More fixture chaos for Cricket Australia as men's side gets double-booked

So which board do you think should rejig the scheduling – New Zealand Cricket or Cricket South Africa? I will not back down that I think Test cricket and T20 cricket are wildly different formats that should be treated differently from one another by players, boards and fans rather than expected everyone to be a sort of jack of all trades.

Sure. But Test cricket has been under pressure for some time (years) even though attendances in Australia and England remain strong. For the sake of Test cricket, I'd rather not put further pressure on the emerging fans to make a choice. Unfortunately (in my opinion) the short-form cat is out of the bag and has been for some time. And some will gravitate towards it if they have to choose. As I said at the start, if the option is available to rejig the scheduling, then the Boards should do it. There is a sufficient window available to do so. The only thing standing in the way, as I see it, is the inability of administrators to communicate efficiently/quickly between themselves and be flexible. I get it that they have other pressures to manage, including commercial issues such as broadcast contracts and venue bookings (in some cases), but for mine, that is where the administrators need to earn their remuneration by taking control and getting it resolved.

So Kiwis aren't going to enjoy watching their team thrash the Aussies, if that scenario were to come to pass?

Or do boards and fans need to realise that this is something they are going to have to deal with in the short-term due to Covid? I don't think this is going to be something we see once the cricket calendar returns to normal. There's no need to avoid the clash - the Test game and the T20 game are different entities in my eyes. I have no problem with people enjoying T20 cricket - I watch a few games myself from time to time. However, when it comes at the expense of Test cricket, alarm bells start ringing in my head. In fact, I think New Zealand Cricket is scheduling far too many T20s and not enough Test matches.

The dilution effect when there was a clash of homeT20s v SL and SA Test tour a couple of seasons ago didn't go over well with the cricketing public. Surely all Boards need to ensure they don't alienate some of the game's supporter base if they don't need to. What's the issue with adjusting schedules to avoid clashes if it can be achieved? "Shouldn’t the cricketing public accept that Test cricket is more important than T20 cricket" I accept that Test cricket is more important than short form. I don't, however, see how you can force all cricket supporters to accept that view if some of them do in fact prefer the shorter formats.

for sure there'll be some who'll go but you could fill stadiums if you had two full strength teams going at each other. Don't forget too, the real numbers are those who do or don't watch on TV. If Australia looks uncompetitive, after a game or two, viewing numbers will rapidly drop off.

Agreed Micko and I don't think the NZ fans themselves will care too much either.

The tickets are half price - I think people are going to go watch regardless of whether the Aussies are at full-strength.

Why do they need to sort this out Jeff? Shouldn't the cricketing public accept that Test cricket is more important than T20 cricket and that the guys who play Test cricket will go to South Africa to play Test cricket (in what will be some of Australia's last matches in the World Test Championship)? Sure, it was all held behind closed doors but there was no adverse impact of the English side being a bit depleted in the ODIs v Ireland and the T20s v Pakistan because of the absence of those who had played in the test series. I don't see there being an adverse impact of the Australian side being depleted in similar circumstances with the clashing tours of South Africa and New Zealand. Everybody should accept that this is what is happening and just deal with it.

Agree. Dilution of the best available representative talent in showcase (international) series is one of the last things international cricket can afford to dabble with right now as the game and its' collective administrators grapple to deal with the scheduling disruption and financial hits arising from CV-19. The three Board's need to work together to sort this out and I can't think of any reason why any of them can't do so.

Well, you wouldn't be sending Smith and Warner to South Africa would you? Look what happened last time! :happy:

I think coinciding series is less than ideal and will especially become a problem if we find ourselves short on a couple of players due to injuries. I must admit the scheduling approach overall has an ad hoc look to it. We are going back to South Africa for a second test series yet they haven't toured here for tests since the last time we were there. I notice this also for India, having won a test series here on their last tour and now they are back again without the Aussies touring their country for tests in the meantime. Mind you, I am looking forward to their time here. I suppose it's a matter of follow the money.

Your right of course, Australia could put out plenty of guys for the T20s, but they're quite at the same level as Smith, Starc, Warner, etc, nor do they have the same pulling power for fans. If I was looking after NZ Cricket, I wouldn't be thrilled so many star players were missing from the Aussie squad.I guess we'llhave to wait to see what CA does abut this issue. Interesting you decided no back up was required for Lyon? Don't forget about Murphy's Law.

For T20Is: Finch (C) Short/Weatherald Stoinis Handscomb/McDermott Maxwell Carey/Philippe (WK) Agar Sams/Tye K Richardson/Coulter-Nile/Behrendorff Stanlake/Meredith Zampa For Tests: Warner Burns/Khawaja/Maddinson Labuschagne Smith Head/Renshaw Wade/Patterson Paine (C & WK) Pattinson/Starc Cummins/J Richardson Hazlewood/Neser Lyon Swepson would be a second choice spinner.

what kind of cricket are we going to this summer in australia?rubbish games.boring.cant they just play games they way the were before.

The team might not care but I bet their Board does.

The kiwis won't care. They'll show up to beat any aussie team.

I'm not as convinced this is as simple as replacing a few guys in our T20 lineup and having a Test squad in South Africa and a T20 squad in New Zealand. The NZ Cricket Board would be desperate for dollars, as the article suggests, so they'd be wanting Australia to provide the very best players for this series. By my count there are at least 7 guys who would not be available for the T20's including Warner, Smith, Lyon, Starc, Hazlewood,Cummins & Wade, from the squad who toured England. Sure they can be replaced, but how competitive would this side be against a full strength Black Caps outfit? And if they weren't perceived to be competitive, who'd watch the games, or want to pay sponsorship dollars? This scheduling will need sorting asap. CA can't afford to treat New Zealand shabbily after how they were prepared to stick it out in Australia, when the virus crisis first. The Warriors also did the NRL a huge favour by staying in the rugby league competition, so I think we owe that country plenty of payback for their support in tough times.

From what happened with England when this happened this summer, those who have a Test contract will be off to South Africa and the rest will be off to New Zealand (which gives the chance for the selectors to debut some players, who may then find themselves keeping their place in the side). It is what it is. It can be dealt with. The T20 side may not be at completely full strength but Test cricket is what's more important. It's about time the Test players stopped playing as much T20 cricket as they do now anyway.

I've just taken a little break from writing whilst I sorted some stuff out but I'll be back, don't worry!