Strauss gives go-ahead for points system

A desire to ensure the continued relevance of international cricket - and especially Test cricket - is at the heart of the ECB's decision to introduce a points system to ascertain the winners of international series this summer.

This summer, in a trial announced by the ECB, points will be awarded for games in each format against the tourists, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. The winner of each Super Series, as the ECB is calling it, will be the side which accumulates the most points from the three formats combined.

Adopting an idea first used in the women's Ashes in 2013, four points will be awarded for a Test win and two for a draw. Two points will be awarded for victory in white-ball cricket, with one awarded in case of a tie.

Although there is not, as yet, a trophy for the winners and prize money amounts to just £25,000 for each Super Series - not much in today's sporting terms when split between a couple of dozen squad members - the ECB hope the initiative will encourage more interest and coverage of the sport.

"We know that Test cricket is well supported in this country," Andrew Strauss, the director of England cricket, said. "We know that every English player takes the format incredibly seriously and I can't see that changing. But we also know that Test cricket is being challenged around the world and I certainly feel a responsibility - I think everyone involved in the game should feel a responsibility - to make sure it remains relevant.

"The rationale is that the game of cricket is evolving unbelievably quickly. We feel responsibility to ensure the international game develops and evolves and, central to that, is context and relevance for every game of cricket. We believe the Super Series will provide that context and relevance by connecting the formats and ensuring that every game counts for something more than just itself.

"The advantages of this are that, first of all, there is that context and, secondly, fans of a certain format will hopefully feel more connected to the other formats. Also our players in very different and quite separate teams will feel more connected to each other so two separate white-ball and red-ball teams will be connected by something greater than their own immediate interests."

Strauss admits that this summer will, in effect, be a trial period for the idea. He has not, as yet, spoken to the cricket boards in Bangladesh or India about the possibility of utilising the format for this winter's tours.

But the ECB have spoken to the Bangladesh board about the possibility of playing one Test in this October's series as a day-night match. Agreement has yet to be reached though it appears that, if it were to happen, it would be the second Test of the series. Bangladesh time is six hours ahead of GMT, which might allow viewers in the UK to enjoy a session or two of cricket on TV after work or school and before bed.

"I'm a big supporter of the concept of day-night Test cricket," he said. "I think anyone who saw that game in Adelaide between Australia and New Zealand can see the great benefits if it is done properly. There seems to me a far greater will around the world to play day-night Test cricket and generally we are very supportive of that, as long as we ensure we can prepare properly for any series we play."

Strauss also supports, in theory, promotion and relegation in international cricket and the introduction of a World Test Championship. He admits though that, in both cases, the devil is in the detail.

"I think the idea behind the World Test Championship is a very sound idea," he said. "And it should provide more context to every game you play.

"I'm a supporter of that [promotion and relegation]. I'm a supporter of having high quality, meaningful cricket. And any way we can move towards that is a good thing. But like all these things, it's all about detail.

"We need to evolve and innovate. Anyone out there who doesn't see the need for international cricket to keep moving forwards really does have his head stuck in the sand. The most important thing from my point of view is the ECB and the England team are at the forefront of these innovations rather than lagging behind everyone else. I think that hopefully will ensure that the game continues to grow in this country."

It might be argued that the introduction of a Super Series will further dilute the importance of Test cricket. Certainly there will be concern if the idea is rolled out to include the Ashes.

But the Ashes is, in many ways, the aberration. It is the only series that is all but guaranteed to sell out wherever it is staged in England or Wales (Tests against other nations sell well in London but less well elsewhere, though Trent Bridge fares pretty well) and it is, perhaps, the only series that does not require the added context that the Super Series may offer.

Strauss was at pains to reassure spectators - and sponsors - that the Super Series idea is not designed to detract from the stand-alone series in each formats, but designed to bring added exposure to them.

"This doesn't replace any of the individual series awards this summer," he explained. "So there will still be a Test series victor, one-day series and the T20 match as well. But it sits on top of that, wraps around it and creates something bigger to aim for.

"We are quite happy for this to grow organically, we are not pushing it massively. We want people to understand that greater relevance through the course of the summer and it is something that resonates with people as the summer goes on.

"If you look at the last two series we played, against South Africa we would have lost the Super Series in the final T20," Strauss said. "And against Pakistan in the UAE we would have won the Super Series in the Super Over in the final game of the T20 competition. So those are two good examples of it working well. Not every series is going to go down to the last ball of the last game, but hopefully it will provide more relevance.

"We have nothing to lose by doing this. We still have all the individual series but then something that wraps around the top of it. We'll see what the ICC comes up with. I know they are taking this very seriously."

Will it work? Who knows. If not, it can be abandoned without any harm having been done. But it is not hard to envisage a situation where late-season limited-overs games - which do not always sell brilliantly - could win more coverage due to the initiative.

It is also intriguing that Strauss, a man who took office a year ago with a reputation as a somewhat conservative character, has introduced this and the North-South limited-overs competition in domestic cricket within a week or so of one another. He clearly has the will to embrace more innovations.

Few of these measures will, on their own, help cricket reach a new audience - or re-engage with a lapsed one - but, in conjunction with one another, they may help. Strauss, and the ECB, deserve credit for trying.