The main problem holding cricket back in this country is the mediocre club season. Whilst the Sheffield Shield might be millions of years old and originally handed down by God to Moses on a mountaintop, today it has little impact in the lives of the average cricket fans.
Looking forward to the year 2020, here’s some thoughts on what Cricket Australia should be doing to address a restructure of the spring-summer season:
Sheffield Shield Test matches:
Played during late July to early October in country towns in their respective states – 10 matches home and away and a final held from October 8th to 12th. Note: there is no Sheffield, one-day or Twenty20 series.
Test matches:
There should only be five Test matches – sorry Hobart, you miss out but you’re compensated elsewhere. Tests are arranged either as two series of two; three games or a five-game Ashes series. The dates remain as per traditional scheduling except for the fifth Test which would avoid the Australia Day holiday and instead wrap up on January 18th by the latest.
New Zealand should arrange their Tests to shadow the Australian date where possible. This means that there would be two touring teams down under over late November through to January – this is important to note for later on.
One dayers:
Gone. Australia and New Zealand should man up, take leadership and be the first countries to opt out of this format. The reason being is as follows:
International Twenty20:
Rather than a pointless 15 game three-way 50 overs tournament that fizzles with four irrelevant matches, the international short form contest can be reworked into the Twenty20 formula.
Australia and New Zealand would participate in a four-way series every summer along with the two touring teams who would also bring their Twenty20 specialists. Each team would play each other twice meaning there would be 12 matches. However, there would be six games involving Australia and six games involving New Zealand.
There would only be two games without them and those matches could be played as the first game as a double header. Because there are four teams in the tournament and no byes the round robin portion can effectively be played over six official match days rather than the 12-15 we’re currently subjected to.
These matches would be scheduled to fall in between the Test matches with the best two teams playing a final decisive match the week following the final Test match.
In all there would be 13 short form internationals played but they would have a greater appeal in Australia and New Zealand than the current somewhat illogical schedule.
Club Twenty20:
The missing component of the cricket empire: a well-supported club competition. The club Twenty20 competition should be expanded to 15 teams broken into five conferences:
Conference A: Perth, Adelaide and Hobart
Conference B: Geelong, Melbourne 1 and Melbourne 2
Conference C: Canberra, Sydney 1 and Sydney 2
Conference D: Newcastle, Gold Coast and Brisbane
Conference E: Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch
Each team would play their own conference twice – four games. Each team would play two team from each of the other conferences – eight games. Total is 12 games per team, so six home games each, two of which are derbies.
The club Twenty20 season would run from the second/third week of October through to the final weekend in February – approximately 20 weeks.
The 12 games of the round robin competition would be played over a 17-week period. This means that teams have five bye rounds. The byes would be scheduled in such a manner that although teams may lose players to internationals that the impact of this would be even to all clubs.
The aim for scheduling matches most weeks would be to have Friday night, Sunday afternoon and Sunday night timeslots with two games in each. This means that two games can be aired simultaneously and shown over the main channel and a secondary channel, the game selection varying from state to state.
This means that four markets can be serviced in any time slot – so a Friday night could see games appealing to Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia – maximising television returns. Obviously when there are Test matches on Sunday afternoons and international Twenty20 there would be adjustments for this.
The end of the season would be a top six knockout finals format with the five conference winners plus one wildcard played over three weeks with the grand final on the last weekend of February.
So to recap. Five Test matches in Australia and five more simultaneously in New Zealand; 13 international Twenty20 featuring four teams; 94 domestic Twenty20 featuring 12 Australian and three New Zealand teams.
Gleeso
Guest
Thanks Code 13 for an interesting article. This is the way I would like to see Australian cricket in 2020:- Sept-Dec: Sheffield Shield/Tests Dec-Jan: Big Bash Feb: T20 international tri-series March: Origin tournament I would have the traditional 10 rounds of the Sheffield Shield played from late September to early December played concurrently with 5 tests commencing in November and finishing with the Sydney test every year in the first week of January. The season would be condensed as there would be no one-day domestic competition. I would have a regional round of the Sheffield Shield in the last week of September played in centres like Geelong, Canberra, Wagga, Newcastle etc and the Shield final played around the second week of December. Like this year, the Big Bash would commence the week before Christmas and be played through to the end of January. Players on test duty will probably only miss around 2 rounds of the Big Bash coinciding with the Boxing Day and New Years tests. The Big Bash would feature between 10 and 14 teams. Canberra, Newcastle, Gold Coast, Geelong and possibly 1 or 2 New Zealand teams would make up the extra sides. Friday and Saturday night games would be on free-to-air. Maybe a 3-game ODI series around Australia Day for postarity. February would be devoted to an international limited over series. I believe countries like Afghanistan, Canada, Ireland, Scotland, Netherlands, Kenya, USA and China/Hong Kong should be given more opportunities to compete and I think the best way to do this would be prioritising first-class and T20 and phasing-out ODIs. I think the minnows should be able to tour the current full member nations and be the third nation in a triangular T20 series (i.e. Australia, England and Ireland) and play first class matches against state teams or A teams (i.e. New South Wales, Australia A or Chairman's XI). This would raise both the profile and skill level of the teams and add new blood to what is often and parade of tired old faces. In March, to stop the encroachment of football codes, I would go out with a bang and explore a short T20 origin tournament like the old Big Bash with state-based sides competing. I’d also like to see 18-team T20 World Cups played every second year with the Olympic and Commonwealth Games featuring T20 in between years.
mds1970
Roar Guru
I'd favour having 15 teams, but organised more like Super Rugby, with 3 groups of 5; every team playing every other team from their own group twice and three teams from each other group. NZ Group - Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, Hamilton, Dunedin AUS North - Brisbane, Sydney 1, Sydney 2, Gold Coast, Canberra AUS South - Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne 1, Melbourne 2, Hobart
Ben Carter
Roar Guru
Hi Code - I must be in the insane minority. Cricket in 2020 - the Irish Cricket Union announced in the past week that it will aim for Test nation status by 2020. Nothing more, nothing less. Whether the ICC or other nations like it or not. Good on 'em for having some confidence! So... 2020. Cricket in Australia, possibly three-day twilight-ish Shield games at large regional city venues? Hopefully a meaningful 40-over one-day comp (even if it's only a dozen or less games a summer), hopefully a more meaningful Twenty20 comp (with NOT too many matches!)... Tests (still six - INCLUDING Hobart). Make Canberra the new home of the four-day Australia A tour match. ODIs - 40 overs a side, nine World Series prelim games and ONE final. Give a neutral-team game to Canberra. Although it would be tricky to schedule, LOVE the idea of including NZ more in some way or another. ODI World Cup - 40 overs a side, 16 teams. T20 World Cup - 20 teams. T20 in the 2020 Olympic Games, with a minimum of 16 teams. And a minimum of 11 Test nations - including IRELAND.
KNACKERS
Guest
KNACKERS
Guest
Australia GDP per capita 67K NZ GDP per capita 38K Aust population 22.8 mill NZ population 4.4 mill
code 13
Roar Guru
I would introduce one rule change though. At either the loss of the 5th wicket or the end of the 10th over (whatever comes first) the teams swap over. This means there would be 4 miniature innings and thus more ebb and flow.
code 13
Roar Guru
I guess the major problem with Townsville and any team too far North is the weather. There is room for expansion though. This is a plan that could be realised within 8 years. But beyond that there could be an Otago team and then 4 conferences of 4 teams potentially. But I think 15 is a sustainable number for a good 20 years.
code 13
Roar Guru
Some points to consider: New Zealand has 20% the population of Australia. 3 teams out of 15 = 20% I never said there was a gulf in talent but these are CLUBS not REP TEAMS. If New Zealand has an excess of talent then they would get picked up by other clubs in a heartbeat If ACB didn’t want to repeat their mistake then why would they want to have a 3 nation Southern Hemisphere Twenty 20 comp with New Zealand & South Africa? In that one New Zealand would have only had two teams. I disagree with adding South Africa into the mix – it makes for a gruelling domestic tournament. New Zealand and Australia are close enough to make it work.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
In the HS today - Bash to Lure in Big Bucks: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/cricket/big-bash-final-to-lure-in-big-bucks/story-fn6w5lwh-1226255880109 The most excited person tonight will be "Cricket Australia chief executive James Sutherland as he prepares to negotiate the next multi-million-dollar television rights deal, with the big hope the Big Bash will make it on free-to-air TV." They are looking for a sizeable increase on their current $30 mill per annum. Also, the CA is thinking: rather than have 12 well known cricketers, why not 200 well known crickters? i.e. who are followed by the public in big numbers. He confirms FTA interest. Crowds are up 10% on the CA's original estimates and ratings are double what they were under the old state based comp. They are predicting ratings of around 900,000 on FTA if a broadcaster were to take it up.
Rob9
Guest
Great plan. I like it! Ive thought about the expansion of the BBL in the future and Id like to see the places you've listed all included and one day and chuck Townsville on the list too (when they have a decent oval stadium). 3 teams is the right amount for NZ in these particular cities. They all have the population to support a franchise in an Australian centric t20 comp and they have the venues to hold big crowds. Outside of their 3 biggest cities they dont have the population centres to sustain a team while adding something to the league.
Mykuhl
Guest
Knackers? are you completely incapable of 3 minutes research? NZ's GDP per capita is lower than Australias, but by about 30%, not half. NZ's population is slightly more than 20% of Australia's, not between a fifth and a sixth. Code13 I'm not suggesting that there should be the same number of teams from NZ and Australia, but last time I checked NZ won the last test and t20 matches between the two countries and made it further in the World Cup. I'm not sure there is such a gulf that there needs to be 4 times as many teams in Australia than New Zealand. And I don't buy the population argument either. If that was the category, Hamilton and Tauranga would have teams before Geelong. If we were to combine the NZ teams geographically, then it would be very difficult to see the NZ teams losing too many games. For example the Auckland squad would look something like this: Guptill, Williamson, H. Marshall, Styris, de Grandhomme, McGlashan, Hira, Vettori, Bates, Mills, Southee, Boult, Vincent, Adams, Hopkins, Watling, J Marshall, C. Martin, B Martin. Realistically you would leave out 8 international cricketers from the squad. Do you honestly think that this team would be challenged by a further diluted BBL team? That the likes of the Melbourne Renegades would get within a stones throw of them? I understand that you are Australian, and don't know the New Zealand players, but ten Doeschate, who played in both countries said that he felt the standard in NZ higher than in Australia. Now that was probably an exaggeration, but still implies that there is not the gulf that you suggest exists. Remember the last time a NZ team played in an Australian competition they won all but 1 game in 3 seasons. After that they were not invited back. I'm fairly confident that the ACB won't repeat that mistake.
KNACKERS
Guest
What is this ? New Zealand Week ? For everyone's information NZs poulation is between a fifth and a sixth of Australia's NZ's economy is about one tenth to one twelth of Australia's ie the GDP per capita is half that of Australia . Ever wondered why there are so many over here ? NZ's interest in cricket is ....well not much by comparison I doubt anyone is betting that NZ is bridging the gap
willjohn
Roar Rookie
You need four day games to prepare young players for Test matches.
code 13
Roar Guru
Well part of the reason why the test series should finish by January 18th is to allow a 3-4 week uninterrupted run to the finals. But during the Australia Day period when it falls midweek, I would give the 3 New Zealand teams a bye and have 6 games played - 2 the night before and 4 on Australia day - in Hobart, Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney & Brisbane. Going to the cricket on Australia Day would become a massive tradition not just for one state but for every state.
code 13
Roar Guru
I believe that 20/20 and One Dayers cannot both survive when their both trying to achieve the same thing. 20/20s are much more flexible and appealing. You may even start to see non-traditional countries that struggle with Test cricket step up on the 20/20 level - much like Rugby 7s. As for your other issues, a Newcastle team would be dependent on a ground construction. Sheffield Shield test matches and BBL 20/20s cannot run at the same time because they require the same player pool - to do this would dilute both. The whole point of this article is to show 20/20's can be a popular domestic form of the game. Condensing them into 6 week period as you've suggested is to miss the concept entirely. Also if playing Sheffield shield in country towns is a problem, surely competing against the AFL pre-season is a bigger one. The interest in Shield test matches are low and the only reason they still exist is to build players for national level which is why they must continue. At the time of year I have suggest many regional ovals in country towns are actually available for use.
code 13
Roar Guru
Yes I'd only have 3 New Zealand teams. One to represent South Island and two dividing North Island in half. The three clubs could obviously play matches outside their home base in those other zones. Having 6 teams in New Zealand and 12 in Australia would be a poor balance when you consider that New Zealand's population is barely a quarter of Australia's. If there were 6 New Zealand teams they would struggle financially and I don't think it would even be achievable in the 8 year time line I've specified. The other 3 teams are free to participate in the local test match comps. Why would the NZC go for this? Money. By having 3 quality teams in this expanded comp they will earn more than they ever will with 6 teams in their own isolated comp. Plus the added benefit is that unified scheduling means Internationals will be co-ordinated to also maximise revenue. As for Wellington not being able to play cricket, remember these are clubs under the BBL rules. It's an open recruitment market. And yes the weather is an issue. The alternative is for New Zealand to play a subcontinent team overseas during that period and invite that team to the 4 way comp. Australia would then play that team later in the January period and New Zealand would swap and play Australia's opponent. As for players having to choose, we have a 20 week window for this competition to work. By having 5 byes and using midweek matches you can condense a team's round robin length into 10-11 weeks. This gives them 6 weeks unopposed. This mean they can avoid 2-3 test matches and 2-3 20/20 Internationals. Spread across all teams the international rep impact would be equitable and no different to other sports. National players would still be playing about 8 club 20/20's plus their other matches which is a fair commitment. If some special in only one form at international level, then they'd play 10 club matches.
Jack Russell
Roar Guru
It would be silly not to schedule the BBL during the holiday season, at least in part. Half the reason the BBL exists is to get the kids through the gates, and the best time to do that is when they're all on holidays. Having the tests and BBL on at the same time hasn't detracted from either this summer.
sheek
Guest
In 2020 the BBL will be the Sheffield Shield. Test batsmen will be celebrated for a strike rate of over 150 runs per 100 balls, & test bowlers will be celebrated for the number of dot balls (no runs) they bowl. Test cricket as it was once known (over 5 days) can be viewed on the history channel..........
Chris
Guest
I suspect the future of T20 is in domestic comps rather than international games. It will probably end up being much like soccer - just have a World Cup every four years. I'm undecided about the future of the ODIs though - I'd prefer to wait a few years to see what the demand is for this form of the game. Oh, and one small point - Newcastle doesn't have a suitable ground to have a BBL team. My biggest issue though is with your scheduling of the Shield season from July to October. You do know cricket is a summer sport don't you? Where on earth do you plan for these games to be played? Even in regional centres the grounds will be used by the football codes during this period. My proposal is less radical: Nov - Interstate games (Shield and one-dayers) start Dec - Tests start Jan - Tests finish mid month, international limited overs games to be played in the second half of the month Feb - BBL starts Mar - BBL finishes mid month Apr - football seasons start The other option is that the Tests are scheduled to finish with the Sydney New Year Test and bring the start of the BBL forward to start in Jan. That variation is for those who think the BBL succeeds because it is scheduled in the holiday season.
Mykuhl
Guest
Wait, so you want there to be only 3 NZ teams, and those teams to feature Wellington (who can't play cricket). You would have a team based in Geelong, but nothing from Central Districts, Northern Districts or Otago. I'm sure NZC would love this. Also getting NZ to drop the one form of Cricket that we are among the best in the world at would be difficult. The other issue would be playing matches in NZ on the same timetable as Australia with our different climate. We have settled weather in February, March and April, so that is when we want to have test matches. The idea to have a 4 team series is a good one, as is the idea of a combined tournament, but it needs to be done better than a 12-3 split, and it should not happen at the same time as the test matches. We don't want to make players make a choice, it is better to allow them to play both. There are some specialists, but making Brendan McCullum choose between the formats is not good for the team.