Test matches in England could be cut from five to four days under ECB plans

[Abdullah719]

The traditional five-day Test, which has been a feature of the English summer for nearly 70 years, will end in 2020 if the England & Wales Cricket Board successfully argues for the introduction of four-day matches.

The ECB is leading the push for Test matches to be reduced to four days after the 2019 Ashes summer, believing it is the best way to breathe new life into the game’s oldest format and is confident it has the support of broadcasters and host grounds.

A four-day Test would start in England half an hour earlier at 10.30am to give teams more time to bowl the increased number of overs in a day and with all venues now having floodlights, play would be extended where possible.

Sources have told Telegraph Sport the ECB will put its weight behind the switch to four-day Tests at the next board meeting of the International Cricket Council in New Zealand in October, which will discus the ongoing restructuring of the game and introduction of a Test championship in 2020.

The ECB’s support for four-day Test cricket will alarm traditionalists, who already feel the game is being squeezed by too much Twenty20 with the introduction of a new league in England in two years’ time.

Reducing Test matches to four days will help the ECB and other boards schedule their domestic Twenty20 leagues and ease the workload on players.

It is understood the ECB’s new broadcast deal does not guarantee Test matches will be scheduled for five days, removing one potential obstacle for change. A shift to four-day Tests would enable the ECB to guarantee Thursday starts for each match, which is the preferred option for Test match grounds as it allows them to maximise corporate income. Next summer, England and India are squeezing a five-match Test series into seven weeks, forcing Trent Bridge to host a game that starts on Saturday, making the sale of corporate hospitality boxes very difficult.

Test matches have been scheduled over five days since 1973. A series that year between New Zealand and Pakistan was the last to be played over four days.

But South Africa announced this week it plans to play a four-day Test starting on Boxing Day against Zimbabwe and the ICC are set to give it approval at its October board meeting. More experiments with four days are expected around the world over the next 12 months as the initiative gathers momentum.

Colin Graves, the chairman of the ECB, and its chief executive, Tom Harrison, have both publicly supported the concept of four-day Test matches over the past 12 months. The ECB’s support is significant because England is the only country in the world where Test matches are consistently sold out.

Last year Graves said about four-day Tests: “Every Test match would start on a Thursday, with Thursday and Friday being corporate days and then Saturday and Sunday the family days.

“From a cost point of view you'd lose that fifth day, which would save a lot of money from the ground's point of view and the broadcasters... I would look at that.”

​

Only two of England’s seven Tests this summer lasted into the fifth day. In the 1980s, 77 per cent of Test matches ended on the fifth day, but that has reduced to 58 per cent since the start of this century.

There are fears that reducing Tests to four days will increase the number of draws, but with this generation of players brought up on Twenty20, the pace of the game has changed and is unlikely to slow down.

The majority of players are believed to remain sceptical about four-day Tests because of the problem with over rates. England often use the extra half-hour to bowl the 90 overs minimum in a day of Test cricket with delays such as DRS appeals slowing the game down. The ICC will have to address over rates or players accept they have to bat on under floodlights if the four-day plan is to become a reality.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/...matches-england-cut-five-four-days-ecb-plans/

 

[SL_Fan]

I'm all for giving four day Tests a go. I reckon we'll start to see more sporting wickets everywhere as a result.

 

[Junaids]

Great!

So long as the wickets are bowler-friendly.

Great news.

 

[JaDed]

Great!

So long as the wickets are bowler-friendly.

Great news.

How is that equality?So bowling friendly pitches that pad up bowler's stats will be taken into account then?

 

[Robert]

[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] means as long as they are not roads, as long as the bowler has a fair chance. A bit of grass or a bit of bounce or a track that breaks up later on.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Not against this,let’s see how the SA-Zim test goes.

 

[Abdullah719]

England sensitive to effects of four-day Tests

BRISTOL: The England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) insisted on Sunday it had ‘no firm position’ on playing four-day Tests, adding they were ‘sensitive to the potential effects of any change to the traditional format’.

It had been reported that English cricket chiefs were in favour of reducing Tests from their current five days to four to fit in with modern trends such as Twenty20 which have made shorter-form cricket ever more popular.

Cricket South Africa have announced plans to stage a four-day Test against Zimbabwe at Port Elizabeth starting on Dec 26, although the move is still subject to International Cricket Council approval.

There is a view that moving to four days would, as is the case with professional golf tournaments, ensure two good ‘corporate’ days on Thursday and Friday while increasing the chances of matches finishing in prime television viewing time at the weekend.

Advocates also argue that a move to four-day Tests would give players more time to rest between matches in what are increasingly crowded fixture schedules.

Supporters of four-day Tests have said teams would bowl more overs in a day to compensate for the loss of a fifth day.

But critics point to how many Test sides struggle to bowl the scheduled 90 overs in a current standard day’s Test play as evidence of how a move to four days could reduce the amount of playing time.

England staged their inaugural day/night Test against West Indies at Edgbaston last month — a match that ended inside three days after the tourists lost 19 wickets in a day.

“ECB has no firm position on the staging of four-day Test matches,” said a spokesman for the national governing body on Sunday. “We can see benefits that more compact scheduling might deliver but are sensitive to the potential effects of any change to the traditional format.

“Careful consideration is required to support the right decisions for the wider game, and on-field matters are key,” he added.

“We would welcome more insight on the effects for players and fans in order to help the game make a fully-informed decision on any proposal,” the spokesman said.

“It is important that cricket is prepared to innovate in all formats of the game where it can help drive interest, accessibility or improvement.

“Above all, ECB is committed to a healthy and competitive future for Test match cricket, here and around the world.”

ECB chairman Colin Graves had previously come out in support of four-day Tests, telling MCC’s website in 2015: “Personally, I think we should look at four-day Test cricket and play 105 overs a day starting at 10:30am (0930 GMT) in the morning, and finish when you finish as all the grounds now have lights.

“Every Test match would start on a Thursday, with Thursday and Friday being corporate days and then Saturday and Sunday the family days.

“From a cost point of view you’d lose that fifth day, which would save a hell of a lot of money from the ground’s point of view and the broadcasters,” he added.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1359796/england-sensitive-to-effects-of-four-day-tests

 

[MMHS]

ICC should discard these matches from Test status. This is categorically designed to cover Poms incapability of playing spin & producing a half decent spinner who makes the team on bowling merit.

Absolute rubbish idea to say that 5 day is too long - in that regard, even a T20 takes twice the time of a basketball game & 3 times of a soccer match. Who can't enjoy it for 5 days, won't do it for 4 days either, therefore I don't think duration has anything to do in it. PCB, BCB or SLCB doesn't bother much about Test cricket, therefore I don't have any expectation from them; but I would expect BCCI to stand firm against this trick, which basically is a cunning tactics to counter Asian teams.

There is a detailed post of mine on the idea of 4 days Test, therefore I didn't write again in the recent thread, but ultimately 4 day Test will kill whatever interest left in the game, as I explained (can't find the post now, can't write for 2 pages once more). It'll make the game slow - whichever team is behind after Day 1, will play to time out a draw, because 4 days Test hardly allows teams to make a come back. In fact, not after 1st day - if the batting side reaches 197/2 at Tea on day 1, fielding side will start post Tea session with 4 men on line. Simple reason is, once there is a 1st innings of 450+, side batting 2nd can only hope for a draw in remaining time. Add to that time wasting, playing with dead bat, bowling negative line ..... From time less Test, in 1950s & 1960s, world moved to fixed duration Test - anyone can check, scoring rate in 1950s & 60s were worst in cricket - so were the number of draws.

Besides, Cricket's largest market is Asia, even Test cricket. Those house full English grounds give a wrong picture - 10-12-20K capacity English grounds would be accommodated in one stand of major Asian grounds, hence it looks like that. Last day of Dhaka Test had 25K+ paid crowd ......, a 5 day Eden Test would bring more crowd than an entire English summer - economy of scale is different, hence gate money, but not by ticket numbers.

ICC must think how the game can be popularized in Asia & reducing days isn't the best idea, unless we are planing to make it 4 innings of 6 overs each (then it's possible to finish a "Test" cricket within a view-able time). In summer, Poms can play for 8 hours, in Asian cricket season, 6 hours is a challenge in most grounds - add to that weather interruption, bad light, winter fogs & smogs, time wasting .... 4 Day Test will be a joke. Test cricket isn't County Championship that teams will declare to make a direct result - we have seen only once in Test, courtesy of someone Cronje, & I don't have further taste in that.

In every FC match everywhere, some sort of point system is associated, which has a higher gain for direct result & some sort of bonus point on wickets, runs, 1st innings lead .... hence, both teams try for a direct result and we can expect 303/4d, 233/5d, 243/4d & 312 sort of exciting matches (to design that once Steve Ossagnessy scored a 23 ball 100!!) in FC cricket..... same match in Test will end like 450, 343, 201/4, 91/1 ...... after 4 days - basically, people will stop following even in CI, after Day 2 ends at 450, 135/3. Add, one more day in it, it can end like an epic.

Making it to play on under prepared tracks to force result in 4 days would make it even bigger joke - cricket batting technique will shift from top hand to bottom hand and spinners will turn in to darters ..... and bits & pieces all-rounders will be the MVP of the game, because one would need just to bowl legally to get wickets & whoever can bat a bit makes it better value - in short, Ben Stokes & Moeen Ali makes a better value than Dale Styen & Muthia Muritharan.

Hope BCCI stops this nonsense next summer and put a nip in the bud of this 4 day Test (ECB can extract 4 days out of 10 in the 2 Tests against PAK for sure, if they convert those 4 days in to 4 more T20s, PCB will gleefully accept that).

 

[KevinFern]

ICC should discard these matches from Test status. This is categorically designed to cover Poms incapability of playing spin & producing a half decent spinner who makes the team on bowling merit.

Absolute rubbish idea to say that 5 day is too long - in that regard, even a T20 takes twice the time of a basketball game & 3 times of a soccer match. Who can't enjoy it for 5 days, won't do it for 4 days either, therefore I don't think duration has anything to do in it. PCB, BCB or SLCB doesn't bother much about Test cricket, therefore I don't have any expectation from them; but I would expect BCCI to stand firm against this trick, which basically is a cunning tactics to counter Asian teams.

There is a detailed post of mine on the idea of 4 days Test, therefore I didn't write again in the recent thread, but ultimately 4 day Test will kill whatever interest left in the game, as I explained (can't find the post now, can't write for 2 pages once more). It'll make the game slow - whichever team is behind after Day 1, will play to time out a draw, because 4 days Test hardly allows teams to make a come back. In fact, not after 1st day - if the batting side reaches 197/2 at Tea on day 1, fielding side will start post Tea session with 4 men on line. Simple reason is, once there is a 1st innings of 450+, side batting 2nd can only hope for a draw in remaining time. Add to that time wasting, playing with dead bat, bowling negative line ..... From time less Test, in 1950s & 1960s, world moved to fixed duration Test - anyone can check, scoring rate in 1950s & 60s were worst in cricket - so were the number of draws.

Besides, Cricket's largest market is Asia, even Test cricket. Those house full English grounds give a wrong picture - 10-12-20K capacity English grounds would be accommodated in one stand of major Asian grounds, hence it looks like that. Last day of Dhaka Test had 25K+ paid crowd ......, a 5 day Eden Test would bring more crowd than an entire English summer - economy of scale is different, hence gate money, but not by ticket numbers.

ICC must think how the game can be popularized in Asia & reducing days isn't the best idea, unless we are planing to make it 4 innings of 6 overs each (then it's possible to finish a "Test" cricket within a view-able time). In summer, Poms can play for 8 hours, in Asian cricket season, 6 hours is a challenge in most grounds - add to that weather interruption, bad light, winter fogs & smogs, time wasting .... 4 Day Test will be a joke. Test cricket isn't County Championship that teams will declare to make a direct result - we have seen only once in Test, courtesy of someone Cronje, & I don't have further taste in that.

In every FC match everywhere, some sort of point system is associated, which has a higher gain for direct result & some sort of bonus point on wickets, runs, 1st innings lead .... hence, both teams try for a direct result and we can expect 303/4d, 233/5d, 243/4d & 312 sort of exciting matches (to design that once Steve Ossagnessy scored a 23 ball 100!!) in FC cricket..... same match in Test will end like 450, 343, 201/4, 91/1 ...... after 4 days - basically, people will stop following even in CI, after Day 2 ends at 450, 135/3. Add, one more day in it, it can end like an epic.

Making it to play on under prepared tracks to force result in 4 days would make it even bigger joke - cricket batting technique will shift from top hand to bottom hand and spinners will turn in to darters ..... and bits & pieces all-rounders will be the MVP of the game, because one would need just to bowl legally to get wickets & whoever can bat a bit makes it better value - in short, Ben Stokes & Moeen Ali makes a better value than Dale Styen & Muthia Muritharan.

Hope BCCI stops this nonsense next summer and put a nip in the bud of this 4 day Test (ECB can extract 4 days out of 10 in the 2 Tests against PAK for sure, if they convert those 4 days in to 4 more T20s, PCB will gleefully accept that).

Agree with each and every words in this post

 

[HitWicket]

ICC should discard these matches from Test status. This is categorically designed to cover Poms incapability of playing spin & producing a half decent spinner who makes the team on bowling merit.

Absolute rubbish idea to say that 5 day is too long - in that regard, even a T20 takes twice the time of a basketball game & 3 times of a soccer match. Who can't enjoy it for 5 days, won't do it for 4 days either, therefore I don't think duration has anything to do in it. PCB, BCB or SLCB doesn't bother much about Test cricket, therefore I don't have any expectation from them; but I would expect BCCI to stand firm against this trick, which basically is a cunning tactics to counter Asian teams.

There is a detailed post of mine on the idea of 4 days Test, therefore I didn't write again in the recent thread, but ultimately 4 day Test will kill whatever interest left in the game, as I explained (can't find the post now, can't write for 2 pages once more). It'll make the game slow - whichever team is behind after Day 1, will play to time out a draw, because 4 days Test hardly allows teams to make a come back. In fact, not after 1st day - if the batting side reaches 197/2 at Tea on day 1, fielding side will start post Tea session with 4 men on line. Simple reason is, once there is a 1st innings of 450+, side batting 2nd can only hope for a draw in remaining time. Add to that time wasting, playing with dead bat, bowling negative line ..... From time less Test, in 1950s & 1960s, world moved to fixed duration Test - anyone can check, scoring rate in 1950s & 60s were worst in cricket - so were the number of draws.

When talking about this idea previously Graves has stated the intention was to up the overs per day from 90 to 105 so by that only 30 overs would actually be lost.

Besides, Cricket's largest market is Asia, even Test cricket. Those house full English grounds give a wrong picture - 10-12-20K capacity English grounds would be accommodated in one stand of major Asian grounds, hence it looks like that.

Trent Bridge and Headingley are the only 2 current English test grounds that hold a capacity in that range (and both are closer to 20,000), the other 5 are all 25,000+.

Last day of Dhaka Test had 25K+ paid crowd ......,

Eh, looks like about 3-4k maximum to me.

a 5 day Eden Test would bring more crowd than an entire English summer - economy of scale is different, hence gate money, but not by ticket numbers.

There was a 5 day Eden Gardens test last year, they barely got the ticket sales of half a single test in England let alone an entire English summer.

ICC must think how the game can be popularized in Asia & reducing days isn't the best idea, unless we are planing to make it 4 innings of 6 overs each (then it's possible to finish a "Test" cricket within a view-able time). In summer, Poms can play for 8 hours, in Asian cricket season, 6 hours is a challenge in most grounds - add to that weather interruption, bad light, winter fogs & smogs, time wasting .... 4 Day Test will be a joke.

Guess we see how these day-night test experiments go.

 

[MMHS]

When talking about this idea previously Graves has stated the intention was to up the overs per day from 90 to 105 so by that only 30 overs would actually be lost.



Trent Bridge and Headingley are the only 2 current English test grounds that hold a capacity in that range (and both are closer to 20,000), the other 5 are all 25,000+.



Eh, looks like about 3-4k maximum to me.

There was a 5 day Eden Gardens test last year, they barely got the ticket sales of half a single test in England let alone an entire English summer.



Guess we see how these day-night test experiments go.

Forget about the crowd part - I can also tell that in Asia, 80% crowd are youth, who are future of the game; in ENG, 90% are pensioner, don't have any other way out to pass 18 hours day time.

Considering the overs (420 of it), it's absurd in Asia to play more than 6.5 hours/day. If any them is in trouble, they'll make it 12 overs/hour, because they do know that Umpires won't be able to extend thee game. I am telling this from real life experience of why so many teams got away against that PAK side in PAK throughout 1990s & 2000s. D/N Test isn't a feasible idea for the amount of dew in South Asia.

Finally, your post is exactly why Asian teams should block this change - you have absolutely no idea how top quality spinners work or how a true wicket behaves on Day 4 & 5 after rolling. It's not by the customized rank turners, that starts to turn from Day 1, where top quality spinners come in to the game; rather it's the duration of the wicket, the sun light on it & rolling, that allows a good wicket to create every phase of a game to bring the best out of every type of player. 4 Day Test takes out spinners from Day 5 and more importantly, it makes Younis Khan & Usman Khwaza similar, well at least reduces he gap significantly.

I give a classic example from a recent Series, to make you understand, if you wish to. Recent BD-AUS series was played on 2 different surface - 1st one at a tricky, under-prepared Mirpur wicket, where Lyon got 9 wickets & Shakib 10. Next Test was played on a far better track - 1st 3 days were decent for batting, then it started to turn - this time Shakib managed 2, Lyon 13. We didn't lose the Test for poor batting or bowling - rather we lost it for dropping half a dozen catches. 305 was quite decent total on that wicket & good catching would have taken Aussies 20 runs either side of 305. Apart from that 72 lead, more importantly, we would have started 2nd innings on 3rd morning, and batted a significant amount of time before the wicket started to explode, which resulted 42/5 start in 2nd innings.

If you can differentiate the types of spinners those two are, and how a rank turner & a dry but true wicket works, you would have understood my point. AUS beat IND at Pune defending 250+ & I'll back any County side to defend that against IND or PAK on such surface with their spin all-rounders, who averages 30 with bat and 40 with ball in FC cricket. On contrary, if I take every Test to that Lord's condition (between ENG-WI), even Ben Stokes will become Malcom Marshall, while Ashwin, Yadav, Yasir & Herath will contribute more with bat than ball - it's not that spinners can't bowl on grassy wickets, rather, there is not point picking them, if Ganguly or Younis Khan or Soumya Sarkar gets better purchase from the track just for placing it on right spot.

I hope someone puts this post to BCCI people - surely they should understand how to act.

 

[HitWicket]

Forget about the crowd part - I can also tell that in Asia, 80% crowd are youth, who are future of the game; in ENG, 90% are pensioner, don't have any other way out to pass 18 hours day time.

So you get caught making up and exaggerating multiple stats and your reaction is to just brush them off and make up another blatantly false 'fact'? Neat.

Considering the overs (420 of it), it's absurd in Asia to play more than 6.5 hours/day. If any them is in trouble, they'll make it 12 overs/hour, because they do know that Umpires won't be able to extend thee game. I am telling this from real life experience of why so many teams got away against that PAK side in PAK throughout 1990s & 2000s. D/N Test isn't a feasible idea for the amount of dew in South Asia.

At which point you fine and ban them for a poor over rate. It is nearly always possible to add more time on at the start of a typical days play in Asia in test match cricket right now.

Finally, your post is exactly why Asian teams should block this change - you have absolutely no idea how top quality spinners work or how a true wicket behaves on Day 4 & 5 after rolling. It's not by the customized rank turners, that starts to turn from Day 1, where top quality spinners come in to the game; rather it's the duration of the wicket, the sun light on it & rolling, that allows a good wicket to create every phase of a game to bring the best out of every type of player. 4 Day Test takes out spinners from Day 5 and more importantly, it makes Younis Khan & Usman Khwaza similar, well at least reduces he gap significantly.

I give a classic example from a recent Series, to make you understand, if you wish to. Recent BD-AUS series was played on 2 different surface - 1st one at a tricky, under-prepared Mirpur wicket, where Lyon got 9 wickets & Shakib 10. Next Test was played on a far better track - 1st 3 days were decent for batting, then it started to turn - this time Shakib managed 2, Lyon 13. We didn't lose the Test for poor batting or bowling - rather we lost it for dropping half a dozen catches. 305 was quite decent total on that wicket & good catching would have taken Aussies 20 runs either side of 305. Apart from that 72 lead, more importantly, we would have started 2nd innings on 3rd morning, and batted a significant amount of time before the wicket started to explode, which resulted 42/5 start in 2nd innings.

If you can differentiate the types of spinners those two are, and how a rank turner & a dry but true wicket works, you would have understood my point. AUS beat IND at Pune defending 250+ & I'll back any County side to defend that against IND or PAK on such surface with their spin all-rounders, who averages 30 with bat and 40 with ball in FC cricket. On contrary, if I take every Test to that Lord's condition (between ENG-WI), even Ben Stokes will become Malcom Marshall, while Ashwin, Yadav, Yasir & Herath will contribute more with bat than ball - it's not that spinners can't bowl on grassy wickets, rather, there is not point picking them, if Ganguly or Younis Khan or Soumya Sarkar gets better purchase from the track just for placing it on right spot.

I hope someone puts this post to BCCI people - surely they should understand how to act.

You're losing 30 overs, it's not like you suddenly need to make an instant raging turner/green carpet to ensure you get a result.

 

[MMHS]

So you get caught making up and exaggerating multiple stats and your reaction is to just brush them off and make up another blatantly false 'fact'? Neat.



At which point you fine and ban them for a poor over rate. It is nearly always possible to add more time on at the start of a typical days play in Asia in test match cricket right now.



You're losing 30 overs, it's not like you suddenly need to make an instant raging turner/green carpet to ensure you get a result.

I am losing a full day - 10 minutes or rolling, 24 hours sun burn & cooling down in nigh & one morning moisture, followed by scorching Sun after lunch on Day 5. Over rate penalty is still there - still don't see Captains rushing on to complete 30 overs in a session, when his team is facing a big chase on 4th innings. If I make it 7 hours in Asia + 30 minutes extension for slow over rate, batsmen under cosh will change box twice every session - then their sponsors will happily pay those pennies ICC is going to charge them - in fact, their paid media will glorify their brand ambassadors to save a Test with bravery, despite blood in the box.......... .

The crowd part you can keep with yourself - I know, if South Asia doesn't exist how long Cricket will survive.

 

[kingusama92]

It's a good idea but I think it's time to cut matches down to three days.

3-day tests with a meaningful Test championship is the way forward.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

105 overs in a day is ridiculous. People already have trouble watching 90. Even the most avid test fans don't watch the full 90. And why the hell would spectators stay for even longer than they're already used to?

This is idiotic and will be counterproductive. There will be a lot more draws no matter what pitches you serve up. You can mark this damn post down. If you force the issue of creating pitches that will ensure results in 4 days, the game will become imbalanced and favoured towards bowlers. No one wants to watch HTB's like Anderson and Ashwin all the time.

Bowlers will be fatigued after a day's play and injuries will become far more common. People might think right now it's only 15 overs more but it will add up over time.

If ICC are really eager to shorten the test game, then it would be better to shorten the day instead of days.

 

[Shutdown Corner]

If they can fit 112.5 overs per day...or at least 105. I'm fine with it. Tests have only been 5 days since 1973. Might force all teams to bowl more overs of part time spin to get through the allotted overs.

But honestly current format is best and I hope enough countries oppose it to keep the status quo.

 

[Napa]

ICC should discard these matches from Test status. This is categorically designed to cover Poms incapability of playing spin & producing a half decent spinner who makes the team on bowling merit.

I think a few innovations are needed. Let a local team play a one day game on the pitch before the Test begins so that you begin with a 2nd day wicket. That way, spinners will not be penalized.

Also, let every innings end after the first 8 wickets are down instead of 10 wickets.

Finally, if you really want to give the bowlers a bit more so that most games get over in 4 days, just make the width of the bats narrower!

95 or 105 overs a day are too much.

 

[Specialisttailender]

How about 100 Overs match with 2 innings ?

 

[CanadianG00se]

I think a few innovations are needed. Let a local team play a one day game on the pitch before the Test begins so that you begin with a 2nd day wicket. That way, spinners will not be penalized.

Also, let every innings end after the first 8 wickets are down instead of 10 wickets.

Finally, if you really want to give the bowlers a bit more so that most games get over in 4 days, just make the width of the bats narrower!

95 or 105 overs a day are too much.

These all suggestions just makes no sense. Used wicket will give more advantage to captain winning the toss. And then ending an inning at 8th wicket? Why even have 11 players then?
Changing things just for the sake of changing will have adverse effect. Test cricket will gradually lose interest among fans except Australia and England.
No matter how you look at it, Test cricket is already too long and boring. Fans now a days dont even pack the stadium in Odis unless if its an ICC event, so even making 4 day test wont automatically bring in fans. Whether one likes it or not, club cricket is the future. Sooner the board realizes this the better.

 

[Napa]

These all suggestions just makes no sense. Used wicket will give more advantage to captain winning the toss. And then ending an inning at 8th wicket? Why even have 11 players then?

There are ways to neutralize the effect of a toss, it needs innovative thinking. For example each team could bat for the first 4 wkts, then the next team, and then back to the first team etc.

8 players bat, and the other 3 are included in the team as specialist bowlers. 5 specialist batsmen + 1 wkt keep + 2 ARs + 3 specialist bowlers. The 3 specialist bowlers do not get to bat.

If you don't innovate to make games shorter, then moving to a 4 day game will mean even more draws. There has to be innovation, as the 5 day game is in danger of dying.

 

[CanadianG00se]

There are ways to neutralize the effect of a toss, it needs innovative thinking. For example each team could bat for the first 4 wkts, then the next team, and then back to the first team etc.

8 players bat, and the other 3 are included in the team as specialist bowlers. 5 specialist batsmen + 1 wkt keep + 2 ARs + 3 specialist bowlers. The 3 specialist bowlers do not get to bat.

If you don't innovate to make games shorter, then moving to a 4 day game will mean even more draws. There has to be innovation, as the 5 day game is in danger of dying.

Each team bat after 4 wickets? might as well call it a baseball.

Like i said, no matter which way you look at it, test cricket is just not feasible. Experimenting with test cricket will not bring crowd or funds. CNZ just recently released a statement in which they claim that every test match they host, it incurs a loss of half million dollars. If you want to save test cricket first find a way to host games less economic challenging. Until then muddling with test cricket will just speed up its demise.

 

[MMHS]

I think a few innovations are needed. Let a local team play a one day game on the pitch before the Test begins so that you begin with a 2nd day wicket. That way, spinners will not be penalized.

Also, let every innings end after the first 8 wickets are down instead of 10 wickets.

Finally, if you really want to give the bowlers a bit more so that most games get over in 4 days, just make the width of the bats narrower!

95 or 105 overs a day are too much.

105 overs will definitely kill the game to boredom. As Chief mentioned, 105 overs in these days isn't manageable (modern players are not Cyborg like Larwood & Tyson). If it's forced upon, what'll happen in a 3 hours last session is even worse as we'll see Captains using part-timers in the last session with defensive fielding & bowling line, to preserve his regular bowlers & make up over rate - result 88/1 in last session, which might be as long as 48 overs. It should be other way actually - the game ends at bang on 6 hours, or rather the last over starts before 360th minute - and teams will be forced to bowl 15 overs/hour, regardless of whatever; any time loss will be made up from lunch & tea session - AT THE END OF DAY, WHATEVER OVERS ARE UNDER-BOWLED X 6 runs as penalty, imposed against whichever team is culprit + individual fines & ban's imposed in that match. It's like Yellow & Red card - if a player (s) deliberately wastes time, BAN him for the remaining part of the match from batting or bowling (BAN Umpires as well if possible, who to me are the worst culprit in these slow over-rate business). Even, it can go to as harsh as timed out (It's the 10th rule of getting a batsman out, so far none in Test, but 1 or may be 2 had been given out in FC, for delay in entering the ground) in 4th innings for individuals, wasting time in an effort to save a match. Banning player (s) for future match (s), doesn't hurt you much when you are in trouble at present.

For the other idea of 8 wickets innings, it actually will make the game even slower & defensive - now teams under pressure or behind will know that they have to manage a draw in 4 days with 16 wickets ........

Starting the match on Day 2 wicket or taking out toss doesn't help much either for 2 reasons.

1. This will make the game imbalance as it gives the tourists (or the side given the option to choose prior to the match) undue advantage. For example, say on a dry wicket both team know what team to pick, but the team having the choice will go with 4 spinners and bat first. Opposite will be on green tops - 2 pacers & 5 dibly dobley all-rounders.......

2. Unless the wicket is doctored (that's even worse for the game), these 4 day formula takes out the classic strategy of cricket - bat first, bat well & put pressure with attacking field. Because, it's almost certain that unless it's a doctored, under-prepared wicket, the side batting 1st has very little chance to win the Test. On a good batting wicket, they can put 500+ in 9 hours, then it's a bore feast as the 2nd team simply'll go for time killing. If they are all-out for 200, there's absolutely no chance for them to make a come back after conceding just a lead of 100, because of duration - think about that Eden Test in 4 days!!!!! We 'll start to see most teams opting for fielding first on standard wickets & that's without spinners in equation - be it start even on a Day 2 wicket.

The fundamental of Test cricket is that it tests your temperament, mental toughness, physical endurance (it's the least energy extracting game in an hour, but you need to preserve energy & focus for 5 days), perfection (Test batting is the most perfectionist job in any sports - one mistake & you might spectator for 5 days) & fatigue - that's why British gave the name "Test Cricket" - it truly tests the person on his mental capacity. It should be kept like that - get 20 wickets for the lesser expenses than your opponent. Ideally, it should have been timeless, but we need to bind it in some time frame, so 5 days & 450 overs come & it's perfectly OK.

The beauty of the game is in the thrill & drama that it can create over 5 days - and every epic needs a minimum time to complete. In other way - imagine Nasir Hussain making Mughal - E - Azam for 100 minutes duration - that ends in soap opera. Test cricket should be kept like as it is or why bother to play at all? I don't mind if they stop Test cricket all together, instead of those hybrids.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Teams struggle to get in 90 overs in a day with the pathetic over-rates, time wasting breaks etc.. so how on earth are 105 overs going to be squeezed in? Add to that day light conditions in each hosting countries tend to very also depending on time of year making days cricket completion harder.. 4 day tests means more draws or teams trying to manufacture results probably with buffet and gift runs etc.. like we see in county cricket.. Thanks but no thanks! All this because of more T20 cricket and burn out? what utter nonsense!

 

[Buffet]

Bad idea to make it 4 day. 5th day pitches have produced some fun to watch batting under challenging conditions in Asia. 5th day may not make huge difference where wickets become flat as matches go on, but many times they provide a different challenge.

Also, 90 overs don't get bowled most of the times in a day. Let's first ensure that all teams bowl 90 overs every single day in tests.

 

[Napa]

105 overs will definitely kill the game to boredom. As Chief mentioned, 105 overs in these days isn't manageable (modern players are not Cyborg like Larwood & Tyson).

Agreed

For the other idea of 8 wickets innings, it actually will make the game even slower & defensive - now teams under pressure or behind will know that they have to manage a draw in 4 days with 16 wickets ........

Harder for a team under pressure to draw with 16 wkts than with 20 wkts.

Actually I meant to write that each side should get 7 wkts, not 8. That way you can have 5 specialist batsmen, 1 wkt kp, 2 ARs and 3 specialist bowlers. No need to play the last 3 wkts, who wants to see Agar, Mishra or Rashid bat anyway?

The fundamental of Test cricket is that it tests your temperament, mental toughness, physical endurance (it's the least energy extracting game in an hour, but you need to preserve energy & focus for 5 days), perfection (Test batting is the most perfectionist job in any sports - one mistake & you might spectator for 5 days) & fatigue - that's why British gave the name "Test Cricket" - it truly tests the person on his mental capacity.

I mostly agree with you. However, it is true that for the modern world 5 days is too much. Tests differ from LOIs by letting a batsman bat as long as he can survive. The option to reduce it to 7 wkts per innings preserves essential feature of Tests.

We have to make the innings shorter somehow or the other. Maybe making the bats half an inch or even 3 quarters of an inch thinner may be the easiest solution. Not sure if a thinner bat would favor pacers or spinners more.

The beauty of the game is in the thrill & drama that it can create over 5 days - and every epic needs a minimum time to complete. In other way - imagine Nasir Hussain making Mughal - E - Azam for 100 minutes duration - that ends in soap opera. Test cricket should be kept like as it is or why bother to play at all? I don't mind if they stop Test cricket all together, instead of those hybrids.

While I can respect you for feeling that way, the reality is for most fans 5 days is too much, which leads to Test matches losing lots of money for some countries.

 

[CanadianG00se]

Agreed



Harder for a team under pressure to draw with 16 wkts than with 20 wkts.

Actually I meant to write that each side should get 7 wkts, not 8. That way you can have 5 specialist batsmen, 1 wkt kp, 2 ARs and 3 specialist bowlers. No need to play the last 3 wkts, who wants to see Agar, Mishra or Rashid bat anyway?




I mostly agree with you. However, it is true that for the modern world 5 days is too much. Tests differ from LOIs by letting a batsman bat as long as he can survive. The option to reduce it to 7 wkts per innings preserves essential feature of Tests.

We have to make the innings shorter somehow or the other. Maybe making the bats half an inch or even 3 quarters of an inch thinner may be the easiest solution. Not sure if a thinner bat would favor pacers or spinners more.




While I can respect you for feeling that way, the reality is for most fans 5 days is too much, which leads to Test matches losing lots of money for some countries.

What makes you think cutting down test cricket to four days would bring fans and money back into test cricket?

Lets face it, now a days fans dont have more than 2-3 hours to spare for entertainment, let alone 4-5 days. Test cricket is and will continue to decline, there isnt anything ICC or anyone can do to stop it.

 

[Napa]

What makes you think cutting down test cricket to four days would bring fans and money back into test cricket?

Lets face it, now a days fans dont have more than 2-3 hours to spare for entertainment, let alone 4-5 days. Test cricket is and will continue to decline, there isnt anything ICC or anyone can do to stop it.

We both seem to agree that Test matches are too long, so reducing the time from 5 to 4 days should help. We disagree on the magnitude of the impact. You think it will have a negligible impact, I think it is worth a try.

 

[Prince of Pakistan]

We are going to see a lot of boring draws then especially in Asia. Due to bad light there isn't more than 80 overs a day possible in these Asian countries.

 

[GLORY OF '92]

Terrible idea.

Tests are the bedrock of Cricket. Messing with it is idiotic

 

[MMHS]

Agreed



Harder for a team under pressure to draw with 16 wkts than with 20 wkts.

Actually I meant to write that each side should get 7 wkts, not 8. That way you can have 5 specialist batsmen, 1 wkt kp, 2 ARs and 3 specialist bowlers. No need to play the last 3 wkts, who wants to see Agar, Mishra or Rashid bat anyway?




I mostly agree with you. However, it is true that for the modern world 5 days is too much. Tests differ from LOIs by letting a batsman bat as long as he can survive. The option to reduce it to 7 wkts per innings preserves essential feature of Tests.

We have to make the innings shorter somehow or the other. Maybe making the bats half an inch or even 3 quarters of an inch thinner may be the easiest solution. Not sure if a thinner bat would favor pacers or spinners more.




While I can respect you for feeling that way, the reality is for most fans 5 days is too much, which leads to Test matches losing lots of money for some countries.

I can predict something - we'll see in in couple of years time -

1. If ECB can bluff BCCI to make it 4 day Test (PCB will agree gleefully, no issues there), they will play 7 home Tests next year against Asian teams forr 4 days, on damp wickets & 7.5 hours/day schedule, having 4/5 like Stokes, Woakes, Curren, Moeen and few from several "all-rounders" bowling at 125km for a FC bowling average of 35 & batting average of 25 ......... in their line-up, literally taking out Ashwin, Yadav, Jadeja, Yasir, Shadab & Asghar out of the game .......... then revert back to 5 Day fixture for 2019 Ashes

2. If BCCI isn't fooled, you'll see ECB "parking" the idea for few years, until next time IND/PAK tours ..... and 2019 Ashes will be again 5 Days affair.

There could be many, many, many reasons for declining/reducing Test cricket and I agree with most of those, but I am not sure who is the bigger tool here - those who believe that reducing 1 day out of 5 will make it more lucrative for viewers or those who think they can sell that idea.

 

[CanadianG00se]

We both seem to agree that Test matches are too long, so reducing the time from 5 to 4 days should help. We disagree on the magnitude of the impact. You think it will have a negligible impact, I think it is worth a try.

The reason why i think that cutting and chopping test cricket will not work is because its not addressing the actual cause of concern. You need to ask yourself, why is test cricket not appealing to younger audiences? Why is test cricket failing to generate revenues in most countries( except for Big 3), and why do you think fans would flock stadium if test matches is 4 day and not traditional 5 day game?

Im not a test fan, i just browse scorecard and if have time will watch few highlights here and there. Im sure millions of fans just follow scorecard and dont generally watch ball by ball. Most cricket fans don't generally have time to sit and watch test cricket for 4-5 days.
You've to understand in todays world for a product to survive it needs to be economically viable and able to self sustain. Sadly, in most countries test cricket is loss making venture. Lets say test cricket is made 4 days, and fans still dont flock the stadium and/or dont watch live ball by ball. So, despite changing the game the outcome is still the same, lack of fans. If there are no fans watching live or on tv, it will not generate the desired revenue, in other words Test cricket will continue to suffer.

So, in my opinion the real cause is lack of interest among fans and i honestly dont see making 4 days would change anything.

 

[Napa]

I can predict something - we'll see in in couple of years time -

1. If ECB can bluff BCCI to make it 4 day Test (PCB will agree gleefully, no issues there), they will play 7 home Tests next year against Asian teams forr 4 days, on damp wickets & 7.5 hours/day schedule, having 4/5 like Stokes, Woakes, Curren, Moeen and few from several "all-rounders" bowling at 125km for a FC bowling average of 35 & batting average of 25 ......... in their line-up, literally taking out Ashwin, Yadav, Jadeja, Yasir, Shadab & Asghar out of the game .......... then revert back to 5 Day fixture for 2019 Ashes

2. If BCCI isn't fooled, you'll see ECB "parking" the idea for few years, until next time IND/PAK tours ..... and 2019 Ashes will be again 5 Days affair.

There could be many, many, many reasons for declining/reducing Test cricket and I agree with most of those, but I am not sure who is the bigger tool here - <b>those who believe that reducing 1 day out of 5 will make it more lucrative for viewers or those who think they can sell that idea.</b>

Giving a pass to your mind-reading ECB & BCCI...

If you are running at a loss then you can either 1) increase revenues OR 2) cuts costs. So it is possible that 4 day matches will cut losses simply by cutting costs even if viewership does not increase. As for selling the idea, money talks. If ECB is pushing the idea and other boards come to believe that 4 day matches will have lower losses than 5 day matches, then you can bet that it will happen.

 

[90MPH]

Test cricket shouldn't be tinkered much with.

This is too radical of a step.

 

[CadPakFan]

I for one think test cricket is fine as it is.

 

[90MPH]

Pure 20/20 Slog fans who have no interest in Test cricket will not be converted just because the Test game is reduced by a day.

Those type of fans will never be persuaded because Test cricket will appeal to those that either have grown up with it or have the attention and patience that form of the game requires.

So I hope the ICC thinks again on this one.

 

[hadi123]

It really won't have a big impact on the future of tests if they shorten the matches from 5 days to 4 days. Yes, there are problems with tests at the moment and these are mainly to do with the T20 generation. However, shortening tests from 5 to 4 days still won't really convince the T20 lovers to have more interest. Also changing it to 4 days may affect tactics and teams may become more negative to try and play for a draw. 5 day tests are beautiful; there is a reason most First Class games are only 4 days as 5 day matches only deserve to be played by the world's best and that is what makes International cricket so beautiful.