ECB points system has only one drawback: it totally devalues Test cricket

Ashes wins in 2009 and 2010-11 were under Andrew Strauss's best moments as England captain. At the time, anyway. In the future, they may be perceived differently. proposed under the new points system by the ECB for the bilateral series, England would have lost both times.

If you or I was busy on another planet, or in Leicester, in the past few weeks, let's be too specific. The system was first trialled in 2013 for the Women's ashes, and includes all three forms of the game merger to decide a winner. It is likely, with four points for a Test win and two T20 are used for the upcoming men's series against Sri Lanka and Pakistan for victory in ODIs or.

"How do you assess encourage the public to resume the international game?" Said Strauss. "I think you give to search every game context. If it's a case of just another test game or just another five-ODI series between the two nations, it loses some of its context and some of its importance and that is something the ICC must consider. I personally think there are ways in linking test ODI and T20 cricket in some sort of major world championship, which includes all three formats. it is an idea that I have been a fan of for a long time . "


To be James Taylor to have devastated lost his career, but glad alive
Continue reading
The Spin loves Strauss, today Midas of English cricket. When he told us Eldorado was the greatest show HBO never created, we would think also immediately given our previously contemptuous assessment of emotional depth Pilar, Fizz and Bunny. Strauss made entering the Spin Pause and consider this idea instead of applying anger-based foam on the whole keyboard to our usual practice stick, but we can still make sense of it. All instinct and logic, it proposes an unnecessary evil, for two reasons: It is a gimmick too far, and it devalues ​​Test cricket.

Under the new system, lost England 16-10 to Australia in 2009 and 16 to 14 in 2010-11. What actually happened was that she won the ashes every time and lost the subsequent ODI series by an aggregate of 6-1. England won just a solitary ODI, but no one was really a lonely one.



If these scenarios happen again, both sides could claim victory. One of the charms of Test cricket is that you can play for four days and still not be sure who will win, but a 32-day series, without a clear result, which will probably end up pushing.

There are other famous series that would have been similarly affected. Australia had not dethroned the West Indies in 1994-1995, when they lost 12-10 - but they would have won earlier by the same score 4 years. Pakistan iconic summer Reverse-Swing in 1992 had actually been an England triumph. Oh, and England would have beaten Australia in 1997, when they won the ODI series 3-0 and lost the Tests 3-2: new money, a 14-12 victory and MBEs for all of Mark Ealham to Phil DeFreitas.

The ash can not be immediately at stake under the new system - but they were in the women's game, and it would be naive to think the key, is to be not thick. If they are not at stake, what's the point? If they are, the winners are all formats the little urn, or simply lift only the winners of the Test series? Maybe we could modernize and replace the box with a gold hashtag things.

The system is not weighted properly. Whether it is to sweat metric blood, tears, fame or day game, a Test victory is much more than two ODI wins worth. The original system gave them six points instead of four - but which provides almost the team that the Test series win, the entire series will win. Which, at least qualitatively, where we are at the moment.

The proposed system is linked to the rhetoric, ODIs and T20s now the same meaning as have tests in England. A brief look at when select England players show to rest, that can not be denied is hyperbole. Quite rightly. It is good that white-ball cricket is no longer an afterthought, but it should always be secondary to Test cricket. to have a scoring system for the two white-ball series, is worth being tested because they clearly have a common basis. But red- and white-ball cricket go together like bananas and bone marrow sauce.



There is a need to tweak Test cricket, and the first day-night Test was an uplifting triumph, but that feels like an attempt hard contrivance of a country that has adopted belatedly in limited overs cricket. A few years ago, Kevin Pietersen said that talking about the IPL to Strauss was like "explain gangsta rap to a priest." Now the minister has detected dirt and it does not take care of your isms and schisms, granddad.

As such, the system is relatively harmless and probably goes into actually pretty small bucket Cricket poor innovations, along with things like the Supersub and the aluminum bat. But there is another exciting in a concern list of compromises and as the examples of 2009 and 2010-11 show devalue an obvious case of Test cricket. It is also an indication of a sport that is catering for an assumed audience with an IQ of 25 Test cricket following the company in danger, our sanctuary from the real world should be.

Let us be clear on this: Test cricket is the largest, most soulful sports format ever invented. A world without them is as unthinkable as a world without art house cinema or alternative music. The point system is only a small act of cultural vandalism, but it is much more those testify.