Yeah because right now we get to play Australia and India regularly? Ireland barely even gets test matches, the closest thing to a "regular" fixture is the one off test against England in the Ashes every 4 or so years. At least with this system they'd be playing more test cricket regularly (and in the context of a competition instead of squeezing in a random test against Ban on a white ball tour) as opposed to scrapping 3 or so matches a year and not having the chance to improve
Yeah cause they've been playing so much test cricket so far. It's been over 7 years since Ireland gained test status and in all that time England have played them in two one-off 4-day test matches. What a great loss that would be!
Harmy’s extra passion and romanticisation of the Ashes is the exact problem Test Cricket faces. Start giving importance to other series as well. When is the last time England brought Bangladesh over to play some Test Cricket?
Test cricket is thriving, most anticipated Ashes ever, Best BGT crowds in Australian history. Agree with Harmy. Need to nurture West Indies young fast bowlers, in England, Aus and India, with red ball scholarships, SA doing well. India needs to do more for subcontinental neighbours.
Bangladesh got some exciting talents that caught the eyes of Harsha Bhogle earlier in the end of 2024, with Test's tendency to spotlight players ? It will be amazing to see how the tide will lift all boats here.
I don’t think you will get bigger crowds if we have India and England touring with Test matches in Australia almost every year. I think the reason you get bigger crowds because you look forward to that series every four years with different players touring as well. Maybe the big three could play a single Test against the minors on a regular basis until they improve. Two Test series is another bad example, should play Three, maybe over four days. Keep five days for the Five Test series. Need to promote Test cricket in as many countries as possible. It would be the death of Test cricket if West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, did not play, maybe there is a sinister motive and certain people in power only want white ball cricket. I do not like 20/20 cricket.
The other nations need to be playing more. You can’t have a system like now where england plays 15 tests, india plays 12 tests and a team like NZ plays 6 in a year. ICC needs to enforce that somehow, all teams must play a minimum of 10-12 tests in a year. That way it forces more 3-test series and the smaller teams play more often and get to hone their skill. In 3~4 years, you will see a difference.
Underneath I think the plan is not so much a two tier system, but an attempt to return to test cricket of 30+ years ago. Basically the big 3 have come together and said having teams like Bangladesh, Afg, Ireland, Zim etc was a mistake, and we want to exclude all but 6-8 teams, like we used to have.
As an Aussie I’m all for 2 divisions with promotion or relegation for everyone. If one of the big three drop into Div 2, it will be a huge boost for the teams they play against. It would be the best thing for game globally.
Even if England slipped to 6th/7th, they'll never cancel the Ashes. The whole system is meant to make more games with the big3 and everyone else eats the crumbs.
All this talk is great but nobody does anything to help Bangladeshi Test cricket. Our board may be corrupt but not poor. We are only behind India and Pakistan in terms of the number of fans. Make England and Australia invite us and see if the diaspora over there does not fill stadiums. England haven't invited us over for 15 years and are not scheduled to host us in the next cycle as well. Australia will host Bangladesh for the first time in 24 years in 2027. England and Australia will face Bangladesh in Tests in 2027 for the first time in 10 and 11 years respectively. Last time both these sides faced us, the series was drawn 1-1 in Bangladesh. You may bash us in your conditions but generations of Bangladeshi players haven't even had the chance to experience those conditions. So, I would like to see these experts and administrators from England and Australia actually do something about Bangladesh rather than looking down on us. Cause you know we are not guaranteed victories even if you invite us especially in white ball cricket. (Which you haven't done either)
Fix the corruption in the board, and then you will find things will change for the best. England and Australia aren't interested in dealing with corruption
@@ashjain1008 The fact that you've replied in Hindi tells me everything I need to know. And even if we lose by an innings I'll be happy. But there's no point in actually trying to have a proper cricketing conversation with you if your first response is you'll lose heavily so what's the point.
Part of the prestige of Ashes, BGT etc is the build up. Seeing them play more regularly will become too familiar. Cricket needs variety. Also West Indies cricket would probably die from this.
Australia won't play bilateral matches with Afghanistan due to their repression of women, specifically their refusal to allow them to play cricket or any sport.
Australia don't want anything to do with Afghanistan. The Taliban don't allow women to play cricket, so Australia has already said they want nothing to do them. Also, Australian Cricket is in massive debt. They're losing 10's of millions of dollars every year. Our own kids are struggling to get funding from CA. So fat chance CA will give away funds to other countries. It's up to the ICC to help the poorer nations. Not Australia, England and India.
@@jimloveday2836which is a real shame, look at the epic Aus vs Afg world cup, although Aus won, we probably shouldn't have except for Maxi 😅 I think Aus has lost to Zimbabwe in T20 in the past few years also, there's no reason other than an 'elite' mindset that is keeping the big 3 immune. Scotland is almost at test status by the current ICC system, an IRE vs SCO (or even ENG test is going to fill plenty of seats, especially if it's worth something in a championship. African nation's like Namibia can probably compete in tests also, several players have first class experience, and then there's the money bank that's USA, and Canada, we should look to expand into a 16-18 nation, two tier system, with full promotion and relegation (the bottom placed wtc1 team plays a 3 test series vs top wtc2 team 🤔
Simple. Relegate one of the top 3 if they finish 7th. But allow one 3-4 match major series outside of the WTC. For example Ashes for no points, just the urn. Or BGT for no points, just the trophy.
why do the icc do not take the initiative of having ind vs pak series for revenue concerns like arranging it on a neutral venue or so. I remember Aus playing Pak at lords
They have no authority over the fixturing of Test cricket between nations. Both nations would tell them to keep out. The Pak v Aus in England only worked because Australia and Pakistan have good relations and there was long amicable talks with England about the logistics of the move. India and Pakistan have to fix their relations for this which is the business of both nations and no one else.
@@scottmoody2561 All the same, for most of the 80's Australia couldn't get out their own way. England had been trash for years up until the 2005 Ashes.
Two pools of 5/6 teams, home and away series, winner of each pool plays in the final. Big ticket series, ashes etc, can be played in addition to these fixtures, if teams are in separate groups.
. It is a terrible idea. the reason Australians flock to the Ashes and BGT when played here is because it is once every four years is because it has meaning. I was in the members at the MCG on day two and three( v India) which holds 30,000. I literally could not get a seat and had to stand for 7 hours both days. The Ashes is over a 140 years old, the Border- Gavaskar trophy while not as traditional is taking on more and more significance in those countries eyes. Why destroy this with meaningless and repetitive scheduling? And individual records for tests will get skewed. A top class bowler or bat will emerge in tier two who will have 'test' stats like Tendulkar or Warne. The whole thing has a bad wiff about it. test cricket apart from a few nations in on the rack and this may well kill it off in smaller nations.
Every 2 years (home and away). And the video is not correct, these series would still be every 2 years just like they are now under a top division of 7.
@@geoffmaloney2717 they won't be in a 7 nation top division where everyone plays everyone. England's home ashes will still be every 2nd cycle, ie- every 4 years.
The gap between the top nations and smaller nations will only widen if they adopt this model. The poms should know this. Most of them have seen it occur in football. The financial difference between Liverpool and Man Utd compared to Stoke is enormous. That's what will happen in Test Cricket.
@StuTheDon17 it already is like that in cricket. A top division would at least give a lot more money to the 4 non-Big3 teams who would then play play 1 and a half series per year against a big 3 nation (currently they average 1 series per year against the Big3). That would be a huge boost for South Africa, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, and whichever other nation is lucky enough to make start in the top league (most likely Pakistan). It would also be a big carrot for the Windies to push to get promoted. The biggest problem with the current system is that there's "1 division", but actually there's not! The Big3 play each-other every time and don't play everyone else so much. Rewarding the stronger teams with more series against the Big3 is fairer, more profitable, and will make for more competitive tests.
They just need to make it like the old world cup qualifying system where certain nations automatically qualify for division 1 and there are a few slots available that division 2 teams can be promoted to. The top team of division 2 gets promoted and the bottom team of the flex slots gets relegated. Then periodically they should review what teams automatically qualify for division 1
What a mess this is. Certainly your competition test match special should change its theme tune from the Caribbean one to Wagner. Perhaps it would be more fitting. I cannot believe the short-sightedness in this. There are only two perfect cricketers in the history of the sport Don Bradman and the other is from the West Indies. I'd like to know what on earth Cricket is doing by giving all the power to only three teams okay? West Indies deserve to be in the second tier because they've had 25 years of poor results. However, they won't be able to climb back up the ladder being stuck down at the bottom in a second league. And what about all the other teams? There should have been an ICC academy in the West Indies long ago to preserve talents in the region once again, Cricket shoots itself in the foot, but this may be the worst case of all because many people actually got attracted to the sport in the first place because of the West Indians. They changed the way the game was played and a lot of people turned on the telly to watch them. It's just not the same without a strong West Indies. All you have is a strong arrogant India for whom things like TV rights and match fixing and ridiculous leagues dominate stealing Cricket from the West Indies region and giving nothing back. What about giving something back to the West Indies for all the lessons in great Fielding and fitness that Dennis Waite taught us years ago? What a joke this is!
Getting extremely annoyed with all the chit chat by Vaughn (yes England lost 11 test matches) and Co. regarding South Africa getting to the final and the attempts to placate the Indian market. They won 8 test matches in a row this year, home & away against 4 opponents, with more pressure as they had to win every game. Its not SA's fault they don't get given more than 2 test series any more.
If you place money at the centre of the game, it will become your master. And cricket doesn’t have the money, so they will end up licking the boots of the broadcasters. There are plenty of examples where we see sports sells its soul and the broadcasters continually drive the price down and demand more of the profitable product and not the best product. Look at rugby and the Heineken cup. The money is a fraction of what it used to be with more rugby. Only people winning are the accounts. Cricket should really think very carefully about who they want to be. The ICC and big 3 could well be chasing the death of the game outside the big 3 and then even the in the big 3. Who will watch only England, Australia and India play each other. That is the path we are heading to. Broadcasters will sell you anything you want any on first contact and make their money on the subsequent contacts.
There are many models worldwide to replicate. Regional, divisions, conferences.... it's the cycles and scheduling to fit into Test Series. Revenue? Turn it into an ICC event and hence distribute the broadcasting revenues and prizes accordingly. Costs may have to go towards broadcasting whilst turnstiles can also be negotiated. It's just a matter of logistics but there is a future for Test Cricket with the right administrators with cricket rather than national interests
I know it seems crazy but they should introduce the notion of benefits for the bottom 6 ranked teams - where they get an extra bat when playing top 6 opposition and limit the overs for the opposing team to 70 while they play 80.
I think a two tier system would be great for the weaker teams… Zim, Ire, Afg, they would get more regular matches, and if they do well, they could get to mix it up with the big teams. And it would give the big teams more incentive to perform, because if they don’t they risk relegation. Sounds great! Of course harms doesn’t like it
Have a 2 year test league..Continue FTP for points table.. top 6 will play each other in a 5 week test championship tournament.. Top two will play WTC final.. Have it in England for starts... No other cricket except maybe minor T20 or womens cricket.. I am sure there are ways to make Test cricket more appealing and rewarding.
I'd prefer to see a proper ranking system rather than a 2 tier competition. A situation where you could only play test series against teams that are within 3 or 4 spots of your position in the rankings. For example, if you are rated 1 - they could only then compete against the teams ranked 2 - 5. This ensures that the big teams get games against each other and don't get to beat up on the little guys. The 5th ranked team could play anyone from 1 - 9. This means that they still get some high drawing series, but also get some games against teams to pad their stats a little and provide competition and improvement opportunities to lower ranked teams. The bottom ranked team only gets to play against other bottom 5 teams - if they are to improve and progress, they can face tougher opposition as they climb in the rankings. The problem, obviously, is the way the current rankings are worked out in the WTC which make very little sense.
2 tier concept will actually act as a motivation for many countries to improve the quality of their cricket, in the present state there is hardly any motivation, even for test championship just 3- 4 countries are really motivated. Another point its not the big 3 countries responsibility to improve cricket in other test playing countries, their boards need to do that , as of now these boards are only concerned anout the mo ey thry get when 1 of the big 3 play them but what have they done to improve the game abd love for game within their country. During BGT despite being test matches virtually every ground had full capacity for most days and the spectator numbers during T20 world cup in West Indies was dismal at the least. So yes , the 2 tier makes a lot of sense
When the windies was on top was it their responsibility to tour weaker teams for eg India? They did and other teams got better by playing against them more often.
Several misunderstandings in the video. The Big3 already play eachother once per cycle. That would be identical in a division of 7. Ashes series would not be more common. Relegation would be great, and there's no need to fearmonger about the Big3 being relegated. The reason the Big3 have sometimes looked like being low on the ladder is *because* they play each-other while other teams *don't* in the current 9 nation system. If there were 7 teams everyone would play everyone and if series are returned to being worth equal points like the 1st iteration of the WTC then the other 4 teams all having to play the Big3 will batter at least a few of them to the bottom of the ladder. I think the proposed system has great merit, but absolutely the prospective 2nd division nations should be holding out for greater revenue sharing.
You could have a pool system like the world cup in test cricket, so the smaller nations play top ranked nations and then as expected Australia vs England and so until the test championship game. You can keep the ashes etc every 2 years for revenue and this gives everyone a fair go.
Instead of a tier system it would be good to see each the big 3 teams equally play every "smaller" team away from home during a 2-3 year window while retaining the current structure for home series against each other like Ashes and BGT. India and Pakistan need to come up with something and play neutral too, a test series between them would make huge money. as for WTC, they should drop the qualifying points system and every 3 years have a test tournament (like a world cup), alternate the host country, top 6- 8 ranked teams in knockout matches for the privilege to challenge the previous year's trophy holder in the final. during that month period the trophy holder could play an official 3 match test series against it's own A-Team. might be a lot of cricket all at once across a month or 6 weeks but surely that's better than the current mess
100 percent they should focus on revenue, test cricket can't afford to compete with 2020 salaries currently, if you want the best players playing for their countries instead of franchises you have to increase revenues and pay them more.
I think in division 1 there should be only six teams and atleast 4 match series and last in division 1 and first one in division 2 gets interchanged. And if this means anyone of top three getting relegated then so be it . Purpose of this System should be to get More teams to be competitive in overseas situations. To be Fair Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and West Indies very rarely play good hard cricket. Two division system can give more competitive environment to Test Cricket. And I would like to see associate Nations also playing in division 2 .
Cricket is just the same as any other global sport. Money talks it's as simple as that. The interest and financial aspect of an ashes series is massive.
I disagree on it being an American style if there’s no promotion relegation, they have a “draft” which means the worst team from the previous season gets the best rookie pick and hence their teams are more competitive, that’s why you’ll notice that you don’t have the same team winning for years and years like Australia for example, rarely when that happens like bulls or lakers, it’s called a dynasty, but those teams are pretty poorly performing now
Do you think that if India regresses as a test nation the clamour around the two tier system will die down ? India have a transition on their hands. With Ashwin gone, and the triumvirate of Jadeja, Kohli and Sharma on their last legs..if they were to have a bad tour to England then suddenly India would have a gaping hole in their test side for the home season.
Bangladesh has a population of 177 million. If they can stabilise their politics and grow economically they are likely to become a force in cricket. Perhaps it will end up with the big 4 playing one another.
A league series is only worth it if there is relegation and promotion, and every team is part of it. What is needed is something the big three play each other max every 3 years, giving an off year to be made to play other teams by the ICC, with tour sponsorship by the ICC so smaller countries can travel to the big 3 and players get paid a decent amount. That would take away money from the big 3 though, so will never happen.
Will Steve Harmison think differently if he is forced to take the position of any country but England, which is the only country where Test cricket does not need to be subsidized by white ball cricket?
The criticisms are correct, but what’s the alternative? You can say the big three and the ICC should ‘help’ other teams, but how exactly? If the game simply isn’t financially viable the only thing the ICC could do is go to the West Indies and Sri Lanka and say we’ll pay your best players more than they earn in IPL and other leagues. Then somehow make the cricket they’re playing viable. There’s no way it could happen. The future could be the big three playing each other in 5-6 tests/year. Can’t see another option. Btw this isn’t necessarily forever. Look how the game has changed in the last 10 years. It could change again.
WTC 4 year cycles T20 World Cup and 50 over World Cup every 4 years. Bilateral ODI and T20 every 4 years and shouldn’t be able to play a side at home or away more than once in a 4 years cycle. ICC need to stop monopoly England, Australia and India have on cricket.
icc should premier test league Australia, England, India, Pakistan, South Africa , NZ and 2nd division, Scotland, Ireland,Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe,West Indies the bigs countrys can play the big series like the ashes etc outside the wtc championship series obligation if one of big teams drops down
I think this problem can be solved more easily, stop always playing the big three together. Short term it will hurt the finances but Lets be honest if you really want to keep test cricket alive then the big three needs to open up more to playing other nationas and give reasons why people woulod want to have more viewers wanting to be interested in watching test cricket.
Sorry Harmy and Manners - but do you think the current way of administering test cricket is some kind of philanthropic eutopia for the smaller nations? The current problem is that the WTC does not have enough buy in from the big 3, so all the media interest gets poured into the 5-test bilateral series they play against each other, every single year. If having a 7-team top tier is what is necessary to make the WTC a viable world league that everyone buys into - then it can grow the game far better than the current system. Imagine a 4-week tournament each year in a neutral host country, where each team plays 3 matches - Test cricket that the whole world is watching. Tier 2 teams can increase viewership by having their games played in the rest days between the tier 1 games. I bet they will end up playing more games, and get more revenue for their boards under that system than they currently do by having each of the big 3 throw them a token 2 test series every 4 years.
Most of the players that worried about money there the one that bringing down the cricketing world players need to let performance speak for it self then the money will come can't be paying players to do rubbish out there on the cricket field
So you don't like this because England may get relegated? Is this even a reason? I won't mind it even if India gets relegated if we play poor cricket. We deserve it then. That's how it should be looked at. Only the deserving and well playing nations will be in tier 1. How are you going to spread the game if you just care about the Ashes and BGT? We may not have an Ashes then if England is relegated. And by the way since the last 15 years Ashes is there only in England when you tour Australia you are bashed so badly that it feels like a tier 3 team is playing Australia. No match up there.
Test cricket should have 2 wtc trophies/ maces..One in gold(only division 1 team can achieve) and other in silver( both div 1 and div 2 can achieve). Number 1 ranked div 1 team should play no 1 ranked div 2 team for the silver ,which help the div 2 teams to have some motivation to play wtc..
Gold- ( 3 match series finale betwen ranked no 1 and no 2 in WTC division1 ) Silver - 1 match finale between rank no 1(div1) and rank 1 in (div2) teams ...division 2 teams can never compete for gold mace ,but can compete for silver, but div 1 teams can compete for both silver and gold and no 1 team can even get both the silver and gold mace at same time as well
It’s been great for creating interest in test cricket in places like South Africa, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Waste of time for India, England and Australia maybe.
@@HkFinn83 Where are you pulling the numbers out of for Bangladesh? Nobody cares about the WTC cause we are not improving. We don't get the chance to tour England or Australia. That's the real problem. Let everybody play everybody instead of this threesome that they've going on. If you want to make money then have India and Pakistan play each other in England or Australia.
@@HkFinn83not a waste of time for Australia since it’s another trophy to win. I’m guessing Cabin is English though so makes sense he thinks it’s a waste of time because England will never win it
Not if you at all interested in test cricket. Seems to be working, plenty of talk about it. It is very flawed, but it is a start. The alternative is, we just go down the abyss of losing tests other than maybe just Australia v. England.
Cricket can survive in "smaller nations" without test cricket against the "Big Three". They will still have white ball series against India, which basically pays all of their bills. Whether they will then spend any cash on test cricket is another matter.
only england cricket is skeptical about this, they have a very outdated mindset remember these were the same peolpe who said that ipl is a circus and today they themselves come here licking our boots, dont take these guys seriously
@@elennet4116 Mr. smart brains test cricket is not an olympic event with Gold, silver and Bronze medals ........... It's just played in max 10-12 countries thats all ..........
Not sensible. We just had 375k at one test at the MCG because the Australia/India rivalry is huge. The series attracted 837k people over 5 tests. Next season we will have huge attendances as it is for the Ashes. they do that every two years and the interest will soon drop off. Nothing to do with Australia winning, it is tradition and eagerly awaited in Australia. Golden Goose etc.
Imagine Ireland, spending their whole history fighting to get test cricket, and then ending up only being able to play Zim, Ban and WI!
Yeah because right now we get to play Australia and India regularly? Ireland barely even gets test matches, the closest thing to a "regular" fixture is the one off test against England in the Ashes every 4 or so years. At least with this system they'd be playing more test cricket regularly (and in the context of a competition instead of squeezing in a random test against Ban on a white ball tour) as opposed to scrapping 3 or so matches a year and not having the chance to improve
Yeah cause they've been playing so much test cricket so far. It's been over 7 years since Ireland gained test status and in all that time England have played them in two one-off 4-day test matches. What a great loss that would be!
Bro you don’t watch cricket do you😂😂
We would rather get those test matched, guaranteed, rather then nothing we get now.
@@vettelfan17 EXACTLY, we're seeing a max 1 home test a year and potentially 1 away. It's pointless right now
Harmy’s extra passion and romanticisation of the Ashes is the exact problem Test Cricket faces. Start giving importance to other series as well. When is the last time England brought Bangladesh over to play some Test Cricket?
Bangladesh aren't able to improve for the last 30 years
They are not good enough for Test
No broadcaster will pay a penny for such series
Knob, that’s not Stephen it’s just how it is. You must have all teams playing each other, not just three or four.
Test cricket is thriving, most anticipated Ashes ever, Best BGT crowds in Australian history. Agree with Harmy. Need to nurture West Indies young fast bowlers, in England, Aus and India, with red ball scholarships, SA doing well. India needs to do more for subcontinental neighbours.
Bangladesh got some exciting talents that caught the eyes of Harsha Bhogle earlier in the end of 2024, with Test's tendency to spotlight players ? It will be amazing to see how the tide will lift all boats here.
I don’t think you will get bigger crowds if we have India and England touring with Test matches in Australia almost every year. I think the reason you get bigger crowds because you look forward to that series every four years with different players touring as well. Maybe the big three could play a single Test against the minors on a regular basis until they improve. Two Test series is another bad example, should play Three, maybe over four days. Keep five days for the Five Test series. Need to promote Test cricket in as many countries as possible. It would be the death of Test cricket if West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, did not play, maybe there is a sinister motive and certain people in power only want white ball cricket. I do not like 20/20 cricket.
The other nations need to be playing more. You can’t have a system like now where england plays 15 tests, india plays 12 tests and a team like NZ plays 6 in a year. ICC needs to enforce that somehow, all teams must play a minimum of 10-12 tests in a year. That way it forces more 3-test series and the smaller teams play more often and get to hone their skill. In 3~4 years, you will see a difference.
Underneath I think the plan is not so much a two tier system, but an attempt to return to test cricket of 30+ years ago. Basically the big 3 have come together and said having teams like Bangladesh, Afg, Ireland, Zim etc was a mistake, and we want to exclude all but 6-8 teams, like we used to have.
As an Aussie I’m all for 2 divisions with promotion or relegation for everyone. If one of the big three drop into Div 2, it will be a huge boost for the teams they play against. It would be the best thing for game globally.
That and it's most likely to be the Poms, and that will be hilarious 😂
Even if England slipped to 6th/7th, they'll never cancel the Ashes. The whole system is meant to make more games with the big3 and everyone else eats the crumbs.
@@darylblain4710 Even if England drops to tier 2 still you could have Ashes but it won't be official but for the sake of it.
All this talk is great but nobody does anything to help Bangladeshi Test cricket. Our board may be corrupt but not poor. We are only behind India and Pakistan in terms of the number of fans. Make England and Australia invite us and see if the diaspora over there does not fill stadiums. England haven't invited us over for 15 years and are not scheduled to host us in the next cycle as well. Australia will host Bangladesh for the first time in 24 years in 2027. England and Australia will face Bangladesh in Tests in 2027 for the first time in 10 and 11 years respectively. Last time both these sides faced us, the series was drawn 1-1 in Bangladesh. You may bash us in your conditions but generations of Bangladeshi players haven't even had the chance to experience those conditions. So, I would like to see these experts and administrators from England and Australia actually do something about Bangladesh rather than looking down on us. Cause you know we are not guaranteed victories even if you invite us especially in white ball cricket. (Which you haven't done either)
Tum log do do innings se haaroge
Ro mat. Tumko balaya to bhi zaleel ho kar jaoge.
Fix the corruption in the board, and then you will find things will change for the best.
England and Australia aren't interested in dealing with corruption
No one helped India become the cricketing power. England and Australia tried damn hard to stop. If you are looking for handouts nothing will happen.
@@ashjain1008 The fact that you've replied in Hindi tells me everything I need to know. And even if we lose by an innings I'll be happy. But there's no point in actually trying to have a proper cricketing conversation with you if your first response is you'll lose heavily so what's the point.
Part of the prestige of Ashes, BGT etc is the build up. Seeing them play more regularly will become too familiar. Cricket needs variety. Also West Indies cricket would probably die from this.
As an Aussie l love Harmi!
He always speaks sense and from a place of knowledge and care!
Harmison and knowledge is a real oxymoron.
I'd like to see England and Australia invite SL, Afg, Ban, WI more often to develop their test cricket potential
Australia won't play bilateral matches with Afghanistan due to their repression of women, specifically their refusal to allow them to play cricket or any sport.
Australia don't want anything to do with Afghanistan. The Taliban don't allow women to play cricket, so Australia has already said they want nothing to do them.
Also, Australian Cricket is in massive debt. They're losing 10's of millions of dollars every year. Our own kids are struggling to get funding from CA. So fat chance CA will give away funds to other countries.
It's up to the ICC to help the poorer nations. Not Australia, England and India.
@@jimloveday2836which is a real shame, look at the epic Aus vs Afg world cup, although Aus won, we probably shouldn't have except for Maxi 😅
I think Aus has lost to Zimbabwe in T20 in the past few years also, there's no reason other than an 'elite' mindset that is keeping the big 3 immune.
Scotland is almost at test status by the current ICC system, an IRE vs SCO (or even ENG test is going to fill plenty of seats, especially if it's worth something in a championship.
African nation's like Namibia can probably compete in tests also, several players have first class experience, and then there's the money bank that's USA, and Canada, we should look to expand into a 16-18 nation, two tier system, with full promotion and relegation (the bottom placed wtc1 team plays a 3 test series vs top wtc2 team 🤔
If the top 3 cant be relegated, what is the point
The point is the money hounds don't give a fk.
The point is the big three can play each other more often.
💵💵💵
He said at the beginning Disney are involved.
They will drive cricket into extinction as long as it means they make a quick buck along the way.
Simple.
Relegate one of the top 3 if they finish 7th. But allow one 3-4 match major series outside of the WTC.
For example
Ashes for no points, just the urn.
Or
BGT for no points, just the trophy.
why do the icc do not take the initiative of having ind vs pak series for revenue concerns like arranging it on a neutral venue or so. I remember Aus playing Pak at lords
No matches will weaker teams like pakistan
For the same reason South Africa was faced with a 20 year international cricket boycott for Apartheid
They have no authority over the fixturing of Test cricket between nations. Both nations would tell them to keep out.
The Pak v Aus in England only worked because Australia and Pakistan have good relations and there was long amicable talks with England about the logistics of the move.
India and Pakistan have to fix their relations for this which is the business of both nations and no one else.
Indian govt won't allow any bilateral ties with Pak as per the current geopolitical situation
ICC is a puppet of the BCCI.
World cricket fans must protest
I simply think it would be very dull. Test cricket needs more variety not less.
Wild how the world of cricket seems to want to shrink the game while the rest of the world sport is expanding access
Imagine England of the 90s stinking it up on Div 1 on name alone 😂
What was better than Shamar Joseph ripping through the Aussies? Got to keep everyone at the same level
How many drubbings did WI go through before that happend???
@@scottmoody2561 All the same, for most of the 80's Australia couldn't get out their own way. England had been trash for years up until the 2005 Ashes.
Two pools of 5/6 teams, home and away series, winner of each pool plays in the final.
Big ticket series, ashes etc, can be played in addition to these fixtures, if teams are in separate groups.
.
It is a terrible idea. the reason Australians flock to the Ashes and BGT when played here is because it is once every four years is because it has meaning. I was in the members at the MCG on day two and three( v India) which holds 30,000. I literally could not get a seat and had to stand for 7 hours both days.
The Ashes is over a 140 years old, the Border- Gavaskar trophy while not as traditional is taking on more and more significance in those countries eyes. Why destroy this with meaningless and repetitive scheduling?
And individual records for tests will get skewed. A top class bowler or bat will emerge in tier two who will have 'test' stats like Tendulkar or Warne. The whole thing has a bad wiff about it. test cricket apart from a few nations in on the rack and this may well kill it off in smaller nations.
Every 2 years (home and away). And the video is not correct, these series would still be every 2 years just like they are now under a top division of 7.
@@benneem Every four years in one country. I dont want either India or England here more often.
@@geoffmaloney2717 they won't be in a 7 nation top division where everyone plays everyone. England's home ashes will still be every 2nd cycle, ie- every 4 years.
The gap between the top nations and smaller nations will only widen if they adopt this model.
The poms should know this. Most of them have seen it occur in football. The financial difference between Liverpool and Man Utd compared to Stoke is enormous.
That's what will happen in Test Cricket.
@StuTheDon17 it already is like that in cricket. A top division would at least give a lot more money to the 4 non-Big3 teams who would then play play 1 and a half series per year against a big 3 nation (currently they average 1 series per year against the Big3).
That would be a huge boost for South Africa, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, and whichever other nation is lucky enough to make start in the top league (most likely Pakistan).
It would also be a big carrot for the Windies to push to get promoted.
The biggest problem with the current system is that there's "1 division", but actually there's not! The Big3 play each-other every time and don't play everyone else so much. Rewarding the stronger teams with more series against the Big3 is fairer, more profitable, and will make for more competitive tests.
They just need to make it like the old world cup qualifying system where certain nations automatically qualify for division 1 and there are a few slots available that division 2 teams can be promoted to. The top team of division 2 gets promoted and the bottom team of the flex slots gets relegated. Then periodically they should review what teams automatically qualify for division 1
What a mess this is. Certainly your competition test match special should change its theme tune from the Caribbean one to Wagner. Perhaps it would be more fitting. I cannot believe the short-sightedness in this. There are only two perfect cricketers in the history of the sport Don Bradman and the other is from the West Indies. I'd like to know what on earth Cricket is doing by giving all the power to only three teams okay? West Indies deserve to be in the second tier because they've had 25 years of poor results. However, they won't be able to climb back up the ladder being stuck down at the bottom in a second league. And what about all the other teams? There should have been an ICC academy in the West Indies long ago to preserve talents in the region once again, Cricket shoots itself in the foot, but this may be the worst case of all because many people actually got attracted to the sport in the first place because of the West Indians. They changed the way the game was played and a lot of people turned on the telly to watch them. It's just not the same without a strong West Indies. All you have is a strong arrogant India for whom things like TV rights and match fixing and ridiculous leagues dominate stealing Cricket from the West Indies region and giving nothing back. What about giving something back to the West Indies for all the lessons in great Fielding and fitness that Dennis Waite taught us years ago? What a joke this is!
Getting extremely annoyed with all the chit chat by Vaughn (yes England lost 11 test matches) and Co. regarding South Africa getting to the final and the attempts to placate the Indian market. They won 8 test matches in a row this year, home & away against 4 opponents, with more pressure as they had to win every game. Its not SA's fault they don't get given more than 2 test series any more.
If you place money at the centre of the game, it will become your master. And cricket doesn’t have the money, so they will end up licking the boots of the broadcasters.
There are plenty of examples where we see sports sells its soul and the broadcasters continually drive the price down and demand more of the profitable product and not the best product.
Look at rugby and the Heineken cup. The money is a fraction of what it used to be with more rugby. Only people winning are the accounts.
Cricket should really think very carefully about who they want to be. The ICC and big 3 could well be chasing the death of the game outside the big 3 and then even the in the big 3. Who will watch only England, Australia and India play each other. That is the path we are heading to.
Broadcasters will sell you anything you want any on first contact and make their money on the subsequent contacts.
There are many models worldwide to replicate. Regional, divisions, conferences.... it's the cycles and scheduling to fit into Test Series.
Revenue? Turn it into an ICC event and hence distribute the broadcasting revenues and prizes accordingly. Costs may have to go towards broadcasting whilst turnstiles can also be negotiated. It's just a matter of logistics but there is a future for Test Cricket with the right administrators with cricket rather than national interests
"I don't like it because I don't benefit from it.". Typical of the modern era or everything. Pathetic.
I know it seems crazy but they should introduce the notion of benefits for the bottom 6 ranked teams - where they get an extra bat when playing top 6 opposition and limit the overs for the opposing team to 70 while they play 80.
I think a two tier system would be great for the weaker teams… Zim, Ire, Afg, they would get more regular matches, and if they do well, they could get to mix it up with the big teams. And it would give the big teams more incentive to perform, because if they don’t they risk relegation. Sounds great! Of course harms doesn’t like it
Have a 2 year test league..Continue FTP for points table.. top 6 will play each other in a 5 week test championship tournament.. Top two will play WTC final.. Have it in England for starts... No other cricket except maybe minor T20 or womens cricket.. I am sure there are ways to make Test cricket more appealing and rewarding.
I'd prefer to see a proper ranking system rather than a 2 tier competition. A situation where you could only play test series against teams that are within 3 or 4 spots of your position in the rankings.
For example, if you are rated 1 - they could only then compete against the teams ranked 2 - 5. This ensures that the big teams get games against each other and don't get to beat up on the little guys.
The 5th ranked team could play anyone from 1 - 9. This means that they still get some high drawing series, but also get some games against teams to pad their stats a little and provide competition and improvement opportunities to lower ranked teams.
The bottom ranked team only gets to play against other bottom 5 teams - if they are to improve and progress, they can face tougher opposition as they climb in the rankings.
The problem, obviously, is the way the current rankings are worked out in the WTC which make very little sense.
2 tier concept will actually act as a motivation for many countries to improve the quality of their cricket, in the present state there is hardly any motivation, even for test championship just 3- 4 countries are really motivated.
Another point its not the big 3 countries responsibility to improve cricket in other test playing countries, their boards need to do that , as of now these boards are only concerned anout the mo ey thry get when 1 of the big 3 play them but what have they done to improve the game abd love for game within their country.
During BGT despite being test matches virtually every ground had full capacity for most days and the spectator numbers during T20 world cup in West Indies was dismal at the least.
So yes , the 2 tier makes a lot of sense
When the windies was on top was it their responsibility to tour weaker teams for eg India? They did and other teams got better by playing against them more often.
Several misunderstandings in the video.
The Big3 already play eachother once per cycle. That would be identical in a division of 7. Ashes series would not be more common.
Relegation would be great, and there's no need to fearmonger about the Big3 being relegated. The reason the Big3 have sometimes looked like being low on the ladder is *because* they play each-other while other teams *don't* in the current 9 nation system. If there were 7 teams everyone would play everyone and if series are returned to being worth equal points like the 1st iteration of the WTC then the other 4 teams all having to play the Big3 will batter at least a few of them to the bottom of the ladder.
I think the proposed system has great merit, but absolutely the prospective 2nd division nations should be holding out for greater revenue sharing.
End of the day other nations are not concerned about the game but the money they will lose if big teams don't play them.
It would be a laughable regression of test cricket
England lost to the West Indies on a regular basis from the mid 1970s onwards. Where would they be now if this nonsense was around then.
Excuse me, they lost up till the beginning of the 2000's but since then hardly pulling up trees are they.
You could have a pool system like the world cup in test cricket, so the smaller nations play top ranked nations and then as expected Australia vs England and so until the test championship game. You can keep the ashes etc every 2 years for revenue and this gives everyone a fair go.
Instead of a tier system it would be good to see each the big 3 teams equally play every "smaller" team away from home during a 2-3 year window while retaining the current structure for home series against each other like Ashes and BGT. India and Pakistan need to come up with something and play neutral too, a test series between them would make huge money. as for WTC, they should drop the qualifying points system and every 3 years have a test tournament (like a world cup), alternate the host country, top 6- 8 ranked teams in knockout matches for the privilege to challenge the previous year's trophy holder in the final. during that month period the trophy holder could play an official 3 match test series against it's own A-Team. might be a lot of cricket all at once across a month or 6 weeks but surely that's better than the current mess
Even we dont like the idea of wtc final in england only. It should be rotation policy like all the world cup.😏
i think you including scotland as well
Absolutely no way the Ashes should be played every year. It is currently perfect. Why weaken that to try to strengthen others.
100 percent they should focus on revenue, test cricket can't afford to compete with 2020 salaries currently, if you want the best players playing for their countries instead of franchises you have to increase revenues and pay them more.
I think in division 1 there should be only six teams and atleast 4 match series and last in division 1 and first one in division 2 gets interchanged.
And if this means anyone of top three getting relegated then so be it . Purpose of this System should be to get More teams to be competitive in overseas situations. To be Fair Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and West Indies very rarely play good hard cricket.
Two division system can give more competitive environment to Test Cricket.
And I would like to see associate Nations also playing in division 2 .
Cricket is just the same as any other global sport. Money talks it's as simple as that. The interest and financial aspect of an ashes series is massive.
In the wise words of gavaskar....
This is STUPID, STUPID, STUPID
I disagree on it being an American style if there’s no promotion relegation, they have a “draft” which means the worst team from the previous season gets the best rookie pick and hence their teams are more competitive, that’s why you’ll notice that you don’t have the same team winning for years and years like Australia for example, rarely when that happens like bulls or lakers, it’s called a dynasty, but those teams are pretty poorly performing now
Without promotion-relegation would be ridiculous.
Do you think that if India regresses as a test nation the clamour around the two tier system will die down ?
India have a transition on their hands. With Ashwin gone, and the triumvirate of Jadeja, Kohli and Sharma on their last legs..if they were to have a bad tour to England then suddenly India would have a gaping hole in their test side for the home season.
I’m with kimbers 3 tier system
Bangladesh has a population of 177 million. If they can stabilise their politics and grow economically they are likely to become a force in cricket. Perhaps it will end up with the big 4 playing one another.
A league series is only worth it if there is relegation and promotion, and every team is part of it.
What is needed is something the big three play each other max every 3 years, giving an off year to be made to play other teams by the ICC, with tour sponsorship by the ICC so smaller countries can travel to the big 3 and players get paid a decent amount.
That would take away money from the big 3 though, so will never happen.
Will Steve Harmison think differently if he is forced to take the position of any country but England, which is the only country where Test cricket does not need to be subsidized by white ball cricket?
Thank you India! Soon only you will be the only country playing this dying sport
The criticisms are correct, but what’s the alternative? You can say the big three and the ICC should ‘help’ other teams, but how exactly? If the game simply isn’t financially viable the only thing the ICC could do is go to the West Indies and Sri Lanka and say we’ll pay your best players more than they earn in IPL and other leagues. Then somehow make the cricket they’re playing viable. There’s no way it could happen. The future could be the big three playing each other in 5-6 tests/year. Can’t see another option. Btw this isn’t necessarily forever. Look how the game has changed in the last 10 years. It could change again.
Dude you can't play ashes every year
That takes away the wait and suspense of the series
Nah that would be boring af.
Aussie fan
WTC 4 year cycles
T20 World Cup and 50 over World Cup every 4 years.
Bilateral ODI and T20 every 4 years and shouldn’t be able to play a side at home or away more than once in a 4 years cycle.
ICC need to stop monopoly England, Australia and India have on cricket.
😢i am sri lanka , english creator & distributor of cricket now time to be savier
Talksport = this is not the solution, i dont know the solution, today’s model is not the solution.
icc should premier test league Australia, England, India, Pakistan, South Africa , NZ and 2nd division, Scotland, Ireland,Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe,West Indies the bigs countrys can play the big series like the ashes etc outside the wtc championship series obligation if one of big teams drops down
Will there be relegation in your speculative premier test league
@tseyazmutseyami1402 yeah
I think this problem can be solved more easily, stop always playing the big three together. Short term it will hurt the finances but Lets be honest if you really want to keep test cricket alive then the big three needs to open up more to playing other nationas and give reasons why people woulod want to have more viewers wanting to be interested in watching test cricket.
Cricket is such a joke now. How are these teams going to get better if they can only play trash teams
Sorry Harmy and Manners - but do you think the current way of administering test cricket is some kind of philanthropic eutopia for the smaller nations? The current problem is that the WTC does not have enough buy in from the big 3, so all the media interest gets poured into the 5-test bilateral series they play against each other, every single year. If having a 7-team top tier is what is necessary to make the WTC a viable world league that everyone buys into - then it can grow the game far better than the current system. Imagine a 4-week tournament each year in a neutral host country, where each team plays 3 matches - Test cricket that the whole world is watching. Tier 2 teams can increase viewership by having their games played in the rest days between the tier 1 games. I bet they will end up playing more games, and get more revenue for their boards under that system than they currently do by having each of the big 3 throw them a token 2 test series every 4 years.
Most of the players that worried about money there the one that bringing down the cricketing world players need to let performance speak for it self then the money will come can't be paying players to do rubbish out there on the cricket field
I have an Idea
Banned T20 cricket
What will happen if India keeps losing and enters the Division 2
Money money
So you don't like this because England may get relegated? Is this even a reason? I won't mind it even if India gets relegated if we play poor cricket. We deserve it then. That's how it should be looked at. Only the deserving and well playing nations will be in tier 1. How are you going to spread the game if you just care about the Ashes and BGT? We may not have an Ashes then if England is relegated. And by the way since the last 15 years Ashes is there only in England when you tour Australia you are bashed so badly that it feels like a tier 3 team is playing Australia. No match up there.
Test cricket should have 2 wtc trophies/ maces..One in gold(only division 1 team can achieve) and other in silver( both div 1 and div 2 can achieve).
Number 1 ranked div 1 team should play no 1 ranked div 2 team for the silver ,which help the div 2 teams to have some motivation to play wtc..
Gold- ( 3 match series finale betwen ranked no 1 and no 2 in WTC division1 )
Silver - 1 match finale between rank no 1(div1) and rank 1 in (div2) teams ...division 2 teams can never compete for gold mace ,but can compete for silver, but div 1 teams can compete for both silver and gold and no 1 team can even get both the silver and gold mace at same time as well
The no 7 ranked team in div 1 will be demoted to div 2 and no 1 team in div 2 will be promoted to div 1 after end of each cycle as well .
Dont get relegated...
The Test championship is a waste of time
It’s been great for creating interest in test cricket in places like South Africa, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Waste of time for India, England and Australia maybe.
@@HkFinn83 Where are you pulling the numbers out of for Bangladesh? Nobody cares about the WTC cause we are not improving. We don't get the chance to tour England or Australia. That's the real problem. Let everybody play everybody instead of this threesome that they've going on. If you want to make money then have India and Pakistan play each other in England or Australia.
@@HkFinn83not a waste of time for Australia since it’s another trophy to win. I’m guessing Cabin is English though so makes sense he thinks it’s a waste of time because England will never win it
Not if you at all interested in test cricket. Seems to be working, plenty of talk about it. It is very flawed, but it is a start. The alternative is, we just go down the abyss of losing tests other than maybe just Australia v. England.
Hahaha i bet you don't, England will be division 2 in 5 years
You seriously think England would stay in the top flight for 5 years???
@alansmith2426 hahaha, what can I say i am a optimistic
Cricket can survive in "smaller nations" without test cricket against the "Big Three". They will still have white ball series against India, which basically pays all of their bills. Whether they will then spend any cash on test cricket is another matter.
they fear that they would be relegated considering the fact how bad england plays nowadays
only england cricket is skeptical about this, they have a very outdated mindset remember these were the same peolpe who said that ipl is a circus and today they themselves come here licking our boots, dont take these guys seriously
The problem is you think like a socialist
Harmison doesn't want ashes every year as he knows ENG will get thrashed by AUS when ashes are hosted by AUS ...
Have some sense, will you conduct Olympics every year? No
@@elennet4116 Mr. smart brains test cricket is not an olympic event with Gold, silver and Bronze medals ........... It's just played in max 10-12 countries thats all ..........
Not sensible. We just had 375k at one test at the MCG because the Australia/India rivalry is huge. The series attracted 837k people over 5 tests. Next season we will have huge attendances as it is for the Ashes. they do that every two years and the interest will soon drop off.
Nothing to do with Australia winning, it is tradition and eagerly awaited in Australia. Golden Goose etc.
@@venkateshkasturirangan6166 have some sense, holding Ashes every year will take away the buildup, pressure, suspense factor of the event
@@venkateshkasturirangan6166 people like you are ruining test Cricket