Test Series

My first post in the Cricket boards, but I come in peace!

I am just wondering if someone can give me an answer/good reason for having Test Series that are 2 or 4 matches instead of 3 or 5?

I know that calendar considerations and time factors will account for much of the reasoning as to why you cannot have 5 Test series all the time, but surely playing 3 would, at least in theory, be better in respect of having a result over the aggregate of all matches?

Now please do not get me wrong, I enjoy the contest and will applaud any side that busts itself to salvage a draw, so this is not a test versus shorter forms of the game rant, but BECAUSE this is Test cricket and you need the ability to take 20 wickets to win, why set it up that you are potentially depriving a given sides bowlers the chance at winning (or saving) a series tied (or 2/1 down) after 4 matches?!

As I say, timig and fatigue are major factors but then opt for 3 Tests in that case.

Question/rant over.

Welcome

A draw is just as likely as a win I suppose, so playing four is fine, but not two, which is way to short.

I don't like 2 Test series. Well, unless Bangladesh or Zimbabwe are playing then its fine to get that rubbish out of the way (0 Tests would be preferable).

The issue is teams are mandated to play each other over a period of time by the ICC. They end up shoe-horning these 2 Test series in to get them done. As crowds are non-existent in most countries for Tests it is preferable to play as few as possible.

I suppose the power is with the ICC here, its them that determine that 2 Tests is a valid series.

I don't have a problem with a 4 test series (if the only alternative would otherwise be 3). A keenly fought drawn series with two wins apiece could keep everyone interested.....

I don't mind four Tests.

I do have an issue with 2 Test series, particularly when they involve teams of similar ability. For scheduling reasons 2 Test series between higher and lower ranked teams are necessary.

3 isn't enough for the most important series. For that reason SA-Eng was somewhat disappointing (particularly as my eyes were elsewhere for 1 of them, during the Olympics). 4 tends to be a good length. 5 should probably be reserved for those series which can hold the public attention over that length of time - primarily the Ashes.

debaters1 wrote:My first post in the Cricket boards, but I come in peace!

I think on the cricket boards we tend to assume everyone comes in peace unless and until they demonstrate otherwise!