Test Cricket Prediction and Discussion Thread [self - mod]

[Vishnu.Reang]

I think the ICC should add reserve day. Because if the matches are not broadcast, the broadcasting TV channels are damaged. And these broadcasting TV channels are a major source of income for each board. So the ICC should keep a reserve day in each series even if it thinks of the broadcasters.

I really doubt whether they would do that. A few months back, they were discussing about reducing the duration of test matches by 1 day (i.e to make it 4-day matches instead of 5-day). And here we are talking just the opposite (to increase the duration from 5 days to 6 days). First of all, the popularity of test format is falling like a rock. No amount of tweaking by the ICC is going to slow it down. Cricket fans want more of T20 cricket, but the oldies of the ICC are still romantically attached to the test format.

[1714738529]

1714738529

[1714738529]

1714738529

[JSRAW]

~snip~

Maybe the ICC should start adding a reserve day, in case more than 180 overs of the match gets washed out? Due to the COVID pandemic, a number of bilateral tours are now being played in off-season, and this increases the risk of washouts. Also the global climate change is resulting in increasingly irregular weather across the globe. The broadcasters are losing money, but the cricket boards themselves are not directly affected. At this point, the minimum that the ICC can do is to add a reserve day.

I think the ICC should add reserve day. Because if the matches are not broadcast, the broadcasting TV channels are damaged. And these broadcasting TV channels are a major source of income for each board. So the ICC should keep a reserve day in each series even if it thinks of the broadcasters.

I wouldn't suggest any reserve day for the test cricket, majority of test playing nations struggling to generate enough revenue and they are always in loss when they schedule any test series, 1 extra day would hurt their economic model more, this is one of the main reason some cricketing board were trying to reduce 5 days cricket to 4 days. Although this doesn't apply to PIG-3 bilateral series or when India play with other member.

IMO The best possible solution would be some kind of mutual contract between PIG-3 (no interference from the ICC), they have resources so they can afford extra day for their bilateral series, these series generate enough revenue. Schedule can posses some challenges but it looks manageable if we dig deeper. for example rotation policy for players, 2 different team for Tests and LOI etc.

[nhaila]

Rain has been stopped and it highly possible to start match. Currently tea Break .... We all waiting for next update. Pitch outfield very moisture ... So spinner and fast ball can beat any batsman....

The match is called off without a single ball being bowled on the final day and the advantage was for India coming into the final day and i thought they could have won the match considering the batting line up they have and the total was not that huge. India needs to regroup and play like this throughout the tournament and if there is no rain interruption we could see a competitive series because i am sick of these stale draws due to bad weather.

Due to the bad weather effect India vs england first test match drawn without bowled. England team very pleased other side India cricket team very disappointed because Indian team can beat england very simply.

[Sithara007]

I wouldn't suggest any reserve day for the test cricket, majority of test playing nations struggling to generate enough revenue and they are always in loss when they schedule any test series, 1 extra day would hurt their economic model more, this is one of the main reason some cricketing board were trying to reduce 5 days cricket to 4 days. Although this doesn't apply to PIG-3 bilateral series or when India play with other member.

IMO The best possible solution would be some kind of mutual contract between PIG-3 (no interference from the ICC), they have resources so they can afford extra day for their bilateral series, these series generate enough revenue. Schedule can posses some challenges but it looks manageable if we dig deeper. for example rotation policy for players, 2 different team for Tests and LOI etc.

The only viable solution is to have two completely different teams for test and the limited overs format. It will allow the national team players to make some money by playing in franchise T20, and at the same time they can stay away from the time-wasting test format. The Pig-3 can easily do this. They can form separate teams and maintain the quality. But the same can't be said about the lower tier test teams such as South Africa, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, which are overdependent on a few players.

[Haunebu]

The only viable solution is to have two completely different teams for test and the limited overs format. It will allow the national team players to make some money by playing in franchise T20, and at the same time they can stay away from the time-wasting test format. The Pig-3 can easily do this. They can form separate teams and maintain the quality. But the same can't be said about the lower tier test teams such as South Africa, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, which are overdependent on a few players.

Pig-3? Lol. That cracked me up. Some players play well in all formats(Steven Smith, Virat Kohli, Jasprit Bumrah, Rohit Sharma, Ben Stokes etc) which is mutually beneficial to both the boards and the players.

This is the reason why completely different teams for different formats isn't really beneficial in my opinion.

[bryant.coleman]

This is the reason why completely different teams for different formats isn't really beneficial in my opinion.

It is not beneficial to the board, but definitely it is beneficial to the players. If a player takes part in all the three formats, and at the same time he participates in 2-3 franchise T20 leagues, then he will be hardly having any free time. For the Indian players, it may be OK. Because they don't take part in foreign franchise T20 leagues. But take the case of someone like Kieron Pollard or David Warner. It is not possible for these guys to play in all the three formats, because they will be busy with multiple T20 leagues.

[ene1980]

It is not beneficial to the board, but definitely it is beneficial to the players. If a player takes part in all the three formats, and at the same time he participates in 2-3 franchise T20 leagues, then he will be hardly having any free time. For the Indian players, it may be OK. Because they don't take part in foreign franchise T20 leagues. But take the case of someone like Kieron Pollard or David Warner. It is not possible for these guys to play in all the three formats, because they will be busy with multiple T20 leagues.

Do you think the cricket boards will be thinking much about the players, there is a rift going on with the players in almost all of the cricket boards especially West Indies, Pakistan cricket board always had issues with the players and Bangladesh board is also not in good terms with some of the players and recently i heard about the Sri Lankan board having issues with the players and disputes regarding the contracts.

The players want more freedom and finance due to new franchise leagues around the globe and the board does not want them to play and they need to focus on the International schedule and that is where the fights starts and basically the structure need to evolve if they want cricket to be popular like football with club having the priority than international games .

[Sithara007]

With the more experienced players, there is hardly anything that the board could do. On many occasions we have seen West Indian players refusing to play international matches, since they are busy with franchise cricket. The same can be said about Australian players like David Warner. The boards are unable to force them, since these players may otherwise retire form international cricket to concentrate fully on franchise leagues. Anyway, none of the players prefer the test format. Too much work, and too little pay.

[JSRAW]

~snip~
Pig-3? Lol. That cracked me up. Some players play well in all formats(Steven Smith, Virat Kohli, Jasprit Bumrah, Rohit Sharma, Ben Stokes etc) which is mutually beneficial to both the boards and the players.

This is the reason why completely different teams for different formats isn't really beneficial in my opinion.

Virat, Bumrah takes regular break from the LOI because of workload, i remember many LOI series where they were not part of the squad. Smith-Warner also skipped low profile series in the past (Not Tests) and they don't play in any league except IPL, recently they backed out from the 100. Rohit being in the Tests team regularly is new thing.

In modern times schedule is packed for good or bad reasons and IMO this amount of cricket is not possible for every player. Once a while some players can take part in all 3 format but not continuously, just look at the 3 recent examples Stokes took break from the cricket due to mental health. Archer is Struggling with injuries and can't play in recent series against India, T-20 WC and The Ashes. Pandaya used to play 3 format now his body is not allowing him to ball.

Kieron Pollard

Pollard is bad example because he's not test player.

[CryptoBuds]

With the more experienced players, there is hardly anything that the board could do. On many occasions we have seen West Indian players refusing to play international matches, since they are busy with franchise cricket. The same can be said about Australian players like David Warner. The boards are unable to force them, since these players may otherwise retire form international cricket to concentrate fully on franchise leagues. Anyway, none of the players prefer the test format. Too much work, and too little pay.

You are right There are very few players who prefer the Test format. Many players participate in the Test format due to the pressure of the board, while many play in this format thinking about the country. The focus of all the famous players is on the franchise league. Because here they can earn a very large amount of money by performing in a few matches. If the Test format is to survive, then of course all the cricket boards have to come up with some tough measures and policies.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Pollard is bad example because he's not test player.

Just now realized that Kieron Pollard hasn't played a test match till date. Perhaps he don't want to participate in test matches, but my opinion is that he could be more than handy even in the longer format. West Indies has been performing quite poorly in test format, ever since Shivnarine Chanderpaul was forced to retire. I believe that he was the last West Indian batsmen who could dig in and build a partnership under adverse conditions. After his retirement, I am yet to see a quality test batsmen in the West Indian squad.

[ene1980]

~
Just now realized that Kieron Pollard hasn't played a test match till date. Perhaps he don't want to participate in test matches, but my opinion is that he could be more than handy even in the longer format.

The only format Kieron Pollard plays well is the T20 format and there is not much memorable performance in the T20 International format as all of his performance are in franchise T20 leagues, he is not even consistent in the ODI format and only recently he started to perform consistently and there is no way he will perform well in Test matches.

West Indies has been performing quite poorly in test format, ever since Shivnarine Chanderpaul was forced to retire. I believe that he was the last West Indian batsmen who could dig in and build a partnership under adverse conditions. After his retirement, I am yet to see a quality test batsmen in the West Indian squad.

Why was Shivnarine Chanderpaul forced to retire, i do not know these stories but i would like to know. I know they had a great team in the past but for decades they are a mediocre team in the longer format.

[JSRAW]

Pollard is bad example because he's not test player.

Just now realized that Kieron Pollard hasn't played a test match till date. Perhaps he don't want to participate in test matches, but my opinion is that he could be more than handy even in the longer format. West Indies has been performing quite poorly in test format, ever since Shivnarine Chanderpaul was forced to retire. I believe that he was the last West Indian batsmen who could dig in and build a partnership under adverse conditions. After his retirement, I am yet to see a quality test batsmen in the West Indian squad.

Its correct that they hit the rock bottom but they do have some serious test players. In first batch Jason Holder, Kemar Roach, Kraigg Brathwaite, Roston Chase, Shannon Gabriel names come to my mind, then we have young players like Shimron Hetmyer (Big fan of his batting and really talented batter but sadly not quite successful yet), Shai Hope and Kyle Mayers are also seems promising.

[Sithara007]

Why was Shivnarine Chanderpaul forced to retire, i do not know these stories but i would like to know. I know they had a great team in the past but for decades they are a mediocre team in the longer format.

West Indies cricket team doesn't represent a single nation, but more than a dozen different countries. So it is normal to have differences related to selection policies. And in West Indies, religion and race plays a large part in sports. In case of Shivnarine Chanderpaul, he was kicked out of the team because the selectors wanted Brian Lara to remain as the top run-scorer for West Indies in test cricket. Lara has a total of 11,953 test runs to his name, while Chanderpaul had 11,867 runs when he was dropped from the test side (86 runs behind Lara). Also, Chanderpaul was quite assertive about his religion, which worked against him in a region where non-Christian religions are treated sub-par.

[Juggy777]

Why was Shivnarine Chanderpaul forced to retire, i do not know these stories but i would like to know. I know they had a great team in the past but for decades they are a mediocre team in the longer format.

West Indies cricket team doesn't represent a single nation, but more than a dozen different countries. So it is normal to have differences related to selection policies. And in West Indies, religion and race plays a large part in sports. In case of Shivnarine Chanderpaul, he was kicked out of the team because the selectors wanted Brian Lara to remain as the top run-scorer for West Indies in test cricket. Lara has a total of 11,953 test runs to his name, while Chanderpaul had 11,867 runs when he was dropped from the test side (86 runs behind Lara). Also, Chanderpaul was quite assertive about his religion, which worked against him in a region where non-Christian religions are treated sub-par.

@Sithara007 this is a totally new angle for me cause for all this while I believed he was dropped because of his form, and due to his age. Furthermore I did a quick search to see if what you say is mentioned somewhere, but all I found was articles saying he was dropped due to poor form, and due to him being 40 years, so I’m sharing those links below have a look and offer your take on them.

Sources:

https://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2015/05/23/chanderpaul-dropped-for-australian-series/

https://gulfnews.com/sport/cricket/chanderpaul-i-wanted-12000-runs-not-laras-record-1.1661423

[bryant.coleman]

@Sithara007 this is a totally new angle for me cause for all this while I believed he was dropped because of his form, and due to his age. Furthermore I did a quick search to see if what you say is mentioned somewhere, but all I found was articles saying he was dropped due to poor form, and due to him being 40 years, so I’m sharing those links below have a look and offer your take on them.

Sources:

https://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2015/05/23/chanderpaul-dropped-for-australian-series/

https://gulfnews.com/sport/cricket/chanderpaul-i-wanted-12000-runs-not-laras-record-1.1661423

This is what Chanderpaul had to say: https://www.espncricinfo.com/video/i-was-forced-to-retire-by-wicb-chanderpaul-968357

And the argument that his form was not good is simply not true. Chanderpaul scored 648 runs in 2014-15, at an average of 43.20. His batting average may look ordinary, but this includes runs scored in a few tough bilateral series. And the issue of selection has been raised by many players of Indian origin, including Ravi Rampaul. And in case of Rampaul, he was told that he can't be selected in the national team because he belonged to a different race:

https://www.cricketcountry.com/news/west-indies-selectors-told-i-was-not-picked-because-of-how-i-look-on-tv-says-ravi-rampaul-441512

[JSRAW]

Few updates

- Anderson (Quad)-Board (Calf) are facing fitness problem.
- Moeen Ali is back in the England's squad.
- Lord Thakur is also struggling with Hamstring. Ashwin might get in the team this time and Ishant could replace Siraj.  
- India and England both lost 2 WTC points due to slow over rate and 40% match fees lol  

-------------------------
Edit

Stuart Broad has been ruled out of the current test series

[Sithara007]

If Ishant gets in to the playing XI, then it will be good. I don't know why he was not considered for the first test. I believe that he is a far better bowler than either Mohammed Siraj or Shardul Thakur. I guess Siraj got in to the team because of the RCB quota. His test record so far is not very impressive, despite the fact that he has played almost all of his matches in seam-friendly conditions. For the second test, I would prefer three seamers (Jasprit Bumrah, Ishant Sharma and Mohammed Shami), as well as two spinners (Ravindra Jadeja & Ravichandran Ashwin).

[Lordshiva]

If Ishant gets in to the playing XI, then it will be good. I don't know why he was not considered for the first test. I believe that he is a far better bowler than either Mohammed Siraj or Shardul Thakur. I guess Siraj got in to the team because of the RCB quota. His test record so far is not very impressive, despite the fact that he has played almost all of his matches in seam-friendly conditions. For the second test, I would prefer three seamers (Jasprit Bumrah, Ishant Sharma and Mohammed Shami), as well as two spinners (Ravindra Jadeja & Ravichandran Ashwin).

I think they played Shardul Thakur because he can bat as well. But he only got a duck so that concept did not worked out and i totally agree with you. Ishant must be in the playing 11 so as ashwin they got 300 and 400 wickets respectively for india so they must be in the playing 11 without any doubt.

[JSRAW]

If Ishant gets in to the playing XI, then it will be good. I don't know why he was not considered for the first test. I believe that he is a far better bowler than either Mohammed Siraj or Shardul Thakur. I guess Siraj got in to the team because of the RCB quota. His test record so far is not very impressive, despite the fact that he has played almost all of his matches in seam-friendly conditions. For the second test, I would prefer three seamers (Jasprit Bumrah, Ishant Sharma and Mohammed Shami), as well as two spinners (Ravindra Jadeja & Ravichandran Ashwin).

3 seam + 2 spin or 4 seam + 1 spin combination will depend on the conditions. If Kohli & co think that pitch supporting seamers then Bumrah, Shami, Siraj and Ishant will take care of seam attack. Ashwin might lose the spot because keeping Jaddu out doesn't make sense after his last performance with the bat. England also looking at 4 seam + 1 spin combination.

If conditions are different then Ashwin-Jadeja combination with 3 seamers looks fine but i'm not sure who would kohli pick as his 3rd seam option if it comes down to Siraj or Ishant. So far Siraj played 4 games in SENA countries and took 16 wickets. 6 wickets in Brisbane, 5 in Melbourne, 3 in Nottingham and 2 in Sydney so his numbers are not that bad. On the other hand Ishant record is also good and he's experienced.