OPINION: It's fitting that this week's ICC meetings in Auckland were held at SkyCity. The chips are down for cricket's traditional formats, and the game's powerbrokers are going all-in in a bid to save the game.
At least that's what they'll have you believe.
The ICC board on Friday hailed its move to establish a nine-team Test league and a 13-team one-day league, bringing "context and meaning" to bilateral series. The Test championship will culminate in a final, the one-day league will become a direct pathway to the World Cup. ICC chairman Shashank Manohar described the move as a "genuine solution".
But is a league where teams play six series - three home, three away - and don't play each other team in the competition over the course of *two* years really a solution? This sounds worse than Super Rugby.
The ICC is like the middle-aged man who got bored, had an affair with the new hot thing, and by the time he realised his mistake it was all too late. T20 is the new hot thing, and the traditional formats need some TLC. Yet across the Tasman, Cricket Australia CEO James Sutherland says part of this "tremendous step forward" for the game is fewer Test and one-day matches.
Less cricket. Go figure.
The ICC has approved trials for four-day Test matches that won't count towards the Test championship. The idea of four-day Tests is basically cricket's way of saying "we respect tradition, but it's a pain in the arse".
Here's the thing. Part of this new context for Test cricket is points for every match. That's good, but it's also likely to force big changes to the way games are played. Teams are likely to use more aggressive tactics in the pursuit of victory and league points. Don't be surprised if by the end of the first cycle of the Test league we've seen fewer draws, more wins, more losses, and - more importantly - in less time. The move to bring greater context to Test cricket may in fact be a fast-track to proving to the purists that fifth days aren't necessary.
Only time will tell. But Test cricket is running out of time. It will take a lot more than the moves agreed at a casino hotel to hit the jackpot of three thriving formats of cricket.
Scheduling will go a long way to revealing how seriously cricketing authorities are about rescuing Test cricket. It's all very well having points on offer for every Test match, but not if they're scheduled during months where it rains every second day. Administrators understandably want to capitalise on fine weather by scheduling as much T20 and one-day cricket as possible during the peak summer months. The acid test is whether they're prepared to compromise cash in a bid to minimise the chances of weather impacting the outcome - and attractiveness - of a Test match.
Cricket also needs to figure out how to sell Test cricket to young players. The elder statesman of the current crop probably still say all the right things about Test cricket being the pinnacle of the game, etc, etc, but the fact is T20's where the money is. Kids are being taught to smash sixes with fat bats instead of waiting for the right ball to stroke through the covers; change-ups and changes of pace instead of rhythm and swing, line and length.
If, as James Sutherland says, there will be fewer Tests, will match fees go up to ensure "Test specialists" aren't left short-changed? What happens to the Jeet Ravals, Neil Wagners and BJ Watlings? Are these new measures enough to keep these players coming through? A triple-century, or triple your bank balance? It's not a tough choice.
The ICC board members are making the right sounds and looking confident around the table, but this announcement feels like they're bluffing with a dud hand.
Andrew Gourdie is a Newshub sports reporter/presenter and host of RadioLIVE's Sunday Sport from 2pm
