World Test Championship 2019-2021

[swingdog]

30 years is a little different to a decade.

you can't compare afl to the wtc. during the afl cycle 'premiership season, everyone plays everyone.

the wtc doesn't allow everyone to play everyone during the championship cycle.

in any case i doubt an afl has won the flag but eluded to beat a team for 10 years.


not sure you can say the aussie team are average at the moment. sure the last 2 tests weren't great, but we were ranked #1 prior to that test series.
you could throw a blanket of 3-4 teams at the moment for the best test team - but average is harsh. even if australia are 4th best, thats still not 'average' - it's more a case of - not as per australia's lofty and high expectations.

The number 1 ranking gets passed around between a few countries which suggests test cricket is highly competitive and/or everyone is too weak to have one team dominate. In terms of broadly competitive test cricket, there have been two eras of dominance by a single team - West Indies 1976-1995, Australia 1995-2005.

India is probably the team most likely to attain that sort of dominance.

 

[PhatBoy]

The number 1 ranking gets passed around between a few countries which suggests test cricket is highly competitive and/or everyone is too weak to have one team dominate. In terms of broadly competitive test cricket, there have been two eras of dominance by a single team - West Indies 1976-1995, Australia 1995-2005.

India is probably the team most likely to attain that sort of dominance.

I'm like a broken record but SA 05-15 lost less regularly than Australia's 95-05 team, and won more regularly than the Windies era (in terms of win-loss Test percentage) and only lost 2 series all told in that time, both at home to Australia). It's a sorely underappreciated achievement.

 

[corbies]

I'm like a broken record but SA 05-15 lost less regularly than Australia's 95-05 team, and won more regularly than the Windies era (in terms of win-loss Test percentage) and only lost 2 series all told in that time, both at home to Australia). It's a sorely underappreciated achievement.

From 95-05 Australia lost 25 out of 132 (18.93%).
From 05-15 South Africa lost 28 out of 103 (27.18%).

 

[PhatBoy]

From 95-05 Australia lost 25 out of 132 (18.93%).
From 05-15 South Africa 28 out of 103 (27.18%).

It may have had different time parameters that I applied but there is definitely an extended period in which this applies. I recall having a squiz at it on StatsGuru

 

[PhatBoy]

There's actually some losses I just noticed (not really related to the topic) that I had forgotten existed. I had it in my head that Australia won the FW Trophy in 96-97 4-1. It was actually 3-2, WI won the Melbourne Test before Australia retained the trophy with a win in Adelaide. WI won the dead rubber. Also forgot about the Sydney Test where Mushtaq Ahmed and Ijaz led the Pakistanis to victory. And England in Adelaide winning an Ashes Test during one of their famous periods of sewage in 94-95

 

[melanChronic]

Even if the format sucks, if it finally gets people to take the over rate issue seriously will have been WORTH IT

I remember at the time wondering what was so egregious about the Australians on that particular day in Melbourne as compared to EVERY other day of the series. It seemed every day they struggled to get the allotted overs in.

 

[melanChronic]

Glad to know it wasn't just the King Pinhead being targeted

If only Paine had been suspended for the last two tests lol. Wonder why they changed the punishment.

 

[swingdog]

I'm like a broken record but SA 05-15 lost less regularly than Australia's 95-05 team, and won more regularly than the Windies era (in terms of win-loss Test percentage) and only lost 2 series all told in that time, both at home to Australia). It's a sorely underappreciated achievement.

Agree they were a great team. There's an intangible with the 80s Windies and 00s Australians which is that in most series they went in as favourites (Australia in India the general exception) and opposition teams seemed to psyche themselves out before series had even begun.

 

[BStaff17]

Unfortunately Covid-19 had wrecked the WTC.

I personally feel it does have a place moving forward once covid is over. But the final should be like ODI world cup in a 4 year cycle so gives everyone plenty of time to play everyone home and abroad.

It would also stop certain teams playing each other in tests 3 times in a 4 year period and not playing others.

Since 2010 we travelled to New Zealand for a test series once in 2016. And it was just 2 tests. Thats not enough. Everyone should have to travel to play a series against every test playing nation in that 4 year cycle.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I thought that first fielding session in August at pre-season was bad. Imagine catching a cricket ball in Melbourne in June.

It would be just like Headingley in July.

 

[Park cricketer]

Ideally the following changes must be made to the WTC to make it more meaningful:

1. Conduct the WTC final every 4 years. 2 year cycle is not long enough to know who's the best test team. When you have the ODI world cup every 4 years, there's no reason why we can't have the WTC final every 4 years too, which would be more fitting given the primacy of the format.

2. Make every team play each test team once except Ireland and Afghanistan. This is the tricky part since India don't play Pakistan but if sides are not willing to visit a particular country due to say security concerns, they must at least play in a neutral country, else risk losing points for the match up. I know there's fat chance of this happening with the BCCI but a man can dream..

3. Each test series should be at least 3 matches long. There should be none of these 2 match series as they disproportionately influence the ranking table. This way, the lesser influential boards can get to play more test matches.

4. There are 9 test teams in the championship. So each team has to face 8 teams over the 4 year cycle. The home/away scheduling for each cycle should be such that each team has an even home/away split between the top 4 teams (relative to its position) and the bottom 4 teams in the ICC test rankings at the start of each cycle.



Assuming the cycle starts tomorrow, if we take Australia as an example, the top 4 teams for Australia would be NZ, Ind, Eng and SA. So Aus should face at least two out of these teams at home and two away. Similarly Aus should face 2 out of the bottom 4 teams at home and 2 away. In this way, teams won't get easy home scheduling or tough away scheduling.

5. Two multipliers should feature in the ranking system.

a) The first multiplier should be for away victories. So each away win gets you 10% (just an example, need not be exactly 10%) more points than a home win. I guess you can also reward draws in away venues with 5% more points but don't mind if it's not included. However, an away victory should definitely give you more points. So a test win against India or NZ away is more valuable than a win against the same sides at home.

b) The second multiplier should be inversely related to the ranking position of the teams at the start of the cycle. So the multiplier is the highest for beating the first ranked team in the ICC test rankings table (in present scenario, NZ) and the lowest for beating the lowest ranked team (Bangladesh). So, beating Bangladesh at home in a 3 match series does not give you the same points as beating India at home in a 3 test series.

6. Extra series can be scheduled between boards but cannot be considered towards the championship points.

7. The WTC final should be a 3 match series in a predecided venue instead of a single match. In case of a draw at the end of the 3 tests, the team which finished at the top of the table wins the championship as it rewards consistency of the highest ranked team.

Obviously this is just a crude version and probably has some flaws as well but think this will give a lot more meaning to the WTC than in its present form.

 

[The Passenger]

Ideally the following changes must be made to the WTC to make it more meaningful:

1. Conduct the WTC final every 4 years. 2 year cycle is not long enough to know who's the best test team. When you have the ODI world cup every 4 years, there's no reason why we can't have the WTC final every 4 years too, which would be more fitting given the primacy of the format.

I don't think this is quite a fair comparison. Yes the ODI world cup - same as the Rugby world cup, Olympics, FIFA World Cup - are held every 4 years, but the results between events have zero influence on deciding the winner of the next edition. The players and team performances during 2004/05 season have zero relevance to what happened in the 2007 world cup.

Whereas the nature of test cricket and the vast amount of travel required forces the WTC to be played over an expanded time frame. IMO the two year period is a good compromise between getting as many games/series in as possible, whilst still ensuring it's largely the same players involved. I just think if it was extended to four years, some teams can be vastly different across the competition and I'm not sure that's great for it's integrity.

Regardless, pulling this tournament off was always going to be a struggle in terms of agreement on the best format. Having ******* COVID thrown in, just makes it a total nightmare.

3. Each test series should be at least 3 matches long. There should be none of these 2 match series as they disproportionately influence the ranking table. This way, the lesser influential boards can get to play more test matches.

This I 100% agree with. 2 test series can * right off.

 

[melanChronic]

As we know, most of the problems with the WTC (and international cricket in general) stem from the global governing body (ICC) being hamstrung and toothless against the big three boards (BCCI, CA and ECB).

There is also seemingly a massive problem in how test cricket is broadcast. For the last 20 years it has been sucked into a pay TV vortex that has meant the game has lost many potential followers.

Recently there has been signs of pay TV losing its grip to the new age of internet streaming. I'm not too familiar with how it works outside of Australia, but half of the most recent test series have not been on Foxtel/Kayo. The Pakistan South Africa series is streaming on Youtube for free, which is a promising model but surely it would be tough for PCB to make money through that avenue.

Imagine if there was a centralised cricket streaming platform, run by the ICC? Subscribing would get you access to all international cricket. It would be a great way for the WTC in particular to become more prominent if all series were presented on a coherent platform. The ICC is so anonymous outside of the world cup periods, this would give them agency all year round.

Obviously the big 3 boards wouldn't hand over their home rights (at least initially), but if the other boards could pool together then the ICC could spread the proceeds evenly then it would held them to stay afloat and give them collective power in negotiations with the big 3.

Eventually it could be a way for the ICC to leverage control away from selfish national cricket boards that are killing the game.

 

[iluvparis]

b) The second multiplier should be inversely related to the ranking position of the teams at the start of the cycle. So the multiplier is the highest for beating the first ranked team in the ICC test rankings table (in present scenario, NZ) and the lowest for beating the lowest ranked team (Bangladesh). So, beating Bangladesh at home in a 3 match series does not give you the same points as beating India at home in a 3 test series.

The problem with this multiplier is that it makes it harder for the best team to qualify as they don't get to play the team with the highest multiplier attached (themselves).

 

[PhatBoy]

Of particular significance to no doubt the entire cricket watching world - West Indies are now up to seventh and a win in the last test against Bangladesh would bump us to sixth possibly fifth

 

[Cleavy]

Fixing cricket’s broken system could change the Ashes as we know it

Fixing cricket’s broken system could change the Ashes as we know it

www.foxsports.com.au

potential 3 Test Ashes series every 3 years?!?! hard pass!

 

[konkani]

Been watching some excellent Jarrod Kimber videos recently, loved this one about Neil Wagner:

 

[footyfan1978]

WTC
India win 2-1 or 3-1 and they goto the final.
If England win this Test, what does that do ?

 

[Heisenberg111]

Of particular significance to no doubt the entire cricket watching world - West Indies are now up to seventh and a win in the last test against Bangladesh would bump us to sixth possibly fifth

West Indies are ahead of Sri Lanka and South Africa in the WTC table, but I don't think they are a better team than both those sides. West Indies are yet to win a Test series against South Africa, excluding the one off Test in 1992 and haven't beaten Sri Lanka in a Test series since 2003.

ICC Test rankings give a fairer reflection of where the teams stand at the moment.

 

[Heisenberg111]

WTC
India win 2-1 or 3-1 and they goto the final.
If England win this Test, what does that do ?

England needs to win 3-1 to get to the final.

 

[footyfan1978]

England needs to win 3-1 to get to the final.

Cool, So an England win here is good for Australia as then India win last Test or draw and Australia goto the final.
I like how this WTC is making me take a bit more interest in this other series than I normally would.

 

[PhatBoy]

West Indies are ahead of Sri Lanka and South Africa in the WTC table, but I don't think they are a better team than both those sides. West Indies are yet to win a Test series against South Africa, excluding the one off Test in 1992 and haven't beaten Sri Lanka in a Test series since 2003.

ICC Test rankings give a fairer reflection of where the teams stand at the moment.

Honestly right now the only things beating us if SA came to India to play a full strength West Indies, are nortje, Elgar and Markram. Their team has so many gaps and their other good players are THAT out of form that I think our bowling would be more than good enough to compete and the batting with dowrich and holder to return would almost be enough to scrape home.

I think we will beat Sri Lanka in the upcoming series

 

[Heisenberg111]

Honestly right now the only things beating us if SA came to India to play a full strength West Indies, are nortje, Elgar and Markram. Their team has so many gaps and their other good players are THAT out of form that I think our bowling would be more than good enough to compete and the batting with dowrich and holder to return would almost be enough to scrape home.

I think we will beat Sri Lanka in the upcoming series

I think, it will be a close series, could see it being drawn 1-1 like last time. When is West Indies playing South Africa next ?

 

[Voice of the G]

I think, it will be a close series, could see it being drawn 1-1 like last time. When is West Indies playing South Africa next ?

Not sure about any one else but personally struggle to understand why have this World Test Champion Series.

 

[Heisenberg111]

Not sure about any one else but personally struggle to understand why have this World Test Champion Series.

So, you are saying that West Indies vs Sri Lanka series shouldn't be part of the World Test Championship ?