Test Cricket Prediction and Discussion Thread [self - mod]

[YinShuiSiYuan]

When there are no fixtures scheduled then it's bound to happen, for some time this happened with the ODI thread too so nothing wrong with that.

Test cricket won't die among fans as long as BIG-3 takes this format seriously. ENG and AUS won't see any decline in this format anytime soon and for India just look at a hike on Eng/Aus cricket rights deal for the Indian market, it shows the fan base is increasing and not the other way around.

Test cricket would never die. There is a seperate fan base for test cricket but to maintain it the ICC needs to fix more test matches every year. There are many here who might not watch the full game but would certainly watch the highlights or might be following the match.

You yourself said that many dont watch the test but only score at the end of day. Whats the point of having such game where no one watches it rather just follow the score. I my view there is not much viewership for test cricket rather majority are interested in T20 these days. ICC should focus more on T20 format.

[1714980010]

1714980010

[BobK71]

When there are no fixtures scheduled then it's bound to happen, for some time this happened with the ODI thread too so nothing wrong with that.

Test cricket won't die among fans as long as BIG-3 takes this format seriously. ENG and AUS won't see any decline in this format anytime soon and for India just look at a hike on Eng/Aus cricket rights deal for the Indian market, it shows the fan base is increasing and not the other way around.

Test cricket would never die. There is a seperate fan base for test cricket but to maintain it the ICC needs to fix more test matches every year. There are many here who might not watch the full game but would certainly watch the highlights or might be following the match.

In order to save Test cricket, either the audience has to come forward to watch the game or the ICC has to take the responsibility of managing this game on its own initiative. Otherwise, the game may gradually stop. Because this generation prefers the short form of cricket. Everything now depends on the ICC.

[pakhitheboss]

When there are no fixtures scheduled then it's bound to happen, for some time this happened with the ODI thread too so nothing wrong with that.

Test cricket won't die among fans as long as BIG-3 takes this format seriously. ENG and AUS won't see any decline in this format anytime soon and for India just look at a hike on Eng/Aus cricket rights deal for the Indian market, it shows the fan base is increasing and not the other way around.

Test cricket would never die. There is a seperate fan base for test cricket but to maintain it the ICC needs to fix more test matches every year. There are many here who might not watch the full game but would certainly watch the highlights or might be following the match.

In order to save Test cricket, either the audience has to come forward to watch the game or the ICC has to take the responsibility of managing this game on its own initiative. Otherwise, the game may gradually stop. Because this generation prefers the short form of cricket. Everything now depends on the ICC.

I am certain that there are many fans for Test cricket in Australia and England as @JSRAW stated. Then there is the subcontinent where fans of T20 is growing because of the premium leagues. The boards and ICC should come up with such a format for test cricket. Only playing ICC matches won't help this format. As I stated earlier there are many who follow this format in their own ways.

[BobK71]

When there are no fixtures scheduled then it's bound to happen, for some time this happened with the ODI thread too so nothing wrong with that.

Test cricket won't die among fans as long as BIG-3 takes this format seriously. ENG and AUS won't see any decline in this format anytime soon and for India just look at a hike on Eng/Aus cricket rights deal for the Indian market, it shows the fan base is increasing and not the other way around.

Test cricket would never die. There is a seperate fan base for test cricket but to maintain it the ICC needs to fix more test matches every year. There are many here who might not watch the full game but would certainly watch the highlights or might be following the match.

In order to save Test cricket, either the audience has to come forward to watch the game or the ICC has to take the responsibility of managing this game on its own initiative. Otherwise, the game may gradually stop. Because this generation prefers the short form of cricket. Everything now depends on the ICC.

I am certain that there are many fans for Test cricket in Australia and England as @JSRAW stated. Then there is the subcontinent where fans of T20 is growing because of the premium leagues. The boards and ICC should come up with such a format for test cricket. Only playing ICC matches won't help this format. As I stated earlier there are many who follow this format in their own ways.

I don't know how many fans in Australia who likes test cricket, but there are a lot of Test fans in England. Especially in England, when the county games start, a large number of spectators come to watch the game. It is clear that Test cricket has the existence and will continue. But the picture is completely different in the Indian subcontinent.

[fullhdpixel]

I am certain that there are many fans for Test cricket in Australia and England as @JSRAW stated. Then there is the subcontinent where fans of T20 is growing because of the premium leagues. The boards and ICC should come up with such a format for test cricket. Only playing ICC matches won't help this format. As I stated earlier there are many who follow this format in their own ways.

I don't know how many fans in Australia who likes test cricket, but there are a lot of Test fans in England. Especially in England, when the county games start, a large number of spectators come to watch the game. It is clear that Test cricket has the existence and will continue. But the picture is completely different in the Indian subcontinent.

Right now, Australia and England still are heaven for test format and there is no chance they are going to be had any negative view about this format because these two countries having rich history and these are the father and mother of this format as well which is surely a great feeling for them and their fans even things are changing very quickly in many other countries, but they are still at their best and good love affair which is going to be existed for long time.

Many other countries are badly suffer due to economic issues and have not enough structure for this format which give them quality players for this format as well specially we have West Indies and South Africa most effected countries with Zimbabwe are already suspended and Afghanistan and Ireland which have new test caps are still looking for positive change which is not possible with current situation.

[Naficopa]

When there are no fixtures scheduled then it's bound to happen, for some time this happened with the ODI thread too so nothing wrong with that.

Test cricket won't die among fans as long as BIG-3 takes this format seriously. ENG and AUS won't see any decline in this format anytime soon and for India just look at a hike on Eng/Aus cricket rights deal for the Indian market, it shows the fan base is increasing and not the other way around.

Test cricket would never die. There is a seperate fan base for test cricket but to maintain it the ICC needs to fix more test matches every year. There are many here who might not watch the full game but would certainly watch the highlights or might be following the match.

In order to save Test cricket, either the audience has to come forward to watch the game or the ICC has to take the responsibility of managing this game on its own initiative. Otherwise, the game may gradually stop. Because this generation prefers the short form of cricket. Everything now depends on the ICC.

I have a feeler that the test cricket will soon fade away - in this fast moving time ... No One would have time to watch long series
it will be waste of people time and the players energy - the dull uniform and slow over is not attractive to people who are fast and wants instant results.

[Sithara007]

Test cricket would never die. There is a seperate fan base for test cricket but to maintain it the ICC needs to fix more test matches every year. There are many here who might not watch the full game but would certainly watch the highlights or might be following the match.

Yes.. there is a separate fan base for test cricket. But the numbers are too small when compared to T20 or ODI cricket. I don't have an issue if test cricket remains in its place. But right now, it is overlapping with other formats. For example, a majority of the players who are included in the test squad are part of the T20 squad as well (I am talking about teams such as India). And these players spend more time playing test cricket compared to any other format.

Let's take the example of Virat Kohli. Last year, he played a total of 11 test matches (55 days), 3 ODI matches and 10 T20I matches. How can you justify a player like Virat spending 55 days on test cricket and just 13 days on limited overs cricket? Another example is that of Rohit Sharma. In his case, he played a total of 11 test matches in 2021, compared to 3 ODI and 11 T20I matches. 55 days of test cricket versus 14 days of limited overs. Does this make any sense?

[justdimin]

there is a separate fan base for test cricket. But the numbers are too small when compared to T20 or ODI cricket. I don't have an issue if test cricket remains in its place. But right now, it is overlapping with other formats. For example, a majority of the players who are included in the test squad are part of the T20 squad as well (I am talking about teams such as India). And these players spend more time playing test cricket compared to any other format.

Let's take the example of Virat Kohli. Last year, he played a total of 11 test matches (55 days), 3 ODI matches and 10 T20I matches. How can you justify a player like Virat spending 55 days on test cricket and just 13 days on limited overs cricket? Another example is that of Rohit Sharma. In his case, he played a total of 11 test matches in 2021, compared to 3 ODI and 11 T20I matches. 55 days of test cricket versus 14 days of limited overs. Does this make any sense?

This all is happening with few players those are involved in these all formats for long time now as time is running out we can watch few changes with mostly teams are having quality players for T20 and test format which are giving their best in separately which is good because in near future we can expect more changes with mostly big countries will have two teams and these could be done better justification as both could be able to give their best into their formats and boards needs to do one thing just give them salary packages which could be affordable for all as well.

Because IPL factor is surely having big impact and with this mostly youths are not interested in test and domestic cricket which is related to 3 or 4 days, and they love to have big contracts with IPL franchise which is more beneficial so if they are able to do these changes than surely we can bring good players in both formats which could be more helpful.

[Juggy777]

there is a separate fan base for test cricket. But the numbers are too small when compared to T20 or ODI cricket. I don't have an issue if test cricket remains in its place. But right now, it is overlapping with other formats. For example, a majority of the players who are included in the test squad are part of the T20 squad as well (I am talking about teams such as India). And these players spend more time playing test cricket compared to any other format.

Let's take the example of Virat Kohli. Last year, he played a total of 11 test matches (55 days), 3 ODI matches and 10 T20I matches. How can you justify a player like Virat spending 55 days on test cricket and just 13 days on limited overs cricket? Another example is that of Rohit Sharma. In his case, he played a total of 11 test matches in 2021, compared to 3 ODI and 11 T20I matches. 55 days of test cricket versus 14 days of limited overs. Does this make any sense?

This all is happening with few players those are involved in these all formats for long time now as time is running out we can watch few changes with mostly teams are having quality players for T20 and test format which are giving their best in separately which is good because in near future we can expect more changes with mostly big countries will have two teams and these could be done better justification as both could be able to give their best into their formats and boards needs to do one thing just give them salary packages which could be affordable for all as well.

Because IPL factor is surely having big impact and with this mostly youths are not interested in test and domestic cricket which is related to 3 or 4 days, and they love to have big contracts with IPL franchise which is more beneficial so if they are able to do these changes than surely we can bring good players in both formats which could be more helpful.

@Sithara007 ICC did try a attempt with the test championship, but honestly it feels like it flopped because the concept is too confusing. Furthermore ICC needs to move on from day tests to night tests, because those are more appreciated by the fans but even then the demand for test cricket is fading away and maybe ICC will decide in coming year’s to end this format and focus more on T20 matches which fans just can’t get enough of.

[JSRAW]

Test cricket would never die. There is a seperate fan base for test cricket but to maintain it the ICC needs to fix more test matches every year. There are many here who might not watch the full game but would certainly watch the highlights or might be following the match.

Yes.. there is a separate fan base for test cricket. But the numbers are too small when compared to T20 or ODI cricket. I don't have an issue if test cricket remains in its place. But right now, it is overlapping with other formats. For example, a majority of the players who are included in the test squad are part of the T20 squad as well (I am talking about teams such as India). And these players spend more time playing test cricket compared to any other format.

Let's take the example of Virat Kohli. Last year, he played a total of 11 test matches (55 days), 3 ODI matches and 10 T20I matches. How can you justify a player like Virat spending 55 days on test cricket and just 13 days on limited overs cricket? Another example is that of Rohit Sharma. In his case, he played a total of 11 test matches in 2021, compared to 3 ODI and 11 T20I matches. 55 days of test cricket versus 14 days of limited overs. Does this make any sense?

You are looking at this from a completely different (IMO wrong) point of view. 

This system or call it rotation policy is designed for the exact same reason that the premier player feature in Bilateral Test cricket and takes a rest from the useless Bilateral LOI series. It simply reflects the priorities of boards and players.

After all, no one remembers T-20 performance for long but people remember and talk about Test performance even after decades. 

@Sithara007 ICC did try a attempt with the test championship, but honestly it feels like it flopped because the concept is too confusing. Furthermore ICC needs to move on from day tests to night tests, because those are more appreciated by the fans but even then the demand for test cricket is fading away and maybe ICC will decide in coming year’s to end this format and focus more on T20 matches which fans just can’t get enough of.

Test Championship is just 1 season old so it would take time to mature, recent settings are not perfect but it's something that offers some sort of relevance due to the point table.

[YinShuiSiYuan]

When there are no fixtures scheduled then it's bound to happen, for some time this happened with the ODI thread too so nothing wrong with that.

Test cricket won't die among fans as long as BIG-3 takes this format seriously. ENG and AUS won't see any decline in this format anytime soon and for India just look at a hike on Eng/Aus cricket rights deal for the Indian market, it shows the fan base is increasing and not the other way around.

Test cricket would never die. There is a seperate fan base for test cricket but to maintain it the ICC needs to fix more test matches every year. There are many here who might not watch the full game but would certainly watch the highlights or might be following the match.

In order to save Test cricket, either the audience has to come forward to watch the game or the ICC has to take the responsibility of managing this game on its own initiative. Otherwise, the game may gradually stop. Because this generation prefers the short form of cricket. Everything now depends on the ICC.

I am certain that there are many fans for Test cricket in Australia and England as @JSRAW stated. Then there is the subcontinent where fans of T20 is growing because of the premium leagues. The boards and ICC should come up with such a format for test cricket. Only playing ICC matches won't help this format. As I stated earlier there are many who follow this format in their own ways.

Test cricket is very important for the player fitness, activeness and temperament. Test cricket although is becoming lesser played form of cricket as compared to T20 but nobody can ignore its significance.  This is really important for developing stamina in players. But this is also sad reality that since more money is flowing towards T20, so nations are less interested in Test.

[Sithara007]

After all, no one remembers T-20 performance for long but people remember and talk about Test performance even after decades. 

That is no longer the case. The vast majority of the test matches now are boring and hardly anyone follows them. I still remember about matches those were played two decades earlier. Back then there were legendary players such as Glenn McGrath, Muttiah Muralitharan, Shaun Pollock, Dale Steyn, Brian Lara, Rahul Dravid and Shivnarine Chanderpaul. Those times are long gone. There are no comparable players right now in test cricket. People talk about test cricket even after decades, because back then the matches were of very high quality. I don't expect anyone to remember players such as Nathan Lyon or Kagiso Rabada two decades from now.

[TheGreatPython]

Test cricket is very important for the player fitness, activeness and temperament. Test cricket although is becoming lesser played form of cricket as compared to T20 but nobody can ignore its significance.  This is really important for developing stamina in players. But this is also sad reality that since more money is flowing towards T20, so nations are less interested in Test.

But in my opinion, test cricket needs super fit players those able to stay in ground for five days then produce quality cricket which is very important right now for this format and currently if you are able to check then please go ahead right now Australia, England and India are having more test playing days instead of T20 because they are doing good for them, and it's unstoppable.

Test cricket is just like University love (This only Indian and Pakistani can understand those completed their University in 80s or 90s) which you can never forget and T20 is just like TikTok hopefully now you understand better about this

[JSRAW]

After all, no one remembers T-20 performance for long but people remember and talk about Test performance even after decades. 

That is no longer the case. The vast majority of the test matches now are boring and hardly anyone follows them. I still remember about matches those were played two decades earlier. Back then there were legendary players such as Glenn McGrath, Muttiah Muralitharan, Shaun Pollock, Dale Steyn, Brian Lara, Rahul Dravid and Shivnarine Chanderpaul. Those times are long gone. There are no comparable players right now in test cricket. People talk about test cricket even after decades, because back then the matches were of very high quality. I don't expect anyone to remember players such as Nathan Lyon or Kagiso Rabada two decades from now.

- Archer's knocking out Smith with a bouncer and then his concussion substitute Marnus takes the test cricket by storm.
- Ben Stokes-Leach last wicket partnership, Tim Paine's captaincy, LBW decision, Nathon Lyon's brain fade moment by missing the run out chance at Headingley.
- Trio of Starc +Cummins +Hazelwood wreaking havoc in Indian camp at Adelaide, 36 all out.
- 2 injured batters battling against the same trio for more than 40 overs to save the test at Sydney. Hanuma Vihari (Batting on 1 leg due to hamstring injury) and Ashwin (Struggling with back spasm)
- Gabba - Australia with 1033 wickets in the Playing XI and in contrast India with just 13 wickets. So many debutants, 2 new guys Thakur and Sundar (21 yo kid) saving the team in 1st inning, and in the second inning another kid Shubham Gill smashing Starc all over the ground for fun and 1 Thick boy Rishabh Pant was on another level. Everything is about this test is mind-boggling, I still wonder how did Aussie manage to lose the test match.

- Then we have Bongs winning the test in NZ.
- SL whitewashing the SA in their own backyard.

The point is there are many memorable series and moments in just last 5 years. Rabada still has a long career and FYI he already has a better record than ATG Wasim Akram, be it SR or Average but if you think that no one will remember Rabada once he finishes his career then OK because every generation has its bias. Lyon is a tricky one but IMO he's 2nd best off-spinner in this decade, after Ashwin. The problem is that off-spinners are at bottom of the food chain and that's why everyone writes them off.

[Sithara007]

^^^ Different people have different opinion. For example, I never considered Archer to be in the same league as that of McGrath and Donald. Starc +Cummins +Hazelwood can never achieve the same success as McGrath+Lee+Gillespie. Similarly, I will never consider Shaheen Shah Afridi as equal to Shoaib Akhtar or Waqar Younis. And never ever I would compare Lyon with someone like Warne or Muralitharan. I admit that I may be having some personal bias. I hardly ever watch test cricket nowadays.

[JSRAW]

^^^ Different people have different opinion. For example, I never considered Archer to be in the same league as that of McGrath and Donald. Starc +Cummins +Hazelwood can never achieve the same success as McGrath+Lee+Gillespie. Similarly, I will never consider Shaheen Shah Afridi as equal to Shoaib Akhtar or Waqar Younis. And never ever I would compare Lyon with someone like Warne or Muralitharan. I admit that I may be having some personal bias. I hardly ever watch test cricket nowadays.

Jofra Archer has just played 13 test matches so I don't think there is any comparison necessary with the likes of McGrath or Donald.

But fair enough as we both agree on "Personal Bias". My point wasn't about comparison anyway, I was merely pointing out that we have enough memorable tests/series in recent times too. For example fans (at least Indian and Aussie) will talk about recent BGT even after a couple of decades.

[Sithara007]

Jofra Archer has just played 13 test matches so I don't think there is any comparison necessary with the likes of McGrath or Donald.

But fair enough as we both agree on "Personal Bias". My point wasn't about comparison anyway, I was merely pointing out that we have enough memorable tests/series in recent times too. For example fans (at least Indian and Aussie) will talk about recent BGT even after a couple of decades.

Agreed. One thing that I don't like about test cricket is that it has changed a lot during the last 10-20 years. One difference is that we no longer have someone like Brett Lee or Shoaib Akhtar, who can bowl at 95 mph constantly. Even Mfuneko Ngam used to bowl at such pace, before his career got destroyed as a result of injury. And second thing is that we no longer have someone like Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Rahul Dravid or even Trevor Gripper, who would dig in and play with a lot of patience. Nowadays even test batsmen have strike rates of 70 or 80.

[pakhitheboss]

Jofra Archer has just played 13 test matches so I don't think there is any comparison necessary with the likes of McGrath or Donald.

But fair enough as we both agree on "Personal Bias". My point wasn't about comparison anyway, I was merely pointing out that we have enough memorable tests/series in recent times too. For example fans (at least Indian and Aussie) will talk about recent BGT even after a couple of decades.

Agreed. One thing that I don't like about test cricket is that it has changed a lot during the last 10-20 years. One difference is that we no longer have someone like Brett Lee or Shoaib Akhtar, who can bowl at 95 mph constantly. Even Mfuneko Ngam used to bowl at such pace, before his career got destroyed as a result of injury. And second thing is that we no longer have someone like Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Rahul Dravid or even Trevor Gripper, who would dig in and play with a lot of patience. Nowadays even test batsmen have strike rates of 70 or 80.

Fast bowlers are a rare breed these days. In my opinion, most bowlers avoid being fast in order to increase their sporting life. I still remember the fear in the batter's eye if any of the mentioned bowlers come to bowl. They were really very fast at that time. The demand for hitters has reduced such batsmen in this era of cricket. I think from India Shubhman Gill can become one of them in the future.

[Sithara007]

Fast bowlers are a rare breed these days. In my opinion, most bowlers avoid being fast in order to increase their sporting life. I still remember the fear in the batter's eye if any of the mentioned bowlers come to bowl. They were really very fast at that time. The demand for hitters has reduced such batsmen in this era of cricket. I think from India Shubhman Gill can become one of them in the future.

Reducing the run-up and pace doesn't guarantee injury-free career. Look at the case of Jasprit Bumrah. He is having such a short run-up (even Ganguly had a longer one), and still ended up injured. On the other hand, bowlers such as James Anderson never gets injured, despite the lengthy run-up. Outside sub-continent, the bowling domain is still dominated by fast bowlers. I don't know much about Shubhman Gill. His batting style seems to be very different from that of Chanderpaul or Dravid.

[Maidak]

Fast bowlers are a rare breed these days. In my opinion, most bowlers avoid being fast in order to increase their sporting life. I still remember the fear in the batter's eye if any of the mentioned bowlers come to bowl. They were really very fast at that time. The demand for hitters has reduced such batsmen in this era of cricket. I think from India Shubhman Gill can become one of them in the future.

Reducing the run-up and pace doesn't guarantee injury-free career. Look at the case of Jasprit Bumrah. He is having such a short run-up (even Ganguly had a longer one), and still ended up injured. On the other hand, bowlers such as James Anderson never gets injured, despite the lengthy run-up. Outside sub-continent, the bowling domain is still dominated by fast bowlers. I don't know much about Shubhman Gill. His batting style seems to be very different from that of Chanderpaul or Dravid.

Actually, the problem is that in the subcontinent the weather and pitch are not best suited for fast bowling. This is one of the major reasons why even a lot of really proficient fast bowlers are getting injured a lot more often, despite their talent. The fact that the bowler has a short distance to run up to the pitch is not going to benefit him in any way either.

Actually, I think it can cause a lot more arm and shoulder injuries to the bowler because with a short runup a bowler has to put in more shoulder power to produce pace. But on the other hand, with a long runup the bowler has a lot more momentum to generate speed. It is not really the runup that is the main reason why a lot of bowlers are getting injured, it is the mechanics of the bowl. I actually think that it is more about the rhythm and the follow-through of the bowler.