Financial setup? What do you mean? Are there some flaws regarding money management in this regard or is it something else? I did hear that ICC might be looking into the boundary count rule to decide winner later on thanks to public outcry.

I don't think that in case the test match ends in a draw, they'll call for super-over. ICC will be more interested in declaring the winner based on their ridiculous rules (just like the maximum boundary rule they had for the CWC finals). For example, they can declare the team which bowled the least extras as winners. Or it could be the team which contributes the most to the ICC in terms of revenue. You never know these crazy people and the rules they make. Their aim is not to award the match to the team which performed the best.

Espn has released this information as draw possibilities are higher when it comes to test matches.


The reserve day is only going to make it worse as again it will be June 2021 and the finals will be played in UK. Another rain wash. But I am glad they will chose to make both teams joint winners.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27279509/faqs-happens-world-test-championship-final-ends-draw-tie

I don't get why they get no other place to host the Test WC except for England and now I also believe that it's in favor of England.

Also, the format is so confusing. First 5 matches of Aus and Eng on 1st August, then 2 matches of other team and here India and Pakistan are not playing against each other so no cricket tension for both.

But still how are they going to decide the winner by having irregular number of matches between 2 teams?

I am sure they are going to prefer Finch instead of Khawaja because he is also performing good in recent matches and deserve this opportunity even Khawaja is also not bad at all but Finch and Warner can do much better as they already done in ODI's. But we have one more person Bancroft he is also recalled so this is very interesting as now they have more openers lets see how they are going to manage this all in next few days.

Pathetic performance by Ireland. It was the worst performance by any team in a test match. The ICC should seriously consider revoking their test status and reconsider the decision only when they are 100% sure of their competitiveness. Their appalling performance brought disgrace to all the emerging teams and now test nations would be reluctant to stage any matches against these lesser teams.

Anyone agree with me that the ICC should revoke the test status of Ireland? Their performance was really horrible and I have a feeling that test matches should be limited to those teams with international standard. Ireland comes nowhere close. Afghanistan is doing well, so I would suggest the ICC to revoke the test status of Zimbabwe and Ireland, to make it a ten team affair.

BTW, someone had claimed that 9 out of the 11 members of the Irish squad were born in England. This is not true. Check this:

~Edited

Now I go to a pub to have a GinTonic (hendricks) of course, after celebrating with my wife the 29 anniversary of married, a good white wine, fish and seafood.

Tomorrow hangover.  

If you see a big green dildo tonight, it's me who will be pushing hard, If it’s a red candle, I’ve fallen asleep.

Good weekend to everyone.

First wicket down for Ireland.

My prediction is like this:

If the lead is <150, then Ireland has a great chance of winning this test.
If the lead is in the range of 151190-200, then both the teams have equal chances.
If the lead is >200, then England has a great chance of winning this test.

Now the lead has increased to 181, and let's see whether they will be able to cross 200 or not.

@haunebu : it's very clear that other poster is not making any sense and clearly a signature spam. If someone reports his post then your reply will be delete along with his posts. Recently happened with pffrt, royce and me where someone deliberately reported pffrt posts in cricketing thread.

So make sure you are not quoting any useless comment  in cricketing thread.

Now this test enter in very interesting situation as England 70 on board and 4 wickets down Bairstow and Root on crease so any result can happen because with three quick wickets Ireland bowling and fielders feeling some good one more wicket and England in some deep trouble.

Bairstow gone now England feeling pressure even Root is still on but now they are in danger

~snip~

It seems that Strauss wanted him to play for England

if this match gets a result, that will be on the Irish side I think. I wish they get their maiden test win.

Oh yeah, I forgot about second innings too. So after they get 85, they'll continue to play till they all get out. Then England bat to chase the runs (if any) and/or put runs on the board and Ireland again chase. Am I right? Last I saw a test match was in 2014 where England were playing with a score of 500+ against India I guess. :-P

3rd innings started in day 1? That's interesting. I really like test which get completed earlier. Ireland has good chance to win the match.

That timeless Test must be a fun. The boat won eventually I guess :-P

By the way, I was asking for the nation to win a test match in shortest waiting time after they get the Test status :-)

Thanks bud. I managed to get the news. So, if Ireland somehow manage to win this test (BIG LOL) then will they be the nation who will win their first test in very short time?

I am very poor in looking at history. May be JSRAW has it. :-P

Before proceeding to New Zealand, South Africa engaged in their concluding Test match with Australia and for the fifth time were defeated, Australia, although scoring only 153, winning in an innings with 72 runs to spare. For this game Australia brought in L. Nash, a Tasmanian fast bowler who jumped into prominence by taking seven wickets for fifty runs when the tourists played Tasmania. Short, but of powerful build, Nash made the ball rise in very awkward fashion, several of them getting head high. He and Ironmonger proved so effective on a pitch slightly on the soft side that in a little more than ninety minutes South Africa were dismissed for the sorry total of 36. This was not their lowest total in Test cricket for they had twice been got rid of previously by England for 30 - at Port Elizabeth in 1895-96 and at Birmingham in 1924. Their lowest score before this in Test matches against Australia was 80 at Melbourne in 1910-11. Cameron alone reached double figures and Ironmonger had the remarkable analysis of five wickets for six runs.

Before the day was over there were further surprises, Australia being got rid of for 153. The wicket appeared a little easier, but Bell, Quinn and McMillan were all able to get considerable work on the ball. Woodfull was out first ball, but Fingleton and Rigg put on 51, the only other stand being that between Kippax and Nash which produced 37. Australia's total was their smallest against South Africa, the previous lowest being 175 at Johannesburg in 1902-03. South Africa, 117 behind, lost one wicket for five runs before play ceased for the day, and on the Saturday no cricket took place, heavy rain during the night and a further downfall soon after two o'clock preventing any chance of a resumption. On the Monday, however, there came more sensational play.

The game was not proceeded with until quarter past two and then in less than an hour and a half the last nine South African wickets went down for another 40 runs. Thus South Africa were twice dismissed for an aggregate of 81, the lowest total for two innings ever recorded in the history of Test match cricket. The wicket was very difficult and Ironmonger once more proved practically unplayable. He dismissed six men for eighteen runs, thus having a record in the match of eleven wickets for 24. Five batsmen failed to score and only Curnow reached double figures.

The third wicket fell at 25 and then, with the sun coming out, the wicket became terribly treacherous, the last seven batsmen being dismissed for another 20 runs.

Btw when it comes to Test cricket, for some games even 5 days are not enough . sharing some interesting story.

Time Less Test Match