Two-tier Test cricket proposal greeted with concern from some and weary acceptance from others

If you can, cast your mind back to January 28 last year.

Australia was licking its wounds, humbled by the West Indies at the Gabba off the back of a brilliant spell by debutant Guyanese quick Shamar Joseph.

This was a team that had been branded as “pathetic and hopeless” by Rod Hogg and they had just won at the Gabba.

Days like that have been few and far between for the West Indies in recent years.

But under widely reported plans to introduce a two-tier system in Test cricket, having the West Indies travel to Australia at all for Test matches may soon not happen at all.

Does a two-tier set-up already exist?

It has been reported in The Sydney Morning Herald that a two-tier system would allow the “big three” of India, Australia and England to play each other more often, while providing more meaningful matches for smaller Test nations.

This is a model that has been explored in international football with the UEFA Nations League.

There, teams are pitted against nations of similar standard, which avoids shocking mismatches and gives moments of joy to those smaller nations, such as San Marino, which late last year ended a 140-match losing streak stretching back over 20 years by beating Lichtenstein.

And there is some reason to argue that, despite the heroics of last January, the West Indies have provided paltry resistance in Australia for decades. After all, the island nations have only won one of their last 18 Tests in Australia.

Then again, England hasn’t won any of its last 15, losing 13 with two draws, so perhaps the Ashes shouldn’t take place Down Under until it improves its overseas form.

The International Cricket Council’s (ICC) Indian chairman Jay Shah would meet representatives of the Australian and English boards this month to discuss the plans, the report said.

Of course, the “big three” already play more Test cricket against each other than any other teams.

Australia and India’s recent series was typified by record crowds and interest over an engrossing contest that Australia came out on top of 2-1 — and they should get used to those types of contests.

Australia and India play against each other and England 24 times in this four-year cycle.

That’s more Tests than Afghanistan, Ireland and Zimbabwe each play in total, and just a handful fewer than the West Indies, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and South Africa manage.

England, meanwhile, will play Australia and India 10 times each.

Bangladesh has been a Test-playing nation since 2000. Australia has played it six times. Zimbabwe has been a Test nation since 1992 and Australia has played it just three times.

It has never played Ireland or Afghanistan in a Test match.

Lloyd says two-tier set-up will be ‘terrible’

West Indies great Clive Lloyd said he was “very disturbed” by the idea.

Lloyd, widely acknowledged as one of Test cricket’s greatest-ever captains of one of the sport’s greatest-ever teams, said the plans would be catastrophic for teams such as the West Indies.

“I think it will be terrible for all those countries who worked so hard to get the Test status,” Lloyd said.

“Now they’ll be playing among themselves in the lower section. How are they going to make it to the top when you play against better teams.”

He is not a lone dissenting voice.

Former England bowler Steven Finn told the BBC that it was “greedy”.

“I don’t like it. I don’t think it’s good for the game,” Finn said.

“I think it’s greedy — monetising something that is so pure like Test cricket feels like it is sullying the game. It just doesn’t sit right with me.”

ABC cricket commentator Jim Maxwell agreed.

“Sheer greed,” he wrote on X/Twitter.

“Self interest is always the favourite. Australia negligent. Has to be a better way of accommodating the minnows.”

Those in favour, raise your hands

Perhaps unsurprisingly, those in favour of the move are aligned with the so-called big three.

“I was delighted to read the ICC are considering a two-tier structure from 2027 which could see the Ashes staged twice every three years,” Michael Vaughan wrote in his Telegraph column.

“I have been saying for a long time this is the way to keep Test cricket relevant by ensuring the best play the best as often as possible, and we get fewer mismatches.”

Vaughan admitted that there had been some “great upsets” but those are just “few and far between”.

“I have no doubt that there will be people disappointed to hear that West Indies or Bangladesh, perhaps even some other well-loved teams, would miss out on the top flight,” Vaughan added.

“They have provided some great moments but more often than not, they struggle against the top teams and without radical change, sadly the sums don’t add up.”

It is telling, perhaps, that Vaughan did not note that the other sums that don’t quite add up are those in the financial distribution model currently employed by the ICC, which sees India take home about 38.5 per cent of revenue compared to just 6 per cent for Australia, England and Pakistan, with the others taking home between 2 and 5 per cent.

Granted, India makes 80 per cent of all that money, but the redistribution hardly smacks of equality.

Former India coach Ravi Shastri said the move would be beneficial for Test cricket.

“The top teams play against each other more often, so there is a contest. You want contests,” Shastri told SEN radio during the fifth Test at the SCG.

“It [the Australia vs India series] was a stark reminder that the best should play the best for Test cricket to survive,” he added.

“There is too much of a clutter otherwise.”

Smaller nations potentially welcome change

It is not just the top sides that are for the idea though. Andrew White, chief selector of Ireland — a side that has played barely any Test cricket since it was admitted to the top tier of full membership in 2017, playing just nine matches — was in favour.

“I think it is crying out for that to be brutally honest,” he told the BBC in March.

“The gulf between Afghanistan and ourselves to England, India and Australia is massive at Test level.

“We want to give the players a chance to play and improve and for those games to have some context.

“If you had a two-tier Test Championship it would give the guys something to get their teeth into.”

Former West Indian great Michael Holding too, said a two-tier set-up was somewhat inevitable.

“I have seen this coming for a long, long time,” Holding wrote in the UK’s Telegraph.

He said that two tiers of six teams would work as long as certain caveats were put in place, including that each Division 1 team toured a Division 2 team once per cycle.

“If there is no promotion and relegation, the top division will just keep on making all the money,” he wrote.

“The bottom division will get poorer and teams will disappear.

“Maybe that is what they want.

“The ICC is the problem. They should distribute the money that they are making very differently so poorer teams have a chance.

“I would live to see people responsible for the game being truly responsible for the game, and not being just responsible for a few countries to better themselves.”