World Test Championship 2019-2021

(Log in to remove this ad.)

melanChronic

Club Legend
Apr 1, 2009
2,391
3,679
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Throw the whole concept out? Wtf?
Haha I was fairly pi**ed and fairly taking the piss last night. But it is weird and annoying that they're trying to add context to the traditional format, and concurrently making it look cheap and tacky in line with limited overs cricket. They need to be focusing on distinguishing the product from the short form.

Just when England had gone to a classy cream and returned to the knit vest over the rubbish they'd been wearing for the last 10 years. Speaking of the vests, it particularly ruins the spectacle when half the players out there don't even have their number visible anyway. Looks very park cricket.
 

Blue1980

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 9, 2011
10,210
9,662
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Haha I was fairly pi**ed and fairly taking the piss last night. But it is weird and annoying that they're trying to add context to the traditional format, and concurrently making it look cheap and tacky in line with limited overs cricket. They need to be focusing on distinguishing the product from the short form.

Just when England had gone to a classy cream and returned to the knit vest over the rubbish they'd been wearing for the last 10 years. Speaking of the vests, it particularly ruins the spectacle when half the players out there don't even have their number visible anyway. Looks very park cricket.
Yeah it doesn’t bother me too much, I think we will all get used to it in the next few months and won’t even think about it bit after a while

Following in from this, should we have a thread for drunken posters?
 

big_e

Premiership Player
Apr 28, 2008
4,801
12,329
Your Wi-Fi
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wycombe Wanderers, 76ers
Haha I was fairly pi**ed and fairly taking the piss last night. But it is weird and annoying that they're trying to add context to the traditional format, and concurrently making it look cheap and tacky in line with limited overs cricket. They need to be focusing on distinguishing the product from the short form.

Just when England had gone to a classy cream and returned to the knit vest over the rubbish they'd been wearing for the last 10 years. Speaking of the vests, it particularly ruins the spectacle when half the players out there don't even have their number visible anyway. Looks very park cricket.
They're not trying to make it look cheap and tacky, they're trying to make it more accessible. It's a massive help to casual viewers, new viewers and in fact any time you see someone new. There are some players it's easy to pick out on the field, but for others, having a number and a name there helps a lot.
 

melanChronic

Club Legend
Apr 1, 2009
2,391
3,679
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
They're not trying to make it look cheap and tacky, they're trying to make it more accessible. It's a massive help to casual viewers, new viewers and in fact any time you see someone new. There are some players it's easy to pick out on the field, but for others, having a number and a name there helps a lot.
Yep, fair enough I can see why they would bring it in, still looks naff though and unless you are at the game with binoculars I don't think you even get much of a look at a fielder's name on the back. If the player is batting or bowling then their name is on screen at all times.

I will say that England executed it a lot better than Australia, so if it must stay I hope that Australia look at toning down the bold-face italic monstrosity factor.
 

Howard Littlejohn

Brownlow Medallist
May 30, 2006
14,025
7,281
Canberra
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Was excited about this concept but it's definitively a fail if it has ushered in numbers on the backs in tests. Disgrace.
I barely noticed the number to be honest. On TV at least you mostly only see the bowler's back, maybe the non-striker, everyone else is front or side on for the bulk of the action. And its handy for distinguishing fielders. Not the disaster more sponsorship logos would be, and unlike big bats and day-night games it doesn't impact the way the game is played. Keep them, remove them, makes very little difference.
 

Howard Littlejohn

Brownlow Medallist
May 30, 2006
14,025
7,281
Canberra
AFL Club
North Melbourne
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27295281/new-world-test-championship-playing-conditions
Over-rate penalties
As previously announced, captains will no longer bear a bigger brunt for slow over-rates than the rest of the members of his team, and there will be no danger of suspension for being behind the required rate. Instead, all players will face equal fines, and teams will lose WTC points if they are found to be behind the rate.
  • For each over a team is found to be short, a Penalty Over will be incurred
  • For each Penalty Over, there will be two WTC points deducted from the team's total
  • All players will be fined the same as the captain for over-rate offences - 20% of their match fee per Penalty Over, up to a maximum of 100%
  • There will be no escalation in penalties for repeat offences
A quirk of this is that teams playing longer series are at more risk.
A win in a longer series is worth less points (the same number of points are available across a series but laid out on a match by match basis).

A team that wins a match in a three match series, receives 40 points but loses two per lost over.
In a five match series, those two deducted from 24 points. Along with there 40% more chances to offend in the longer series.
It rewards short series by reducing risk.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

melanChronic

Club Legend
Apr 1, 2009
2,391
3,679
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27295281/new-world-test-championship-playing-conditions


A quirk of this is that teams playing longer series are at more risk.
A win in a longer series is worth less points (the same number of points are available across a series but laid out on a match by match basis).

A team that wins a match in a three match series, receives 40 points but loses two per lost over.
In a five match series, those two deducted from 24 points. Along with there 40% more chances to offend in the longer series.
It rewards short series by reducing risk.
So having bowled 88 overs on day 2, do Australia already cop two of these penalty overs? England were also laughably behind the over rate on day 1. Will be interesting to see if the loss of points system actually results in teams addressing slow over rates.
 

Cleavy

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 28, 2004
28,075
15,944
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
So having bowled 88 overs on day 2, do Australia already cop two of these penalty overs? England were also laughably behind the over rate on day 1. Will be interesting to see if the loss of points system actually results in teams addressing slow over rates.
negative points coming up then... guessing some allowances to be made for DRS?
 

Howard Littlejohn

Brownlow Medallist
May 30, 2006
14,025
7,281
Canberra
AFL Club
North Melbourne
negative points coming up then... guessing some allowances to be made for DRS?
Apparently an allowance is given for DRS, but if you can't get in 90 with the extra half hour you deserve the fine and points loss IMO. That time is supposed to cover those types of delays, not be a standard part of the day's play.

Umpires will do calculations across both innings, which I guess means a faster over rate in the second innings could wipe off the deficit in the first. I would still prefer 30 overs a session, cut into lunch and tea if needed (one benefit this series being the Nine crew in the studio would be on less), but that's another issue.
 

Santana

Premiership Player
Feb 28, 2008
3,029
989
........
This whole thing just comes off as a gimmick. How can you determine a champion off a one off test match? And why predetermine where that final will be? Why not just give the final to the top of the table team? That's an insane advantage to England. Could you imagine a scenario where you had Australia and New Zealand play off in a final and the final was somewhere like in India? There would barely be anyone in the crowd. How embarrassing would that be?

And a format that stretches across multiple years and you don't have all the teams play each other at least once? Joke


Really comes off as a pathetic attempt to keep test cricket relevant.
 

Park cricketer

All Australian
Nov 29, 2018
974
1,242
AFL Club
Adelaide
This whole thing just comes off as a gimmick. How can you determine a champion off a one off test match? And why predetermine where that final will be? Why not just give the final to the top of the table team? That's an insane advantage to England. Could you imagine a scenario where you had Australia and New Zealand play off in a final and the final was somewhere like in India? There would barely be anyone in the crowd. How embarrassing would that be?

And a format that stretches across multiple years and you don't have all the teams play each other at least once? Joke


Really comes off as a pathetic attempt to keep test cricket relevant.
I quite like the idea of a predetermined venue which allows for the possibility of a neutral venue in test cricket which I think would be cool.

Imagine India and Australia battling it in the inaugural test championship final at Lords. Although I agree that England will get a huge advantage if they make the final.
 

Santana

Premiership Player
Feb 28, 2008
3,029
989
........
But imagine if it was someone like New Zealand and South Africa at lords though. They'd be struggling to get crowds at that one. Test Cricket isn't a popular enough spectator form of the game to have two teams playing away at a neutral venue. It's just really silly imo

I take it the ICC are banking on India finishing in the top 2 because of their home form to make sure there are decent crowds there.
 
Mar 5, 2011
29,534
22,027
Australia
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fremantle, WA, Associates
But imagine if it was someone like New Zealand and South Africa at lords though. They'd be struggling to get crowds at that one. Test Cricket isn't a popular enough spectator form of the game to have two teams playing away at a neutral venue. It's just really silly imo

I take it the ICC are banking on India finishing in the top 2 because of their home form to make sure there are decent crowds there.
TV matters much more than live crowds.
 

Park cricketer

All Australian
Nov 29, 2018
974
1,242
AFL Club
Adelaide
But imagine if it was someone like New Zealand and South Africa at lords though. They'd be struggling to get crowds at that one. Test Cricket isn't a popular enough spectator form of the game to have two teams playing away at a neutral venue. It's just really silly imo

I take it the ICC are banking on India finishing in the top 2 because of their home form to make sure there are decent crowds there.
Decent crowds where?

There was hardly any Indian crowd in the test matches vs India in England last summer. It's a different story for the LOIs though.
 

Santana

Premiership Player
Feb 28, 2008
3,029
989
........
TV matters much more than live crowds.
Agreed but it will be pretty embarrassing if you have a world championship final and the ground is half full at best. At least with the one day world cup finals they have always been sell outs.

Decent crowds where?

There was hardly any Indian crowd in the test matches vs India in England last summer. It's a different story for the LOIs though.
Good point, the Indian fan base definitely are more keen on going to odi's than tests but you would still get a better crowd with them than most.


What happens if England doesn't qualify for the 2021 final? And I still can't get my head around a one off test match. If the home team gets in won't they just completely cook the pitch to their advantage? They really thought this out.
 

Howard Littlejohn

Brownlow Medallist
May 30, 2006
14,025
7,281
Canberra
AFL Club
North Melbourne
This whole thing just comes off as a gimmick. How can you determine a champion off a one off test match? And why predetermine where that final will be? Why not just give the final to the top of the table team? That's an insane advantage to England. Could you imagine a scenario where you had Australia and New Zealand play off in a final and the final was somewhere like in India? There would barely be anyone in the crowd. How embarrassing would that be?

And a format that stretches across multiple years and you don't have all the teams play each other at least once? Joke


Really comes off as a pathetic attempt to keep test cricket relevant.
I'm no fan of the one-off, predtermined, venue.
Hopefully it will change, and I'm guessing to some extent its forced by the seasons. If England were be on top, they can't play in February and more than New Zealand could in August. Unfortunately there is no way the boards would allow a month to aside for a proper series, or three months or whatever for varying contingencies.
 

Starburns_

Super Moderator
Mar 30, 2011
48,157
89,949
Out searching for Pokemon
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Colts, Stars, The Exers
But imagine if it was someone like New Zealand and South Africa at lords though. They'd be struggling to get crowds at that one. Test Cricket isn't a popular enough spectator form of the game to have two teams playing away at a neutral venue. It's just really silly imo

I take it the ICC are banking on India finishing in the top 2 because of their home form to make sure there are decent crowds there.
Take any test not played in Australia or England and the crowds are sparse at best. There's some decent arguments against it, but this isn't one.
 
Top Bottom