matches through that period of time would we have had more drawn games.

"That's one thing I don't think anybody wants to see.

"I understand there is a commercial side to it, saving money and things like that and how they would start on a Thursday to finish on Sunday.

"I'd like to hear the other reasons behind it. I don't understand it enough and I'm very much a traditionalist, so if something's not really badly broken then why do we need to fix it or change it?"

Four-day Tests have been trialled by the ICC since 2017, with a four-day Test between South Africa and Zimbabwe in 2017 followed by England and Ireland last year at Lord's.

Cricket Australia chief executive Kevin Roberts said CA will "seriously" look at four-day Tests, with next summer's clash against Afghanistan a chance to be a four-day game.

Ponting is part of the MCC World Cricket Committee, a group of former international cricketers which meets biannually to discuss the state of the game and suggest changes to the laws of cricket to remain fresh and keep in touch with advancing technology.

But Ponting says four-day Test cricket has previously been raised among the committee and was voted down.

"Let's wind the clock back two, three years ago, it was being discussed then," Ponting said.

"I know we had a vote at one of the meetings about putting a proposal forward to changing it and the overriding decision there was that we wanted to keep it as five days.

"Everyone will say the Test match game is badly broken because a lot of countries around the world aren't getting much attendance to the games.

"We're certainly lucky here in Australia and England that we do get good solid crowds for the Test match games played over five days.

"My overall opinion is leave it the way it is and it seems to be working pretty well at the moment."


https://www.cricket.com.au/news/ric...ralia-new-zealand-kohli-lyon-paine/2020-01-05
Click to expand...

That stat (38 of 43), is a bit mid leading. 38 Tests did end inside 392 overs, when there was 450 overs available, hence the losing team didn’t bother to play out time in last stages. Make it 392 overs Test from start, some of these games would have ended in boring draws.

Also, in Australia it’s possible to play 98 overs a day, may be in South Africa as well; while in UK & NZ even 110 overs/day is possible. But, in South Asia, it’s not that easy. You have to consider the work load as well - 1998 Ashes Test as MCG started after 1st day was washed out; the then rule was one hour extension for make up + 30 minutes for slow over rate; means three days play continued for almost 8 hours. Players complained & I believe both Captains submitted written complaints on the work load - result was 60 minutes extension was reduced to 30 minutes and that includes loss time as well (means game can’t go for more than 6:30 hours a day, unless there is weather interruptions).

Third issue can be explained with current SCG Test - Aussies have decided not to follow on and bat for 4-5 hours.... if it was a 4 day Test, they would have been forced to enforce follow-on means 4 bowlers would have been bowling back to back innings after 90+ in first one. Injury & fatigue will be a big issue in that case.
 
MMHS said:
That stat (38 of 43), is a bit mid leading. 38 Tests did end inside 392 overs, when there was 450 overs available, hence the losing team didn’t bother to play out time in last stages. Make it 392 overs Test from start, some of these games would have ended in boring draws.

Also, in Australia it’s possible to play 98 overs a day, may be in South Africa as well; while in UK & NZ even 110 overs/day is possible. But, in South Asia, it’s not that easy. You have to consider the work load as well - 1998 Ashes Test as MCG started after 1st day was washed out; the then rule was one hour extension for make up + 30 minutes for slow over rate; means three days play continued for almost 8 hours. Players complained & I believe both Captains submitted written complaints on the work load - result was 60 minutes extension was reduced to 30 minutes and that includes loss time as well (means game can’t go for more than 6:30 hours a day, unless there is weather interruptions).

Third issue can be explained with current SCG Test - Aussies have decided not to follow on and bat for 4-5 hours.... if it was a 4 day Test, they would have been forced to enforce follow-on means 4 bowlers would have been bowling back to back innings after 90+ in first one. Injury & fatigue will be a big issue in that case.
Click to expand...

Plus rain effect, in a 5 day test if 1 / 2 sessions are washed away, you can still get a result but in a 4 day game it would mean a draw, that would make it worse in terms of people watching it
 
Two tier system is the only answer.

Lasting 4 days or 5 doesn't make any difference as long as there is no competition between the sides. The recent Ashes series has shown how enthralling Test cricket can be , when two evenly matched sides face off. Just have two tiers of 5 teams each based on the current rankings and get it done with.
 
Mesozoic said:
Two tier system is the only answer.

Lasting 4 days or 5 doesn't make any difference as long as there is no competition between the sides. The recent Ashes series has shown how enthralling Test cricket can be , when two evenly matched sides face off. Just have two tiers of 5 teams each based on the current rankings and get it done with.
Click to expand...

I can see what you have done here😝. However, there are 12 Test teams now - split should be 6+6.

But, I think, it should be left with participant boards, if ever it’s applied rather than making it compulsory.
 
MMHS said:
I can see what you have done here😝. However, there are 12 Test teams now - split should be 6+6.

But, I think, it should be left with participant boards, if ever it’s applied rather than making it compulsory.
Click to expand...

Problem with having 6 teams is that you can't have an even distribution of home and away games. Having 5 teams allows for 2 series' home and away for each team against every other team. And it has to be an annual affair with a playoff based promotion and relegation. 2-year cycle is just way too long. Tier 2 teams should just play one off tests against each other.
 
Mesozoic said:
Problem with having 6 teams is that you can't have an even distribution of home and away games. Having 5 teams allows for 2 series' home and away for each team against every other team. And it has to be an annual affair with a playoff based promotion and relegation. 2-year cycle is just way too long. Tier 2 teams should just play one off tests against each other.
Click to expand...

Why do you even need H&A with selective opponents? 6 teams - each play each other’s two series over 4 years period (+ whatever mutually different boards can arrange between themselves outside WTC). After 4 years cycle 1/2 gets promoted & demoted.

This selective H&A tournament isn’t fair - for example take BD, we have been given one of the better draws - home series against AUS, SAF & WIN; away series in IND, PAK & SRL. Imagine this one like home series with PAK, SRL and away series in Australia, SAF; keeping India series as it is ..... cricket could have been ugly, you know.
 
MMHS said:
Why do you even need H&A with selective opponents? 6 teams - each play each other’s two series over 4 years period (+ whatever mutually different boards can arrange between themselves outside WTC). After 4 years cycle 1/2 gets promoted & demoted.

This selective H&A tournament isn’t fair - for example take BD, we have been given one of the better draws - home series against AUS, SAF & WIN; away series in IND, PAK & SRL. Imagine this one like home series with PAK, SRL and away series in Australia, SAF; keeping India series as it is ..... cricket could have been ugly, you know.
Click to expand...

4 years is a very very very long time. Test cricket must have something to play for every year to remain relevant where at the end of the season , teams can have something to show for i.e either the Test mace (or whatever they'd call that) or a promotion to the first tier. There's no other choice left unfortunately. Teams can play each other H&A alternatively for each cycle.
 
5 days test cricket is fine. You may argue for a 4 day test when an elite team plays a minnow. But then in tests Pakistan plays a like a minnow in Australia and Australia doest play its best cricket in UAE so where to draw a line.

What cricket really needs is cutting down 5 test series to 4 test series which is an anomaly in this day and age when teams are playing nonstop cricket. Secondly 5 ODIs is also an overkill which can be reduced to 3 ODIs.

This would automatically create more gap in the international calendar.
 
DeadBall said:
This is just pure ignorance and hatred.

Care to provide some data on that? According to the facts BD are ahead of us in many metrics and indexes.

https://countryeconomy.com/countries/compare/bangladesh/pakistan
Click to expand...

He is right actually- because his knowledge is stuck at 48 years back. First economic audit in BD took place sometimes in 1972.... and most of these economic parameters were 1:3 or better skewed towards Pakistan... which is indeed a great job for BD people over 4 decades; but more than that a complete failure by PAK leadership.
 
Just make the new ball available after 50 overs and most matches wont last 5 days.
 
leave test match as it is, they can experiment with other formats
 
Gilly said:
Just make the new ball available after 50 overs and most matches wont last 5 days.
Click to expand...

That will kill the spinners almost and whatever batting skills against spin still left. I think, Test cricket is beautiful as it is now.
 
barah_admi said:
So you agree Bangladesh is a terrible side. I think Afghanistan will probably overtake it as a test nation in about 18 months. They are also useless in ODIs.

So my point stands, Pakistan is likely to have 5 day tests in England, who are constantly inviting Pakistan to play bilateral series over here. That is the point I was making and you have clearly understood it.
Click to expand...

Bangladesh is indeed a terrible side, particularly in Test - in fact already Afghans have beaten us. That doesn’t mean Test cricket should be converted into 4 days game anyway of 5.

Now, back to the point - your point was not “likely”, rather “deserve”, and I am sure in any semantics, a native English speaker should understand the difference. If you believe Pakistan “likely” to get 5 Day Test, in case ECB selectively decides to reduce number of data in Test, I definitely have a understood your point - it’s your post, your wish - I am indeed 100% with you. You can believe ECB should play 6 day Test with Pakistan, who cares.

Your point definitely stands in that regards of “likely”, but “deserve” is a word, which only has one meaning for someone like me, with English being second language. Anyway, good that you understood the difference between likely & deserving - being native English speaker, must be quite easy for you.... and my humiliation also comes to an end, without egg this time.
 
KARACHI: Former Pakistan speedster Shoaib Akhtar has rubbished the idea of making Test cricket a four-day affair, alleging that it is a conspiracy against Asian teams and the BCCI will not let it happen.

The ICC is considering introducing four-day Tests during the next FTP cycle between 2023-2031 in order to get more free days for the commercially lucrative shorter formats.

"Everywhere there is this conspiracy, a theory against Asian teams these days. I feel this (reduction of Test to four days) is totaly against Asian teams," Akhtar said in a video posted on his YouTube channel.

"I feel this idea is rubbish no one should be interested in it," he added.

The 44-year-old said the ICC cannot implement the idea without the nod of world's richest cricket board, the BCCI.

He said BCCI president Sourav Ganguly is a smart man and he will not let Test cricket get ruined.

"ICC cannot implement this rule without the permission of BCCI. BCCI along with all the smart cricketers are standing against this idea, specially spinners from Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh who dominate and thrive in a series will not let this happen," Akhtar said.

"Sourav Gangully is a smart intelligent person. He will never want to see Test cricket getting damaged. He would want it to survive and see India excel in the format," he said.

Akhtar also echoed Sachin Tendulkar's view that a four-day game will take away the advantage from spinners.

"Sachin is spot on in his criticism. What will the spinners do? Danesh Kaneria, Mushtaq Ahmed, Ravichandran Aswin, Harbhajan Singh, Anil Kumble have taken 400-500 wickets. What will happen to them?" Akhtar questioned.

The idea of four-day Test has been met with strong opposition from current and former players alike.

India skipper Virat Kohli, Tendulkar, Gautam Gambhir, Australian coach Justin Langar, spinner Nathan Lyon, pace legend Glenn McGrath and former captain Ricky Pointing are some of the eminent figures who have voiced their disapproval for shortening of the format.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...od-to-four-day-tests/articleshow/73116324.cms
 
Thread is about 4-5 day Tests - other discussions can be done on other threads.
 
The ICC’s cricket committee is set to discuss the four-day Test proposal in March despite growing criticism from the world’s leading players including India skipper Virat Kohli

Former India captain Anil Kumble, who heads the cricket committee, said the proposal will be discussed in the next round of the ICC meetings, to held in Dubai from March 27-31.

“Since I am part of the committee, I can’t tell what I am thinking about it (proposal) at the moment. We will discuss it in the meeting and let you know,” Kumble said. Andrew Strauss, Rahul Dravid, Mahela Jayawardene and Shaun Pollock are also on the committee.

The proposal, which has been floated for the 2023-2031 cycle, has not gone down well with the greats of the game including Kohli, Sachin Tendulkar and Ricky Ponting.

However, member boards from England and Australia are open to the idea while BCCI boss Sourav Ganguly has said that “it is too early” to talk about it.

Ahead of the three-match T20 series opener against Sri Lanka in Guwahati last week, Kohli made his stance very clear.

"Day-night [cricket] is another step towards commercialising Test cricket and creating excitement around it, but it can't be tinkered around too much. I don't believe so."

"Day-night cricket is the most that needs to be changed about Test cricket, according to me. I mean then you're purely going to be talking about getting the numbers in and entertainment." Leading Australia spinner Nathan Lyon has termed the idea “ridiculous“.

Former Australia captain Ricky Ponting is the latest leading voice to air his disapproval of four-day Test matches.

"I understand there is a commercial side to it, saving money and things like that and how they would start on a Thursday to finish on Sunday.

"I'd like to hear the other reasons behind it. I don't understand it enough and I'm very much a traditionalist, so if something's not really badly broken then why do we need to fix it or change it?" Ponting was quoted as saying by cricket.com.au.

Meanwhile, Test greats Shane Warne, Mark Taylor and Michael Vaughan are in favour of the shake-up. The ICC is likely to formally consider four-day Test cricket later in 2020 in order to free up calendar that is clogged with too many matches and T20 leagues.

https://sportstar.thehindu.com/cric...ane-warne-nathan-lyon-t20/article30493008.ece
 
CSA SUPPORTS FOUR-DAY TEST CRICKET


Tuesday, 07 January 2020

IN view of an unsourced and misleading report in the Media this morning please be advised that it is Cricket South Africa’s official policy to support four-day Test match cricket. We, in fact, hosted the first official four-day Test match between ourselves and Zimbabwe a couple of years ago.
 
Cricket great Sachin Tendulkar has vehemently opposed the International Cricket Council’s proposed “four-day Test”, urging the governing body to refrain from “tinkering” with a format in which the spinners come into play on the final day.

Tendulkar has joined the chorus of calls against the move, which is set to be discussed by the ICC cricket committee this year for 2023 and beyond.

“From a purist’s point of view and as an admirer of Test cricket, I don’t think it should be tinkered with. The format has to be played in the way it has been played for so many years,” said Tendulkar.

A day less, according to the world’s highest run-getter across two formats, will lead to batsmen thinking of Tests as an extended version of limited-overs cricket.

“The moment you bat till the second-day lunch, you know that there are only two and a half days to go. That changes the thinking and dynamics of the game,” he added.

The other worrying aspect could be spinners being rendered ineffective. “Taking away the fifth-day track from a spinner is like taking away the first-day track from a fast bowler. There is no fast bowler in the world who wouldn’t want to bowl on a fifth-day track.

“On the final session of a fifth day, any spinner would like to bowl. The ball doesn’t turn from the first day or the first session. The wicket takes time for wear and tear. The fifth day brings with it, turn, bounce and the unevenness of the surface. It doesn’t happen on the first two days,” he explained.

Tendulkar fully understands that there are commercial aspect and audience interest attached to the game but he wants one format to remain the true test of batsmanship.

“We first need to understand why do they want it and what are the reasons for that. That’s one side of it and obviously, it’s got to do with the commercial side as well,” he said.

“Audience-friendly, yes, it is important. But for that, from Tests, we have moved to ODIs and T20s and now we even have T10s. So there should be something for the purists and that’s Test cricket,” he added.

“The batsmen, are they being tested in Test cricket? At least, there should be one format that should challenge the batsmen and that’s why it’s called Test cricket because it’s not over in two sessions. You need to bat for long hours on difficult surfaces at times.”

Tendulkar has time and again stressed on the need to have good Test match wickets.

“For good Test matches, you need good wickets. If the Test match pitches have quality, the game will not get boring. There are tracks where even the bowler feels he can’t get the batsman out on this surface.

“They then think let’s bowl maiden overs and wait for the batsmen to make mistakes. Batsmen also know that if I don’t play a foolish shot, no one can get me out.”

Mark Taylor, Michael Vaughan and Shane Warne are among former players who have supported the shake up. The ICC approved a trial of the concept in 2017, with South Africa, Zimbabwe, England and Ireland taking part in four-day games since then.

https://sportstar.thehindu.com/cric...in-bowlers-says-tendulkar/article30501894.ece
 
This current test match is a perfect example as to why 4 day matches won't work.
 
hadi123 said:
This current test match is a perfect example as to why 4 day matches won't work.
Click to expand...

In what way? We'd still have 3 overs left in this game and England would've declared earlier because of less time available in the game and also batted more aggressively.
 
HitWicket said:
In what way? We'd still have 3 overs left in this game and England would've declared earlier because of less time available in the game and also batted more aggressively.
Click to expand...

This whole "there will be more overs" ** won't actually happen. Over rates in cricket are appalling these days.
 
one less day means a less day to pay broadcasters, a day less to keep stadium open a day less for accommodation etc, so from that perspective some money can be freed up for smaller boards. The problem is not what makes more sense from a sporting point of view but the fat is test cricket is dying and boards are losing money, if something is not done sooner then there will only be 4/5 teams that find it financially viable to play tests, the rest will just play t20 and odi because they wont be able to afford anything else.
 
ICC should stop tinkering with the Test format, leave it as it is. Protect it. If you want to experiment then do it on 50 overs format or T20 format. Why not abolish the two new balls rule in ODI cricket for a start if you really want exciting matches and balance?
 
HitWicket said:
In what way? We'd still have 3 overs left in this game and England would've declared earlier because of less time available in the game and also batted more aggressively.
Click to expand...

You are looking it from England’s (read team in advantage) perspectives- think from South Africa’s (Team begins from Day 2) perspective - they would have made it absolute bore feast & kill time.

No, I don’t think England could have batted aggressively, not before the lead had crossed 300 - they had lost 8 wickets and easily could have been all out for 300 trying to accelerate; first 80 overs earned them around 220-4, then they took advantage of a tiring SAF attack & that’s exactly what’s Test cricket is all about.

Even in 3 day Test, England won’t have declared (or get all out trying to force the issue) leaving SAF a decent chance to win it from behind - this is not domestic FC game where you earn extra bonus point for a direct result. At best, in a 400 overs Test ENG could have set 380 in 110 overs.... SAF is 5 down in ~100 overs here with the wicket one more day older .... you know what I am trying to explain.

And, we are not even considering the stress of playing 7+ hours of cricket for 4 days, not to mention playing light issues in South Asia for even 90 overs/day.
 
MMHS said:
You are looking it from England’s (read team in advantage) perspectives- think from South Africa’s (Team begins from Day 2) perspective - they would have made it absolute bore feast & kill time.

No, I don’t think England could have batted aggressively, not before the lead had crossed 300 - they had lost 8 wickets and easily could have been all out for 300 trying to accelerate; first 80 overs earned them around 220-4, then they took advantage of a tiring SAF attack & that’s exactly what’s Test cricket is all about.

Even in 3 day Test, England won’t have declared (or get all out trying to force the issue) leaving SAF a decent chance to win it from behind - this is not domestic FC game where you earn extra bonus point for a direct result. At best, in a 400 overs Test ENG could have set 380 in 110 overs.... SAF is 5 down in ~100 overs here with the wicket one more day older .... you know what I am trying to explain.

And, we are not even considering the stress of playing 7+ hours of cricket for 4 days, not to mention playing light issues in South Asia for even 90 overs/day.
Click to expand...

Why would South Africa have made it a bore fest and tried to kill time if they'd bowled England out for ~269 before the end of the first day of a 4 day test?
 
HitWicket said:
Why would South Africa have made it a bore fest and tried to kill time if they'd bowled England out for ~269 before the end of the first day of a 4 day test?
Click to expand...

Because, England will never declare giving SAF a good chance to chase it down - in case of acceleration as you mentioned. SAF could get them all out for 270, which didn’t happen here; BUT had that happened, we would have seen other side of the spectrum- last 4/5 English wickets trying to waste/occupy enough time to make sure that there is only one winner, or a draw.

A lot of people are missing the point here that games are finishing often inside 4 days because the game is scheduled for 5 and both teams know that going through motion won’t take them to any safety. Make it 400 overs affair, may of these 4 day finish will end in draws. In olden days, they used to play timeless Test - that doesn’t mean teams batted for 500 overs at 1.2 run rate.

Only way we can make 4 day Test feasible is to tempering the wicket (underprepared) or law - adjust the LBW law a little like batsmen can be given LBW stuck outside line, playing shot or on balls pitched outside leg .... some games might finish in one day.

The reason they are proposing to reduce day has nothing to do with popularity or expenses - they just want more free days for cheap entertainment & make money. If that’s the only motto, then we shouldn’t have any censor board for films and no age rating either.
 
Only absolute idiots that don't understand test cricket would be happy with a proposal to reduce the game to 4 days.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">We've just seen a brilliant Test match in Cape Town go right to the end of the 5th day. Yet some want Test cricket to be reduced to 4 days so that more ODIs and T20Is can be played <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Cricket?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Cricket</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1214634636770500611?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Last Monetarist said:
Only absolute idiots that don't understand test cricket would be happy with a proposal to reduce the game to 4 days.
Click to expand...
True.

This nail biter which we witnessed yesterday won't have been remotely possible in a 4-day test. I consider 4-day tests a T20 version of 5-day tests.
 
4 day cricket with each innings comprise of 90 overs with the 5th day as reserved for the lost overs in previous days.
 
Nikhil_cric said:
Yeah it's a bit disappointing that the likes of Vaughan and Taylor are supporting this.
Click to expand...

Vaughan's an agent provocateur, he's the sort to be contrarian for the sake of it. It's much more heartening that Atherton and Hussain (who is by no means a traditionalist) are vehemently against the proposal.

Taylor has a vested interest due to his close relationships with many of the same people pushing this agenda at CA. Anything he says is utterly tainted.
 
Cape Town - Proteas skipper Faf du Plessis says that he is opposed to the International Cricket Council's (ICC) proposal to cut Test matches from five days to four.

It is widely known that the ICC could decide to shorten the length of Test matches from 2023 onwards and Cricket South Africa (CSA) in a press release on Tuesday stated that they were in full support the move.

However, Du Plessis had other opinions on the matter calling for Test cricket matches to remain five days long.

"My opinion is that I'm a fan of Test cricket going on for five days," Du Plessis told reporters in Cape Town after his side had lost the second Test to England.

"The great draws of the game have gone to five days. I understand that a lot of money is being burned on the fifth day, because so many Test matches are not going five days. There'll always be an opinion on both and people will sit 50/50 on it.

"I'm still a purest of the game because I've been a part of some great draws that have gone five days. And today is no different, there would definitely not have been a result (in Cape Town) on four days on this wicket," said Du Plessis.

"Yes, not many matches go on to five days. When you've got a shattered Ben Stokes running in towards the end of the day after a long spell and we're just trying to survive that, for me, is what makes the extra day so special."

England captain Root noted his displeasure at the ICC proposal after England won on Day 5 of the second Test in Cape Town by 189 runs.

"I like five-day Test cricket, I might get in trouble for that," said Root on Tuesday.

The ICC approved South Africa to host a once off four-day Test match against Zimbabwe in 2017, which the Proteas won.

Meanwhile, Indian skipper Virat Kohli has also opposed to the notion of four-day Test matches, saying that it isn't "fair to the purest format of the game".

https://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/EnglandinSA/faf-opposed-to-idea-of-4-day-test-cricket-20200107
 
Nikhil_cric said:
Yeah nobody cares about Warne's position on anything cricket -related or otherwise. Taylor and Vaughan are respected and their views carry weight.
Click to expand...
Regarding Taylor & Vaughan, read what Last Monetarist has to say about them.
 
'Five days the way to be': Arthur's blow to four-day Tests

One of the men on a committee that will consider shortening Test matches has voiced his opposition to a move to four-day games as a leading nation declared its support for change.

Veteran coach Mickey Arthur says he will be arguing for Tests to remain at five days when the International Cricket Council's cricket committee meets to discuss a move to mandatory four-day matches.

Arthur, who has coached South Africa, Australia, Pakistan and now Sri Lanka, fears for the future of spinners if Tests are truncated and said there was even a danger of pitches being "doctored" by home boards in the hunt for points in the World Test Championship.

"Five-day Test cricket is the way to be, it's the way to go," Arthur told The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age from India. "I'd be certainly arguing to maintain five-day Test cricket, without a doubt."

There is a clear trend emerging on the issue with most current and former players against change while administrators are more open to a reduction in order to free up more time in a crowded schedule.

Arthur's comments come after captains Joe Root and Faf du Plessis and star all-rounder Ben Stokes all threw their support behind the status quo remaining in the wake of England's thrilling fifth-day win over South Africa in Cape Town.

Australia captain Tim Paine, Nathan Lyon and Josh Hazlewood have also argued for the retention of five-day Tests. The South Africa and England boards, however, have both publicly backed a move to shorten games to four days.

Arthur, who describes himself as a "traditionalist", is well aware of the challenges facing the game's longest form, having coached one of the world's biggest cricket Test nations as well as some of the game's smaller ones.

A move to four days would cut costs for host boards and broadcasters as fifth days are generally not financially viable. Cricket Australia last summer reduced the cost of day five entry to a gold coin donation for their charity partners.

"I do know from the last [ICC cricket committee] meeting, there was from a commercial point of view from the smaller Test nations it is becoming a drain," Arthur said.

"You don't want Ireland, Afghanistan and, I shudder to say, even New Zealand to a certain extent ... Sri Lanka are in the same boat, Pakistan to a point ... where five-day Test cricket financially becomes a drain on the boards.

"It's going to be the commercial and financial considerations versus the actual game.

"I don't think there can be [a compromise]."

Arthur said England's win over South Africa with just 52 balls to spare encapsulated Test cricket. While there would be more overs bowled each day if Tests were shortened, a shorter game would hurt spinners as less deterioration in the pitch would be possible.

"With a World Test Championship you start running the danger of pitches starting to be doctored to get results, to get points in a Test Championship," Arthur said.

"I think the natural variation brings the spinners in, it's got everything.

"Seeing the spinner on the last day giving it a massive rip because the wicket has deteriorated that much - I just don't see that happening in four-day Test cricket.

"They argue most Tests finish in four days anyway. If it finishes in four days then so be it but you have to have that option of day five.

"Your best Test matches generally last that long, then there's that euphoria and emotion like South Africa trying to block it out and England going in for the kill. It was compelling to watch."

Any change to the length of Tests needs approval by the ICC's cricket and chief executives committees and the board.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricke...s-blow-to-four-day-tests-20200108-p53pv9.html
 
Stokes: Amazing England victory proves Test cricket should always be five days

England’s “golden nugget” Ben Stokes and his captain Joe Root both threw their support behind five-day Test cricket after a dramatic late victory over South Africa in Cape Town.

The tourists were forced to toil through 137.4 overs at Newlands, straining every sinew along the way, but finally put the finishing touches on a 189-run when Stokes claimed the last three wickets with 8.2 overs remaining.

The trail had gone gone cold several times over the course of an exhausting concluding act but the rousing manner in which Stokes wrapped the innings up for 248, levelling the series at 1-1, cast a heavy shadow on the current debate around reducing Test cricket to four days.

In the moment, at least, the idea of calling time on such contests in the interests of brevity seemed akin to sporting vandalism.

And in Stokes, the longer format has a powerful – and passionate – ally.

“It was an amazing game to be a part of. The fact it went all the way to the wire proves why Test cricket should be five days and should always stay five days,” he said.

“It must be amazing as a spectator to be living through these emotions but being a player on the field, going through the highs and lows of what Test cricket can do to you on a day-to-day basis is just awesome.

“Test cricket is not made for four days, it’s made for five. It’s called Test cricket for a reason. They should change it to ‘easy cricket’ if they make it four days.”

The England and Wales Cricket Board has offered a “cautious welcome” to the four-day model, which would see each day’s play extended by eight overs in a bid to save on staging costs, a stance which perhaps informed Root’s previous call to be “open-minded” about a change.

In the afterglow of becoming the first England captain to take down the Proteas at Newlands since Peter May in 1957, he sang a slightly different tune.

“It was a great game of cricket and a great advert for five-day Test cricket,” he said. “I like five-day Test cricket, I’ll leave it at that or I’ll get in trouble.”

Away from the troublesome matters of administration, this was another memorable moment for Stokes. Having ended 2019 as the BBC Sports Personality Year, courtesy of heroic performances in the World Cup final and the classic Ashes Test at Headingley, he was at it again in the first match of 2020.

Even before his intervention with the ball he had pouched six catches at second slip, equalled an England record for out-fielders, and smashed 72 second-innings runs in just 47 balls to set up the game.

Stokes said: “2020 can only really go downhill from here after that. I’ve had a few knee issues and stuff like that, but this game here I’ve got the three lions on my chest which is such a proud thing to be standing on a field doing.

He added: “I didn’t tell Joe but I said to myself, ‘you’re not getting the ball out of my hand here until this day is done’. It was one last push for this Test match.

“It’s an amazing thing to be a part of, with all the adrenaline, but there’s so much hard work that goes in before those amazing moments in a game. Cricket is a team sport, it’s always a team effort and is never down to one individual.”

Root was happier to shine a light on his star man’s efforts.

“He’s a golden nugget isn’t he? He’s just a fantastic specimen, really. You put him in a lot of different situations and he stands up to it. He’s a born match-winner that will always put the team first and give everything to the group of players he’s playing alongside.

“Not many sides that have a Ben Stokes in them. We’re very lucky to be witnessing what we are at the moment.”
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/...cket-should-always-be-five-days-38841885.html
 
A competitively played 5 day test is the greatest sight in world cricket- T20 or even ODI victories barring world cup are meaningless in front of it. Diluting tests so that some mediocre teams can save some bucks is the biggest travesty i can think of - if these boards are more interested in money management than developing quality players, then they should be placed in a different Test Tier or even should be given option to drop out from Test cricket altogether. Let Test cricket be played by the topmost teams who value what it brings to the table.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Well played England...Such a good idea to end 5day test cricket....full house watching cricket at its best !! Leave the flag ship of cricket alone it’s a real test of character, skill,guts,stamina & ability...it’s real cricket for real players !!! Leave it Alone !!!!!!</p>— Ian Botham (@BeefyBotham) <a href="https://twitter.com/BeefyBotham/status/1214564295154913282?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Responding to recent requests and discussion around the possibility of a shift to 4-day Test cricket, FICA Executive Chairman Tony Irish makes the following comment:

“We continue to follow this issue closely and understand that discussions are taking place at various levels on this.”

“From our discussions with players around the world, and our global survey data, it is clear that there is currently a lot of negative sentiment, within the global collective of players, towards such a significant change to the game’s most traditional format.”

“Given the obvious cricketing implications, if the ICC and/or Boards do want to make a broader case for 4-day Test cricket, we would need to clearly understand what both the economic and scheduling benefits would be, so we can discuss that with players and gauge genuine collective feedback. It is particularly important for us, and the players, to understand how any additional calendar space in the playing schedule would be used. Making a fundamental change simply in order to provide calendar space to fill with additional or meaningless cricket is clearly not something we can support. Cricket’s global structure desperately needs clarity, rather than further confusion.”

“Until such a time as we and the players are provided with the full picture and compelling reasons for change, we remain supportive of 5-day Test cricket, and would expect significant player resistance if a shift to that is imposed on players by the ICC and/or Boards. Test cricket is a cherished format of the game and it needs player support and buy in to survive. We urge those making decisions to understand that.”
 
ICC aren't serious about cricket. The only reason they want 4 day tests is for financial reasons. Players are coming out and saying keep it as 4 days. If the players who are actually playing test cricket saying keep it at 5 days , that tells you everything you need to know.
 
I know I'm one of the oldest posters on this forum, but I just don't have a problem with 4 Day Test cricket. I think it's a great idea, so long as:

1. All Test series have to be a minimum of 3 Tests long (with could be completed in less than 3 weeks running Thursday to Monday with 2 days off between Tests).

2. An appropriate World Test Championship points system is introduced to encourage enterprising declarations.

Consider the recent Cape Town Test, in which South Africa was bowled out 46 runs behind five overs into Day 3.

You need the points system to encourage England to score much quicker than they did - Sibley batted 8 hours and 17 minutes for 133 not out - so that they score 300 for 6 declared in 75 overs, setting South Africa 347 to win in one day plus 6 overs.

The same points system would have encouraged South Africa to go for it, rather than shutting up shop like they did.

4 Day Tests would allow a 3 match series to be scheduled into a span of 18 days.

I think it's a brilliant idea......so long as the Points System encourages sporting declarations more than it encourages draws.
 
Last edited:
Junaids said:
I know I'm one of the oldest posters on this forum, but I just don't have a problem with 4 Day Test cricket. I think it's a great idea, so long as:

1. All Test series have to be a minimum of 3 Tests long (with could be completed in less than 3 weeks running Thursday to Monday with 2 days off between Tests).

2. An appropriate World Test Championship points system is introduced to encourage enterprising declarations.

Consider the recent Cape Town Test, in which South Africa was bowled out 46 runs behind five overs into Day 3.

You need the points system to encourage England to score much quicker than they did - Sibley batted 8 hours and 17 minutes for 133 not out - so that they score 300 for 6 declared in 75 overs, setting South Africa 347 to win in one day plus 6 overs.

The same points system would have encouraged South Africa to go for it, rather than shutting up shop like they did.

4 Day Tests would allow a 3 match series to be scheduled into a span of 18 days.

I think it's a brilliant idea......so long as the Points System encourages sporting declarations more than it encourages draws.
Click to expand...

Mate, I respect your contribution to this forum immensely so I understand where you are coming from. I know that you consider test cricket to be the ultimate form of the game, i.e. the toughest examination of skill and mental aptitude to succeed at this wonderful sport.

This proposal will only serve to increase contrived results through those "stupid declarations" which you are advocating and not truly necessitate that the best teams and players win at the end. You opine that it will increase run-rates and punish teams that shut up shop. But that suggests that there should be only one true way of playing the game which is frankly preposterous.

If anyone wants to see players batting aggressively and bowl to artificial and negative fields - and you know there will be a lot of defensive bowling and ludicrous field placements when we are just sat around waiting for a sporting declaration. There are two existing formats for that (3 if you count the ECB's new monstrosity). Leave the format alone which allows for patience and perseverance to be rewarded.

Test cricket is the closest sporting parable to life that has ever been invented: you have a smorgasbord of triumphant elation, painful failure, soul-destructive nothingness, hopeful anticipation, and bloody-minded determination all neatly packaged into 5 days. There's literally nothing else on earth that can provide all those emotions/lessons in context.

There should be ample room for defensive batting to be merited and spin bowlers to shape the outcome of the game. If the duration of test matches had always been confined to 4 days you won't probably have seen the likes of Len Hutton, Geoffrey Boycott, the Indian spin quartet of the 70s, Abdul Qadir, Shane Warne, Rahul Dravid, Jacques Kallis, Graeme Swann, Alistair Cook et al. write the stories that we have come to cherish.
 
I think 4-day Test should be given a try.

5-day Test is just too long and it is not practical in 21st century. You are unlikely to find any other sport where a game is played over 5 days.

I think future generations will focus more on shorter formats. T10 format may take off at some point.
 
sweep_shot said:
I think 4-day Test should be given a try.

5-day Test is just too long and it is not practical in 21st century. You are unlikely to find any other sport where a game is played over 5 days.

I think future generations will focus more on shorter formats. T10 format may take off at some point.
Click to expand...

Isn’t 4 day too long as well? What about 3-day/2 day tests then? Where does the buck stop?
 
dildilpak said:
Isn’t 4 day too long as well? What about 3-day/2 day tests then? Where does the buck stop?
Click to expand...

I think they can have one innings per team. That way, they can make it a 3-day Test. I personally would support that.

ODI cricket used to be 60 overs long. It is now 50 overs. Point is, you sometimes need to change things around.
 
LAHORE: Former Pakistan captains Javed Miandad and Intikhab Alam gave a mixed reaction over the proposal of reducing Test matches to four days instead of the existing five-day format which is being currently considered by the Inter*national Cricket Council (ICC).

Talking to Dawn both Miandad and Intikhab — who have also served as head coaches of the national teams — said that the ICC should put explain reasons that have forced the governing body to consider such a decision.

However, while Intikhab totally rejected the proposal, saying it does not make any sense, Miandad said it could only be possible if the ICC finds out a logical solution as to how a full quota of 450 overs could be bowled in four days instead of five.

“Currently, 90 overs are mandatory in a day’s play and if this number will increase to 111 overs that may serve some purpose but otherwise, the five-day format is good enough,” Miandad said. “The ICC may be considering such a proposal because it believes the five-day game is becoming quite boring for the spectators and four-day Tests can revive brisk-paced, competitive matches.”

“Though it will not be easy to bowl 111 overs in a day, it is the only way to reduce the number of days of a Test match while ensuring the results,” Miandad added. “When the two teams will have to bowl, field or bat for 111 overs a day, it will make the players tougher, both physically and mentally. But it is not easy due to day-light problems in some countries,” he said.

Meanwhile, Intikhab termed it as an insult to the game of cricket and urged the ICC to shelve such a plan. “Instead of reducing the Tests to four days, the ICC should concentrate on how to maintain a fair standard in making of the pitches all over the world which should help equally to both home and visiting sides.” he argued.

“It is insult of cricket if you reduce it to four days from five as this way you will be harming cricket rather than promoting it,” Intikhab said. “Yes now a day a good number of Test matches are being decided inside four days but this is not good enough a reason to take such a big decision. Some of the Tests have even ended in two days time, so there will be no end to it really. It does not make any sense and I can’t think that you can do that,” he said.

Intikhab, who has been the part of the Pakistan team management which won the World Cup 1992 (One-day) andthe T20 World Cup in 2009 said he did not know what was behind this plan and who have forced the ICC to consider such a proposal.

“Whatsoever is behind the idea, it will be a bad decision for the game of cricket and it should be turned down immediately,” Intikhab said.

He lamented that while T20 is an entertaining form of the game, it has damaged cricket a lot.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1527103/m...reservations-over-iccs-plan-of-four-day-tests
 
Last edited:
Test cricket is made for 5 days, would not like to see any change in it: Kuldeep Yadav

India spinner Kuldeep Yadav and Sri Lanka coach Mickey Arthur on Thursday voiced their support to keep Test matches a five-day affair, saying reducing it to four will amount to "messing up" with the fabric of the longest format.

Arthur, who has also coached South Africa, Australia and most recently Pakistan, joined his ICC Cricket Committee colleague Mahela Jayawardene in supporting five-day Tests.

"Look, five-day Test cricket is the way to go (forward). Test cricket challenges you mentally, physically and technically and a lot of time on the fifth day (a result comes). We just witnessed a very good Test match (England versus South Africa) that finished on day five," Arthur said ahead of the third T20 here on Friday.

"I know, we can talk about financial pressures and that type of stuff. I think the fabric of Test cricket should not be messed (up) with. You want wickets deteriorating on day five, you want (situations) where there is lot of really good exciting draws," Arthur added.

Kuldeep too feels the existing format should not be tinkered with.

"To be very honest, I would prefer five-day Test cricket. Test cricket is made for five days and I would not like to see any change in it. Something which is classic should be kept as it is," he added.

The cricket Committee, led by Anil Kumble, will discuss the four-day Test proposal in the next round of the ICC meetings, to be held in Dubai from March 27-31.

Cricket icon Sachin Tendulkar, India skipper Virat Kohli have also opposed the idea of four-day Tests.
https://www.indiatoday.in/sports/cr...-arthur-india-vs-sri-lanka-1635351-2020-01-09
 
I don’t really want Test cricket to be a binary Win/Lose sport like white ball cricket.

It’s boring when the best team always wins.

I used to enjoy seeing the weaker team fight it out for a Draw, and I think there is more hope of that in a 360 over Test than a 450 over Test.
 
Team India coach Ravi Shastri joined the list of detractors who are strictly against ICC's idea of experimenting with Test cricket by introducing four-day Tests. With the cricket's governing body set to discuss the idea in their meeting in March, Shastri now joins the likes of Virat Kohli, Faf du Plessis, Sachin Tendulkar among others, who are against the reduction of a day from the longest format of the game.

Speaking to CNN News 18, Sahstri termed the idea as 'non-sense' and said that if at all four-day Test has to be introduced, then it should be played among teams that are ranked lower than sixth in the ICC rankings.

"Four day Test is nonsense," he said. "If this goes on we may have limited overs Tests. There is no need to tamper with five-day Tests. If at all they want to tamper then let the top six sides play five-day Tests and the next six be allowed to play four-day Tests. If you want preserve Tests then let the top six play more against each other. You have the shorter format to popularise the game," Shastri said.

"Four-day Tests? Look, I'm not a fan of [it]. "I think the intent will not be right then because then you will speak of three-day Tests, where do you end? Then you speak of Test cricket disappearing. I don't endorse that at all.

"I don't think that's fair to the purest format of the game - how cricket started initially and five-day Test matches was the highest of tests you can have at the international level. According to me, it shouldn't be altered," Kohli said when asked abut four-day Tests before India's first T20I against Sri Lanka in Guwahati.

Shastri also said that the 'pink ball' needs further work and crowd will turn up to watch Test cricket if the competition is even.

India played their first-ever Day-Night Test last year against Bangladesh in Kolkata and convincingly won the tie within three days but Shastri said that the ball needs to be right for that format to flourish.

"Day-night Test is still under test. I still feel that pink ball does not give any advantage to spinners, they need to get the ball right for day night. During the day you have full Tests, by night it looks like half Test," said Shastri.

"I still feel that you will get more people to watch Tests if you have the top six play each other (more often)," he added.

https://www.indiatvnews.com/sports/...icc-s-idea-to-tamper-with-test-cricket-577859
 
Junaids said:
I don’t really want Test cricket to be a binary Win/Lose sport like white ball cricket.

It’s boring when the best team always wins.

I used to enjoy seeing the weaker team fight it out for a Draw, and I think there is more hope of that in a 360 over Test than a 450 over Test.
Click to expand...

However, a draw needs to be earned. Attaining a draw in 360 overs is not the same as attaining one in 450.
 
sweep_shot said:
I think they can have one innings per team. That way, they can make it a 3-day Test. I personally would support that.

ODI cricket used to be 60 overs long. It is now 50 overs. Point is, you sometimes need to change things around.
Click to expand...

This is eventually what I think should happen. 1 innings for each team, 3 days. You would be able to schedule them on weekends, so people would actually be able to watch them in entirety. Will be far more marketable, easier to arrange, and maybe for a lot of teams tests will actually be profitable again.

Games for most tests are usually decided in 1st innings anyway. And usually the 2nd innings tends to favour the home side, or advantage to whoever batted first.

Tests just refuse to change with the times, and you wonder why people complain when test viewership is going down, players are retiring from the format, and countries outside the big 3 are pretty much sidelining tests altogether (as it's not profitable for them).

I would rather fix tests and adapt them, then just let them have a slow death which is what's happening.
 
Last edited:
I know people want to talk about purism and what not but test cricket has not always been 5 days, we have had timeless tests , 4 day tests etc. in the past. The game needs evolving otherwise there will be no test cricket let alone discussing how many days we want to play. The format is no longer sustainable for 75% of the teams that play the game, and that is the only reason i would advocate 4 days tests to preserve the longer format, apart from England and Maybe India, most days of the test match are empty in the stands anyway if fans cared so much they would do more to save it and actually attend games.
 
sweep_shot said:
I think they can have one innings per team. That way, they can make it a 3-day Test. I personally would support that.

ODI cricket used to be 60 overs long. It is now 50 overs. Point is, you sometimes need to change things around.
Click to expand...

We already have white ball cricket to determine a winner based on 1 innings, why do we need Test cricket to do that? Might as well just shut shop on test cricket then.

Point is that, Test cricket demands altogether different skills from a batsman & bowler - its all about endurance, patience & the art of crafting an innings or setting up a batsman. It also gives a chance to somebody to catch up dramatically even if they falter initially - the ultimate test for any cricketer. All this would be lost if the format goes down the T20 way for the sake of entertainment.

Everybody gets it that barring few nations, the format is not financial feasible anymore - hence the suggestion that playing a 4 day or a 5 day test should be on elective basis. But let not the good players or the game suffer for the sake of monetary considerations.
 
The opinion of any cricket fan that hates the test format is utterly irrelevant, given that most of those fans have an almighty chip on the shoulder and take a perverse pleasure in coming up with ludicrous suggestions to completely disfigure test cricket. They have no skin in the game when it comes to test cricket and would be happy for it to disappear altogether, so all of their suggestions need to be completely disregarded. It would be completely similar if you ask a test purist to help come up with changes to the T20 game.

Now I am not blind to the fact that test cricket in countries such as New Zealand, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and the West Indies is not financially feasible. However, the solution isn't to reduce the game to 4 days or 3 days, that would still be loss-making. There's no empirical evidence whatsoever that 3-day or 4-day cricket will be sustainable in those countries. It's a preposterous leap to assume that just by reducing one day, test cricket will suddenly become self-sustaining. The ICC and the boards are being disgracefully disingenuous when suggesting that this move is motivated by a charming desire to reduce player workload, the primary objective is to open up space in the calendar to schedule more white ball cricket.

If the maximization of profits or cash flows is the only consideration here, then those boards might as well give up test cricket. It's not rational to continue playing tests if that is the overriding objective. But sporting authorities have never been supposed to act as a corporate organization, they are not beholden to shareholders. Their duty is to the sport itself and to enact strategies that make the sport sustainable in the long-term. Unless one is working with the assumption that it is the responsibility of boards to maximize revenues, there's no compelling reason why test cricket cannot be subsidized by other formats in certain countries, just as tests provide financial support for white ball cricket in England and Australia.

Undeniably, test cricket needs a lot of hard work from the administrators to make it a more interesting product for the fans, such as improved pitches, logical scheduling, improving the fan experience at the grounds by investing in stadium infrastructure (one of the reasons why test cricket is so popular in England and Australia is that non-cricket fans have no problem turning up for a day at the cricket because it's a great day out, whereas in the subcontinent cricket boards treat the fans as lepers and do their utmost to repel them from attending), and finally improving the quality of the cricket ball.

The recent Australian test summer was a horrible advertisement for test cricket due to a mixture of noncompetitive and disgracefully underprepared touring sides, pathetic pitches, and the kookaburra ball. Before advocating for a reduction in the duration of tests, CA and the other boards should perhaps work on ensuring that test cricket is competitive in the future. But that requires a lot of hard work and commitment, while it's ludicrously easy to come up with facile unproven solutions instead.
 
dildilpak said:
We already have white ball cricket to determine a winner based on 1 innings, why do we need Test cricket to do that? Might as well just shut shop on test cricket then.

Point is that, Test cricket demands altogether different skills from a batsman & bowler - its all about endurance, patience & the art of crafting an innings or setting up a batsman. It also gives a chance to somebody to catch up dramatically even if they falter initially - the ultimate test for any cricketer. All this would be lost if the format goes down the T20 way for the sake of entertainment.

Everybody gets it that barring few nations, the format is not financial feasible anymore - hence the suggestion that playing a 4 day or a 5 day test should be on elective basis. But let not the good players or the game suffer for the sake of monetary considerations.
Click to expand...

Do you think that future generations will care a lot about Test? I personally don't think so.

England is already trying to come up with format like "The Hundred". There's now a new format called T10 and it is starting to gain interest.

Younger people don't have much interest in Test and I think that is applicable worldwide. Many cricketers are leaving Test to prolong their LOI careers. Mohammed Amir is a very good example.

Test format is sustaining a slow death and I think modern Test format will eventually become a thing of the past. They need to modify it to make it appealing to cricketers and regular folks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
Why modern batters chase big totals in Test matches like a T20 – Good or bad?
Replies
9
Views
419
Muhammad Saad
M
BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
[VIDEOS] Should Test matches be reduced to four days instead of five days?
Replies
48
Views
2K
zn426
Z
H
Under Pressure: Indian players' body language on the final day of the first Test vs England
Replies
26
Views
1K
Energy
E
Ball Blazer
Will India bowl out England to win the 2nd Test?
Replies
35
Views
1K
Ball Blazer
Ball Blazer
H
Only one of Hussain Talat or Faheem Ashraf should play as an all-rounder — make room for Salman Mirza in the playing XI
Replies
42
Views
653
Barragan
Barragan
Back
Top