Big 3 killing cricket stone dead

[Skyliner]

Oh, yes. October-November would be ideal for IPL. Playing the IPL in very hot summer months sucks. This year, there is talk of an IPL 2 in Dubai in October. I reckon they will try to shift the IPL eventually. It would suck to play in such summer heat. We can't even sit in the audiences without sweating.

Right, currently the IPL is played at the hottest time of the year, March to May being the Indian summer. Spectator comfort would be a big issue.
Yes, October through November in the post-monsoon season would be an ideal time for it.

 

[Skyliner]

Jarrod Kimber ‏@ajarrodkimber Jun 17
"I wish they'd keep Tests as it was in the golden era, played on **** pitches, openly racist, no women allowed and run by toffs".

But society in general has evolved over time. All sports bodies would have undergone change over time to eliminate ***ist and racist attitudes and to become more representative. Test cricket is a game, it can't be racist or ***ist.

I think test cricket is still in a golden era. There is an obsession with people needing to be at the ground in an age where it is possible to follow the action ball by ball on any number of media platforms. Sports audiences in general are declining in many countries. Here in NZ, there is constant angst about the numbers of people attending rugby matches. But TV revenues now make up the biggest part of revenues for the major sports, and this means people will be paying to watch the sport at home on their TV. They can't be expected to pay twice.
Although half empty grounds are not a great look, perhaps there needs to be a greater understanding that the paying public are actually watching - remotely.

Instead of looking to change the game itself, they need to look to give the overall series's more meaning and standing by instituting the Test Championship.

 

[Flem274*]

I want healthy test cricket, but there's not many other sports where one nation is expected to prop another nation up financially, so why should "the big 3" prop up the small nations?

Why invite mediocre sides to play tests that you'll win in 3 days? Etc etc.

Every nation's cricket board needs to ensure their own nation's competitiveness. They aren't responsible for other nations, surely.

rubbish

it's better for everyone to have 8 or even more good teams. better teams means a better spectacle which means more popularity and more money.

otherwise it becomes what some boards are trying to create now - a boys club circle jerk. imagine if cricket had as many good teams as international rugby league? it would be dire.

 

[watson]

The Golden Age of cricket had only 2 teams and no one seemed to mind back then, or even now - "I wish the Golden Age of cricket had 4 Test teams" is not something you hear very often.

Point being, spectators like quality cricket and a close brutal contest, and that's what matters. Therefore, it makes sense to me to have 3 Divisions where the top and bottom teams from each division get promoted and demoted. The cricket within the divsions will be more closely fought and therefore sharper because the teams will be about even, and winning will matter more.

You could easily run the experiment with T20 cricket, fine tune it, and then try ODI's and Test cricket if the system works and the fans are interested.

 

[Skyliner]

The Golden Age of cricket had only 2 teams and no one seemed to mind back then, or even now - "I wish the Golden Age of cricket had 4 Test teams" is not something you hear very often.

Point being, spectators like quality cricket and a close brutal contest, and that's what matters. Therefore, it makes sense to me to have 3 Divisions where the top and bottom teams from each division get promoted and demoted. The cricket within the divsions will be more closely fought and therefore sharper because the teams are about even, and winning will matter more.

Even Australia had slumps in their history. Remember Kim Hughes the crying captain? They couldn't win a home series for most of the 80's. They got smashed 5 to nil in South Africa back when Bill Lawry was captain. 20 years from now Bangladesh might be the best test team in the game. All test nations deserve respect, they deserve to be treated as equals.

To expect all test matches to be close is asking to much. In every sport there will always be top and bottom teams on a table, and blow outs in contests between top and bottom teams, but the places on the table shift over the years.

What's close about England getting hammered 5 to nil on 2 occasions in Australia over recent times? I think you are coming from a blinkered point of view here, the 'icon' series's are often one-sided, despite what your perception may be. Moreover, test cricket only has 10 nations, there's not enough for 3 divisions. The big 3 need to quit the arrogance : where are England and India in the test rankings currently? Outside the top 3.

 

[Skyliner]

What happened the last time Australia went to India? Hardly close test cricket. Thankfully it wasn't 5 tests I guess from an Australian point of view.

If India or England got bumped down to the bottom division, how long before the ICC amended the rules to get them get them out of playing (fellow) 'minnows' and returned to the top table?

 

[flibbertyjibber]

I am an England fan and even i am struggling to get motivated for ANOTHER ashes series so close to the last two.

I see the point slightly but he has definitely overegged the pudding much like the ECB and Cricket Australia have with the ashes.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Just skimmed the OP but almost everything said in it is either completely false or taking so far out of context that the statement is meaningless.

 

[TNT]

Just within the full member teams, I must admit the huge inequalities that exist do not sit easily with me:

Of these West Indies, Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe etc have had problems just paying their senior squad. It has resulted in ridiculous situations like the BCCI potentially losing tens of millions because the West Indies literally do not have the funds to pay their players a few hundred grand. Presumably West Indies were not entitled to any revenue share in this bi-lateral series that was generating the $50m+.

When you consider the Windies were the biggest draw cards in world cricket for a couple of decades just as the game was becoming more professional and CA and the ECB in particular (or their predecessors) profited hugely from their presence, it's shameful to see how little support they receive given the huge amounts of money in the game today.

Similarly when Brendan Taylor, one of Zimbabwe's few world class players is forced to play county cricket over internationals just so he can make a living, that in turn means Zimbabwe will be weakened further, will continue to struggle for high profile fixtures against the big 3 and so on. Add the likes of Taylor, Ballance, Ervine and Jarvis into their squad they'd be a different proposition.

I would like to see the ICC become more dynamic by taking on responsibility for player payments for the senior squads of all full member teams. Sure the big 3 can pay their players much more on top of these payments but at a minimum, there should be a decent financial incentive for playing international cricket. Ultimately the financial inequalities that have arisen are now hurting international cricket and will continue to do so until there are less viable on field opponents for the big 3 to play against.

They pissed their money up against the wall so you expect others to give them some more. Cant you see the problem its staring you in the face, Pouring good money after bad will only mean taking others down with the Windies.

 

[TNT]

Just skimmed the OP but almost everything said in it is either completely false or taking so far out of context that the statement is meaningless.

I Agree

Pakistan reduced their last test series against Australia to two match series, NZ have asked Australia to reduce its three test series to two tests.

I just wish people would get their facts right before making stupid claims about the "Big three", this thread is based on misrepresented facts that the OP didn't even verify before making.

 

[Red]

rubbish

it's better for everyone to have 8 or even more good teams. better teams means a better spectacle which means more popularity and more money.

otherwise it becomes what some boards are trying to create now - a boys club circle jerk. imagine if cricket had as many good teams as international rugby league? it would be dire.

It's not rubbish at all. Of course cricket is better with 8 or more competitive test nations, but it's not CA's (nor any other board's) responsibility to ensure the viability of other nation's teams. Each nation earns the right for test status, and each nation has to maintain that.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

They pissed their money up against the wall so you expect others to give them some more. Cant you see the problem its staring you in the face, Pouring good money after bad will only mean taking others down with the Windies.

Bollocks. They sold out immediately to World Series Cricket. They had no money then. There is stuff all money there now. Have you seen the amount of foreign investment and foreign ownership in the CPL20?

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

It's not rubbish at all. Of course cricket is better with 8 or more competitive test nations, but it's not CA's (nor any other board's) responsibility to ensure the viability of other nation's teams. Each nation earns the right for test status, and each nation has to maintain that.

Every country is reliant on ICC revenue and India tours to balance the books. Australia and England to a lesser degree than the rest. This is about revenue and its distribution, not about current on field performances.

 

[Skyliner]

I Agree

Pakistan reduced their last test series against Australia to two match series, NZ have asked Australia to reduce its three test series to two tests.

I just wish people would get their facts right before making stupid claims about the "Big three", this thread is based on misrepresented facts that the OP didn't even verify before making.

NZ are discussing reducing the test series from 2 to 3 because they have no prospect of scheduling ODIs due to their summer having effectively been reduced by a T20 World Cup starting 11 March.
It is disingenuous to say "oh, this is just NZ doing this to themselves" without examining the reasons why this is happening. The Big 3 control the ICC, the ICC scheduled this tournament when they have, and it impacts on NZs home summer.

India sue WI for USD 54 million, and the callous attitude of several posters is "serves them right". It probably serves the current board and a group of players right, but what about the entity that is WI cricket, with its proud history. When the patient is lying on the hospital bed in a critical condition, should you give a dose of poison? What an unbelievable attitude...the passionate WI fans and the future generations of West Indian cricket players and followers are the ones ultimately being punished.

The ECB, meanwhile, are pushing the agenda of 4 day test cricket. My line of thinking is that once 4 day test cricket is adopted, they will seek to play 4 day test cricket against nations they patronise as weaker. They will continue to play 5 day test cricket over 5 test series's against Australia. This opinion is based on the selfish attitude Australia and England have adopted to date, in ramping up the frequency of their Ashes series's while playing more shorter series's against other nations.

I'd like to see the ICC become an entity concerned with advancing a meaningful test championship, and committed to protecting windows for full test nations home seasons, and committed to preserving and promoting test cricket in its current form, and protecting the weaker nations who need the most assistance. The Big 3 is a Faustian pact, in my opinion.

 

[Furball]

We're in a golden age of Test cricket just now ffs. Lighten up and enjoy it.

And if South Africa aren't happy about a lack of Tests then maybe they shouldn't have reneged on the agreement they signed with the ECB in 2008 that all future series between the two would be 5 Tests in length.

 

[Skyliner]

The purpose of the BCCI should not to be to make as much money as possible with that consideration over-riding any other. That is a dangerously narrow objective. The 'Spirit of Cricket' applies to all entities within the game, including cricket boards. The BCCI should not become an amoral organisation seeking 'prestige' through accumulated riches - they should give precedence to adhering to the spirit of cricket, and to the good of the game as a whole.

 

[Skyliner]

We're in a golden age of Test cricket just now ffs. Lighten up and enjoy it.

And if South Africa aren't happy about a lack of Tests then maybe they shouldn't have reneged on the agreement they signed with the ECB in 2008 that all future series between the two would be 5 Tests in length.

Didn't the boards jointly agree that the tour this year would be 4 tests.

 

[Furball]

Didn't the boards jointly agree that the tour this year would be 4 tests.

Yes, because CSA don't want to drop ODIs and T20s to fit in an extra Test.

 

[Skyliner]

Well-planned heist - SA Cricket | OPINION | PLAYERS | TEAMS | FEATURES | SAFFAS ABROAD

 

[Skyliner]

Yes, because CSA don't want to drop ODIs and T20s to fit in an extra Test.

Yeah, ok. The up-coming England vs Australia series has ample room for 5 tests / 5 ODIs and 1 T20. Anyway....