ICC calls meeting for Test championship

[Abdul]

The first step towards the World Test championship is being taken next week. The International Cricket Council (ICC) has called a meeting of the scheduling managers of the boards to finalise the plan for the championship which is tentatively being scheduled for 2019.

The existing proposal is to have afour-year cycle with a cut-off date for the qualification. The two top teams at that cut-off point will be playing a Test to decide the winner. The meeting on Monday and Tuesday will finalise the cut-off point.

Besides, the ICC wants to seek members’ views on whether to start the Test championship cycle retrospectively or prospectively. If the cycle is to start from April 2017, then there is a chance that the 2019 date may not happen.

For the time being, the ICC will adopt the 9+3 format for the Test matches with two sides in the nineteam group qualifying to compete for the title. Currently, India and Australia are the top two sides in the ICC Test ranking.

CEO Rahul Johri and Operations head MV Sridhar are to represent the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) but Johri’s visit has still not been finalised.

During the course of the meeting, there are likely to be discussions over a couple of bilateral series. The most vexing series for the BCCI is the one against Pakistan this year-end. There is no guarantee the series will take place and the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) has said that it is already looking at possible alternatives.

There is a chance that the BCCI side may also explore options but the problem before the board is that the go-ahead from the government could come at the last minute. A contingency back-up plan may be prepared.

Meanwhile, the Committee of Administrators (COA) has scheduled a meeting on March 22 and 23 for decisions on the cricketing matters. Demand for salary hike from support staff of the Indian team and proposals for central contracts are awaiting decisions and these could be decided during the twoday meeting in Mumbai. There is a COA meeting in Delhi on March 17 but that will be over implementation of the Lodha Committee report.

http://punemirror.indiatimes.com/sp...or-test-championship/articleshow/57598295.cms

 

[Major]

No point of having a 4 year cycle, if you donot force test members to play an alotted number of test games against each opposition.

The whole system should be developed as such that the bottom team in the test rank could also get into the qualfication for the play off if it is given a good set number of games to play and win

 

[Gilly]

Don't see the logic here, if the number two team wins but because of points is still ranked at number two who is the bigger champion.

 

[Junaids]

This is why Misbah's selfish extension of his career has been so destructive.

He contributed zero as a batsman in Australia and made a purely negative contribution as skipper.

Yet still Pakistan almost won the First Test and should have drawn the Second Test at Melbourne.

And I haven't even mentioned Younis Khan's inability to reach even 40 in six of his last nine away Tests.

The non-contributing seniors are the difference between ranking at 2 or the current 6.

Not only will they make Pakistan miss the World Test Championship, but by the time it arrives they will be 44 and 45 years old respectively. Yet they selfishly prevent the next generation from getting the experience they need for the challenges ahead.

 

[kingusama92]

Don't see the logic here, if the number two team wins but because of points is still ranked at number two who is the bigger champion.

The points system is to earn a spot in the final.

After that it's a "winner takes all" situation.

It's just like the ODI World Cup. Team A can win every game up to the final and still lose to Team B that barely scratched its way in.

Kind of like Pakistan in 1992.

 

[Convict]

Don't see the logic here, if the number two team wins but because of points is still ranked at number two who is the bigger champion.

Its like the Grand Final.

 

[Gilly]

The non-contributing seniors are the difference between ranking at 2 or the current 6.

.

Good one Junaids, Pakistan would be second without Misbah and Younis, why not number one?.

 

[Gilly]

Its like the Grand Final.

Grand finals are for a season ending then resets for the next year.

 

[Hawkeye]

Good one Junaids, Pakistan would be second without Misbah and Younis, why not number one?.

Been making clueless posts on this topic. Misbah is the reason we reached number 1. Who doesn't fail in 1 tour out of ages? Just won us in England at 42. Others need to play cricket too, not just Misbah.

 

[Napa]

Don't see the logic here, if the number two team wins but because of points is still ranked at number two who is the bigger champion.

It will be no different from a situation where the #1 ranked ODI is different from the WC winner.

 

[Gilly]

It will be no different from a situation where the #1 ranked ODI is different from the WC winner.

Completely different, the ODI world cup has its own qualifying matches and any team can win it not just the two top ranked teams.

 

[Yossarian]

No point of having a 4 year cycle, if you donot force test members to play an alotted number of test games against each opposition.

The whole system should be developed as such that the bottom team in the test rank could also get into the qualfication for the play off if it is given a good set number of games to play and win

Only way to have a meaningful rankings system that leads to two finalists battling it out to be crowned champions is if there was a level playing field for all. That means:

* Every team plays every other team during the qualifying period, home and away.

* The same number of Test matches per series (say two Tests) are counted towards the Test championship rankings league table. The Test series could still be 3, 4 or 5 Tests (eg The Ashes) but only two of the Tests (designated in advance before the series starts) would count towards the Test championship rankings league table.


* 5 points for a Test win, 2 points for a draw/no result. An additional bonus point for an innings victory (or a winning margin of 200+ runs)

* A team refusing to play against any particular opponent will forfeit the series, and also lose additional penalty points.

* The Test championship rankings league table will be reset to zero at the start of a new qualifying period.

 

[R0H1T]

Completely different, the ODI world cup has its own qualifying matches and any team can win it not just the two top ranked teams.

Absolutely, instead of making tests a watchable prospect the ICC is doing the same thing it did with ODI (rules) i.e. trying to repackage the product. Perhaps spicier pitches would be a good start, heck look at the recent NZ vs SA test, btw it's a given that the test product needs to evolve & be more marketable than ever before. The bottom line is tests need to be more engaging, the easiest way to ensure that is to make the contest more even. The harder part is how to make the contest pretty even.

 

[Gilly]

My concern would be say they have a test championship in 2019 and then in 2020 the give the test mace to another team who are the test champions, or do they intend to stop giving the mace.

 

[Junaids]

Good one Junaids, Pakistan would be second without Misbah and Younis, why not number one?.

They WERE number 1 five months ago.

And all that has happened since then is that they have lost Test after Test due to numbers 4 and 5 in the batting order failing again and again.

To be precise:

5 Tests
5 defeats, of which Hamilton and Melbourne were almost drawn, and Brisbane was almost won.

In those Tests:
1) Younis Khan failed to reach 40 in 8 innings out of 10.
2) Misbah-ul-Haq failed to reach 40 in 8 innings out of 8.

Yes, there were problems with the bowling - not least due to Misbah's absurd field placements.

But the fall from Number 2 to Number 6 was clearly at least 90% due to the failures of Misbah and Younis.

Eighteen innings. Sixteen failures.

 

[Junaids]

My concern would be say they have a test championship in 2019 and then in 2020 the give the test mace to another team who are the test champions, or do they intend to stop giving the mace.

You are sort of correct.

There was a very detailed plan for the 2017 World Test Championship and all the ones to follow at 4 yearly intervals.

There were to be semi-finals at The Oval and (probably) Lords, as follows:

Team Ranked 1 at the end of the previous year v Team Ranked 4
Team Ranked 2 v Team Ranked 3

The winners would then play in the Final at Lords.

So the team finishing Number 1 gets the advantage of a relatively easier semi-final.

In reality, the sporting integrity of the championship is not really damaged by this, as we have seen teams like South Africa retain a high ranking for a significant period after the players who earned it have retired.

 

[Gilly]

You are sort of correct.

There was a very detailed plan for the 2017 World Test Championship and all the ones to follow at 4 yearly intervals.

There were to be semi-finals at The Oval and (probably) Lords, as follows:

Team Ranked 1 at the end of the previous year v Team Ranked 4
Team Ranked 2 v Team Ranked 3

The winners would then play in the Final at Lords.

So the team finishing Number 1 gets the advantage of a relatively easier semi-final.

In reality, the sporting integrity of the championship is not really damaged by this, as we have seen teams like South Africa retain a high ranking for a significant period after the players who earned it have retired.

Why not play at the MCG, Lords cant hold many spectators.

 

[HitWicket]

Why not play at the MCG, Lords cant hold many spectators.

Not sure you'd expect to be able to get close to just over 30,000 (Lords capacity) if it turned out to be a neutral test at the MCG? Assume it would end up being rotated around every cycle like the other major tournaments anyway though.

 

[Madplayer]

ICC needs to distribute the test matches evenly. Only then can this be taken seriously.

The teams which disagree to play against a team for any reason based on political or any other grounds should be allowed to do so but their points should be given to their opposition (like a walk over).

 

[Gilly]

ICC needs to distribute the test matches evenly. Only then can this be taken seriously.

The teams which disagree to play against a team for any reason based on political or any other grounds should be allowed to do so but their points should be given to their opposition (like a walk over).

The ICC dont distribute test matches, and for that matter the ICC is a product of the teams. Teams were playing test matches before the ICC was formed and the ICC cannot start dictating what teams can and can not do. The role of the ICC is to get a consensus between the teams to produce a protocol or set guidelines. Australia, England and India have invested heavily in infrastructure and have very well developed systems in place to provide an exceptional entertainment package that promotes cricket, provides employment and delivers a profit.

 

[super hitter]

It would take a whole decade to complete the championship with different teams.

but it can be good if it comes once in a 50 years!

 

[super hitter]

Been making clueless posts on this topic. Misbah is the reason we reached number 1. Who doesn't fail in 1 tour out of ages? Just won us in England at 42. Others need to play cricket too, not just Misbah.

Exactly! and people beg for the ouster of seniors!

 

[battler]

Why not play at the MCG, Lords cant hold many spectators.

Or they could also play at Eden Gardens, Kolkata.

 

[Madplayer]

The ICC dont distribute test matches, and for that matter the ICC is a product of the teams. Teams were playing test matches before the ICC was formed and the ICC cannot start dictating what teams can and can not do. The role of the ICC is to get a consensus between the teams to produce a protocol or set guidelines.

Well that's what i am saying, ICC should have that power to distribute matches equally. Otherwise its just a farce (i believe it is) and a powerless organisation just there to bend over to the one who makes most money (which actually happens). Whats the point of having a "world test championship" if some teams play more and others dont? If they cant get teams to have equal number of matches, they should call it a quadrangular test match series and not fool people by calling it a world championship.

Australia, England and India have invested heavily in infrastructure and have very well developed systems in place to provide an exceptional entertainment package that promotes cricket, provides employment and delivers a profit.

That is true but it still doesnt mean that equality in home and away series of at least the top 8-10 teams cannot be achieved. There is a need to look beyond making profit if a world test championship is to be made into a reality. It has to be accepted that some nations wont make you enough money or pull in enough crowds in tests. For a test championship to actually live up to it's name, these nations have to be taken forward along with the bigger teams. Hopefully the test championship brand will become bigger in future and with Matches having more meaning to them, more people would watch them in the coming years.

 

[USofA]

Well that's what i am saying, ICC should have that power to distribute matches equally. Otherwise its just a farce (i believe it is) and a powerless organisation just there to bend over to the one who makes most money (which actually happens). Whats the point of having a "world test championship" if some teams play more and others dont? If they cant get teams to have equal number of matches, they should call it a quadrangular test match series and not fool people by calling it a world championship.



That is true but it still doesnt mean that equality in home and away series of at least the top 8-10 teams cannot be achieved. There is a need to look beyond making profit if a world test championship is to be made into a reality. It has to be accepted that some nations wont make you enough money or pull in enough crowds in tests. For a test championship to actually live up to it's name, these nations have to be taken forward along with the bigger teams. Hopefully the test championship brand will become bigger in future and with Matches having more meaning to them, more people would watch them in the coming years.

Agree. But there should be an end game to it. A timeline of how long these teams will be supported with other people's money. They should be put on a path to self sufficiency. Perhaps a 5-8 year plan with a requirement of progressive and visible results to be achieved. Otherwise it will just be throwing money down a bottomless pit, which will be unfair to the others.

 

[Madplayer]

Agree. But there should be an end game to it. A timeline of how long these teams will be supported with other people's money. They should be put on a path to self sufficiency. Perhaps a 5-8 year plan with a requirement of progressive and visible results to be achieved. Otherwise it will just be throwing money down a bottomless pit, which will be unfair to the others.

Yes that is correct. Goals need to be set but they have to be realistic. Unfortunately it has to be accepted that teams like Zimbabwe will take decades to become profitable if at all they become profitable in future. Thats why it is important to understand which countries can bring value to cricket before investing in them.

 

[Nil Dhumrojal]

First assure equal number of matches for all 9 teams home and away then apply else no need of this hypocritical system.

 

[USofA]

Yes that is correct. Goals need to be set but they have to be realistic. Unfortunately it has to be accepted that teams like Zimbabwe will take decades to become profitable if at all they become profitable in future. Thats why it is important to understand which countries can bring value to cricket before investing in them.

Anything over 8-9 years would be a waste of time. If a board cannot get thing right and help themselves in that time frame, then they never will. Zim I am afraid falls in the lost cause category.

 

[zn426]

Look, I have no problem with having a Test Championship.
I have no problem with it rotating.
The key is getting all the teams to play. If India and Pakistan refuse to play each other, this system won't work.
If India will not play Pakistan in UAE or Pakistan, and Pakistan refuses to tour India in return, then there's nothing to talk about. We know that the political climate in both countries is the real reason there have been no series.
And it's quite frankly FOOLISH.
The USA played the USSR in ice hockey for the entire Cold War. Not just in Olympics but also in exhibition matches and friendlies.
If the USA and the USSR were sworn enemies and could put aside their differences to play each other in sport, then Pakistan and India can do the same.

 

[Syed1]

This concept is bound to fail.

 

[Balthazar]

I am curious to know how ICC plans to make India play against Pak. This is going to be real fun watching ICC put in its place.

 

[HitWicket]

I am curious to know how ICC plans to make India play against Pak. This is going to be real fun watching ICC put in its place.

Presume it'll be the same as the womens ODI league where the team refusing to play forfeited the game. In that case it cost India automatic qualification for the world cup and they had to go through the qualifier instead.,=

 

[USofA]

Presume it'll be the same as the womens ODI league where the team refusing to play forfeited the game. In that case it cost India automatic qualification for the world cup and they had to go through the qualifier instead.,=

Forfeits mean less chances for India to qualify for the "final". Would the ICC want this? More importantly will the broadcaster want/stand for it? It is no secret that all ICC run events are designed to maximize India's presence. Forfeitures do not accomplish this.

 

[Markhor]

I am curious to know how ICC plans to make India play against Pak. This is going to be real fun watching ICC put in its place.

Sad that people who claim to be cricket fans can't take their parochial lens off for one second and consider the greater good of the game.

 

[Balthazar]

Presume it'll be the same as the womens ODI league where the team refusing to play forfeited the game. In that case it cost India automatic qualification for the world cup and they had to go through the qualifier instead.,=

We are number #1 Test team. We can afford to throw away a match or two and still win the trophy. I am more interested in knowing whether ICC has guts to go against BCCI wishes.