Should Test Cricket have a Football(Soccer) Scoring System ?

[Iconoclast]

3 Points for a win 1 Point for a draw. Will entice teams to go for the win in close matches where a result is possible. Also will encourage boards to make more result oriented pitches.

[Iconoclast]

For calculating ICC Team rankings these points will be weighted with respect to the rank of the opposition.

[The Outsider]

It's already there - a win gets you more points in ICC rankings than a draw. There are bonus points for a series win as well. I feel, people fret too much about a result. As long as the match is exciting who cares if it's a draw. Why the need to have a winner?

[Number]

Its already there. What I'd like to see is, top 8 playing equal no. of home and away tests against each other in a 4 or 3 years period and points being given on that basis like football leagues. Team with highest no. of points declared the winner of test championship.

[The Outsider]

^ Problem is that the gulf between some of the sides is too much. Two test series are enough for that. For teams at the same level, need to have longer series - 4 tests, sometimes 5. The idea of a test championship doesn't appeal me. Good test cricket is exciting enough in a bilateral contest without the need for these gimmicks.

[GoldenSun]

^ Problem is that the gulf between some of the sides is too much. Two test series are enough for that. For teams at the same level, need to have longer series - 4 tests, sometimes 5. The idea of a test championship doesn't appeal me. Good test cricket is exciting enough in a bilateral contest without the need for these gimmicks.

agreed wholeheartedly. I've never really subscribed to the theory that test cricket is dying. Granted, the gulf between some of the sides seem to be high and there are onl 2-3 good sides in the world right now, but my interest in tests has never wavered even with the rise of T20's. How is the attendance in India though?

[sachin34357]

system is fine as it is; some people just need to understand the current system http://www.ehow.com/how_6916968_calculate-icc-rankings.html

[Number]

^ Problem is that the gulf between some of the sides is too much. Two test series are enough for that. For teams at the same level, need to have longer series - 4 tests, sometimes 5. The idea of a test championship doesn't appeal me. Good test cricket is exciting enough in a bilateral contest without the need for these gimmicks.

I agree but top teams are anyway not playing 4 or more tests against each other these days. Ashes is an exception but that itself has been a one-sided boring affair since 90s(2005 excluded). And top teams against weak teams are anyways playing 2 tests in 5 years or so, adding one more to it won't really affect much in my view.

[putrevus]

This crappy idea of ICC test championship was floated by Lorgat but I think it is mainly brainchild of ECB who did not want to host 2013 CT.

[Iconoclast]

It's already there - a win gets you more points in ICC rankings than a draw. There are bonus points for a series win as well.

Obviously a win should get you more points than a draw. However whatever advantage a win has in the current point system is clearly not enough to make teams go for it. In recent weeks you have twice seen teams in reasonable position to win a match on day 5 go for a draw instead. Furthermore there is the routine example now of home teams producing flatter and fatter home wickets. Perhaps there is a financial incentive of seeing tests last five days. If wins count 3X as much as a draw you might see more result oriented pitches as well as more thrilling chases on day 5.

[bulbul]

Ranking doesn't even mater when only 4 good/Ok teams out there. Only India,SA,OZ and England can compete for long time , even between these teams there are lot of one sided matches.

[JourneyMan]

Agree with Outsider. The current format works quite well, and not having a result isn't an issue. India-SA could have been 0-0 and it was still an exciting series.