Test Four-and-a-half day tests

[Chiz]

100 overs a day for days 1-4, 50 overs on day 5 (450 overs total). Any time lost to rain or other delays could be made up on day 5 (up to a maximum of 50 overs).

Think this would create more results, and would prevent the time wasting tactics often used by teams that can't win the match.

 

[footyfan1978]

Yeah, nah.
Four days of 7.5 hours play each, for day/night Tests with last session under lights the longest session of day.
Five days of 6 hours play for pure daylight Tests.

 

[GROTTO]

Lets go back to timeless tests.

 

[Chiz]

Yeah, nah.
Four days of 7.5 hours play each, for day/night Tests with last session under lights the longest session of day.
Five days of 6 hours play for pure daylight Tests.

Except teams are struggling to bowl 90 overs in 6.5 hours - you'd need closer to 8.5 hours to play a full 450 over test in four days.

 

[footyfan1978]

Except teams are struggling to bowl 90 overs in 6.5 hours - you'd need closer to 8.5 hours to play a full 450 over test in four days.

Cycles of a few teams here and there, get below a decent over rate has been part of Test cricket for a number of decades.
It is simply a matter of forcing the odd side that does, that to get a wiggle on. We not changing the whole thing to make that the new norm.

 

[Chiz]

Cycles of a few teams here and there, get below a decent over rate has been part of Test cricket for a number of decades.
It is simply a matter of forcing the odd side that does, that to get a wiggle on. We not changing the whole thing to make that the new norm.

I think a bit part of slow over rates is relatively new, eg DRS reviews, mandatory concussion tests, etc. so bowling 90 overs in 6 hours (or 110 in 7.5) is a tough ask outside of spin-friendly conditions.

Anyway, I'm not proposing to accept slow over rates, just that the overs would still have to be bowled regardless of the over rate.

 

[cricketnut14]

100 overs a day for days 1-4, 50 overs on day 5 (450 overs total). Any time lost to rain or other delays could be made up on day 5 (up to a maximum of 50 overs).

Think this would create more results, and would prevent the time wasting tactics often used by teams that can't win the match.

don't mind this theory.

so essentially day 5, the last session wouldn't exist unless making up for lost time or time wasting tactics employed by batting sides, ensuring enough light is left etc.

98 overs a day is feasible as we already do it to make up for rain and we play 100 overs in a odi.


having a roof on all venues would be ideal though - although never gonna happen.

 

[Gethelred]

Test cricket could probably start earlier in the day really, 8:30am as opposed to the 10am. Extend each session by 30 minutes to compensate, and you've got a recipe for more overs.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Test cricket could probably start earlier in the day really, 8:30am as opposed to the 10am. Extend each session by 30 minutes to compensate, and you've got a recipe for more overs.

I think that'd be a pretty quick way to kill off crowd interest. It's a pretty long day for fans as is.

 

[Gethelred]

I think that'd be a pretty quick way to kill off crowd interest. It's a pretty long day for fans as is.

I think that people have been talking about how things will kill off crowd interest for nigh on three decades now, and administrators have spent their entire time trying to make cricket as 'marketable' as they can and it hasn't had much effect as far as bringing the crowds back.

Test cricket is a niche product, requiring a specialized skillset that is rarer than T20 requires and features some overlap but not as much as those concerned need to think. Cricket needs to move deeper into its niche rather than trying to appeal to a broader demographic, because its appeal is never going to be broad; it remains the truest distillation of cricket.

There's also the fact that tests are viewed via streaming more than attendance anyway, and are rewatched at leisure.

Name the person whose eyes could be torn from the screen yesterday, or in Headingley in 2019. Are you really telling me that you don't think people would watch that more often, as the increased overs made draws increasingly harder to obtain?

 

[anchor man]

Test cricket could probably start earlier in the day really, 8:30am as opposed to the 10am. Extend each session by 30 minutes to compensate, and you've got a recipe for more overs.

The skippers would still work out a way to not bowl the required number of overs. Especially those that are struggling.
That is an extra one and a half hours. Maybe 12 over. And that would be a real push., or pull, depending.

 

[Gethelred]

The skippers would still work out a way to not bowl the required number of overs. Especially those that are struggling.
That is an extra one and a half hours. Maybe 12 over. And that would be a real push., or pull, depending.

92 overs in a day sounds ******* sublime.

 

[1990crow]

I'm open to anything that reduces the likelihood of a draw. I hate draws. In any sport.
I'd prefer an option of if after 5 days a side only needs 100 runs to win, or to take two or three wickets, the game gets extended into day 6.
Should only take a session extra so not major toll physically, and would drastically reduce the quantity of draws in test cricket.

 

[anchor man]

92 overs in a day sounds ******* sublime.

92 , but sitting for at least another hour and a half just to get close.
I am an oldy, but a goody, I remember when we saw 100 eight ball overs. ALL bowled in the 6hours, some times more than the 100, depending on the position of the game.
It wasn't until the Windies came up with four, five pronged pace attack that the umpires and administrators relaxed the 90 over minimum per day.

 

[Chiz]

don't mind this theory.

so essentially day 5, the last session wouldn't exist unless making up for lost time or time wasting tactics employed by batting sides, ensuring enough light is left etc.

98 overs a day is feasible as we already do it to make up for rain and we play 100 overs in a odi.

That's right - it's not a huge change from what currently happens when it rains, but it would get additional overs in advance.

If, for instance, day 4 is washed out, the current system allows for 368 overs across the other four days, while this change would allow 400 overs - an additional session, which would create more results (for context, the SCG test was 391 overs).

 

[Chiz]

Test cricket could probably start earlier in the day really, 8:30am as opposed to the 10am. Extend each session by 30 minutes to compensate, and you've got a recipe for more overs.

Current start time is usually 10.30am, with stumps at 6pm (including the additional half hour to make up the overs). I'd suggest starting half an hour earlier (10am) and finishing half an hour later (6.30pm) - still three 2.5 hour sessions, which is more than enough time to get the overs in. I would also have stumps called when 100 overs are bowled, rather than when the scheduled time is reached, with play to continue beyond 6.30pm if safe to do so (but with heavy penalties for slow over rates).

For day/night tests, you could do something similar.

 

[Chiz]

I think that'd be a pretty quick way to kill off crowd interest. It's a pretty long day for fans as is.

100 overs is what fans currently get in ODIs.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

100 overs is what fans currently get in ODIs.

Probably the least popular form of the game with fans these days.

 

[Chiz]

I'm open to anything that reduces the likelihood of a draw. I hate draws. In any sport.
I'd prefer an option of if after 5 days a side only needs 100 runs to win, or to take two or three wickets, the game gets extended into day 6.
Should only take a session extra so not major toll physically, and would drastically reduce the quantity of draws in test cricket.

I think the draw adds something to test cricket - eg the prospect of the draw kept interest in the Sydney test even when only one side could win. I'm not a fan of draws where a team is greatly assisted by rain.

 

[Chiz]

Probably the least popular form of the game with fans these days.

True, but I don't think that's due to the length of the day.

 

[Around the Wicket]

100 overs a day for days 1-4, 50 overs on day 5 (450 overs total). Any time lost to rain or other delays could be made up on day 5 (up to a maximum of 50 overs).

Think this would create more results, and would prevent the time wasting tactics often used by teams that can't win the match.

Pretty much every Test has a result these days, batsmen suck.

 

[Around the Wicket]

Probably the least popular form of the game with fans these days.

T20's already in rapid decline so if they aren't careful all 3 forms will be struggling.

 

[anchor man]

T20's already in rapid decline so if they aren't careful all 3 forms will be struggling.

T20 collapsing just might lead to much much better cricket.
I remember a commentator of T20 one night saying, "T20 is for those with a short term memory span".
Hopefully he is right and that those with the short term memory can forget about T20.
Maybe it will lead to more real cricket.
.