What's new

Two-Tier Test system: Is it the way forward?

Are you in favour of a Two-Tier setup for Test cricket?


  • Total voters
    7
The only way the WI can compete internationally is by pooling their resources together. They are a collection of tiny island nations (bar Guyana which's located on mainland South America) with small economies.

Outside of the Olympics, the idea is a non-starter and rightly so.
Bro can this change assuming pakistan is back in top six of icc test ranking is it confirmed pak will be in division 2?
 
The thing is while a 2 div structure sounds great, I don't think deep down Ireland and Afghanistan can afford to play tests or really care about it too much. So having them stack up a div 2 doesn't really help anyone.

Ideally the initial round would just be Div 1 India, England, Australia and South Africa.

Div 2
Pakistan Sri Lanka, Kiwis, Bangladesh and WIndies.

Now what could make or break this is if big 3 would allow themselves to get relegated. If they don't then the whole thing is pointless...but if they do then test cricket could get exciting again.
 
The only way the WI can compete internationally is by pooling their resources together. They are a collection of tiny island nations (bar Guyana which's located on mainland South America) with small economies.

Outside of the Olympics, the idea is a non-starter and rightly so.
Yes perhaps but I'm not in favour of trying to artificially construct things to keep something intact for the sake of it. West Indies must themselves decide if they want to pursue test cricket as a collective rather than the other countries make decisions to try and keep them together.
 
With such a significant change requiring the support of a two-thirds majority of the ICC’s 12 full members, the biggest challenge will be to agree on a system of promotion and relegation between the two divisions to prevent the smaller nations being cut adrift.
This is the crux of the matter and why the two division proposal has failed in the past including back in 2017 when it was last raised. Why would turkeys vote for Christmas ?

The bottom six boards cannot financially sustain themselves without series with India (TV) and to some extent England (travelling fans/tourism), unless some form of compensation is agreed such as organising more white-ball cricket with the Division Two sides.
 
Bro can this change assuming pakistan is back in top six of icc test ranking is it confirmed pak will be in division 2?
The idea has not been formalised into a detailed proposal. Nothing yet confirmed. For approval it needs a two-thirds majority amongst the Test playing nations - which is why it's failed in the past.


Personally I wouldn't be opposed to the 2016 proposal which was 7 teams in Division 1 and 5 teams in Division 2 - but I'd have two teams promoted and two teams relegated after a two year cycle.

Each Division 1 team would play 6 Test series (as they do currently in a WTC cycle) while each Division 2 team would play 4 Test series. If England were relegated, they could still play the Ashes (which has its own context) but the series wouldn't count towards the WTC.
 
FC has one main purpose and that is to produced test players. If you dont have test cricket then there is no need for FC cricket and you could just play 50 and 20 overs to prepare for the same formats at the international levels

There is some merit to having an FC system. Batters batting for long periods of time help hone their techniques and bowlers learn to bowl long spells etc.

Useful skills to have in ODI cricket at least.
 
There is some merit to having an FC system. Batters batting for long periods of time help hone their techniques and bowlers learn to bowl long spells etc.

Useful skills to have in ODI cricket at least.
Totally agree but if you have no FC, you aint spending millions on a competition that isn't needed
 
Just leave Test cricket alone.

Let it breathe and exist as it has for more than a hundred years unhurried, pure, and unapologetically traditional. In today’s fast-paced world where everything must entertain instantly, Test cricket stands apart. It doesn’t beg for attention. It earns respect over time, through grit, craft, and quiet moments that build into unforgettable passages of play.

We already have enough formats catering to the demand for thrill and spectacle—ODIs, T20s, T10s, The Hundred, and even five-over tournaments in Hong Kong. They are designed for the modern appetite, and that’s fine. Let the administrators innovate there. Add lights, colors, countdowns, and gimmicks. But please, for the love of the game, let Test cricket be. It needs no tinkering—no tiers, no manufactured drama, no forced results. Its beauty lies in its raw, extended uncertainty and its demand for commitment, both from players and fans.

Test cricket is not for everyone. And that’s okay. Those who love it don’t ask for change. We’ve woken up early to watch the first ball of a morning session in New Zealand or stayed up deep into the night watching a hard-fought draw in Australia. We understand the rhythm, the pauses, the ebbs and flows. We see the contest in every delivery, not just in the scoreboard. And we cherish the silence between the roars.

So if West Indies are bowled out for 27 or someone nearly breaks Brian Lara’s record, let it be. The beauty of Test cricket is that it reflects life—it can be brutal, boring, brilliant, or bizarre. Records will fall, players will come and go, but the format will remain. These moments, good or bad, form part of the rich fabric of cricket’s history. That history is not meant to be perfect—it’s meant to be remembered.

Test cricket doesn’t need saving. It needs space. It needs trust. It needs to be left alone by those who don’t truly understand it, and loved by those who always have.
 
Good that it happens, I understand the financial difficulties but either the nations which already play very little test cricket(6 7) matches a year stop playing tests altogether or embrace two tier to maintain a good test cricket schedule and competition.
 
Back
Top