Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

For discussion of any non-Zimbabwean cricket.
Kriterion_BD
Posts: 2292
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by Kriterion_BD » Sat Feb 04, 2017 12:38 am

Radical and surprising turn of events at the ICC meeting. Is it good for the game overall?

Summary (as of now):

- 12 team Test league, 13 team ODI league, region-based WT20 qualifiers
- ICC will once again take charge of the FTP
- no specific mention of promotion/relegation
- Big 3 Takeover will effectively be abolished
- may be finalized tomorrow...or at next ICC meeting in April

Details of the Test League

- top 9 teams in Division 1, Zimbabwe plus 2 qualifiers (almost certainly Ireland and Afghanistan) in Division 2.
- 2 year cycle in which all teams play the other in their Division (ensures marquee series like the Ashes)
- Only Division 1 teams accumulate points, with a Test final scheduled between the top 2 teams
- series length can range from 1-5 Tests, to be agreed mutually by the boards involved
- possibility of some exposure for Division 2 teams to play Division 1 sides per cycle
- presumably there is promotion/relegation opportunities in all Divisions

ODI League

- Current 12 ODI teams plus winner of ongoing World Cricket League to compete in 3 year cycles
- series must be a minimum of 3 matches, no maximum
- extra series can be scheduled, but will not count to the league standings
- T20Is will be played concurrently, with maximum series length of 3 matches
- top 7 teams plus host nation will automatically qualify for World Cup
- bottom 5 teams will join Associates from WCL in WC Qualifier for the remaining 2 world cup slots
- 10 team world cup to be retained

Interesting to see how this will pan out and the broadcast deals that come out of this. If it all goes through, it could start by 2019.

For Zimbabwe, the absence of revenue from series vs India/Australia coupled with loss of World Cup revenues might be the incentive needed for the ZC thieves to find a new cash cow. This could be the best thing for Zimbabwe since 2004...
Truth is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. Time is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. You don't need anything else.
[Malcolm X]

JHunter
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:12 am

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by JHunter » Sun Feb 05, 2017 2:15 pm

Is it good? That I am not sure of yet. Will it even get off the ground? Seems doubtful with India opposed to the other changes, but we shall see.
Details of the Test League

- top 9 teams in Division 1, Zimbabwe plus 2 qualifiers (almost certainly Ireland and Afghanistan) in Division 2.
- 2 year cycle in which all teams play the other in their Division (ensures marquee series like the Ashes)
- Only Division 1 teams accumulate points, with a Test final scheduled between the top 2 teams
- series length can range from 1-5 Tests, to be agreed mutually by the boards involved
- possibility of some exposure for Division 2 teams to play Division 1 sides per cycle
- presumably there is promotion/relegation opportunities in all Divisions
That about sums it up except in the cricinfo article I saw on it, there is no mention of "divisions" anywhere:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/cont ... 80769.html
The proposal for each format is as follows:

Test cricket
Despite talk of a conference-style structure with 12 teams, the proposals call for a 9-3 league. That is, nine Full Members excluding Zimbabwe will play each other in Test series either home or away once over a two-year period, at the end of which there will be a play-off between the top two teams.

The duration of the series will be up to the members - even a one-off Test can be considered a series. The system of how points will be awarded, given that each series will not be of the same length, is yet to be worked out. The home and away stipulation is such that, if, for example, New Zealand tours Sri Lanka in the first two-year league cycle, then in the following one Sri Lanka will tour New Zealand. If one team refuses to play another - as has been the case with India playing Pakistan - they will forfeit points. Full Members will retain the power to schedule bilateral series should they wish outside of this league structure.

The details of how the bottom three teams operate within this league are still to be fully worked out. They will play against each other in what will be Test matches, but essentially outside of the league structure and with no points at stake. Administrators, however, are also working out a way for the nine Full Members play a series against at least one of the three in each cycle, to provide them with exposure and the opportunity to improve.

Part of the reason this is not yet finalised is because it is linked to the question of membership status for Associate sides, which is on the agenda of the ICC Board meeting on Saturday. There is talk of decoupling Test status from Full Membership, so that a side - such as Afghanistan or Ireland - can play Tests without being Full Members.

At the end of a four-year period - of two cycles - the performances of these three teams will be assessed and it is here, presumably, where the Test ambitions of other Associate sides come into play. Performances there will be part of a criteria for Test status; another criterion is for countries to have a domestic first-class competition. Ireland's domestic competition was approved last year; Afghanistan's came up at the CEC meeting and it is believed it will also be granted first-class status.
This structure seems to formalize what has essentially been in place during Zimbabwe's self-imposed break from test cricket and merely extends the test system to applicant associate countries which have certain performances and which have domestic first-class cricket....which, if anyone had been following what I have been repeatedly saying all along is what the ICC's current rules on applying for full membership list out as among the main criteria for attaining full membership and test cricket. It's not rocket science and I'm glad the ICC stuck to its guns in this instance instead of caving to Irish pressure to let them become full members without even so much as setting up a multi-day domestic tournament. All that talk about "no clear pathway" has been shown for what it is - pure, unadulterated rubbish griping. Now for the first time in decades we have two entirely new first-class systems in non-full member states which is a very clear sign that they are progressing to full membership. Afghanistan's efforts are even more commendable when one considers that they also have an inter-provincial two-day tournament that is played before their (now) first-class 4 day tournament (which includes a 5 day final!). Clearly the two-day tournament is intended to serve as preparation for the first-class tournament....as happens in a lot of, if not all full member states.

As a league presumably all of the teams will be ranked, so I'm not sure how it is that the matches amongst the bottom 3 teams in the league will not have points. Unless there are two points systems at play - one for ranking purposes (which means it is just one league and no divisions as in a true two division system the two divisions don't share the same points and rankings calculations, e.g. county cricket's divisions or the difference between South Africa's 4 day first class system and their 3 day first-class system) and one for the purposes of determining who qualifies for the test championship playoff final.

JHunter
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:12 am

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by JHunter » Mon Feb 06, 2017 11:03 pm

Looking at the other proposals, the regional qualifications for T20 cricket are interesting, but given the geographic distribution of the full members, the strongest associates and affiliates then regional qualification tournaments will almost certainly mean automatic qualification for Australia, New Zealand and West Indies as the Americas and East Asia/Pacific contain some of the weakest associate and affiliate sides.

Assuming 16 spots for the World T20, I thus expect that the regional qualification spots might go as follows:

Asia - 6
Africa - 3
East Asia/Pacific - 3
Europe - 2
Americas - 2

..which would basically leave all full members with the possibility of qualifying and for the strongest associate/affiliate team from each region (or 2 in the case of Asia) to qualify.

Had the 2016 men's World Twenty20 been so structured the likely qualified teams would have been:

Host:
India

Full Members:
Australia
England
New Zealand
Pakistan
South Africa
Sri Lanka
West Indies
Bangladesh
Zimbabwe

Qualified Associates and Affiliates:
Afghanistan
Canada
Namibia
Ireland
Oman
Papua New Guinea




Unless they expand it to 18 teams and give Europe another 1-2 spots.

Kriterion_BD
Posts: 2292
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by Kriterion_BD » Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:17 am

I really dont give a shit ahout T20 cricket, but a regional qualifier system makes sense.

I really like the idea of the Test and ODI league and feel all matches should count. Should be based on winning percentage or win loss ratio so that all 12 teams have equal chance at winning the Test Championship.

ODI league will be great!
Truth is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. Time is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. You don't need anything else.
[Malcolm X]

User avatar
brmtaylor.com admin
Administrator
Posts: 6093
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by brmtaylor.com admin » Wed Feb 08, 2017 3:56 pm

Bangladesh are the big winners of the new model, followed by Ireland and Afghanistan (because from their perspective Test status in any form is better than no Test status at all).

Zimbabwe is the only loser.

The only silver lining that I can see is it might result in more ODI cricket, but I don't think that's much consolation for the prospect of never playing another Test match again against anyone besides a fake team (Ire/Afg).

Kriterion_BD
Posts: 2292
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by Kriterion_BD » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:17 pm

BRMT, Zim fans are stuck in a quandry. Obviously any fan wants international status...before 2010, BD fans vehemtly denied that we were not a worthy Test side...even though we now realize that was true. At the same time, that very status is what keeps ZC alive to loot, steal, pilfer, and embezzle.

My assumption is that ZC will finally be put on notice. I predict 4 years for Zim ending in 2023. If Zim falls significantly behind Ireland and Afghanistan by that time in both formats, there seems little hope of continual ICC support.

It took 10 years for the ICC to recognize Ireland and afghanistan (OK a little less perhaps)...it will take 20 in the case of Zim. Which I think is fair. 2004 to 2023...thats enough grace for Zimbabwe to fix their problems given Afghanistan went from WCL Division 5 in 2009 to Test status by 2017 (officially 2019). Granted AFG are an outlier.

Apparently the ICC chief executives board has approved this plan, yet its still not finalized till April or June. It can always change from 9-3...

But yes, Bangladesh are the biggest winners, other top 8 countries don't have a net change, Ireland and Afghanistan also gain big, with Zim the only one losing out. Every other proposal had 2+ countries suffering a net loss.
Truth is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. Time is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. You don't need anything else.
[Malcolm X]

Kriterion_BD
Posts: 2292
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by Kriterion_BD » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:23 pm

Also the latest cricinfo article suggested the boards seem to agree on using Zim, Ire, and Afg as tour matches for SA, ENG, PAK tours respectively. So a one off 5 day Test would replace the traditional 3 day first class match vs a domestic or A team. Thats 2 Tests per year, or 4 per cycle for the lower division sides.
Truth is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. Time is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. You don't need anything else.
[Malcolm X]

User avatar
jaybro
Posts: 4700
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 3:36 am
Supports: MidWest Rhinos

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by jaybro » Thu Feb 09, 2017 12:08 am

Kriterion_BD wrote:Also the latest cricinfo article suggested the boards seem to agree on using Zim, Ire, and Afg as tour matches for SA, ENG, PAK tours respectively. So a one off 5 day Test would replace the traditional 3 day first class match vs a domestic or A team. Thats 2 Tests per year, or 4 per cycle for the lower division sides.

If Zimbabwe got to host 2 test v any side prior to touring RSA, that would definitely give us 4 tests a year minimum which is better than what we have ATM plus tests against Ireland and Afghanistan. I'm sure BD would still play is aswell. Problem is england will not tour Zimbabwe so once they decide not to the rest will as well .....
1.G.Flower 2.B.Taylor 3.M.Goodwin 4.A.Flower 5.D.Houghton 6.N.Johnson 7.T.Taibu 8.P.Strang 9.H.Streak 10.R.Price 11.H.Olonga 12.A.Campbell

Kriterion_BD
Posts: 2292
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by Kriterion_BD » Thu Feb 09, 2017 12:35 am

Big 3 wont. England due to politics and India and Australis since they dont have the time in their schedules and even if they did, they wouldnt want to.

Pak, SL, WI, and BD would Im sure tour though 2 tests puts increase risk of injuries.
Truth is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. Time is on the side of the oppressed; its against the oppressor. You don't need anything else.
[Malcolm X]

JHunter
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:12 am

Re: Latest ICC Proposal: 9-3 Two-Division Test Cricket

Post by JHunter » Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:26 pm

brmtaylor.com admin wrote:Bangladesh are the big winners of the new model, followed by Ireland and Afghanistan (because from their perspective Test status in any form is better than no Test status at all).

Zimbabwe is the only loser.

The only silver lining that I can see is it might result in more ODI cricket, but I don't think that's much consolation for the prospect of never playing another Test match again against anyone besides a fake team (Ire/Afg).
Yes, I noticed that. Zimbabwe lose out in terms of scheduling and don't gain much more in terms of financing while most other boards gain noticeable sums, especially Afghanistan and Ireland.
Kriterion_BD wrote:BRMT, Zim fans are stuck in a quandry. Obviously any fan wants international status...before 2010, BD fans vehemtly denied that we were not a worthy Test side...even though we now realize that was true. At the same time, that very status is what keeps ZC alive to loot, steal, pilfer, and embezzle.

My assumption is that ZC will finally be put on notice. I predict 4 years for Zim ending in 2023. If Zim falls significantly behind Ireland and Afghanistan by that time in both formats, there seems little hope of continual ICC support.

It took 10 years for the ICC to recognize Ireland and afghanistan (OK a little less perhaps)...it will take 20 in the case of Zim. Which I think is fair. 2004 to 2023...thats enough grace for Zimbabwe to fix their problems given Afghanistan went from WCL Division 5 in 2009 to Test status by 2017 (officially 2019). Granted AFG are an outlier.

Apparently the ICC chief executives board has approved this plan, yet its still not finalized till April or June. It can always change from 9-3...

But yes, Bangladesh are the biggest winners, other top 8 countries don't have a net change, Ireland and Afghanistan also gain big, with Zim the only one losing out. Every other proposal had 2+ countries suffering a net loss.

I suspect that ZC have been put on notice that if they don't at least attempt to get their act together then ICC support will fall to the minimum necessary based on ICC obligations towards full members. So when Afghanistan and Ireland become full members, ZC may find that the financing those two currently get might become the minimum amount due, and so ZC could face a cut in funding and the prospect of less tours.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest