ICC Test Championships 2013 Format- timeless tests could come in

[whats_at_stake]

With the ICC inaugural Test Championships to played between May-June 2013 in England between the top 4 ranked nations the ICC is considering a timeless Test for the Grand Final.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/523745.html

I believe that may be difficult as there is only a two week window for the event although I guess it is unlikely a timeless Test will go on for that much longer.

My preferred format:
1 v 4, 2 v 3- 5 Day Test- higher ranked team only needs a draw to get through. There should be an advantage to finishing top 2.

Grand Final: 6 Day Test- higher ranked team needs a draw to win.

Thoughts?

 

[legend166]

Interesting.

Can't say I hate it. I don't exactly trust in the integrity of cricketers (and the people directing them) these days to go out and try and win when a draw is all that's needed.

 

[whats_at_stake]

Agree so perhaps on second thoughts a timeless Test for the Grand Final would be a good option. At best I doubt it could longer then 10 days (unless it rains a lot) and it only happens once every four years anyway. I would still strongly support the semi-finals requiring a draw to give a incentive to finish in the top 2 although perhaps extending it to days instead of 5 could be looked at.

 

[Phone]

yeah the big worry many had about the test championship was a team playing for the draw ala the Shield so this is very good.

 

[whats_at_stake]

I still think playing for a draw is okay for semi-finals- at the end of the day if you are ranked number 1 you deserve more advantages. Still in its proposal stage but I do like the like the idea of a timeless test to determine the ultimate winner.

Shield in Australia should keep the current system but add another day to the match for the final. It is too easy to draw in a 4 day match.

 

[Selective Retention]

The final is 5 days.

 

[Phone]

this is about sorting out the best team in the land - so no they don't deserve advantages. no doubt they'll get some but they don't deserve any.

 

[whats_at_stake]

The final is 5 days.

Not that bad a system then although it is dependant on rain and pitch conditions.

 

[Jolldo87]

I like it. Playing for a draw for defeat the purpose of the competition.

 

[W.C. Fry]

Can just see it now. Win the toss, bat decently in the first innings and you win the game. Noone is going to be able to chase down any kind of score in the 4th innings on a pitch that is older than 5 days. Could you imagine what a pitch on the 7th day would do?

 

[The Passenger]

i don't think finals really work that well in First Class cricket competitions. it's just too easy for the top ranked team to bat it out and win that way.

the shield final should be the pinnacle of the domestic season but it just isn't.

would rather just play a round robin with the top 4 or top 5 ranked teams.

each match has 10 to 14 points on offer. 6 to 10 for the result and 4 for first innings bonuses.

match result:
win outright after leading first innings: 10-0
win outright after tieing first innings: 9-1
win outright after trailing first innings: 8-2
tie after leading first innings: 6-4
tie after tie on first innings: 5-5
draw after leading first innings: 4-2
draw after tie on first innings: 3-3

only 6 points awarded for draws to encourage teams to go for the result.

if more than a days play (86 overs i think it is now. it seems to change all the time) is lost due to rain, and the match is still a draw than the points are awarded as if the game was a tie as it not entirely the teams fault who were playing.

first innings bonuses (2 points awarded for each teams first innings)
401+ runs: 2-0 (batting team v bowling team)
301-400 runs: 1-1
300 or less runs: 0-2

top 5 teams works better because each team will play 2 tests at home and 2 tests away.

quotient to decide points difference. team on top wins. do it every 4 years.

 

[The Speaker]

Sounded good at first, but I suspect it'll be an excuse to make flat, flat pitches.

 

[Bomber Bears]

You'd get scores of 800 first innings, team batting first would just try and bat and bat and bat. Takes out tactical declarations, weather etc, all the things that make test cricket great.

Shit idea IMO

 

[Jolldo87]

You'd get scores of 800 first innings, team batting first would just try and bat and bat and bat. Takes out tactical declarations, weather etc, all the things that make test cricket great.

Shit idea IMO

But so would allowing the side on top to play for the draw.

 

[whats_at_stake]

Yes maybe you may end up with slow batting but it is just for one Test. A final every four years.

At the end of the day I doubt once Dravid, Kallis etc. retire any of the next generation players will have the temperament to bat all day. Test matches will probably be finished within four days in twenty years.

 

[courtjester]

The best idea would be a six day final. Basically forces a result without being it being timeless. If two teams draw after six days, so be it. You'd have to bowl pretty shit to not be able to force a result in six days.

 

[The_Reaper]

The best idea would be a six day final. Basically forces a result without being it being timeless. If two teams draw after six days, so be it. You'd have to bowl pretty shit to not be able to force a result in six days.

If you can't take 20 wickets over 6 days then you don't deserve to be world champions.

 

[whats_at_stake]

If you can't take 20 wickets over 6 days then you don't deserve to be world champions.

What if it rains for three days? Unless you mean cap it at 6 full days of cricket?

 

[Furn]

What about making it 6 days which is 540 overs and limiting first innings to sa y 160 overs that way the teams can't just bat for time in the 1st innings at some point they have to make runs.

I know limited overs isnt real test cricket but 160 overs is heaps its unlikely a team will reach that in english conditions and mosy teams declare about then anyway in a normal 5 day game.

It will just stop the possiblity of the top side batting for 3 days and making 700 and basically ending the match.

even go 170 that leaves 200 overs for the 2nd innings even if both teams bat the whole 170.

 

[pluga_4]

not many tests are drawn these days that go the full 450 overs.

so as long as it's not affected by bad weather, light etc there should be a result.

a 6th day (hopefully) allows for lost time and if its in england then you probably need that 6th day.

 

[whats_at_stake]

The thing is though it could rain for multiple days. For the Grand Final you need a winner (unless you go with dual champions) which is why I think one Timeless test every four years is not overly onerous.

 

[rickyp]

But so would allowing the side on top to play for the draw.

Unless a draw is exactly that, a draw. Why don't they just make it so that if a draw occurs there is no winner? Or there is a drawn series?

 

[whats_at_stake]

Unless a draw is exactly that, a draw. Why don't they just make it so that if a draw occurs there is no winner? Or there is a drawn series?

You need to have a winner for the Test Championships. You could declare dual winners which they would do if a ODI World Cup final was rained out.

One Timeless test every four years is okay. I think it works well.

They have a two week window to play this event. Day 1-5 days play semi-finals with the higher team going through if there is a draw.

Then from days 9 onwards start the Timeless Test. This gives three days rest to the players and I doubt the Test will last longer then the seventh day anyway at most.

 

[Phone]

you've either got to have a 3 or test series or a single test match with very good ground rules to prevent a) rain wrecking it and/or b) a team batting for 1000/bowling not to take wickets but to prevent scoring eg spinners bowling down the leg side. so i'm fine with a timeless test

 

[rickyp]

You need to have a winner for the Test Championships. You could declare dual winners which they would do if a ODI World Cup final was rained out.

One Timeless test every four years is okay. I think it works well.

They have a two week window to play this event. Day 1-5 days play semi-finals with the higher team going through if there is a draw.

Then from days 9 onwards start the Timeless Test. This gives three days rest to the players and I doubt the Test will last longer then the seventh day anyway at most.

But what if we don't have a winner? I see a timeless test being a real non-event where the team who bats first goes at 2 an over for 3 days and can't lose after ensuring the team batting second will bat on a 7th day pitch