Print

[langer17]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/523745.html

Seems interesting, but I don't think they should do it.

[stevie_94_]

Why not? Surely if its a final its better to have a result rather than someone win based on who scored more in the first innings or something

[mdl_1979]

A timeless test for the World Championship Final is a great idea, if they aren't going to make the final a series. At least we would get a winner.

[rp27]

Why not? Surely if its a final its better to have a result rather than someone win based on who scored more in the first innings or something

Because he knows if it's timeless the aussies arent going to win it!

[tim2000s]

I think it's a great idea, but, and here's the big but, the ICC will be extremely worried that after four days the audiences will tail off and the cost of running the match will outweigh the value of having a test champion in marketing terms. Especially if India aren't in it.

[langer17]

Why not? Surely if its a final its better to have a result rather than someone win based on who scored more in the first innings or something

I just think that with the 5 day test, teams know that they have 5 days to win, lose or draw so it adds some urgency to the games, especially on days 4 and 5. Without a 'time' limit, the game will just go through the motions untill someone wins, with no real excitement as you know that someone has to win, whereas with a game that has a time limit you don't know if it will be a win, loss or draw.

[Lekka Global Alliance]

Make it a 900 over game.

[Kulli]

Wasn't that world XI vs Oz game a few years ago 6 days?

[Apple]

I dont think you can have that, because the whole game changes if you don't have to win within 5 days, if you make the final timeless then you have to make every game timeless.

[tommo256]

There will be batsmen im sure we English to count on to be there, Jonathon trott, would be good to have Boycott back to block out in a timeless test

[Lekka Global Alliance]

I may need to double check but have the ICC just suggested a "timeless test match" only 2 weeks after banning runners ?

[tim2000s]

I may need to double check but have the ICC just suggested a "timeless test match" only 2 weeks after banning runners ?

Yup, on the basis that as you injure yourself, the duration of the game shortens...

[jonwilson]

I just think that with the 5 day test, teams know that they have 5 days to win, lose or draw so it adds some urgency to the games, especially on days 4 and 5. Without a 'time' limit, the game will just go through the motions untill someone wins, with no real excitement as you know that someone has to win, whereas with a game that has a time limit you don't know if it will be a win, loss or draw.

Would agree.  No sense of urgency would make the game just so unbelievably dull.  Just imagine a nice flat batting track.  Extremely likely that the side winning the toss and batting first would win.  Bat and bat and bat etc.  To quote Neville Cardus (as quoted in the Guardian);

 "In the future, reports will begin 'so-and-so won the toss but it cannot be said they made full use of the first fortnight."

 I think the idea of a timeless test is actually quite dangerous in terms of Test Cricket.  Runs the risk of it making a mockery out of the game and people would simply pull the plug. 

[tim2000s]

I actually like the idea of playing a 450 over match, with each side having a maximum of 225 overs to win, over two innings...

But it's not a test match if you play it like that... It's just a different form of limited overs cricket as you know you will win or lose dependent on the outcome at the end of 450 overs.

[Apple]

Draws can be some of the most exciting and intresting games in test cricket. If its a draw just share the title!