Three World Test Championships and three different winners in New Zealand, Australia and, now, South Africa. There is no denying the fact that the WTC (ICC World Test Championship) is gaining in popularity with every edition and is doing its best to keep interest in the traditional format of the sport alive. That said, it must be added that after three editions, the WTC points system is basically flawed and under severe scrutiny. The ICC will have to come up with a more streamlined system even as the next (2025-2027) cycle gets underway, says Partab Ramchand, and explains why the present one is flawed
They were slapped with an unwanted tag but largely it was all their fault. Time and again, South Africa faltered at the doorstep of victory, over and over again they failed to live up to their ‘favourites’ label and went down to a team ranked below them. They repeatedly flattered only to deceive, losing matches from winning positions and letting their fans down despite having some of the best players in the contemporary game. Finally, cricket fans couldn’t take it anymore and they were dubbed chokers.
The label stuck. It didn’t matter that they won the inaugural Champions Trophy (then called the ICC knock out tournament) at Dhaka in 1998. Even the fact that they notched up by far the greatest victory in an ODI at Johannesburg in 2006 when they chased down 434 against Australia, a feat that will perhaps remain unique, did not change matters. And South Africa being the No. 1 Test team in the period 2012-2014 also could not remove that tag because along the way, especially in limited overs cricket, they continued to be a major disappointment.
South Africa making the final of the World Test Championship was a surprise. It again looked like being an India-Australia title clash. But India fell away towards the end of the campaign while South Africa remained a bit more consistent. Still, they were given little chance against defending champions Australia who looked formidable. And yet, after a stirring battle for supremacy over four days, it was South Africa who emerged triumphant with a five-wicket victory.
Moreover, coming back after a first innings deficit of 74 runs in a low-scoring game and then getting to a tough target of 282 – the highest score of the match – speaks volumes of the determination, dedication and resilience that shaped the victory. And it was achieved against an Aussie bowling line-up with the quartet having a total of some 1500 wickets between themselves in Test cricket. Of course, one also cannot forget the roles played by Kagiso Rabada and Aiden Markram in the ultimate result.
It certainly was a victory for Test cricket. For too long, the focus has been on the Big Three of Australia, England and India. The other countries have been made to feel like the poor cousins of the game. Skipper Temba Bavuma has spoken of what the triumph means to South African cricket and indeed to South Africa as a nation. After all, it’s been a long wait for 27 years for an ICC Trophy.
Three World Test Championships and three different winners in New Zealand, Australia and now South Africa. There is no denying the fact that the WTC is gaining in popularity with every edition and is doing its best to keep interest in the traditional format of the sport alive. That said, it must be added that after three editions, the WTC points system is basically flawed and under severe scrutiny. The ICC will have to come up with a more streamlined system even as the next (2025 – 2027) cycle gets underway.
Ever since the inaugural WTC cycle (2021-2023), the system has not met with universal acceptance. And it is becoming increasingly clear that the points system is bizarre. Somehow, there seems to be something very wrong when some teams get to play more matches than others. In any tournament that does not have groupings, it is imperative that each side plays the other and figures in the same number of games. In a strikingly odd sort of way, under the WTC points table, there is a percentage system that determines the outcome as the teams do not play the same number of Tests.
Consider the points table for the just concluded edition. Before the final, England had played 22 Tests and India and Australia 19 each. The other six competing sides Bangladesh, South Africa, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Pakistan and West Indies played in matches ranging from 12 to 14 Tests. So, it can be seen that at the very conceptualisation, there is something wrong with the system. Yes, it is not easy to conduct numerous five-day Tests over so many home and away contests involving nine teams in a two-year period. Indeed, when the WTC championship was first mooted, the cynics wondered how it could ever be conducted. It did seem a herculean task. To try and make it a reality, the ICC came up with a pretty haphazard schedule involving a bizarre points system, and if it is not universally accepted it is pretty understandable.
The WTC structure requires the teams that qualify to play an equal number of series between each other through the course of the cycle. But aside from India, England and Australia, who play four and five-Test series, most other sides play a series of two matches except when they play one of The Big Three sides when they may have a three-Test encounter carded in. This is clearly unfair.
The format is clearly in need of a revamp. Former England captain Michael Vaughn is of the view that it is very hard for the average cricket fan to understand who is the best team in the world and how exactly the top two teams make it to the final. Current England captain Ben Stokes says he can’t remember if he has given any real time to the WTC as it is “utterly confusing”. Another former England captain Michael Atherton is clear that the fixture list is uneven. “Not everyone plays everyone else and some have an easier ride than others. Everyone knows that the WTC in its present guise is flawed.”
It is difficult to disagree with these views. The WTC as it stands is a bewildering competition devoid of uniformity and an unbalanced points system. There was much criticism, for example, about how South Africa reached the final without playing either England or Australia during the two-year qualifying phase. But that’s only one of the many questions that need to be answered.
(The writer is a veteran sports writer who spent his career working for The Indian Express and The Telegraph and Sportsworld. He lives in Chennai.)
from Webdoux