ICC Chairman - "Test cricket is dying"

[Park cricketer]

Just predicting here, but I think India and Australia have high chances of playing the world test championship final at Lords in 2021.

Just went through the fixtures of the top teams in the ftp schedule and India and Australia are most likely to be the top 2 teams by the end of March 2021 which is the deadline for the end of the group stage of the first installment of the test championship.

 

[PhatBoy]

Just predicting here, but I think India and Australia have high chances of playing the world test championship final at Lords in 2021.

Just went through the fixtures of the top teams in the ftp schedule and India and Australia are most likely to be the top 2 teams by the end of March 2021 which is the deadline for the end of the group stage of the first installment of the test championship.

Windies are the form side in the world mate

 

[Ishikawa]

I like T20 (not more than tests though), but you could encapsulate said perennial troll of a poster's total knowledge of cricket writing in texta on a teaspoon.

 

[Damon_3388]

Australia is the front runner to actually kick start something like this, we have one of the richest boards, England are even more old fashioned and still have their cricket completely behind a paywall so I'd bank on them doing absolutely nothing while India has no need given it's the most popular sport there anyway.

Why do people act like pay television is an antiquated idea? Australia has never really caught up, and Australian broadcasters have never been as ruthless as those overseas, which is why we still get so much free-to-air sport and entertainment. No other country does it like this anymore, and some haven't for decades.

We're lucky, but we're not ahead of the curve.

 

[to1994]

Why do people act like pay television is an antiquated idea? Australia has never really caught up, and Australian broadcasters have never been as ruthless as those overseas, which is why we still get so much free-to-air sport and entertainment. No other country does it like this anymore, and some haven't for decades.

We're lucky, but we're not ahead of the curve.

I've mentioned this in another thread but there's a good reason for that. Australia has a smaller population then most countries and you go putting things like Cricket behind paywalls and most will just move onto something else, they won't pay and follow it over there. In countries like England they have 3 times the population so they can still do that without completely killing the sport (they've certainly hurt it though).

So it's not some charitable decision or missed opportunity. Australia is too small to really do this without killing a whole bunch of content. It's also too late, Foxtel and the like are really outdated and any meddling that makes an entire sport exclusive to Pay TV will see most people moving onto other interests.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

This time last year you were stating the Big Bash's long term ambition will be it running from October to March and how the increased length of this season would be great so you will forgive me for taking your predictions with a grain of salt.

I think that is still their long term ambition, 20 years from now. Do you disagree?

It's not my fault Seven sucked much of the fun out of this season with shoddy production and forcing crap scheduling.

 

[Topkent]

I dunno so much. Ashes generates mass interest, but:

Aust vs India is always hotly contested, with plenty of feeling.
India vs Pak is always fiercely fought and means a lot.
Aust would hate to be beaten by little brother NZ, and likewise NZ love to bash their big brother given half a chance.

You named 3 series. There's dozens of others that no one including their own countries fans give a **** about

I love test cricket but you have your head up your ass if you can't see a 5 day contest in this modern world of millenials just ain't gonna last

 

[PhatBoy]

You named 3 series. There's dozens of others that no one including their own countries fans give a **** about

I love test cricket but you have your head up your ass if you can't see a 5 day contest in this modern world of millenials just ain't gonna last

I have been following cricket for 29 years and every, single, year, that argument has been raised, whether it’s in regard to odi cricket or T20.

Yet here we are, and the number one ranked side’s captain has made it clear that test cricket is easily his major priority, and the captain of the number 8 ranked side has stated repeatedly that his ultimate goal is to get the West Indies to number one in test cricket, and most normal cricket fans still regard it as the one true format.

 

[Topkent]

Personally I think test cricket should be shortened to 4 days an more juice put in the pitches around the world. It's incredibly boring watching teams rack up 400+ in the first innings and the contest being finished.

Day night tests are the potential saving grace as they allow for swing which causes batsmen to struggle. I love the test matches where if someone scores a hundred or close too it's an achievement.

 

[Bombermania]

I don't think test cricket is dying, its going though a lull after a strong period from the 1980s through to probably five years ago.

In time a new generation of stars will emerge that will bring the game back to live, but I do hold concerns for Aussie test cricket because it seems to be struggling more than it ever has, even in the dark days of the 1980s we at least had Border.

I think a big part of the problem has been the changes made to the schedule. summer should start with the shield then the Brisbane test followed by Perth then the Boxing Day test with Sydney a week later then Adelaide starting Australia day with a international one day series played during January into February.

I know that will read like I don't like change but the problem at the moment is knowing when is the cricket on, the schedule is all over the place with no purpose to it. The big bash should be played separately from the Shield.

 

[Topkent]

I don't think test cricket is dying, its going though a lull after a strong period from the 1980s through to probably five years ago.

In time a new generation of stars will emerge that will bring the game back to live, but I do hold concerns for Aussie test cricket because it seems to be struggling more than it ever has, even in the dark days of the 1980s we at least had Border.

I think a big part of the problem has been the changes made to the schedule. summer should start with the shield then the Brisbane test followed by Perth then the Boxing Day test with Sydney a week later then Adelaide starting Australia day with a international one day series played during January into February.

I know that will read like I don't like change but the problem at the moment is knowing when is the cricket on, the schedule is all over the place with no purpose to it. The big bash should be played separately from the Shield.

It's not a lull, have you seen a millennial kid? They aren't gonna sit around and watch guys keep a patient line outside off on a flat pitch with catching covers. I don't watch the big bash at all but the games don't go hours without anything happening

 

[Bombermania]

It's not a lull, have you seen a millennial kid? They aren't gonna sit around and watch guys keep a patient line outside off on a flat pitch with catching covers. I don't watch the big bash at all but the games don't go hours without anything happening

Besides needing to be continuously connected to their phones and friends, and they have more options than earlier generations but beyond that they are little different than the previous generation that grew up in a golden era where matches were regularly won within three days.

 

[corbies]

I think that is still their long term ambition, 20 years from now. Do you disagree?

It's not my fault Seven sucked much of the fun out of this season with shoddy production and forcing crap scheduling.

I do disagree. I watched 49 of the 57 big bash games this year because I love cricket but its not like any other league that can hold an audience over an extended season. Its target market aren't going to follow it for more than 4 weeks a year over the xmas break because frankly most of them don't really like cricket.

 

[corbies]

Besides needing to be continuously connected to their phones and their friends, and they have more options than earlier generations but beyond that they are little different than the previous generation that grew up in a golden era where matches were regularly won within three days.

When was this? 2018 had the lowest percentage of drawn test matches since 1932 at 10%. Around 45% of matches in the 80s were draws and 30% in the 90s. We've been down to 15-20% over the past decade. Matches are won within 3 days alot more regularly now then back then simply because their is a victor more often.

 

[Bombermania]

When was this? 2018 had the lowest percentage of drawn test matches since 1932 at 10%. Around 45% of matches in the 80s were draws and 30% in the 90s. We've been down to 15-20% over the past decade. Matches are won within 3 days alot more regularly now then back then simply because their is a victor more often.

Not sure why you have focused on the number of drawn tests when I said many matches where won in three days.

The Aussies during the 1990s won many matches in three days, often they would bat first resulting in 500 or 600 then Warnie and McGrath would bowl the other side out in just over a day.

 

[_M_16_]

Personally I think test cricket should be shortened to 4 days an more juice put in the pitches around the world. It's incredibly boring watching teams rack up 400+ in the first innings and the contest being finished.

Day night tests are the potential saving grace as they allow for swing which causes batsmen to struggle. I love the test matches where if someone scores a hundred or close too it's an achievement.

It's not so much the pitches. The reason many tests are one sided is because test cricket talent in general is drying up.

Sri Lanka is a shadow of the team it was in the 90's.
Pakistan whilst capable of upsets here and there, are not the competitive team it once was
England is crapper since it won the ashes
The West Indies keep hanging on to the past great eras and now have a poor test team dominated by party boys who prefer to play 20/20
Australia's whilst still one the leading teams, their golden run is over
South Africa is weaker than the team it was in the mid 2000's-early 2010's.
India is good, and have been for awhile, but with all the young talent they have coming through and the other teams weaker, easy to look dominant, and will no doubt put them in good stead for the next few years.

Wouldn't surprise me if the new golden era is India. West Indies > Australia > India. They are almost the only country putting serious money and support into cricket on their own turf.

It goes all the way to the grass root and developmental level of all countries, and lack of investment and pathways. There is little coming though in talent, and many players lack the technical finesse to bat out a long slow innings, or produce solid bowlers.

 

[Topkent]

It's not so much the pitches. The reason many tests are one sided is because test cricket talent in general is drying up.

Sri Lanka is a shadow of the team it was in the 90's.
Pakistan whilst capable of upsets here and there, are not the competitive team it once was
England is crapper since it won the ashes
The West Indies keep hanging on to the past great eras and now have a poor test team dominated by party boys who prefer to play 20/20
Australia's whilst still one the leading teams, their golden run is over
South Africa is weaker than the team it was in the mid 2000's-early 2010's.
India is good, and have been for awhile, but with all the young talent they have coming through and the other teams weaker, easy to look dominant, and will no doubt put them in good stead for the next few years.

Wouldn't surprise me if the new golden era is India. West Indies > Australia > India. They are almost the only country putting serious money and support into cricket on their own turf.

It goes all the way to the grass root and developmental level of all countries, and lack of investment and pathways. There is little coming though in talent, and many players lack the technical finesse to bat out a long slow innings, or produce solid bowlers.

I agree completely with everything you say but a spicier pitch is a great leveller. It also might encourage countries to develop fast bowlers.

 

[Blue1980]

If you actually look deep into the figures, the advantage for home sides has barely changed in 50 years.

Between 1970 and 1990, in all games with a result, the home side won 62 per cent.

Since 2000, the home side has won 63.3 per cent.

Now the draw numbers I imagine would have changed significantly but as far as results go, you’re statistically barely more likely to get a win at home nowadays than you were 30-40 years ago.

It’s always been tough, and the ability to win away from home is precisely what makes the great sides stand out - the three greatest statistical dynasties in the last 50 years (WI, Aus, SA) have all achieved that status because they could compete overseas.

Doesn’t mean because that was the way in the past it should continue to be so.

I just think for the future of test cricket we need more competitive and closer test matches.

I know the mark of a great side is winning away, but I don’t think the current scenario of say an ashes series where most series are 3-0 or 4-0 to the home team really make for exciting cricket. Sport is at its best when there is an element of unpredictability.

 

[PhatBoy]

Personally I think test cricket should be shortened to 4 days an more juice put in the pitches around the world. It's incredibly boring watching teams rack up 400+ in the first innings and the contest being finished.

Day night tests are the potential saving grace as they allow for swing which causes batsmen to struggle. I love the test matches where if someone scores a hundred or close too it's an achievement.

In 214 innings since the start of last year there have been 22 totals of over 400.

It’s not nearly the chronic occurrence people think it is.

There have also been 32 scores of 100 or less this decade.
(Chance to brag: West Indies own only one of these, Australia 4, SA 4, England 3)
For perspective, there were 13 scores of 100 or lower in the 1990s

 

[PhatBoy]

Doesn’t mean because that was the way in the past it should continue to be so.

I just think for the future of test cricket we need more competitive and closer test matches.

I know the mark of a great side is winning away, but I don’t think the current scenario of say an ashes series where most series are 3-0 or 4-0 to the home team really make for exciting cricket. Sport is at its best when there is an element of unpredictability.

No it doesn’t, but it debunks the myth (which seems to have been perpetuated of late) that somehow cricket was ‘better back in the day’ or that suddenly home sides have started to win with much greater frequency or ease.


The whole point of striving for excellence in test cricket is so that you can win in all conditions against all types of opponents.

I don’t believe there should be artificial attempts to level the playing field when it comes to homogenising conditions.

Should they start putting heaters around the boundary in NZ to make subcontinental players feel more at home?
Mist fans in the UAE to help the English?
It’s a ridiculous proposition, why? Because when you travel to those countries, that’s what you get, you deal with it.
So why tamper with the natural inclination of the pitches?

 

[Topkent]

In 214 innings since the start of last year there have been 22 totals of over 400.

It’s not nearly the chronic occurrence people think it is.

There have also been 32 scores of 100 or less this decade.
(Chance to brag: West Indies own only one of these, Australia 4, SA 4, England 3)
For perspective, there were 13 scores of 100 or lower in the 1990s

Absoloutely useless set of statistics. Tell me how many tests finish with less than 100 run wins or less than 5 wicket wins.

 

[Topkent]

Doesn’t mean because that was the way in the past it should continue to be so.

I just think for the future of test cricket we need more competitive and closer test matches.

I know the mark of a great side is winning away, but I don’t think the current scenario of say an ashes series where most series are 3-0 or 4-0 to the home team really make for exciting cricket. Sport is at its best when there is an element of unpredictability.

Bingo.
How many tests are genuinely alive deep into the 4th innings? No where near enough

 

[PhatBoy]

It's not so much the pitches. The reason many tests are one sided is because test cricket talent in general is drying up.

Sri Lanka is a shadow of the team it was in the 90's.
Pakistan whilst capable of upsets here and there, are not the competitive team it once was
England is crapper since it won the ashes
The West Indies keep hanging on to the past great eras and now have a poor test team dominated by party boys who prefer to play 20/20
Australia's whilst still one the leading teams, their golden run is over
South Africa is weaker than the team it was in the mid 2000's-early 2010's.
India is good, and have been for awhile, but with all the young talent they have coming through and the other teams weaker, easy to look dominant, and will no doubt put them in good stead for the next few years.

Wouldn't surprise me if the new golden era is India. West Indies > Australia > India. They are almost the only country putting serious money and support into cricket on their own turf.

It goes all the way to the grass root and developmental level of all countries, and lack of investment and pathways. There is little coming though in talent, and many players lack the technical finesse to bat out a long slow innings, or produce solid bowlers.

Sorry what?

The West Indies is a poor test team dominated by party boys dedicated to T20?

I’m curious to see if you can name a single player in the current test team, save for Darren Bravo - who only turned to T20 after being suspended by the WICB chairman - who has shown any inclination to lean towards T20.

Pakistan were number 1 in the world less than 3 years ago and are trying to defy the retirement of an obvious all time XI member (Younus) and one of their most successful captains (Misbah).
West Indies are in their most successful period for some time and have won 3 series under Holder, and won tests in England and the UAE in that time. NZ have arguably their strongest or second strongest ever line up.

Not every team will be strong at every moment.

 

[PhatBoy]

Absoloutely useless set of statistics. Tell me how many tests finish with less than 100 run wins or less than 5 wicket wins.

There’s been 5 scores of less than 100 with not all wickets falling

An 8-106 declared
A couple of 150-ish run chases where not all wickets fell (6, 4, 5)


If you want I can do it as a percentage, which would mitigate factors such as small run chases or third innings top-ups, as they happen in all eras.


In the 1990s, 15 per cent of team totals were 400 plus.
In my sample from the start of 2018, 10 per cent of team totals are.

Keep going though. I’m sure your ‘things are getting worse for test cricket because I said so’ approach will trump any meaningful statistical analysis.

 

[PhatBoy]

There is little doubt that test cricket has gone through some pretty boring periods at times where runs have been too easy to come by.

But anyone who hasn’t noticed that trend starting to change surely has to have their head buried in the sand.