I support this move, pretty much because it will empower BCCI and CA more than they are now. Which means proliferation/more consideration given to 20/20 cricket, which is the future of cricket
This move, if it goes through, in my opinion, will lead to the sidelining of international cricket in favor of cricket leagues like BBL, IPL, etc. How so, one may ask ? Well, this proposal makes series bilateral by agreement and emphasizes that sides are not obligated to take on financially losing tours. From India's perspective, this means bye bye to series involving West Indies, New Zealand, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe. From Australian perspective, it means bye bye West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe. From England's perspective, it is bye bye West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe.
What are they going to do with the excess free time ? Probably upgrade India-Australia and India-England to 5 test series(ashes is already 5 test series).
but that still does not fill the gap completely, so it will lead to expansion of the 20/20 scene.
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the reason i support this move. Future of cricket is not test cricket, however enthralling some matches can be and however more skilled the competition is.
The future of cricket is 20/20 on a franchise model. Virtually every team sport- from Soccer, Football, hockey, basketball,baseball (and rugby too i think, though i dont follow Rugby) exist primarily as private franchises competing in a league as the fundamental model, with international competition being ancillary and a side show.
Cricket is the only exception and this is the reason cricket has failed as a global sport.
99% of sportsmen- like any other professional, want to make money. Playing for your country is a 'great honor' but last i checked, honor does not buy you a house or feed you. Money does. If we want cricket to blossom in associate nations, tinkering with the FTP, having the occasional World Cup appearance 'carrot', etc. is of little consequence to 99% of the players from these nations.
However, dreams of making it big playing for Chennai SuperKings or Mumbai Indians ? Yep, that 1-2 million dollars a year ( and this price too will rise with the gaining net worth of 20/20 franchises and eventual schedule expansion) will go a long way to motivate your average Afghan or Bermudan cricket enthusiast to take it seriously.
Yes, this is an idea that has little favor from cricket fans, particularly the non-subcontinentals, who are stuck in a horrid mixture of 'statistical gluttony and traditional reverence' that test cricket engenders.
But seriously, test cricket is an epic fail of a format. 5 days of playing. Result not garanteed, even if weather does not interfere. Asymetric number of matches per series. match can be over in 3 days, leading to disgruntled fans who have tickets for the last two days and set aside time from their precious schedule for it.
The only thing Test cricket has it going, strictly from a playing perspective, is that it requires the most skill. Which is why Test cricket should be relegated to 3-5 tests a year at most, akin to 'international friendlies' in soccer.
it is a proven fact that appealing to greed also appeals to quality- since even the best of the best sportsmen are greedy and will follow the money. How do you turn a profit, attract the top level talent & promote the sport on a global scale ? you start a franchised league. Which at the moment, only 20/20 caters to. maybe 50 overs cricket can be turned into one too.
And one of the biggest benefit, as a sport, cricket would derive from relagation of international cricket in favor of franchise cricket, is that players (who would ultimately be free agents, instead of citizens forever playing for one team only) will earn their reputation fair and square, based on their skills and contributions, rather than the jingoistic nationalistic fandom that is central to cricket.