Cricket Australia CEO Todd Greenberg has sounded an alarm over the long-term sustainability of Test cricket for all nations. According to Greenberg, forcing every full-member board to maintain a regular Test schedule could drive smaller cricket boards towards financial collapse. His stance is rooted in a simple idea — the game’s most traditional format thrives on quality over quantity, and intentional scarcity could be the key to keeping it alive.
Greenberg argues that only top-tier, high-appeal series such as the Ashes should be prioritized, while lower-ranked teams should not be burdened with the heavy costs of staging Tests that draw limited crowds and commercial interest. “We’re literally trying to send countries bankrupt if we force them to try to play Test cricket,” he warned, urging global administrators to rethink the structure before the sport’s oldest format becomes a financial liability.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) is already exploring options, with a two-tier Test framework being one of the most discussed proposals. This model would see an elite first tier consisting of the strongest Test-playing nations, while a second tier would host developing sides. Promotion and relegation could ensure upward mobility for teams that improve, but the initial separation aims to reduce the economic and competitive gap between nations.
Supporters of this plan say it could make Test cricket more competitive, keep broadcasters happy, and give smaller boards room to grow at their own pace. However, critics believe it risks deepening inequalities and denying developing nations exposure to the sport’s top teams — exposure that often inspires growth and investment.
The England and Wales Cricket Board has reportedly expressed concerns about the relegation system, fearing it could strip them of lucrative series against India or Australia in a poor performance cycle. Meanwhile, cricket greats like Clive Lloyd have spoken against the tiered model, stressing that it may further marginalize teams such as the West Indies, who have historically contributed to the sport’s prestige but now struggle to match the elite financially and competitively.
Among fans, the divide is sharp. Some believe that a merit-based promotion and relegation system could revitalize Test cricket and reward performance. Others argue it would condemn second-tier nations to an endless cycle of low-profile fixtures, eroding interest both domestically and internationally.
The debate boils down to a balance between tradition and pragmatism. On one side, there is a need to protect Test cricket’s heritage and ensure all full members retain access to it. On the other, there’s the reality of a rapidly evolving cricket economy, where shorter formats generate most of the revenue and Test cricket remains financially demanding.
As the ICC weighs its options, Greenberg’s warning stands as a clear signal: without structural change, the format could become an unsustainable burden for many nations. The challenge for cricket’s leaders is to preserve the prestige of the five-day game while ensuring its future does not come at the cost of financial ruin for the sport’s less wealthy members.