Is a Two-Tier Test System the Future of Cricket?

Earlier this year, former India head coach Ravi Shastri ignited a crucial debate, passionately advocating for a two-tier structure within Test cricket. His reasoning was clear: to ensure the very survival of the game’s longest and most revered format. “If you don’t create a two-tier system, you’ll continue to have unmatched teams up against each other and then it’s very unlikely they’ll be able to take a game into the fifth day,” Shastri penned in a column for The Australian, highlighting the growing concern over predictable contests.

This discussion gained further urgency after a recent Test match between India and West Indies in Ahmedabad concluded in a mere two and a half days. While the West Indies team showed commendable resolve in the subsequent Test in the national capital, pushing it to Day 5, India still secured a comfortable seven-wicket victory. Such one-sided encounters inevitably prompt familiar questions: how can Test cricket maintain its relevance, competitiveness, and financial viability all at once?

The idea of a two-tier system isn’t new; it was first proposed in 2009 by Dave Richardson, the then ICC’s general manager for cricket. The vision was to divide Test-playing nations into two divisions, aiming to:

• Ensure more frequent clashes among top-tier teams.
• Inject greater competition and excitement into Test matches.
• Boost revenue and viewership, making the format more commercially appealing.

Context vs. Competitiveness: The WTC’s Dilemma

After years of groundwork, the World Test Championship (WTC) was finally launched in 2019, primarily to add more context to bilateral Test series by culminating in a pinnacle event. The ICC has achieved some success in this regard; even a ‘dead rubber’ Test now carries significance through the points it offers towards the championship.

However, what the WTC hasn’t fully addressed is the issue of one-sided contests. Many Test matches, especially those involving teams outside of the ‘Big Three’ (India, England, Australia), New Zealand (the inaugural WTC winners), and South Africa (the reigning champions), continue to end prematurely, often within two to three days, lacking true competitiveness. This persistent imbalance has fueled renewed calls for fundamental structural changes, with a tiered system being at the forefront to ensure more evenly matched games.

Current WTC Standings (Illustrative Example)

Teams	Matches	Won	Lost	Tied	Drawn	Deduction	Points	PCT
Australia	3	3	0	0	0	0	36	100.00
Sri Lanka	2	1	0	0	1	0	16	66.67
India	7	4	2	0	1	0	52	61.90
England	5	2	2	0	1	2	26	43.33
Bangladesh	2	0	1	0	1	0	4	16.67
West Indies	5	0	5	0	0	0	0	0.00
New Zealand	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.00
Pakistan	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.00
South Africa	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.00

Making the Tier System a Reality

Currently, an informal tier system exists with nine teams participating in the WTC and three outside of it. However, the proposed formal tiered system would officially split teams into two divisions, with clear mechanisms for promotion and relegation.

Cricket analyst and writer Jarrod Kimber has previously advocated for expanding Test status to more countries. While his suggestion involved a significant increase to around 20 Test teams, a more pragmatic first step might be to grant Test status to at least two more nations before fully implementing a tiered system. This could lead to a structure with 14 Test teams divided into two tiers of seven each, complete with promotion and relegation.

In such a setup, every team in the top tier would play the other six in their division during a WTC cycle, ensuring a balanced schedule of three home and three away series. Crucially, teams in the second tier would also benefit from playing regular Tests among themselves. This frequent competition offers a much greater chance for emerging nations like Ireland or Afghanistan to develop their game, rather than being occasionally overwhelmed in one-off matches against top-tier opponents. Since gaining Test status in 2018, Afghanistan and Ireland have played only 11 and 10 Tests, respectively, highlighting the urgent need for more consistent opportunities.

Equitable Revenue Distribution, Dedicated Windows, and Minimum Wage

A significant hurdle for many teams outside of the ‘Big Three’ is the financial viability of playing Test matches. As former West Indies chief executive Johnny Grave noted, traveling to England for a Test could cost Cricket West Indies $1 million with no revenue return, making it a loss-making endeavor. Addressing this financial disparity is paramount for any tiered system to succeed.

Journalist and author Tim Wigmore, author of ‘Test Cricket: A History,’ stresses that the “absolute key thing is that revenue is divided more equally.” He proposes two main approaches:

1. Centralized Revenue System: The ICC would manage all bilateral Tests under the WTC, similar to how it handles World Cups. This would involve centralized broadcasting rights, with revenue distributed among the host nation, the visiting team, and a portion reserved by the ICC for redistribution among the tier two teams.
2. Hybrid Revenue Model: The host nation would still manage broadcasting and logistics, but Test match revenue would be split: 45-50% for the host, 30-35% for the touring side, and the remainder going to the ICC for redistribution to second-tier teams.

Wigmore also suggests establishing designated windows for Test matches, free from the competition of franchise leagues. This would ensure the format receives undivided attention and that all top players are available. Additionally, he proposes the idea of a minimum wage for Test cricketers, especially for those in a potential Division Two, to ensure players are adequately compensated and remain committed to the longest format.

While these proposals paint an optimistic picture, their implementation remains a significant challenge. Yet, as Ravi Shastri wisely put it, for Test cricket to truly thrive, “The best should play the best.”