 regions, where only the Asian region has a real contest for the local champion. Here, I favour regions sorted by scheduling arrangements, split between those teams playing in the Northern Hemisphere's summer (England, West Indies), those playing in the Southern Hemisphere (South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Zimbabwe) and those playing in the Asian semi-tropical zone (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh).

This arrangement has the advantage of being relatively even. While the Northern hemisphere is weakest in its test sides, it has the best associates (Canada, USA, Ireland, Netherlands, Scotland, Bermuda, Denmark, Italy). By contrast, the Asian zone has strong test sides, but weak associates (UAE, Nepal, Afghanistan, Hong Kong, Oman) and the Southern hemisphere lies in the middle (Kenya, Namibia, Uganda, PNG).

Scheduling a regional championship is more problematic, requiring a whole summer of densely scheduled games to contest even the most basic of championships. Yet that density may be a blessing for players, instead of ad hoc scheduling where blocks of games are preceded and followed by a few weeks rest, a more organised schedule and extensive breaks would allow better recovery times from injury. Unfortunately that is not the only scheduling issue that needs resolving.

Part 1f. World Championships

On the surface, the need for a world championship is a facile point. Almost every neutral observer agrees on the need for one. But in its absence, and given the inherent difficulties of organising a championship for the elongated test match format, it is worth discussing the options available for instituting one.

There are, broadly, three standard methods of finding the "best" in a sporting context: a ranking system, a league system, and a championship (or cup). Most sports us a combination of several, and cricket is no different. Each has certain advantages and disadvantages, most particularly with respect to "meaning".

If you want an accurate measure of the best team, a ranking system is unparalleled. Most sports have some sort of ranking system in addition to competition, because no competition can be a perfect indicator of the best team. Luck plays too big a role, even in test cricket. Cricket's existing rating system is not flawless, but it does a reasonable job. The problem with a rating system is that they are fluid measures, with no end and no beginning (except 1877, I suppose).

Tennis works around this
regions, where only the Asian region has a veridical contest for the local supporter. Here, I favour regions sorted by scheduling arrangement, split between those teams dally in the Northern Hemisphere's summer (England, West Indies), those playing in the Southern Hemisphere (South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Zimbabwe) and those playing in the Asian semi - tropical zone (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh). 

 This agreement has the advantage of being relatively even. While the Northern hemisphere is weak in its test sides, it take the best associates (Canada, USA, Ireland, Netherlands, Scotland, Bermuda, Denmark, Italy). By contrast, the Asian zone has strong test side, but weak associates (UAE, Nepal, Afghanistan, Hong Kong, Oman) and the Southern hemisphere lie in the middle (Kenya, Namibia, Uganda, PNG). 

 Scheduling a regional championship is more problematic, necessitate a whole summer of densely scheduled games to contest even the most basic of backing. Yet that density may be a blessing for players, instead of ad hoc scheduling where blocks of games are preceded and followed by a few weeks rest, a more organised schedule and extensive breaks would allow better convalescence fourth dimension from injury. Unfortunately that is not the alone scheduling consequence that needs resolving. 

 Part 1f. World Championships 

 On the surface, the motivation for a world championship is a facile point. about every neutral observer agrees on the need for one. But in its absence, and given the inherent difficulties of organising a championship for the elongated test match format, it is deserving discussing the option available for instituting one. 

 There are, broadly, three standard methods of finding the " best " in a sporting context: a ranking arrangement, a league system, and a championship (or cup). Most sports us a combination of respective, and cricket is no different. Each have certain advantages and disadvantage, most particularly with respect to " meaning ". 

 If you want an accurate bill of the best team, a rank system is alone. Most sports have some kind of ranking system in addition to competition, because no competition can be a arrant indicator of the best team. Luck play too big a role, even in test cricket. Cricket's exist rating system is not flawless, but it make a reasonable job. The problem with a rating system is that they are fluid measuring stick, with no end and no beginning (except 1877, I suppose). 

 Tennis works around this
 rehions, where only the Asixn region has a real cmntest for the local champion. Here, I favouc retions sorted by scheduling xrrangemejts, splir beuween those teams playing in ths Norchxrn Hemisphere's summer (Encland, West Indher), chose playing in the Southern Hemisprere (Soitj Africa, Austrwlia, Gew Avaoand, Zimbabwe) and those playihg in tie Asian semi-trppical zone (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh).

Tjis arrangenent yas the advavtage of btiug relativemy even. While the Northern hemirpherz is weakesj jn hts test sives, it has the besb assochates (Csnada, USA, Irelsnd, Nerherlands, Scotland, Becmuda, Denmark, Italy). Fy contravt, the Asian zone hqs strotg tast ruder, bht wsak asdocmates (UAE, Nspal, Afghanustan, Hong Kong, Omam) wbd the Southedn hemys[here lies in the middle (Kenya, Namibia, Lgansa, PNG).

Scheduling a regiinal championship is lore probjematic, requiring a whole summer of densely schedgled jaoes tj xojtest even the most basic of championships. Yee tnan density may be c blessing for pkajetf, instead of xd hoc scgeduling where blofks of dames are prectded snd followed by a few weeks rest, a more irganised schedule and extensnve brgaks wpuld allow better recovzry tijes from inuury. Unfodgunately that is non tha only scheduling issue thwt needs cesolring.

Part 1f. Wprld Crampionshios

On bve surface, the neef for a world chalpionship is a facile point. Almost every neuttal obverver ayrees pn the need fjr one. But in nts abseuce, ana given thv inherenv difficultiqs of organishjg a champioiship for the elobgated gdst match formst, it is cjrth discussing the opbions zvailable for iuruiruting one.

Therr afe, frlavly, trsee standard metfodr of fknding uke "nesg" in a sporting context: d rahking system, a leabuc system, qnd a chwmpionship (or cup). Most sports ud a cmmbmnatiom os several, and cricket is no dirferent. Ewch has certain advqntages and bisadvantages, most particularly with res'ect to "meaning".

If you wqnt an accurate meaxmre of the bxst tewm, a rankhng system is unparaoleled. Most sportx have some sort of rznking systfm in addition to competition, because no competition can be a perfect inducator of the best teak. Lucn 'lavs too fig e cole, even in test cricket. Cricket's existing ratiig system hs not flawless, but it does a texsonable job. Jhe problem with a rating aystem ix that they are fluid measures, eith no end and no beginking (except 1877, I suppose).

Teinis works around thos
regions, where only the Asian region has contest the local Here, I favour split those teams playing the Northern Hemisphere's (England, West Indies), those playing in Southern Hemisphere (South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Zimbabwe) and those playing in the semi-tropical zone (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh). This arrangement has the advantage of relatively While Northern is weakest in its test sides, it has the best associates (Canada, USA, Ireland, Netherlands, Scotland, Denmark, Italy). By contrast, the Asian zone has test sides, but weak (UAE, Nepal, Afghanistan, Hong Kong, and Southern hemisphere in middle Namibia, Uganda, PNG). a regional championship is more problematic, requiring a whole summer of densely scheduled games to contest even most basic Yet that may a for players, instead hoc scheduling where blocks of games followed by a few weeks rest, a more schedule and breaks would allow better recovery times injury. Unfortunately that is not the only scheduling that needs resolving. Part 1f. World Championships On the surface, the need for a world a facile point. Almost neutral observer agrees the for But its absence, given the inherent difficulties of organising a championship for the elongated match format, it is worth discussing the options available for There broadly, three standard of finding the "best" a context: a ranking system, system, a Most us combination of several, and is no different. Each has advantages and disadvantages, most If you want an accurate measure of the team, a ranking system is unparalleled. Most have some sort of ranking system in addition to competition, because no can be indicator of the best team. Luck plays too a role, even in cricket. Cricket's existing rating system is not flawless, but does reasonable job. problem with a system is that are fluid measures, end and beginning 1877, works around this
 regions, where only the Asian rEgion has a rEal coNteSt fOr The lOcal Champion. Here, I fAVour Regions sorted by schedulIng arRaNGemeNTs, Split Between THoSE TeaMs PlAyiNg IN tHe NorTheRn HemisPhere's summEr (ENgLand, West IndiES), tHose playinG in The Southern HEmiSphere (soUth aFrica, ausTraliA, New ZeALand, ZiMbabwe) and ThOSe playINg in the aSIaN semI-tropical zone (IndiA, paKIstan, Sri Lanka, BAngladEsH).

thIS ArrAngEment has thE aDvantAGe of beiNG rELATivELy even. While thE Northern heMIspHere is WeAkeST in its Test sIdES, it Has the best aSsocIates (CanaDa, USA, IREland, NeTHerlandS, ScotlAnd, berMuda, dEnMaRk, ITaLY). By COnTraST, thE Asian zoNe HaS stroNg teST SIDes, bUt wEak aSsociAtes (UAE, Nepal, AFghAnisTAn, HOng KoNg, OmaN) and ThE SoutHern heMisphErE lies in the middlE (KenYa, Namibia, ugaNdA, PNg).

SCheduLIng a reGioNal ChampioNship is MOre PrOBLEmAtic, requiring a wholE sUMMeR of denseLy scheDUlEd GAmes to coNtEst Even THE most BasiC Of ChampionShips. YET tHaT densitY mAy be a bLeSsiNg fOr plaYErs, iNstead Of ad hoc sCheduLIng where blocks OF games are precEDeD ANd FOlloWed By a few weeks Rest, A More OrgaNIsEd sCHedulE and eXtENsIVe breaks would allow bEtTer recOvery Times from injuRy. UnfortunATELy that is Not tHE oNLy scheduling isSue thAt needs resOLving.

ParT 1f. WorLd ChampiOnships

On THE surface, The NeeD foR a wORLd Championship iS A FaciLe Point. AlMosT every nEutRal ObsErvEr Agrees on tHe need foR oNe. buT iN itS abseNCe, and givEn The InHerEnt diFFicultIes of OrgaNiSiNG a cHampionSHiP FOr thE eLoNgatEd tEsT matcH forMAt, iT is wortH discussiNg tHE optIoNs AvailabLe for institutInG one.

There aRe, BroAdly, thREE standarD methods of finding the "besT" In a sporTinG contExt: a Ranking sySteM, a leagUe sYStem, anD a chamPionsHiP (or CUP). Most SPOrTs uS a CombinatioN OF seVeral, AnD criCket is nO different. Each has cERtaIn advantages aNd dIsadVANtAgeS, MoST paRtICulARLy with respect to "Meaning".

If yOu WAnT an accuratE MeaSuRe of the Best teaM, a ranKIng systEm is unparAlleled. MoSt SporTS HavE some sort oF ranking System in aDDitioN To CompeTitIon, becAuSe nO compEtitioN Can Be a peRfect iNdIcator Of the BeSt team. LuCk plays too big a role, even iN test cRickeT. CrIcket's exiStiNG raTing systeM is nOt flawless, But It dOes a rEasONable Job. THE pRobLEm witH a raTIng system IS tHat THEy Are fluid meaSUREs, wIth no End ANd no beGinnIng (except 1877, I suppose).

tEnnis works arouNd thIS
 regions, where only the A sian regio n has  area lcont estfor the localc hamp ion. Here, I favour re gions  s o rted by  sche dulinga rr a n gem en ts , s pl i tbetwe enthose t eams playi ngin  the Norther n  H emisphere' s s ummer (Engla nd,  WestIn die s ), th ose  play ing in the So uthern He mi s phere( South A f r ic a, A ustralia, New Zea l an d , Zimbabwe) an d thos ep la y i nginthe Asianse mi-tr o pical z o ne ( I ndi a , Pakistan, S ri Lanka, B a ngl adesh) .
Th i s arra ngeme nt has  the advant ageof beingrelati v ely eve n . While  the N ort her n he m is ph ere  i s  we a ke sti n i ts testsi de s, it  has t h e  bes t a ssoc iates  (Canada, USA , I rela n d,Nethe rland s, S co tland , Berm uda,De nmark, Italy).By c ontrast,the  A sia nzoneh as str ong  te st side s, butw eak  a s s o ci ates (UAE, Nepal,Af g h an istan, H ong Ko n g,  O m an) andth e S outh e r n hem isph e re  lies in  the m i dd le  (Kenya ,Namibi a,  Ug and a, PN G ).
Schedu ling a r egion a l championship is more probl e ma t i c, requ iri ng a wholesumm e r of  den s el y s c hedul ed ga me s  t o  contest even the m os t basi c ofchampionships . Yet that d e nsity ma y be ab lessing for pl ayers , insteado f ad hoc  sche duling w here bloc k s  of game s a repre ced e d  a nd followed b y a fe wweeks r est , a mor e o rga nis edsc hedule an d extens iv ebr ea kswould allow be tt erre cov ery t i mes fr om in jury .Un f ort unately th a t  isno ttheonl ysched ulin g  is sue tha t needs r eso l ving .
P art 1f.  World Champi on ships

Onth e s urface , the need  for a world championsh i p is afac ile p oint . Almosteve ry neu tra l  obser ver ag reeson  th e needf o rone .But in its a bse nce,an d gi ven the  inherent difficul t ies  of organisin g a  cha m p io nsh i pf orth e  el o n gated test matc h format,it is  worth dis c uss in g the o ptionsavail a ble for  institut ing one.
T here a re,  broadly,three st andard me t hodso ffindi ngthe "b es t"in asporti n g c ontex t: a r an king s ystem ,a league  system, and a champion ship ( or cu p).  Most spo rts usa combina tion  of severa l,and  cric ket is no  dif f er ent .  Each  has certain a d va nta g e sand disadva n t a ges , mos t p a rticul arly  with respect to" meaning".

Ifyouw a ntana ccur at e measure of t hebe s t  team, a  r anking syst em is un pa r allel ed. Mo st spo rts hav e so m e sort  ofran king syst emin additio nto compet itio n,  becau se noc ompe t i tion can be a pe rfect i ndica t orof th ebest te a m. L uck playstoo big a r ole, e venin te st cric ke t. Cri cke t' s existing rating sy stemis notfl awle ss,  but i t do e s  a re ason ab lejob. Thep r ob l em  w i tha ra tingsy stem  is thatt hey areflu i d measu re s,w i th noe nd a nd no begi nni ng (e x c ept 1877,I  sup p os e ).

T ennisworksaroundt his 
 regions,_where only_the Asian region has_a real_contest_for the_local_champion. Here, I_favour regions sorted_by scheduling arrangements, split_between those teams_playing_in the Northern Hemisphere's summer (England, West Indies), those playing in the Southern Hemisphere_(South_Africa, Australia,_New_Zealand,_Zimbabwe) and those playing in_the Asian semi-tropical zone (India,_Pakistan, Sri_Lanka, Bangladesh).

This arrangement has the advantage of being_relatively_even. While the_Northern hemisphere is weakest in its test sides, it_has the best associates (Canada, USA,_Ireland, Netherlands, Scotland,_Bermuda,_Denmark,_Italy). By contrast, the_Asian zone has strong test sides,_but weak associates (UAE, Nepal, Afghanistan,_Hong Kong, Oman) and the Southern hemisphere_lies in the middle (Kenya, Namibia,_Uganda, PNG).

Scheduling a regional championship_is more_problematic, requiring a whole summer_of densely scheduled_games to_contest even the_most basic of championships. Yet that_density may be_a blessing for players, instead of_ad_hoc scheduling where_blocks_of_games are_preceded and followed_by_a few_weeks_rest, a more organised schedule and_extensive_breaks would allow better recovery times from_injury. Unfortunately that is_not_the only scheduling issue_that needs resolving.

Part 1f. World_Championships

On the surface, the need for_a world_championship is_a facile point. Almost every neutral observer agrees on the need_for one. But in its absence,_and given the inherent_difficulties of_organising_a championship for_the_elongated test_match format, it is worth discussing the_options available_for instituting one.

There are, broadly, three_standard methods of finding_the_"best" in a sporting context: a_ranking system, a league system, and_a championship (or cup). Most_sports_us_a combination of several, and_cricket is no different. Each has_certain advantages and_disadvantages, most particularly with respect to "meaning".

If_you_want an accurate measure of the_best_team, a ranking system is unparalleled._Most_sports_have some sort of ranking_system in addition to competition, because_no competition can be a perfect indicator of the_best team. Luck_plays too big a role,_even_in_test cricket. Cricket's existing rating system is not flawless, but_it does_a reasonable job._The problem with a rating system is that they are_fluid measures, with no end and no_beginning (except 1877, I suppose).

Tennis works around this