The World Test: is it worth it?
The World Test Final had another day ( the fourth day) rained off yesterday and – although there is a reserve day and better weather forecast today at the Ageas Bowl – a draw seems likeliest and the question needs to be raised whether it is worthwhile in what is already a congested schedule.
The boards and ICC obviously think so as the plan is to make it more transparent but not to dispense with it.
At the moment two-Test series, which a lot of boards favour for financial reasons, do not count, there is no cumulative league table and it’s about as clear as which country will proceed into the next round of the Euros when finishing third in the group stage.
And what is the point of it?
Is it to give Test cricket a boost by making a series more competitive?
Or is it to make money for the ICC? Or is it to establish who is the leading Test nation? What do fans and players think of it?
I suspect the players would rather play white ball cricket in the global leagues, preferably the IPL.
After all Test cricket not only pays less but you face an Ollie Robinson, making a fine debut but suspended indefinitely for what you tweeted many years ago and (if Michael Carberry had his way) for life.
To apply a political analogy – if you are running for US President it’s better to be a Governor than as Senator in order to avoid your voting record being scrutinised.
The Robinson affaire has left the English selectors ruing the stress fracture to Olly Stone but unable to pick a tried and tested replacement.
The ICC maintain that the new rules – based on percentages – would still produce the same finalists.
I have not noted any enthusiasm by fans who already have two World Cups (the T20 and the 50 over version are now to be played in the same year), visiting countries playing all three formats, another World Championship- the Champions Trophy – and that is without the pandemic imposing travelling restrictions, a full domestic calendar and other sporting competition.
As they say, enough already.
