The stupidity of Adminstrators at times......

[Black Thunder]

I know The ACB is the best run sporting organization in the country. Is by far the most profitable sport in the country, and is making millions upon millions every single year. Their turnover in 2002 (and i assume 2003 would've been no different but no figures have been released) was miles in front of what the ARU managed to pull of during the RWC (and that is once every 20 years event).

But sometimes you've gotta wonder.

I know Zimbabwe were out here for the test series earlier this summer, but why when you have India and Australia (probably the two best one day teams in the world) competing in a series, would you put Zimbabwe into the competiton.

There are 12 games in this series, 8 of which the result is almost 99.9% garunateed because Zimbabwe haven't even been close to competing in this comp yet.

They struggled to a 10 run victory against a virtually Australian under 24 team, and than got smashed by them the next game. It was a more an Australia C team than an Australia A team, cause realistically only Clarke, Haddin, Hauritz and maybe North and Tait would've got a gig in an Aus A team from that team.

And now the real stuff has started, it has just been annihilation.


Now its easy to say who should've come over than.

England are pretty ordinary themselves and everyone is over them after seeing them here last year.

South Africa* and the West Indies are off competing in their own competition over in South Africa.

*South Africa would've been the preffered option making it the three best teams in the world in the series (despite SAF's poor showing in the WC)

But the use of common sense would give you two options.

a) Invite Sri Lanka out here for the tournament - a bit of pre cursor to the upcoming Sri Lankan tour, and a team which is a world class standard side (particularly when on song). Although they did have a tough time of it in last years VB Series.


or b) other option which i think is the best, would be to break tradition and have a four team tournament, and co-host a series with New Zealand, involving Aus, Ind, NZ and Pak.

Getting India and Pakistan together would be a challenge but i'm sure a bit of $$$ (which the ACB has plenty of) incentive would change their hearts abit.

And a break from the monotonous "three teams play each other endlessly to see which two teams play in a best of three final series" which is just a redicolous format IMO.

But instead of seeing absolute carnage like today, and lopsided results, the Australian public would see a proper competition with the two best OD sides in the world, and two of the next best OD sides in the world.

It would actually be a competition.

Rather than what we have now.....

but it's all abit too late for that.

[DaveW]

The three-team tournament is horribly monotonous.

If there's one stand-out team then the whole tournament is just going through the motions.

If there's two stand-out teams then all the prelimary games (all 12 of them) are just warm ups to the best-of-3 finals.

Only if you get that rare tournament with three evenly matches teams - like Aus/NZ/SAf two seasons ago - will you have an interesting competition.

[Black Thunder]

Originally posted by DaveW
The three-team tournament is horribly monotonous.

If there's one stand-out team then the whole tournament is just going through the motions.

If there's two stand-out teams then all the prelimary games (all 12 of them) are just warm ups to the best-of-3 finals.

Only if you get that rare tournament with three evenly matches teams - like Aus/NZ/SAf two seasons ago - will you have an interesting competition.

exactly. it is getting redicolously boring.

They need to come up with new ideas.

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
or b) other option which i think is the best, would be to break tradition and have a four team tournament, and co-host a series with New Zealand, involving Aus, Ind, NZ and Pak.
That's actually a pretty good idea. The format of the tournament could do with a bit of a shake-up.

So you could have two Aus v Ind, two Aus v Pak, one Aus v NZ and one Ind v Pak in Australia. Six games for six major venues; that works well.

And obviously the other 6 games - two NZ v Ind, two NZ v Pak, one NZ v Aus and one Ind v Pak in New Zealand.

If Aus & NZ both make the finals, stage the first in the country that finished second and the 2nd & 3rd in the country that finished top. (Or perhaps all in the country that finished top?)

If only one of Aus & NZ make the finals, stage them all in the one country.

The scheduling of an Ind v Pak finals series wouldn't matter a whole heap.

Of course it means that CA host less ODIs and less ODIs involving Australia... something they may not be prepared to give up.

[bluechampion]

Agree, but doesn't the ICC wield the massive power of the calendar? Due to the 'test championship table' isn't World Cricket on a massive 4 year rotaion, and isn't that, ultimately, what decides who's free to play us in any given summer?

I'd love to see us incorporate NZ and their opponents every year and have a massive 4 nation series across two countries. We share seasons, but the problem would be that Mr. Packer wouldn't like televising games that start at 6 in the morning from NZ.

I'd also love to see Aus A get a run regularly in the one-day series. Despite S. Waugh's wimpy assertion that it's bad for the game to have Australia A take all the (underdog) support away from Australia proper, I'd like to see it happen.

[Black Thunder]

Well Australia currently play 8 games in the series. You guys are proposing they play 6 in a four-way series.

I would think the best thing is to play each team three times, and therefore each team plays 9 games. Even more revenue.

Plus there'd be 18 games (9 in each country - slightly less than what Australia re getting now).....but i'm sure they could bargain it so that Aus got 12 games and NZL got 6, because the way it currently is now New Zealand only get 5 games (all v Pakistan).

[Black Thunder]

Originally posted by bluechampion
Agree, but doesn't the ICC wield the massive power of the calendar? Due to the 'test championship table' isn't World Cricket on a massive 4 year rotaion, and isn't that, ultimately, what decides who's free to play us in any given summer?



I don't see it as being a problem with the ICC as currently New Zealand and Pakistan are playing in a 5-match one day series on the other side of the Tasman.

All thats happening is the two competitions are joining together and we're ditching Zimbabwe because they're not competitive.

It wouldn't affect the timing of any tours at all.

[bluechampion]

That wasn't a comment based on the idea of combining the NZ series. More a general comment that we can't simply choose our opponents each summer to ensure an interesting competition.

[grayham]

The idea of having 3 teams in the first place is so we can play a minor nation. Its been happening for years.

[ViperV10]

It sounds like an ok idea, however I think you will see diminished interest because Australia isn't playing as many games / isn't playing as often (I know that I don't really give a **** who wins if Aus aren't playing in the current VB series type....its just the way I am I guess). This may change though if there are 4 teams legitimately fighting it out to make the final...but I still think I wouldn't really care who wins or loses.

Just out of interest, in case I am wrong re australia playing less games....how many do they play in the current VB series format?

bluechampion :
I'm all for Aus A playing in the tournaments more often...however it isn't a matter of them taking status away...it is a matter of Aus A and Aus playing off in the final like the series years ago when the "a" team was involved.

Won't happen again for that reason.

[bluechampion]

I agree that was farcical, but my comments re: Steve Waugh are accurate, and were made after the last ever Aus A vs. Aus game (the one where Healy played for Aus. A after his dumping from the one-day side).

He wasn't happy that the crowd got behind Stuart Law's men and not his.

[ViperV10]

All I can say to Steve Waugh in that situation is stiff ****.

The fact that the 2 teams would be too strong though rules out the fact that it would happen again. Even though I would like to see it, it would become a little predictable and dare I say it...boring.

[bluechampion]

Yes, in a few years we'd be complaining about that and wishing for Zimbabwe...

[GOALden Hawk]

Well we can't play the best teams every year - the likes of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh have to tour sometimes.

Question is, why hasn't Bangladesh or Kenya been invited out yet? How are Kenya meant to improve if they don't ever get to tour countries like Australia?

[manmountain]

25 years ago Sri Lanka were easy-beats in the way that Zimbabwe are now. These teams need to be included to improve and increase the level of competition worldwide. It might be a bit monotonous now, but hopefully it leads to having more and more competitive nations worldwide and in 50 years, we might have 12 strong countries which adds more variety.

It risks becoming a bit elitist if we say to Zimbabwe "you're not good enough to play against us" and we play the same four or five countries every year. Australia and other strong nations have an obligation to help smaller nations to improve and gain more exposure in their home countries. The next Grant Flower might take up cricket in Zimbabwe after watching this series at home, who knows?

Reading back over that I realise I sound like an excerpt from an ICC press release but so be it.

[ViperV10]

Originally posted by bluechampion
Yes, in a few years we'd be complaining about that and wishing for Zimbabwe...

I detect a hint of sarcasm...

I wouldn't be complaining about it at all...I would be all for Aus A being in the comp to blood youngsters etc. The people I don't think would be for it are the players of the opposing nations. They would either take it 2 ways.

1) They would treat it as a challenge - to beat Australia's 1 and 2 teams...."it would make us better"

or

2) They would simply not turn up because the results are foregone conclusions.

I myself think that a lot would take the approach mentioned in number 2.

I also think it is great having teams like Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Kenya etc here. Not only does it give them a chance to play against a top line country in cricket, but it gives them a chance to play cricket. Both are vital to the success of the game.
These teams can only improve...why not let them try.

[Disgustipated]

Other countries dont schedule their year around being available to play in Australia.

[Black Thunder]

people seem to be missing the point abit here.

I wouldn't neccasrilly propose a competition every year with our touring side and New Zealand and their touring side.

But this year was a great opportunity to change things around a little.

They had India out here, and had the opportunity to give things a bit of different taste, and have four of the best teams in the world playing in a competition together.

Instead, they wasted that opportunity and invited Zimbabwe to play the two best OD teams in the world and were never going to compete.

Obviousbly, with the way we rotate through all the teams we have to play all the weak teams at some point, but season 2003/2004 was a golden opportunity for the ACB to take advantage of having the two best teams out here, but they missed out big time.

[TheSheik]

Originally posted by Black Thunder


I would think the best thing is to play each team three times, and therefore each team plays 9 games. Even more revenue.



I agree with having a fourth team, it makes it more interesting to see who makes the finals plus at least there should be some genuine contests.

This season they could have kept the three they have and just added another. Zimbabwe need to be included where possible to assist with their overall development so just adding another Test match nation will assist with that even though it is in the shorter form of the game.

Even though there would be more games not involving the Aussies, if the cricketing public know they will see a good quality game they should support it.

Playing each team three times seems like a fair system and means more revenue for the ACB. The other bonus is that some of these additional games that don't feature the Aussies could be played in some of the rural areas (like Bendigo for example) to help promote the game. The country folk would be ecstatic to have a cricket match of that stature in their town and should respond in droves.

[crudbucket]

Personally, I would liketo see a four way tournament, but one with a difference ...

Three test nations and one of the ICC One Day teams that haven't yet qualified for Test status ..

For example :

2001-02 Australia, South Africa, New Zealand AND Netherlands.
2002-03 Australia, Sri Lanka, England AND Canada.
2003-04 Australia, Zimbabwe, India AND Kenya.
2004-05 Australia, West Indies, Pakistan AND Namibia.

Sure, some games have the potential to be routs, but consider the good that would come out of it for these "lesser" countries.
Who knows, in 20 years time, there may be 20 nations playing test cricket instead of 10 as is the case now.

I think that would be fantastic for cricket...

[TheSheik]

Excellent suggestion 'Cruddy', this is the line I have taken in regards to why the Zimbabweans should be here now. If we want world cricket to be a brighter and more exciting spectacle, then we have to bring in more teams capable of matching it with the rest. The fact that Kenya played so well in the World Cup and struck a chord with most of the cricket following public suggests that we are all ready to see some new countries play and unveil their emerging stars.

[Cupestar]

Originally posted by crudbucket
Personally, I would liketo see a four way tournament, but one with a difference ...

Three test nations and one of the ICC One Day teams that haven't yet qualified for Test status ..

For example :

2001-02 Australia, South Africa, New Zealand AND Netherlands.
2002-03 Australia, Sri Lanka, England AND Canada.
2003-04 Australia, Zimbabwe, India AND Kenya.
2004-05 Australia, West Indies, Pakistan AND Namibia.

Sure, some games have the potential to be routs, but consider the good that would come out of it for these "lesser" countries.
Who knows, in 20 years time, there may be 20 nations playing test cricket instead of 10 as is the case now.

I think that would be fantastic for cricket...

If I could expand on this idea...

Rather than inviting them for the series proper, why not give them a learning tour, which would also double as warm-up games for the series teams. They could play a couple of games against Aus A, then a game each against all of the participating nations. The games could be played in regional centres like Darwin, Cairns, or Albury, to take the summer one-day carnival to more of Australia, and those teams would gain valuable experience.

[fearlessone77]

Damn!!! I thought I could whinge about Fred in here.

[crudbucket]

Originally posted by Cupestar
If I could expand on this idea...

Rather than inviting them for the series proper, why not give them a learning tour, which would also double as warm-up games for the series teams. They could play a couple of games against Aus A, then a game each against all of the participating nations. The games could be played in regional centres like Darwin, Cairns, or Albury, to take the summer one-day carnival to more of Australia, and those teams would gain valuable experience.

Your point is valid, and has definite merit. (we all seem to agree that the "minnows" have got to pushed up to the top level asap for the good of the game)

Although I still think you improve quicker when you play the big stuff...Much like young footballers seem to kick along quicker when playing in the ones than if they are left to run around in the magoos.

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by Cupestar
If I could expand on this idea...

Rather than inviting them for the series proper, why not give them a learning tour, which would also double as warm-up games for the series teams. They could play a couple of games against Aus A, then a game each against all of the participating nations. The games could be played in regional centres like Darwin, Cairns, or Albury, to take the summer one-day carnival to more of Australia, and those teams would gain valuable experience.

Great idea Cupestar.

The developing nations have to have the chance to play every side around the world, theres no doubt about that. But at the same time, it is a bit ridiculous to expect Zimbabwe, and even Kenya to come out here and take on the finalists from the last world cup. Them getting slaughtered every match doesnt help anyone.

It would perhaps be like a curtain raiser at footy matches, or minor fights on a title fight night. Get Kenya out here, get them to play Aus A and some state teams, maybe one game against the big boys each, and get them some experioence that will help them.

[CatManDo]

Another idea I just read on the match recap on baggygreen - 2 divisions in world cricket. Sorry if this idea has come up already... but I suppose each year, the best team in the bottom division would earn a spot in the top division, and one would be relegated.

Has potential... for one dayers at least. Would be nice to see a top division of NZ, Aus, Pakistan, India, SA and Sri Lanka, and the 2nd division could start with England, Windies, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Bangladesh and the Solomon Islands. :D

[The Scarecrow]

I think it would be a better idea playing Australia 'A' in the mix awell, atleast then things might look up for the VB series, Zimbabwe needs a lot of work before they will ever be up to the same standards as India, Australia, and other one day teams.

[goaldrush]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
I know The ACB is the best run sporting organization in the country. Is by far the most profitable sport in the country, and is making millions upon millions every single year. Their turnover in 2002 (and i assume 2003 would've been no different but no figures have been released) was miles in front of what the ARU managed to pull of during the RWC (and that is once every 20 years event).

But sometimes you've gotta wonder.

I know Zimbabwe were out here for the test series earlier this summer, but why when you have India and Australia (probably the two best one day teams in the world) competing in a series, would you put Zimbabwe into the competiton.

There are 12 games in this series, 8 of which the result is almost 99.9% garunateed because Zimbabwe haven't even been close to competing in this comp yet.

They struggled to a 10 run victory against a virtually Australian under 24 team, and than got smashed by them the next game. It was a more an Australia C team than an Australia A team, cause realistically only Clarke, Haddin, Hauritz and maybe North and Tait would've got a gig in an Aus A team from that team.

And now the real stuff has started, it has just been annihilation.


Now its easy to say who should've come over than.

England are pretty ordinary themselves and everyone is over them after seeing them here last year.

South Africa* and the West Indies are off competing in their own competition over in South Africa.

*South Africa would've been the preffered option making it the three best teams in the world in the series (despite SAF's poor showing in the WC)

But the use of common sense would give you two options.

a) Invite Sri Lanka out here for the tournament - a bit of pre cursor to the upcoming Sri Lankan tour, and a team which is a world class standard side (particularly when on song). Although they did have a tough time of it in last years VB Series.


or b) other option which i think is the best, would be to break tradition and have a four team tournament, and co-host a series with New Zealand, involving Aus, Ind, NZ and Pak.

Getting India and Pakistan together would be a challenge but i'm sure a bit of $$$ (which the ACB has plenty of) incentive would change their hearts abit.

And a break from the monotonous "three teams play each other endlessly to see which two teams play in a best of three final series" which is just a redicolous format IMO.

But instead of seeing absolute carnage like today, and lopsided results, the Australian public would see a proper competition with the two best OD sides in the world, and two of the next best OD sides in the world.

It would actually be a competition.

Rather than what we have now.....

but it's all abit too late for that. All teams except for Zimbabwe have their own Administrators. Zimbabwe have the government looking after them.

[Mog]

While I don't think there is much value in sending the first XI, Australia A should go on more tours to countries like Canada, Bangladesh, Holland, Kenya and Namibia. With the long term decline of cricket likely in the West Indies, England and South Africa, it can't hurt to build up the small nations and give them exposure to quality cricket. While I doubt they'd challenge Aus A in the beginning, I can't see why after a few year (along with A sides from India and New Zealand) they can't improve to the evel of being competitive. It would make the World Cup less of a chance to build up some averages too.
I recall reading somehitng about the smaller nations organising a regular tournament and tours among themselves, did that ever go ahead?

[EagleBlue]

Why dont we go further, and suggest (or perhaps suggested before this series) that we give an extra bonus for whoever finishes top of the ladder. An example could be that we have a best of 2 finals, in which case the team that finishes 2nd must WIN the series to take the crown. (i.e. The team that finishes top theoretically already has a 1-0 lead in the best of 3) It would add interest into what already is becoming a dull series, not to mention more interest in the bonus points which in this series serves no benefit.

[CharlieG]

Would love for next season to have a four-way comp with South Africa, India and the West Indies... the world's four best sides. Would be almost impossible to organise though, I guess. With the finals, they'd have to be here for 4 weeks or something like that... but if it could possibly be done, CA should try it.

[crudbucket]

But as you can't have the same teams here each summer, it would make for a couple of boring follow-up summers..