I don't think 2 divisions will improve anything - rather it'll dilute stats & make too many greats. Also, division can't filter top & bottom half sides properly in Test cricket because it has a greater impact of home conditions. Despite their recent poor show against IND, still I believe SRL will give AUS, SAF, ENG & NZ a good fight at home while WI recently has taken the series to last Test against PAK & ENG. In soccer, I can say that after the season, it's almost certainly top 4 sides make CL from England or Spain or Italy, but that's not true in Test cricket. When we are touring, we couldn't save a Test to Kiwis after posting 600; but any team will find it difficult to beat BD at home now, and many'll actuly end up losing Tests/Series - but in any judgement, we shouldn't be in top half.
I feel, what we need is a minimum standard for a Test status. The idea is, let's start from Jan 2018 - for next 4 years, teams will play a minimum number of series & they must maintain a minimum points (based in series result, not points on winnings Tests - otherwise when in trouble, bigger boards will call ZIM, IRL or AFGs for 6 Test series), at the end of 4 years cycle, unless - their Test status is stripped off.
Similarly, there should be a 2nd level (FC status), where next top 6 sides plays similar series for 4 years & for a promotion to T day status, any team (s) has to attain a certain points. If that reduces number of Test teams to say 7, I don't mind but it's not healthy that India should play 6 Tests against this SRL side in 5 months gap, while we have 3rd best W/L ratio in last 3 years, because of 3-0 against ZIM & 3 rain interrupted Tests.
For example, if from Jan, I start with 10 teams for next 4/5 years, wehere every team plays at least a 2 Test series home & away with other 9 (18 series), where points are given like -
Home win 2, home draw 1, home loss - 1 (1 point deducted). Away win 4, away draw 2 (or 2.5), away loss 0 (neutral venues has to be considered as home for one), while if a side declines to play series with someone else, their the points are awarded to the other team.
Possible maximum points that one team can get is 54; minimum -9. That's a swing of 63 points - may be we can set a bench mark that to keep Test status, one has to manage 25% of the possible max gap (16 points), otherwise they go down, with a qufifier that not more than 3 to go down, but all 10 can stay put, if they attain 16 points (possible - in total 270 points are on offer). Benchmark can be 33% as well (21 points), but we have to see at least one round to understand the minimum threshold. The cut off par should be declared at the start of 4/5 years cycle.
Similarly, if I take next 8 teams (say AFG, IRL, HOL, Scotland, KEN, Namibia, Canada & probably PNG) play similar 14 series with possible highest point being 42 - teams that can avail 75% of that possible max point (say 30) should get the Test status for next 4/5 years & it goes on.
This should keep both sides honest & there'll be an effort for lesser teams to improve their standard. At present, I don't think this freeloading is helping anyone, neither it'll help if there is 4 divisions with 3 each. That Big 3 was basically 3+6 formula with SAF floating in between & it was the worst idea in cricket to be honest.
).
