What's the problem with a two-tier test system?

[Slow Love™]

Whenever I've seen this subject come up, there seem to be quite a few critics of the idea. I read today that Sourav Ganguly has come out in support of the concept. He said "A two-tier system would ensure more competitiveness and allow weak teams to work their way up gradually."

Surely this makes sense. At the moment, all we seem to hear is doom and gloom whenever Bangladesh plays a series, and many commentators frequently insist that Bangladesh weren't ready, it was a mistake, they should have test status revoked, etc. Perhaps we should learn something from this, and in the interests of broadening the game's appeal base, a two-tier system seems ideal. Let the new teams play each other, and at least enjoy some chance of early success, in order to promote the game in those countries, rather than having support slowly die off because the team is considered an international joke.

Sounds like a great idea to me.

 

[Deja moo]

I'm all in favour of it. Here isa discussion we had earlier on the topic....
Two Tier Test Championship ?

 

[Slow Love™]

Ah, should've done a search. Although much of the disagreement in that thread pertains to the World Cup. To me, the one-day tournament could still operate as a showcase for teams all over the world - I'm only really applying the idea to test cricket.

Obviously you would need a promotion system with time, to give the second div teams something to aspire to. I'd also look on it as a temporary measure rather than a permanent solution - the idea being to promote the sport, allow a measure of success and progress, and have as an objective slow increases/promotions to the "first division" competition.

 

[Deja moo]

Agreed.

Ganguly says the ICc plans to have 16 test playing nations by 2007.

Hence, have 8 nations in pool 1 and next 8 in pool 2.

Pool 1 matches counting as tests, pool2 matches as 5 day FC matches.

with relegation and promotion....and cheerleaders

 

[Waughney]

Yes, I totally agree with all of you, something like this should happen.

 

[Tim]

I don't think a tier featuring Kenya, Canada, Namibia etc is going to improve the skills of the players, but they'll at least learn more about the game & get to travel more often.

I think if it's feasable the ICC should schedule tours for some of the top 8 international countries to send 'A' teams to the minnow countries...that would definately be benefitial, at least for the minnow teams anyway.

 

[tooextracool]

Whenever I've seen this subject come up, there seem to be quite a few critics of the idea. I read today that Sourav Ganguly has come out in support of the concept. He said "A two-tier system would ensure more competitiveness and allow weak teams to work their way up gradually."

Surely this makes sense. At the moment, all we seem to hear is doom and gloom whenever Bangladesh plays a series, and many commentators frequently insist that Bangladesh weren't ready, it was a mistake, they should have test status revoked, etc. Perhaps we should learn something from this, and in the interests of broadening the game's appeal base, a two-tier system seems ideal. Let the new teams play each other, and at least enjoy some chance of early success, in order to promote the game in those countries, rather than having support slowly die off because the team is considered an international joke.

Sounds like a great idea to me.

you are partially right, although i dont see the point of teams like bangladesh etc playing each other because they wont improve. yes there should be a 2 tier system but the ICC should also introduce a relegation system based on the icc test championship table so that 1 test team is eliminated and a new team replaces. so the worst team from the current 10 will go to tier 2 while the best team from tier 2 will rise up to tier 1. this would mean that we would see a new team every year and would give teams like bangladesh and zimbabwe a kick up their backside.

 

[Craig]

At this stage it would like this:

1st tier:

1/ Australia
2/ South Africa
3/ England
4/ India
5/ New Zealand

2nd tier:

1/ Pakistan
2/ Sri Lanka
3/ West Indies
4/ Zimbabwe
5/ Bangladesh

 

[tooextracool]

At this stage it would like this:

1st tier:

1/ Australia
2/ South Africa
3/ England
4/ India
5/ New Zealand

2nd tier:

1/ Pakistan
2/ Sri Lanka
3/ West Indies
4/ Zimbabwe
5/ Bangladesh

i thought we were having 8 or 9 nations in tier 1??this is not going to work because those 3 unlucky teams are going to only get worse playing bangladesh and zimbabwe

 

[JASON]

I think a better way would be to have -

Tier 1 - 1. Australia
2. South Africa
3. England
4. New Zealand
5. India
6. Pakistan
7. Sri Lanka
8. West Indies

Tier 2. 9. Zimbabwe
10.Bangladesh
11. Kenya
12. Scotland
13. Canada
14. Holland
15. UAE/Ireland
16. Namibia


Every 2 years, the Team at the Top of Tier 2 on ranking points, plays Team 8 in a 3 Test play off. Or maybe make it even more interesting by having top 2 teams in Tier 2 play off first in a three test series. The winner then plays Team 8. This could be done on a two yearly basis.
Although realistically there is never going to be a chance in this system for any Team from Tier 2 to come into Tier 1. An alternative may be to leave all 10 current Test Teams in Tier 1 . But Team No. 10 will have to play off with the top team from Tier 2 .(ie. Team 11).

 

[chicane]

I think a better way would be to have -

Tier 1 - 1. Australia
2. South Africa
3. England
4. New Zealand
5. India
6. Pakistan
7. Sri Lanka
8. West Indies

Tier 2. 9. Zimbabwe
10.Bangladesh
11. Kenya
12. Scotland
13. Canada
14. Holland
15. UAE/Ireland
16. Namibia


Every 2 years, the Team at the Top of Tier 2 on ranking points, plays Team 8 in a 3 Test play off. Or maybe make it even more interesting by having top 2 teams in Tier 2 play off first in a three test series. The winner then plays Team 8. This could be done on a two yearly basis.
Although realistically there is never going to be a chance in this system for any Team from Tier 2 to come into Tier 1. An alternative may be to leave all 10 current Test Teams in Tier 1 . But Team No. 10 will have to play off with the top team from Tier 2 .(ie. Team 11).

Something like that...

 

[tooextracool]

I think a better way would be to have -

Tier 1 - 1. Australia
2. South Africa
3. England
4. New Zealand
5. India
6. Pakistan
7. Sri Lanka
8. West Indies

Tier 2. 9. Zimbabwe
10.Bangladesh
11. Kenya
12. Scotland
13. Canada
14. Holland
15. UAE/Ireland
16. Namibia


Every 2 years, the Team at the Top of Tier 2 on ranking points, plays Team 8 in a 3 Test play off. Or maybe make it even more interesting by having top 2 teams in Tier 2 play off first in a three test series. The winner then plays Team 8. This could be done on a two yearly basis.
Although realistically there is never going to be a chance in this system for any Team from Tier 2 to come into Tier 1. An alternative may be to leave all 10 current Test Teams in Tier 1 . But Team No. 10 will have to play off with the top team from Tier 2 .(ie. Team 11).

i think you should have 9 or 10 teams in tier 1 otherwise we wont see any new team in tier 1 and that doesnt go well with the ICC. the playoff is unnecessary because any team that finishes at the bottom of tier 1 should just be replaced by the top team in tier 2 because its highly unlikely that the team in tier 1 would be beaten by the team in tier 2.

 

[Craig]

i thought we were having 8 or 9 nations in tier 1??this is not going to work because those 3 unlucky teams are going to only get worse playing bangladesh and zimbabwe

I spilt it at half way.

 

[bhooth nath]

there is already a icc inter-continental cup going on. it is a series of 3 day matches involving 12 non-test teams as is being held on a continent basis. however, in the asian one, uae drew with nepal after ali asif took 9/74 and nepal beat malaysia in the other. in the only african one held till now, uganda beat namibia.

i guess when the 2 tier system comes up, the tiers would look like

tier 1 - top 8 teams. zimbabwe can join it if they include the rebels like streak, flower, olonga and the 15 other rebel players like ervine, blignaut, carlisle, price, etc. in their team

tier 2 - kenya, holland, scotland, ireland, uae, nepal, usa

 

[pakster]

"At this stage it would like this:

1st tier:

1/ Australia
2/ South Africa
3/ England
4/ India
5/ New Zealand

2nd tier:

1/ Pakistan
2/ Sri Lanka
3/ West Indies
4/ Zimbabwe
5/ Bangladesh
"

That might actually be quite interesting (of course, we would have to swap eng with pak , after all...we did just beat NZ and SA )

2 teams could be relegated and 2 promoted after the end of each season. We could have the top team from the second tier being promoted while the second and third place teams would have a playoff for the final promotion spot.

Would be a lot more competitive!!

 

[Langeveldt]

I like the idea, it would be a good way of getting sides like Namibia into test cricket without throwing them right in the deep end at the very top....

However, a 9-32 from a Pakistani quick against them does kind of devalue the records and tradition of the game...

 

[Neil Pickup]

The fundamental problem with a second tier of Test cricket is that it would not be Test cricket.

Test cricket is the highest possible standard for a player to play at - this system could see someone like Shakhti Gauchan, Jan-Berrie Burger or Klaas-Jan van Noortwijk achieve a career "Test" average of 50-60+

Establishment of an "élite 8" would be the effective removal of Test status from Zimbabwe and Bangladesh - something that, for cricketing reasons, will never help the progress of the game in a country.

Relegation from the top eight will have an equally, if not more, catastrophic effect on the side going down, and any side coming up would be promptly beaten to a pulp and kicked back down again.

Whisper it, but what the ICC are doing with 3-day cricket for the Affiliate sides in the InterContinental Cup, plus an increase in A tours to these nations, is dead right.

 

[anzac]

despite raising the 2 tier system back in my early days on the site - I tend to agree with Neil so far as the Test status etc goes................

rather than it being a 2 tiered Test system, it should be viewed perhaps as a 2 tiered international system, with this '2nd tier' as the next step of development b4 full 'Test' status...........

so far as the current situation is concerned I think we are stuck with having ZIM & BAN & the ICC has to do as much as possible to bring them up to speed - part of this should include a 10 year development & action plan by / for the domestic cricket board & if they fail to fulfill this then their 'Test' status can be revoked & they drop back into the 2nd tier..........

while I'm all for increasing the game globally, I'm concerned that the increasing schedules will either make a mockery of the ratings, or that we will see 2 test series to the exclusion of all else, and that a tour will consist of 2 tests & ODI Tri series, with no other matches...........

 

[Deja moo]

Personally , I hope no other team becomes good enough to gain test status for the next 100 years

Coz more teams would only mean that the big 8 teams at present would in thefuture not play each other so often.

I cant imagine having 20 test teams and then waiting 10 years for the next India-Australia series.. ..( you get my point , dont you ? )

It would be like in football....Brazil and Germany were the two top teams for a long time......but how often did they play each other ?

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

ICC to consider two-tier format