Two-tier Test system, my foot

Two-tier Test system, my foot
It's not right to abandon teams like New Zealand and West Indies who have given their all to prop up the game over the years
Martin Crowe
January 18, 2014

Talk of a two-tier system for Test cricket is shallow. To confine West Indies and New Zealand to the outhouse is disrespectful and ignores the great history that has built up over a century or more. Did we hear of a two-tier system when Australia were drowning in the mid-1980s? Or when England were being smashed by West Indies in Test after Test, series after series? Or when India weren't even in the top four during the same decade?

South Africa are excused, for they were deep in isolation, yet when they came back in 1991, did we suggest they try out in the second division first? During the '80s, West Indies totally dominated, while New Zealand were unbeaten at home for 12 long years, as well as winning away in England and Australia. For that, they command respect, through thick and thin.

And yet, we hear from the likes of even Rahul Dravid, that a two-tier system is a good idea. With respect to Rahul, what is good about it?

This doesn't feel right. It's not right to abandon upstanding nations, countries that have given their all to prop up the game, to cast them adrift. It is so disappointing that the ICC has failed again to find the right formula for showcasing Test cricket and crowning a champion on a regular basis.

The very least they can do is arrange for the top two teams to play and allow someone to raise the mace. Someone. The problem for those languishing in fifth place and below is that those bottom teams will never get back the points they need, over at least two, probably three, years to contest for a place in a final, leaving the same teams to compete for the title. This is not what a competition is about.

Competition in sport is normally held annually, or in the case of the traditional Ryder Cup, every two years. Following a normal competition, in the off season, teams can regroup and come again, trying to find the recipe for the crowning glory at season's end. The winning team tries to recapture that winning way and repeat their success. Of course there are no off seasons in cricket. It's so ridiculously complicated, especially with three formats to juggle, that a team can hardly catch its breath before it's asked to go on another meaningless tour, or play another fruitless series of one-dayers.


More

[color=rgb(51, 51, 51)]I suspect one explanation I will be given is that this is to prevent India from effectively taking over by doing its own thing. [/color]

My old friend Martin, Rahul is a better cricket visionary than you  ::LOL::

Chairman , there was a thread a while back where we Named

the Teams by division and proposed the promotion/relegation concep.

as they do in Soccer .

I cant find it .

I've mentioned in another post regarding the two tier system, and while I think it's something that should be given a go, I think to get it right might take a lot of negotiations.

What country is going to say ok, we'll be in division 2 to start off with? Who's going to decide what teams are classed as top teams?

The ICC ranking system of course.

with some imagination.

Not a problem

I would be interested to hear whether Martin Crowe's views have changed in the two years since he wrote that article?

The landscape of Test cricket has changed greatly since the 1980s. Back then there was no real competition to Test cricket. It took centre stage. The only option of seeing the games best players was at the Test level.

In today's cricketing world, we have T20 tournaments featuring the games best players taking place all throughout the year. It is for this reason that even the World Cup has been devalued.

I am not a fan of the current ranking system. It is incredibly complex. No one really understands it, which in turn makes it hard to get invested in the actual rankings.

The introduction of a two-tiered system should in theory create drama and interest. Every match becomes meaningful and has a direct consequence.

Test cricket is my favourite format of the game. However, I am now in the minority. It seems quite evident that something needs to be done to re-invigorate Test cricket. Nobody likes change. And change for the sake of change is a bad thing. In this instance, however, I think this would be a good move for all involved.

Well said but until we change the Ranking math formula/equation :

that is all we have to go with a historical base..

Too Late , too late shall be the cry  :'(

The ranking system is flawed  have you noticed that india only want 4 Tests and no odi's on their tour. its because they feel they will win the series and help them to being#1