Two-match series look like they are here to stay - sadly

As well-intentioned as the International Cricket Council's Test Championship may be, it is a sad fact that it seems to have given some permanence to the notion of the two-Test series.

New Zealand have just had their programme to India this year confirmed and it includes two Tests only and involvement in yet another tri-series of one-day internationals with India and Australia.

New Zealand have also agreed to a five-match one-day series with Pakistan as compensation for their bomb-aborted tour last year.

The Test match still to be played to make the series count as a Test Championship series will probably now not be played because under the new shape of the Championship, one-off matches can contribute to the Championship placings.

But useful as the two-match series may be when it involves lesser nations of the world against the bigger fish in the game, the three to five-match series are the contests that truly challenge the strengths of the nations concerned.

In a perfect world they allow for a spread of conditions, an assessment of opponents' strengths and weaknesses and a build-up in form and performance by participants as they hone themselves to the requirements for victory.

The two-match series against relatively even opponents is barely a contest.

If you get a weather-affected series such as that which afflicted both New Zealand and India last summer, the series is almost a non-event as a true contest of skill. This series was in contrast to what was a much more fulfilling contest four years earlier in New Zealand when some marvellous cricket was produced, this despite rain causing the first Test of the series to be abandoned without a ball bowled.

While the Zimbabwes and Bangladeshs may be happy to play a reduced quota of matches against all nations, just for the chance to play against some of the sides who have so far barely paid them lip service in the Test arena, the other countries of the world are capable of much closer contests.

As it stands in the forthcoming summer, New Zealand will play two Tests against India (away), two against Pakistan (home) and three against South Africa (home).

Before the onset of the two tours in a summer in the mid-1990s that would probably have been a reasonable Test match programme, but nowadays the constant exposure to one-day cricket has only heightened the desire for more Test match play.

One-day cricket is no place for a spin bowler to ply his trade and the more two-Test series there are, the fewer are the opportunities for spin bowlers to settle into the long and intriguing spells that make them such fascinating performers in Test cricket.

The same applies to batsmen. If they slip into a form trough, the likelihood is greater that they will be exited from the side far quicker by failing in the shorter Test series than if being allowed to work on their problem area, or bowler, in a longer Test series.

It is not without some coincidence that the growing need to have one-day cricket played between three nations, rather than two, has forced countries to look at these two-Test series.

There is so much one-day cricket being played that it is in constant need of titivation, and the tri-series is but another variation in this regard.

It is to be hoped that Test cricket can regain its stature against the greater number of nations and the demands of the one-day monster can be constrained.

But such is the pressure on the game's finances, the sad fact does seem to be that Test match cricket is shaping as the poor relation when it comes to fixture planning. And ultimately that cannot be good for the game overall.