WEBVTT - On The Front Foot Episode 215: Pondering a rearranged World Test Championship 0:00:09.093 --> 0:00:11.973 You're listening to a podcast from News Talk sat B. 0:00:12.373 --> 0:00:15.173 Follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on 0:00:15.333 --> 0:00:21.093 iHeart Radio. 0:00:21.293 --> 0:00:26.333 Take another Patrick, It is out, the Test is over. 0:00:28.573 --> 0:00:30.773 Couldn't smokes a beauty? 0:00:30.893 --> 0:00:32.893 This is out and here he goes. 0:00:33.013 --> 0:00:34.053 This delivery has in. 0:00:34.293 --> 0:00:35.613 Many users to goold. 0:00:37.693 --> 0:00:41.053 On the front foot with Brian Waddell and Jeremy Coney 0:00:41.413 --> 0:00:45.253 powered by News Talks head b at iHeart Radio. 0:00:48.573 --> 0:00:51.053 Hello on the front Poots. This week, what is the 0:00:51.133 --> 0:00:54.333 future of Test cricket? Well, I went for our a 0:00:54.493 --> 0:00:57.693 team in Bangladesh. Will be no more Test cricket for 0:00:57.813 --> 0:01:02.493 Verrat Coley and another unusual outcome in short form cricket 0:01:03.493 --> 0:01:07.213 and will us once again is Jerry Katy and Jerry. 0:01:07.213 --> 0:01:09.573 I don't know whether you be watching the New Zealand 0:01:09.653 --> 0:01:12.973 a great terror for them. Sometimes you wonder whether the 0:01:13.053 --> 0:01:16.973 result is that important that the amount of cricket and 0:01:17.373 --> 0:01:19.933 what they're getting out of it, rather than wins and losses. 0:01:20.453 --> 0:01:23.093 That is the way I seem to think about it, anyway. 0:01:23.093 --> 0:01:24.253 I think, so what's high? 0:01:24.933 --> 0:01:29.253 Look, it seems as though some of the batsmen are 0:01:29.373 --> 0:01:32.453 obviously going a bit better than the others. It seems 0:01:32.493 --> 0:01:37.573 like our bowlers have got their work cut out. They 0:01:37.653 --> 0:01:42.533 obviously finished the one day series with a victory, which 0:01:42.573 --> 0:01:45.293 should make them feel a lot better going into the 0:01:45.413 --> 0:01:49.093 longer formats now. And they've already had a day, haven't 0:01:49.133 --> 0:01:51.893 they they? I saw sort of two twenty for eight. 0:01:52.053 --> 0:01:54.813 Is that about right? I didn't see any of it yesterday. 0:01:55.733 --> 0:01:58.573 Yeah, the four day game played on the same venue, Selects, 0:01:58.853 --> 0:02:02.333 which is sort of just south of Daka, getting a 0:02:02.373 --> 0:02:04.733 little bit closer to the coast as well. But the 0:02:04.813 --> 0:02:08.093 fact that they had that win was significant for them 0:02:08.493 --> 0:02:12.293 changing the team around. I've given everybody a run. I 0:02:12.693 --> 0:02:16.373 like the idea of Ashok and Lenox getting plenty of 0:02:16.453 --> 0:02:19.693 bowling and getting work. It's Dean Foxcroft has come to 0:02:19.773 --> 0:02:24.413 the forefront as a all rounder offspinner and somebody who's 0:02:24.453 --> 0:02:27.653 providing good runs. We've thought of him as a sort 0:02:27.693 --> 0:02:29.493 of a big hitter and a man who can score 0:02:29.493 --> 0:02:32.333 at a fast pace. But you know, we may be 0:02:32.413 --> 0:02:34.613 seeing the best part of his game because in the 0:02:35.053 --> 0:02:38.013 first day of the four day he was one of 0:02:38.093 --> 0:02:40.373 the saviors along with Mitch Hay. 0:02:41.173 --> 0:02:44.853 Yeah, he's He's not runs every time he's batted, hasn't he? Foxcroft? 0:02:44.933 --> 0:02:48.293 He's more I've so far thought of him as sort 0:02:48.293 --> 0:02:52.413 of top top order almost three and four, hasn't he 0:02:52.933 --> 0:02:56.253 where he's batted for Otago and for New Zealand A 0:02:56.413 --> 0:03:01.493 in the past. Here they're using him presumably as an 0:03:01.533 --> 0:03:06.213 all rounder more, batting down at sort of eight, and 0:03:07.373 --> 0:03:10.813 it seems to be he, you know, working very well 0:03:10.893 --> 0:03:13.493 and he's also picking up wickets with his off spinners 0:03:14.133 --> 0:03:16.453 in the one day as anyway, so he's having a 0:03:16.493 --> 0:03:19.973 good tour. Mitch Hay's got a couple of innings now 0:03:20.173 --> 0:03:23.333 under his belt. We know what he's like as a 0:03:23.413 --> 0:03:27.533 keeper as well. Some of the bowlers they have done 0:03:27.853 --> 0:03:30.973 Lennox you mentioned. I think he's looked interesting as a 0:03:31.373 --> 0:03:35.013 left arm orthodox and Addie Ashock. You always like to 0:03:35.093 --> 0:03:37.573 have one legie, don't you if you can in your country, 0:03:38.133 --> 0:03:41.333 to to sort of challenge things and do differently when 0:03:41.373 --> 0:03:45.573 you need, perhaps those Asian tours. So's he's a fairly 0:03:45.653 --> 0:03:49.693 important young man as well. So yeah, I think things 0:03:49.733 --> 0:03:51.773 are you know, well, let's wait and see how this 0:03:51.893 --> 0:03:53.573 one goes. They got put in on what on a 0:03:53.773 --> 0:03:57.093 on a rainy kind of day? Was it because it's 0:03:57.173 --> 0:04:01.013 coming near, it's coming near, you know, the monsoons isn't 0:04:01.053 --> 0:04:01.973 it really over there? 0:04:02.853 --> 0:04:05.813 Yeah, and it was difficult conditions, but you know that's 0:04:05.893 --> 0:04:07.813 the important part of these tours, that they are being 0:04:07.853 --> 0:04:10.293 forced to work a little bit harder, and you know 0:04:10.413 --> 0:04:13.613 that's I think it's great and we'll get a chance 0:04:13.653 --> 0:04:16.973 at some stage. It's difficult to get through and have 0:04:17.093 --> 0:04:20.293 a conversation with Paul Wiseman about how they're going, but 0:04:21.133 --> 0:04:23.733 certainly these are the players we've got to watch. I 0:04:23.773 --> 0:04:25.333 don't know if you had a chance to have a 0:04:25.413 --> 0:04:27.453 look at it. I know you've been resting up and 0:04:27.693 --> 0:04:31.653 looking after your body for a long winter. Stince, Jerry, 0:04:31.933 --> 0:04:37.613 did you see Did you see the five penalty runs 0:04:37.933 --> 0:04:43.573 in that third salt? You must have seen it. 0:04:44.333 --> 0:04:46.013 I did once. I did see it. 0:04:47.013 --> 0:04:50.893 Very very unusual position for a keeper to take up 0:04:51.733 --> 0:04:54.813 looking for it, because there was also a slip there 0:04:55.013 --> 0:04:55.493 wasn't there. 0:04:56.053 --> 0:04:57.813 Yes, Well, the keeper. 0:04:58.253 --> 0:04:59.533 Who was standing at first slip. 0:05:00.693 --> 0:05:02.093 It's just extraordinary. 0:05:02.173 --> 0:05:06.293 The keeper left his post and went over to a 0:05:06.453 --> 0:05:10.293 first slip position and there was also a slip beside 0:05:10.373 --> 0:05:12.613 him as well as a second slip if you like. Yeah, 0:05:13.013 --> 0:05:16.213 and so lying on the ground, well, he forgot to 0:05:16.293 --> 0:05:21.533 take the helmet with him, didn't he yeah, not normally, 0:05:21.973 --> 0:05:26.213 I suppose. And of course I wasnt Mario batting or 0:05:26.253 --> 0:05:28.653 someone like that, wasn't it who just let the ball go? 0:05:29.733 --> 0:05:33.893 Yeah and yeah, and through she went, took the helmet 0:05:33.973 --> 0:05:37.413 that but bounced and away it went. So five runs, 0:05:37.613 --> 0:05:41.493 dead ball, And okay, it's quite weird. 0:05:41.293 --> 0:05:43.893 The whole thing. Obviously the keeper forgot to take it, 0:05:44.893 --> 0:05:45.573 take it with him. 0:05:46.453 --> 0:05:49.173 There wasn't only so much that he forgot to take 0:05:49.213 --> 0:05:51.173 it with him. He didn't even make an effort to 0:05:51.333 --> 0:05:53.453 dive and stop. He just stood there. It was like 0:05:53.573 --> 0:05:55.893 those social games we used to play with a wicket keeper, 0:05:56.053 --> 0:05:58.813 unless the ball came directly to him, you know, it 0:05:58.973 --> 0:06:00.773 was waved on the way down of the boundary as 0:06:00.813 --> 0:06:01.413 it went past. 0:06:02.613 --> 0:06:06.733 Yeah, yours, Well, there is a bit of that. 0:06:07.253 --> 0:06:10.293 I've heard Parkerd tell the story when he was standing 0:06:10.373 --> 0:06:13.093 at slip one stage and it just got a wee 0:06:13.133 --> 0:06:15.293 bit wide for the keeper and he didn't come across. 0:06:15.333 --> 0:06:19.933 And he did he cried out yours quite early, and 0:06:20.293 --> 0:06:20.853 Parks has. 0:06:20.813 --> 0:06:21.653 Let it go, I think. 0:06:22.893 --> 0:06:26.373 But it's an interesting one because where else would you 0:06:26.533 --> 0:06:31.653 put the helmet? I thought to myself, you could leave 0:06:31.733 --> 0:06:37.973 it immediately behind the stumps, But then there might be 0:06:38.053 --> 0:06:41.253 a trouble, mightn't there with the keeper safe for a 0:06:41.333 --> 0:06:45.493 runout running up to the stumps or moving around the 0:06:45.573 --> 0:06:49.573 stumps to collect the throw, that might disturb the helmet 0:06:49.653 --> 0:06:53.173 and then the bales. Or you could leave it maybe 0:06:53.373 --> 0:06:58.093 behind the umpire. You want to have it fairly close 0:06:58.253 --> 0:07:01.693 because it's for a close in fielder, isn't it really. 0:07:02.333 --> 0:07:03.973 I mean you can put it anywhere you like on 0:07:04.053 --> 0:07:04.493 the ground. 0:07:05.413 --> 0:07:07.573 Could be the keeper's helmet as well. Sometimes they have 0:07:07.693 --> 0:07:09.053 them and take them off too, don't they. 0:07:09.333 --> 0:07:14.093 They do, they do, And when a spinner is operating, 0:07:14.173 --> 0:07:16.413 of course they usually got a helmet on, haven't they. 0:07:16.613 --> 0:07:21.013 And sometimes if there's no close in fielder it's close 0:07:21.093 --> 0:07:25.493 in catcher, they don't have a helmet there for the 0:07:25.533 --> 0:07:29.013 field as they run it on. Yeah, it's an interesting one, 0:07:29.053 --> 0:07:31.533 I suppose with the umpire again, it's the same thing 0:07:31.613 --> 0:07:35.613 of him moving out of the way once runners taken 0:07:35.693 --> 0:07:36.053 as well. 0:07:36.493 --> 0:07:38.893 It's a bit of an issue. So I think it's 0:07:38.973 --> 0:07:40.733 probably in the best position. 0:07:42.093 --> 0:07:44.933 Behind the behind the keeper because that's where he's supposed 0:07:44.973 --> 0:07:45.773 to be stationed. 0:07:46.933 --> 0:07:50.613 And strange part of it until he moves to first slip. 0:07:50.893 --> 0:07:54.573 It looked weird. Didn't it look absolutely weird. 0:07:55.413 --> 0:07:58.013 I can remember a game that I played in many 0:07:58.093 --> 0:08:01.533 many years ago when a part time keeper or sorry, 0:08:01.573 --> 0:08:04.893 a part time stopper was playing for the Wellington Wanderers, 0:08:05.133 --> 0:08:07.293 and the Wanderers just happened to have a fellow called 0:08:07.973 --> 0:08:11.013 Archie Taylor in his younger year, so you know how 0:08:11.053 --> 0:08:15.533 far back we're going, and another guy called Jason J. 0:08:15.773 --> 0:08:21.133 Parson John Parsons from John. Yeah, they were the quickest 0:08:21.373 --> 0:08:25.213 around the Wellington region at the time. And the guy, 0:08:25.253 --> 0:08:27.093 I won't mention his name when to put the gloves 0:08:27.133 --> 0:08:31.133 on even though they had another couple of wicket teams 0:08:31.133 --> 0:08:33.333 in this a guy called alis To Botting who was 0:08:33.373 --> 0:08:35.893 a good, wicked killer and I wouldn't be surprised that 0:08:35.973 --> 0:08:39.173 TG was there. But this fellow put the gloves on 0:08:39.213 --> 0:08:40.333 it because he was going to be the key. It 0:08:40.373 --> 0:08:42.413 didn't want to go running around the outfield, and he 0:08:42.453 --> 0:08:45.493 stood up to the stumps to Archie Taylor and Archie 0:08:45.653 --> 0:08:47.533 to stop. Halfway through his rap, he said, do you 0:08:47.613 --> 0:08:51.893 know I bowled quite quick? And the keeper said, yeah, 0:08:52.013 --> 0:08:54.333 I'll be right, I'll be able to cope, And of 0:08:54.373 --> 0:08:56.453 course the first one went swinging down the leg side 0:08:56.653 --> 0:08:58.293 and he just turned his head and watched it and 0:08:58.373 --> 0:09:00.893 go down to the boundary for four and he took 0:09:00.893 --> 0:09:04.053 a couple of places back. And that is a true story. 0:09:04.133 --> 0:09:08.973 I kid you not. So wow, I've seen it happened. 0:09:09.293 --> 0:09:12.573 But it was just amazing to see five penalty runs 0:09:12.613 --> 0:09:16.333 because in a close game that can cost you dearly. 0:09:17.173 --> 0:09:17.653 Oh yeah. 0:09:19.293 --> 0:09:22.573 The World Test Championship, we talked about it last week. 0:09:22.893 --> 0:09:25.773 Was the editor Lawrence Booth joined on the front foot 0:09:26.253 --> 0:09:29.653 and detailed in his review of the Cricket Year thing 0:09:29.733 --> 0:09:32.653 called his editor's note it's anitatorial I suppose he had 0:09:32.693 --> 0:09:36.373 some gathing criticism of the ICC. He suggested the plan 0:09:36.493 --> 0:09:40.853 to a World Test Championship, called it a shambles masquerading 0:09:41.093 --> 0:09:45.213 as a show piece. He wants to change things double 0:09:45.253 --> 0:09:48.733 at SLINKs the four years, like football and rugby said, 0:09:48.773 --> 0:09:51.933 and ensure the top nine in the rankings all play 0:09:51.973 --> 0:09:54.653 each other, so that's a nine team competition. And he 0:09:54.733 --> 0:09:58.373 wants a home and away over the series of at 0:09:58.453 --> 0:10:04.453 least three years. Anything he said. But Barclay's mess, well 0:10:04.493 --> 0:10:08.293 that's a reference to Greg Barclay, who was the president 0:10:08.493 --> 0:10:11.853 before Jay Shah before we we have a bit of 0:10:11.893 --> 0:10:15.093 a chair about it during It's Welcome Lawrence Beck because 0:10:15.093 --> 0:10:18.053 he's glad that he was able to come and join 0:10:18.093 --> 0:10:24.413 us again this week and explain how his plan was shaping. Yeah. 0:10:24.453 --> 0:10:26.973 I mean, look, I think there should be a World 0:10:27.013 --> 0:10:29.933 Test Championship. I just don't like the way it's configured 0:10:29.933 --> 0:10:35.573 at the moment. So as it stands, it's a league effectively, 0:10:35.653 --> 0:10:39.853 but different teams play different numbers of games against different opponents. 0:10:40.453 --> 0:10:43.373 Now that that isn't satisfactory as far as I'm concerned. 0:10:44.213 --> 0:10:46.693 Every team should play the same number of matches against 0:10:46.693 --> 0:10:48.933 the same opponents so that by the end of it 0:10:49.053 --> 0:10:52.493 you have a symmetrical fair system where you can you 0:10:52.573 --> 0:10:54.493 can say that the best two teams have risen to 0:10:54.573 --> 0:10:57.733 the final as things stand. I mean South Africa, I 0:10:57.773 --> 0:11:00.293 mean fair play to them. They beat the opponents in 0:11:00.373 --> 0:11:02.653 front of them and have got to the final where 0:11:02.693 --> 0:11:05.253 they play Australia. And it's not their fault that they 0:11:05.653 --> 0:11:09.133 didn't get long Test series against Australia India, and that's 0:11:09.173 --> 0:11:11.133 the greed of the Big three who carve it up 0:11:11.173 --> 0:11:14.493 to suit themselves. But we still have a situation where 0:11:14.573 --> 0:11:17.573 South Africa, who sent effectively a C team to New 0:11:17.653 --> 0:11:20.093 Zealand at the start of the cycle of you'll remember 0:11:20.133 --> 0:11:22.493 that well, of course, and gave the Zealand their first 0:11:22.533 --> 0:11:24.853 ever series win against South Africa. Partly as a result 0:11:24.893 --> 0:11:26.813 of that. They might have beaten them anyway, but it 0:11:26.933 --> 0:11:31.093 devalued that series. And then South Africa in their fourth 0:11:31.173 --> 0:11:34.413 coming home winter or home summer, do not play a 0:11:34.493 --> 0:11:37.333 home Test match. They have five T twenties against West Indies. 0:11:37.533 --> 0:11:39.373 We're talking here about the team that has reached the 0:11:39.453 --> 0:11:43.453 final of the World Test Championship. Now what we need 0:11:43.613 --> 0:11:46.613 is my suggestion in wisdom is to play, is to 0:11:46.693 --> 0:11:50.173 expand the cycle to four years. It's currently two four 0:11:50.293 --> 0:11:52.933 years works very well in rugby and football, and it 0:11:53.013 --> 0:11:56.773 gives the World Cups a certain stature, certain scarcity value. 0:11:57.293 --> 0:11:59.973 Expanded four years and that would allow each team, probably 0:12:00.013 --> 0:12:01.733 i'd say the top nine to play each other home 0:12:01.813 --> 0:12:04.493 and away in a series of a minimum of three tests. 0:12:05.133 --> 0:12:08.493 They forget these two tests, nonsense, three tests. You have 0:12:08.533 --> 0:12:10.173 a proper test series and by the end of it 0:12:10.973 --> 0:12:13.693 we'll know that it's a fair it's a fair draw. 0:12:15.093 --> 0:12:17.813 At the moment they are muddling through. Look, it's better 0:12:17.853 --> 0:12:20.653 than nothing. An imperfect World Test Championship it's better than 0:12:20.693 --> 0:12:22.933 no World Test Championship. And I accept that we have 0:12:23.013 --> 0:12:25.653 a problem now increasingly so with India against Pakistan and 0:12:25.733 --> 0:12:27.653 what to do about that. You could play those on 0:12:27.733 --> 0:12:30.573 neutual territory, but I can see that lots of people 0:12:30.613 --> 0:12:32.773 in Indian cricket are saying we shouldn't play them, play 0:12:32.813 --> 0:12:34.853 Pakistan at all in any form of cricket after the 0:12:35.533 --> 0:12:38.693 Kashmir atrocity from a few weeks ago. So that is 0:12:38.773 --> 0:12:41.413 clearly a logistical problem. But I think as a basic 0:12:41.533 --> 0:12:45.293 principle it should be fairer and more symmetrical. 0:12:45.973 --> 0:12:48.693 It's interesting because a four years there's still got to 0:12:48.733 --> 0:12:52.053 be enough windows to play test cricket. Danger they seem 0:12:52.133 --> 0:12:55.613 to struggle to find that window. Is there a danger 0:12:56.333 --> 0:13:00.933 that they might shorten Test matches to four days in length? 0:13:01.493 --> 0:13:04.413 There's been talk about that in the past, It's been dismissed. 0:13:04.813 --> 0:13:07.173 Sometimes there are only four days in the Test, but 0:13:07.613 --> 0:13:09.933 five days as of WOWED, so that you can complete 0:13:09.933 --> 0:13:12.453 a Test match in it, and we've seen some wonderful 0:13:12.493 --> 0:13:14.893 results over that period of time. Is there going to 0:13:14.933 --> 0:13:19.053 be enough time? Will the world cricketing bodies want to 0:13:19.253 --> 0:13:20.853 go with that format? 0:13:21.333 --> 0:13:23.453 Well, as you say, I think four day cricket might 0:13:23.853 --> 0:13:26.053 might end up being a solution, whether we like it 0:13:26.213 --> 0:13:29.293 or not. What you could do then clearly is you 0:13:29.333 --> 0:13:32.213 could have Test matches in three successive weeks with a 0:13:32.253 --> 0:13:34.813 bit of time in between for rest and recuperation, and 0:13:34.893 --> 0:13:36.973 if a day is lost to rain, you just tag 0:13:37.053 --> 0:13:38.653 it on to the end. You know, you say we 0:13:38.733 --> 0:13:41.333 turn it into a fifth day. You'd have to get 0:13:41.373 --> 0:13:43.373 overrates up. I mean at the moment. You know, if 0:13:43.373 --> 0:13:45.653 you're a seam if you're a seam bowling side like 0:13:45.853 --> 0:13:48.533 England or New Zealand, you're struggling to get more than 0:13:48.573 --> 0:13:51.173 eighty two eighty three overs in a day. If you're 0:13:51.373 --> 0:13:54.813 a spin bowling team, that that's fine, But so you'd 0:13:54.853 --> 0:13:56.653 have to say, look, you've got to get through overs 0:13:56.653 --> 0:13:58.733 more quickly because you'd probably need ninety six overs a 0:13:58.853 --> 0:14:02.733 day rather than the current ninety. That may be the 0:14:02.733 --> 0:14:05.253 way it has to go to fit it in. Again, 0:14:05.613 --> 0:14:08.653 it's imperfect, but it might be better than the scenario 0:14:08.733 --> 0:14:10.973 we have where teams are playing two match series and 0:14:11.493 --> 0:14:15.933 they're there's kind of they feel meaningless. But it comes 0:14:15.973 --> 0:14:19.613 back to the earlier point as making about the spread 0:14:19.653 --> 0:14:22.933 of money in a Test match. Fund And if teams 0:14:22.933 --> 0:14:24.413 are allowed to make a bit of a loss in 0:14:24.493 --> 0:14:27.933 Test cricket because they knew they were financially supported and 0:14:28.053 --> 0:14:29.693 that they were that money was coming in from a 0:14:29.773 --> 0:14:33.013 white ball game, you could tolerate a three match series 0:14:33.053 --> 0:14:35.373 more easily. It just needs a bit of collaboration between 0:14:35.373 --> 0:14:36.973 the boards. It can be done if there's a will. 0:14:37.293 --> 0:14:39.813 The problem is everyone's chasing money, Brian, Everyone's chasing their 0:14:39.853 --> 0:14:43.653 own T twenty solution. You know, New Zealand cricket getting 0:14:43.693 --> 0:14:46.693 into bed with Major League cricket is the latest example 0:14:46.773 --> 0:14:49.773 of how teams are trying to future proof themselves against 0:14:49.813 --> 0:14:54.893 the loss of bilateral TV rights. So I'm frobly talking 0:14:54.933 --> 0:14:58.853 idealistically here when the cricketing world is getting on pragmatically 0:14:58.933 --> 0:14:59.493 with the problem. 0:15:00.733 --> 0:15:04.133 Yeah, it's interesting because it's just starting point anyway for 0:15:04.293 --> 0:15:09.493 the discussion from your discussions around the U. Okay, how 0:15:09.533 --> 0:15:12.653 many people are of a similar opinion or are they 0:15:12.733 --> 0:15:15.693 a divided group of people who want to do something else? 0:15:16.293 --> 0:15:19.573 No, I mean Test cricket still is the format here. 0:15:19.813 --> 0:15:21.413 I mean, you know, you watch a Test match in 0:15:21.493 --> 0:15:24.213 England and the grounds are packed out. Now the grounds 0:15:24.333 --> 0:15:26.253 in England aren't as big as the grounds in Australia, 0:15:26.333 --> 0:15:29.253 but you're still talking about thirty thousand at Lord's and 0:15:29.373 --> 0:15:33.653 twenty six twenty seven thousand at the Oval. The English 0:15:33.693 --> 0:15:35.773 Test cricket still routinely sells out and that is the 0:15:35.813 --> 0:15:39.813 format that people want to see thrive. The problem we've 0:15:39.853 --> 0:15:42.453 got is that the ECB, the English and Wales Cricket 0:15:42.493 --> 0:15:46.413 board know very well that the easiest solution to that 0:15:46.573 --> 0:15:48.773 is to play five match series against India in Australia. 0:15:49.053 --> 0:15:52.053 I mean this calendar year, England have a one off 0:15:52.133 --> 0:15:54.613 four day Test actually against Zimbabwe in Nottingham at the 0:15:54.693 --> 0:15:57.173 end of May, and after that their test program is 0:15:57.253 --> 0:16:00.013 five home tests against India and five in Australia to 0:16:00.093 --> 0:16:03.173 try and get the ashes back. So it is already 0:16:03.213 --> 0:16:06.653 happening to a degree. They're talking the ECBER talking about 0:16:06.733 --> 0:16:10.213 more longer Test series against other nations. We'll see, we'll 0:16:10.253 --> 0:16:13.133 see whether that happens. But there is a will to 0:16:13.173 --> 0:16:15.173 save Test cricket. It's just whether there can be a 0:16:15.293 --> 0:16:17.373 kind of global will to do it. 0:16:18.373 --> 0:16:20.813 Just a last word on the Test Championship, do you 0:16:20.853 --> 0:16:24.333 see it being run in two groups? A group and 0:16:24.413 --> 0:16:27.213 then a lower tier Because there's been a resistance to 0:16:27.373 --> 0:16:28.773 vet from the sides that would come in to the 0:16:28.853 --> 0:16:31.253 lower tier and the likes of West Indies we're talking 0:16:31.293 --> 0:16:32.373 about that, wren't. 0:16:32.013 --> 0:16:36.573 They Yeah, I don't like tears. I think there's Test 0:16:36.613 --> 0:16:39.693 cricket is more competitive than the people realize. You know, 0:16:40.853 --> 0:16:44.053 West Indies squared the series against Australia last year. In Australia, 0:16:44.093 --> 0:16:48.373 no one gave them a chance. In hell Bangladesh one 0:16:48.453 --> 0:16:51.613 in Pakistan, no one thought that would happen. Sermnanka won 0:16:51.653 --> 0:16:53.853 a Test match at the Oval against England New Zealand 0:16:53.893 --> 0:16:57.293 as we're talking earlier, winning three nil in India. West 0:16:57.333 --> 0:17:00.493 Indies squared the series in Pakistan. It's far more competitive 0:17:00.493 --> 0:17:03.413 than people give it credit for. So I think if 0:17:03.413 --> 0:17:06.413 we go down the two tiers system, we will exacerbate 0:17:06.453 --> 0:17:08.413 the gap between the haves and the have not. That 0:17:08.573 --> 0:17:11.253 is precisely the scenario I would like to see Test 0:17:11.293 --> 0:17:13.613 cricket avoid. I think we all need to work together 0:17:13.733 --> 0:17:17.173 to promote Test cricket and if we can convince people 0:17:17.213 --> 0:17:20.973 that it's a marketable, watchable format, then maybe the TV 0:17:21.653 --> 0:17:24.293 companies will get more involved as well and more money 0:17:24.293 --> 0:17:26.533 will come in that way. Let's not give up on 0:17:26.653 --> 0:17:29.013 Test cricket. If we go down two divisions, two tiers, 0:17:29.253 --> 0:17:32.453 whatever they decided, that gap will grow and it will 0:17:32.493 --> 0:17:34.693 simply hasten the demise of the smaller nations. 0:17:35.013 --> 0:17:38.413 Yes, will be interesting. We will be looking to have 0:17:38.493 --> 0:17:40.213 a discussion about that in this part of the world 0:17:40.213 --> 0:17:43.573 because I think there is a group of people that 0:17:44.093 --> 0:17:46.253 are traditionalists to the heart and they love the game. 0:17:47.053 --> 0:17:48.973 We love it when England coming out because they bring 0:17:49.053 --> 0:17:50.893 the Bami Army in all the tour groups and we 0:17:51.013 --> 0:17:53.373 have a wonderful time. We wish England could come out 0:17:53.493 --> 0:17:57.493 every year because the last two was successful. This year 0:17:57.493 --> 0:17:59.773 we've got kiss matches against Zimbabwe and I think a 0:17:59.813 --> 0:18:02.493 couple against the West Indies. That's basically it. And you 0:18:02.613 --> 0:18:05.893 mentioned South Africa in terms of their home program and 0:18:06.133 --> 0:18:10.533 you're gearing up for a test mat against Zimbabwe very shortly. 0:18:10.533 --> 0:18:13.013 That's right. And you know it's nice they're playing Zimbabwe 0:18:13.173 --> 0:18:15.373 for a one off test. I mean, I don't know 0:18:15.453 --> 0:18:18.333 exactly what it will achieve in the long run, but 0:18:18.373 --> 0:18:20.413 at least it's England. I mean, it's our first Test 0:18:20.453 --> 0:18:22.893 against Zimbabwe for twenty two years, so at least that 0:18:22.933 --> 0:18:25.573 shows they haven't forgotten them. But of course it might 0:18:25.653 --> 0:18:27.853 just be window dressing. I don't know what you know, 0:18:28.213 --> 0:18:29.973 how all the Zimbabwean players, how are they going to 0:18:29.973 --> 0:18:32.413 become proper test players if they just play a one 0:18:32.453 --> 0:18:34.173 off test here and there and then a couple against 0:18:34.493 --> 0:18:36.893 Bangladesh or Ireland. I mean, it's a problem that the 0:18:36.893 --> 0:18:38.173 World Cricket hasn't got to grips with. 0:18:38.653 --> 0:18:40.133 Oh well, the good thing is that New Zealand are 0:18:40.173 --> 0:18:42.333 hitting over there for a couple of Test matches and 0:18:43.373 --> 0:18:46.653 then they'll get that opportunity. And I think that the 0:18:46.853 --> 0:18:51.693 likes of Zimbabwe and even Afghanistan are on the future 0:18:51.733 --> 0:18:53.773 program for New Zealand or so we just have to 0:18:53.853 --> 0:18:56.333 hope that those sides can take part. 0:18:56.493 --> 0:19:00.133 Brian Waddell Jeremy Coney on the front foot. 0:19:00.413 --> 0:19:04.613 Interesting concept from Lawrence Bruth and thanks very much Lawrence 0:19:04.653 --> 0:19:06.853 for joining us once again. I tend to think we 0:19:07.013 --> 0:19:11.773 probably agree in many aspects of what's needed to be done. 0:19:12.133 --> 0:19:15.053 But how to achieve it, I think is going to 0:19:15.093 --> 0:19:16.013 be the challenge, isn't it. 0:19:17.053 --> 0:19:22.333 Well totally I'm with you on that. I have sympathy 0:19:22.453 --> 0:19:30.133 for the proposal. Why it's fair all sides, It's easy 0:19:30.213 --> 0:19:30.693 to follow. 0:19:31.293 --> 0:19:35.253 You get a feeling that after the four year cycle 0:19:36.293 --> 0:19:38.333 that the two best sides. 0:19:39.613 --> 0:19:41.013 Will contest the final. 0:19:42.293 --> 0:19:46.093 The four year term doesn't bother me really, It's like, 0:19:46.213 --> 0:19:49.413 as you say, World Cut, ODIs and a lot of 0:19:49.493 --> 0:19:52.333 other competitions around tournaments. 0:19:52.893 --> 0:19:54.813 And so on, lots of them use it. 0:19:55.653 --> 0:20:00.013 So I guess I would also have to admit that 0:20:01.173 --> 0:20:04.733 it's because I played Test cricket and because I've always 0:20:04.813 --> 0:20:10.093 regarded Test cricket as this of the challenge that a 0:20:10.173 --> 0:20:14.813 player confronts, and you know, I prefer to follow it 0:20:14.893 --> 0:20:19.253 as a format over others. I would have to say, so, 0:20:19.493 --> 0:20:24.053 not everybody's that, and I appreciate that. How do you 0:20:24.213 --> 0:20:27.253 feel a little bit the same way? I suspect that's 0:20:27.293 --> 0:20:27.893 a guest from me. 0:20:28.973 --> 0:20:31.573 Yeah. No, well, I think we've talked about these things 0:20:31.613 --> 0:20:35.493 in the past, and you know, the players will always 0:20:35.533 --> 0:20:37.933 tell you this is the truest form of the game. 0:20:37.973 --> 0:20:40.573 It's the real challenges. As you point out that that's 0:20:40.573 --> 0:20:43.373 why it's called a test. It tests more of your 0:20:43.493 --> 0:20:48.613 game than any other aspect of white ball cricket. And 0:20:49.693 --> 0:20:53.013 you know, I mean I enjoy the cut and thrust 0:20:53.693 --> 0:20:55.973 of the Test match, which you don't see in T 0:20:56.173 --> 0:20:58.573 twenty to a certain extent. You can see it inn 0:20:58.573 --> 0:21:02.413 ODI cricket at times, but the test matches is what 0:21:03.253 --> 0:21:09.133 really gives you the chance to really how the game 0:21:09.773 --> 0:21:11.093 is developing and changing. 0:21:11.973 --> 0:21:12.773 Home and Away. 0:21:14.573 --> 0:21:19.573 Three test series, four year period. Is there going to 0:21:19.613 --> 0:21:23.013 be enough time You're more of a mathematician than I am. 0:21:24.093 --> 0:21:27.893 Yeah, that comes under the heading I mean after stating yeah, 0:21:27.933 --> 0:21:30.893 I'm with this. I think it's very fair and it's easy, 0:21:31.213 --> 0:21:35.013 and it removes some of the problems that exist with 0:21:35.173 --> 0:21:38.093 the current setup playing a different number of games each 0:21:39.013 --> 0:21:42.693 or all those things, the points system, all those stuff 0:21:42.813 --> 0:21:48.213