England propose points system for Sri Lanka Test series

[quote author=ketchim link=topic=103819.msg690062#msg690062 date=1461021029]
Eff Off for you twats ....hahahaha  :-*
[/quote]

You should be proud of yourself.

Chin will soon come to get you.

Brace yourself.

I think that most people would agree that test match cricket needs shaking up to some extent, but I'm more in favour of doing that off the field rather than on it.

A points system to decide the winner of a test series sounds like it's just over complicating things. I'm happy to give it a go, but I don't think it's going to be the ground breaking saviour of test match cricket that it needs.

[quote author=Noreht link=topic=103819.msg690124#msg690124 date=1461072170]
I think it is nonsensical as it actually might allow for more draws in the tests. If a side has built up enough points through the T20's and ODI's, should they be played first, they might not need to win more than two of the five test and eve though they lose the tests 3-2 they still win the series and get a higher ICC ranking. This looks like a ploy to help weaker test teams gain more ICC ranking points. For shame England, for shame.
[/quote]
This could never actually happen. All series/tours have always begun with the Test matches then conclude with ODIs and T20s. This wouldn't change with the introduction of this system for the very reason you point out.

We do need to find a way to make the weaker Test sides (Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and West Indies) more competitive. The recent West Indies/Australia tour is a good example of this. It was too one-sided which makes it hard to generate interest or excitement, however, introducing a points system for the tour that also includes limited overs, should in theory, make it more meaningful as a strong limited overs team could claw those points back.

Personally, I wouldn't change it as I like to keep all three formats of the game separate. But I can see why those such as Wisden's Lawrence Booth are in favour of this change.

This is all moot any way as it was confirmed that the SLC has dismissed such a proposal for the tour.

I have seen a few where the T 20's actually were played first, but yes as you said it is moot as the proposal has been rejected. I love test cricket and even during the week it's big here in South Africa.

I think it is interesting that you bring up the fact that West Indies are seen as a weaker test team as the forum seems to agree that the West Indies team should be dissolved and separate island teams should be use to compete in the test arena. This will weaken test cricket imo.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england-v-pa...05339.html

Agreement!

The suggestion being that four points should be available for each Test victory

and two points for the limited-overs contests.

Ben Stokes never once to mince his words:

Quote:"I think it would be rubbish," he said. "They've changed a lot of things, but Ashes is Ashes, it's a massive series for England and Australia and I don't see why it should get changed.

"People who watch the game and follow the game, especially in the Ashes, would get a little bit like 'why are we doing this?' and I'd probably be in the same boat."

I am with Stokes on this one. I'd rather they go with the Test championship as opposed to this notion. I prefer keeping all three formats of the game separate.

Rob Smyth writing in The Guardian also has an opposing view of the points system, feeling it will devalue the importance of Test cricket.

Quote:The proposed system ties in with the rhetoric that ODIs and T20s now have the same importance as Tests in England. A quick look at when England choose to rest players show that is undeniable hyperbole. Quite right too. It’s good that white-ball cricket is no longer an afterthought, but it should always be a secondary consideration after Test cricket. Having a points system for the two white-ball series is worth trialling, because they have clear common ground. But red- and white-ball cricket go together like bananas and bone-marrow gravy.

There is a need to tweak Test cricket, and the first day-night Test was an uplifting triumph, but this feels like a try-hard contrivance from a country that has belatedly embraced limited-overs cricket. A couple of years ago, Kevin Pietersen said that talking to Strauss about the IPL was like “explaining gangsta rap to a vicar”. Well now the vicar has discovered grime and he don’t care about your isms and schisms, grandad.

In itself, the system is relatively harmless and will probably go into the actually fairly small bucket of cricket’s bad innovations, along with things like the Supersub and the aluminium bat. But it is another in a worrying list of compromises and, as the examples of 2009 and 2010-11 show, an obvious case of devaluing Test cricket. It is also indicative of a sport that is in danger of following society by catering for an assumed audience with an IQ of 25. Test cricket is supposed to be our sanctuary from the real world.

Let’s be clear on this: Test cricket is the greatest, most soulful sport format ever invented. A world without it is as unthinkable as a world without arthouse cinema or alternative music. The points system is only a minor act of cultural vandalism, but it will beget far greater ones.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ma...st-cricket

Well written and well reasoned, IMO. The more I think about it, the more I dislike the idea. I hope sense prevails at some point. Keep all three formats of the game separate. Can you imagine a hard fought Ashes series that is decided by one game of lick it cricket?  There are some traditions that shouldn't be messed with.

It is interesting to read the comments of current and former players on the points system proposal. The majority of comments I have read have been against such an idea.

Michael Vaughan was interviewed by the BBC in which he felt the idea was nonsense.

Quote:Vaughan added: "I think it is nonsense. Sometimes too many brains around the room complicate it.

"What you are going to have is 45 players on a podium at the end of the series."

Conversely, Jason Gillespie is intrigued by the concept and willing to see how it plays out:

Quote:"I am happy to see how it goes," said Gillespie on BBC World Service's "I think the Women's Ashes last year got a lot of good feedback.

"Until you give it a crack there will be debate about whether it is a good idea or not. Let's give it a go and see how it works. The rating and ranking of points can always be tinkered with if it's not quite right.

"If it doesn't work scrap all together. But if you don't give it a go you won't know."

http://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/36217532

There's a difference between thinking and marketing. I wish more cricket pundits would get that.