The World Test Championship

[Wickets]

How many matches in recent years have actually gone into the last 2 sessions of day 5 and not been bore draws?

[sanskritsimon]

Originally Posted by Wickets

How many matches in recent years have actually gone into the last 2 sessions of day 5 and not been bore draws?

I think this misses the point. Changing the number of days available will change the game on the first four days too. It will encourage batsmen to bat more aggressively and this will mean bowlers won't have to work so hard for their wickets.

[Hector]

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon

I think this misses the point. Changing the number of days available will change the game on the first four days too. It will encourage batsmen to bat more aggressively and this will mean bowlers won't have to work so hard for their wickets.

This. It will change the fabric of a match massively. Tactics will be markedly different with less time involved.

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon

This is a daft idea. No wonder England are backing it -- they have no appetite for test cricket and no intention of nurturing a domestic system that can produce proper test players. The fans will love it though -- most posters on here are bored stiff by proper test match cricket.

If England have no appetite for test cricket, why do they always play the most test matches year after year?

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon

I think this misses the point. Changing the number of days available will change the game on the first four days too. It will encourage batsmen to bat more aggressively and this will mean bowlers won't have to work so hard for their wickets.

Originally Posted by Hector

This. It will change the fabric of a match massively. Tactics will be markedly different with less time involved.

Yes, we'll get back to proper test cricket. Batting to set up a win and decisions on declaration timings, fielding tactics when bowling last and batting for a draw will all come back into play. It's too common these days for one side to amass a big first innings lead then have 2 days or near enough to bowl out their opponent at their leisure.

[Aidan11]

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon

This is a daft idea. No wonder England are backing it -- they have no appetite for test cricket and no intention of nurturing a domestic system that can produce proper test players. The fans will love it though -- most posters on here are bored stiff by proper test match cricket.

Really? I love proper test cricket and I suspect many others on here feel the same.

It's the administrators at the top who are killing test cricket. Certain test countries are unable to play as much test cricket as they can't afford to. They are only given so much funding. The fanbase is there but not the money. The rich get richer in the ICC.

I'm sure you will have seen Death of a Gentleman when it was released a few years ago. Nothing has changed since then.

[mawallace]

And then - if you reduce Tests to 4 days then.. County Championship to 3 days?

[1000yardstare]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cr...mandatory.html

The ECB’s support in principle for four-day Tests follows talks with the Board of Control for Cricket in India last month over creating an annual one-day tournament involving England, India, Australia and one other side.

Finding room for such an event in the current schedule is nigh-on impossible, but trimming several days off the Test calendar would help its organisation.


A number of England’s major Test venues are also understood to be opposed to the change and unhappy they have not been consulted by the ECB.

Many grounds, such as the Oval and Lord’s, regularly sell out the fifth day of Tests in advance each summer even with no guarantee of play, while Old Trafford and Edgbaston have also seen healthy crowds for fifth-day finishes in recent years.

Such revenue would be lost if four-day Tests were made mandatory, while there are also concerns that such a change would alter the nature of the sport, making draws far more likely. Potential for disruption caused by rain, bad light and poor over-rates would also be far greater.



'ECB have advocated for shorter matches in order to ease player workloads'. Absolute lie

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by 1000yardstare

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cr...mandatory.html

The ECB’s support in principle for four-day Tests follows talks with the Board of Control for Cricket in India last month over creating an annual one-day tournament involving England, India, Australia and one other side.

Finding room for such an event in the current schedule is nigh-on impossible, but trimming several days off the Test calendar would help its organisation.


A number of England’s major Test venues are also understood to be opposed to the change and unhappy they have not been consulted by the ECB.

Many grounds, such as the Oval and Lord’s, regularly sell out the fifth day of Tests in advance each summer even with no guarantee of play, while Old Trafford and Edgbaston have also seen healthy crowds for fifth-day finishes in recent years.

Such revenue would be lost if four-day Tests were made mandatory, while there are also concerns that such a change would alter the nature of the sport, making draws far more likely. Potential for disruption caused by rain, bad light and poor over-rates would also be far greater.

Aren't draws part of "proper" test match cricket, though? In the 90s up to early 2010s, about 25-30% matches ended in a draw, but over the last couple of years it's closer to 10%.

But so much for player welfare.

[1000yardstare]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...four-day-tests

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by 1000yardstare

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...four-day-tests

I guess the only player opinion that really matters is that of the Indian captain. Players have to take responsibility as well though. Less than a third of matches over the past two years are going into the final day, in part because modern batters are incapable of batting time. They're not exactly evidencing the skills and abilities that apparently are put to test over five days rather than four.

[1000yardstare]

Originally Posted by Ali TT

I guess the only player opinion that really matters is that of the Indian captain. Players have to take responsibility as well though. Less than a third of matches over the past two years are going into the final day, in part because modern batters are incapable of batting time. They're not exactly evidencing the skills and abilities that apparently are put to test over five days rather than four.

[Aidan11]

Joe Root seems to be in favour of four day tests.

"If you don't try it you don't know" he says.

Well I haven't tried cyanide but I know that it would be wise not to.

[Hector]

Originally Posted by Aidan11

Joe Root seems to be in favour of four day tests.

"If you don't try it you don't know" he says.

Well I haven't tried cyanide but I know that it would be wise not to.

ECB employee agrees with his paymasters, quelle surprise.

On the flip side Nathan Lyon has been forthright in his comments against it.

[Chin Music]

Originally Posted by Hector

ECB employee agrees with his paymasters, quelle surprise.

On the flip side Nathan Lyon has been forthright in his comments against it.

Fairly natural for a spinner to be against four day tests and I have to say that is a considerable factor in my opposition as well as the prospect of weather interruption being more crucial and slow play being a factor.

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by Chin Music

Fairly natural for a spinner to be against four day tests and I have to say that is a considerable factor in my opposition as well as the prospect of weather interruption being more crucial and slow play being a factor.

Lyon presumably emerged from a domestic first class competition that only played 4 day matches. I actually think four day tests might catalyse more competitive matches, something sorely lacking at the moment. I don't see "more draws" as a bad thing. Conversely, talk about four day tests being an affront to the traditions of the game is a load of old horse ****.

However, I'm sceptical that this is being done for player welfare. If that's the ICC's concern, it would be better to cut 4-5 tests from the calendar per year.

[Chin Music]

Originally Posted by Ali TT

Lyon presumably emerged from a domestic first class competition that only played 4 day matches. I actually think four day tests might catalyse more competitive matches, something sorely lacking at the moment. I don't see "more draws" as a bad thing. Conversely, talk about four day tests being an affront to the traditions of the game is a load of old horse ****.

However, I'm sceptical that this is being done for player welfare. If that's the ICC's concern, it would be better to cut 4-5 tests from the calendar per year.

I actually agree that there are too many tests. Always felt that a maximum of six tests at home per summer were enough. As well as that we have 8 overseas tests this winter. That is too many as well. My opinion isn't traditionalism but a concern that deteriorating tracks to assist spinners, slow play and the lack of reserve time might actually stall more competitive cricket. I take your point that a four day cricket might enable a few more battling draws but I see it more likely to produce more fine white ball players, attempting to adapt their game to the longer format but insufficiently well in a manner not dissimilar from messrs Buttler and Bairstow.

[Jock McTuffnel v3]

Originally Posted by Hector

ECB employee agrees with his paymasters, quelle surprise.

On the flip side Nathan Lyon has been forthright in his comments against it.

4 day tests would be bad for spin bowling.

No surprise Root is for shorter tests - can pack his team full of medium pacers and win the odd home series. Get slaughtered away from home less often if rain helps.

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by Chin Music

I actually agree that there are too many tests. Always felt that a maximum of six tests at home per summer were enough. As well as that we have 8 overseas tests this winter. That is too many as well. My opinion isn't traditionalism but a concern that deteriorating tracks to assist spinners, slow play and the lack of reserve time might actually stall more competitive cricket. I take your point that a four day cricket might enable a few more battling draws but I see it more likely to produce more fine white ball players, attempting to adapt their game to the longer format but insufficiently well in a manner not dissimilar from messrs Buttler and Bairstow.

I think we're already at the stage where test cricket is full of white ball players trying to adapt their game. It's just that other country's players seem to adapt better than ours.

[Sir Coolerking]

Originally Posted by Ali TT

I think we're already at the stage where test cricket is full of white ball players trying to adapt their game. It's just that other country's players seem to adapt better than ours.

Compared to when limited overs teams were full of Test players attempting to (and largely failing in the case of England) adapt their game.

Anyway, back to the subject title, have the Indians and Aussies booked their London hotels yet?

[Chin Music]

Zaltzman has also made a decent point on twitter in that bowlers would be disadvantaged more by longer days (for four day tests), teams would approach matches differently and that they would be more susceptible to rain (as I said above). He says that 4 day tests seem to be the wrong answer to a valid question.