Surely there are better ways to award WTC points than this absurd series based approach?

To game the current points system, most of the series in the new World Test Championship will consist of two tests. It looks like a self-defeating exercise which will only further reduce the popularity of test cricket.

So after two years of faffing around, in which any country can choose to play whichever six others they like, the table leaders can be determined by those sides that play the shortest series against the weakest teams. How is this good for Test cricket?

Your thoughts?

4 Answers

  • 10 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    Have I got this right, the WTC does not replace the traditional rankings system it merely runs alongside it?

    So what happens for instance if a team that is not ranked in the top 3, or the top 5 accumulates enough points to win the WTC?

    Like for example Sri Lanka or Pakistan can be ranked 6th but finish the WTC with maximum points and be declared the world champions of cricket?

    The points are unlikely to influence the rankings very much so it seems like a farcical idea that could backfire.

    On the other hand the winner could be the team who already holds the top ranking, I cant even think how to predict which team would win this, its a bit of a lottery.

  • 10 months ago

    I think that a Test between India and South Africa should not be given equal weight to Test between England and Australia. If that is what will be happening, so be it. NOBODY who cares about the Ashes is ever going to lose interest in the Ashes over it.

  • small
    Lv 7
    10 months ago

    The ideal case would be like the IPL where every team plays every other team, once at own home and once at the other's home. Test match series should ideally be at least comprising 3 test matches.

    Even if we have this kind of league fixtures amongst the top 8 test playing teams, it would require allotting 840 playing days..... this can be worked out in a cycle of 4 years comfortably (as there can be days when more than one game can be played).

    That looks ideal to me, but mind you, this game of cricket has too many complexities.... for instance some games would be forced as no-result due to rain/bad weather etc. and that would reduce equity to an extent.

  • Anonymous
    10 months ago

    Once again the ICC has come up with a real stinker of an idea. They have dumbed it down so far that a 2 match series accumulates the same number of points as 5 matches. No allowance for quality of opposition or whether the series is home or away. What could go wrong? It is simply not possible for every team to play everyone else both home and away in 2 years, its never even been done in a 10 year period but here we are. No doubt some team will win the thing of course but wherever the final is held it will advantage one side more than the other. I hope England play New Zealand in the final and it ends in a super over and gets rained out with a couple of balls remaining and Duckworth-Lewis decides it in NZ's favour just to make up for the World Cup.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.