Preparations have begun. An elegiac lament has been adopted as an anthem by a notable few. Some have even begun talks with the funeral directors for a fitting tribute and a suitable coffin, nails and all. The leitmotif tune of rigor mortis seems to be echoing in the distant corners. The Citi moment of ruin can’t be far behind ably followed by the Citi moment of slow death. Is Test cricket on a Zimmer frame slowly meandering towards the precipice of damnation? Going by the recent news bytes on its near certain demise, and unless drastic action is taken urgently, Test cricket as we know it may not exist in the same form, if at all. Amid this unfounded pessimism, one would have to wonder if Test cricket is so fragile that it can be blown away by a format that relies so heavily on grunt than grace; enormous than elegance; razzmatazz than refinements; strength of willow than strength of character; brawn than brain; frenetic than fortitude.
As we embark towards the abyss of the unknown, it is natural to give gloom a helping hand. Would a format that stood the test of time for over hundred years not possess the strength of disposition, appeal and character to withstand the new kids on the block with their fancy wares? Surely the Wiis and the PS3s have yet to discard the need to indulge in a bit of scrabble or monopoly. Okay, I lie. Just a bit. No, a fair bit actually but let me not beat my own argument here. It would look pretty daft.
For the die-hard traditionalists, with or without the hallowed MCC membership that is nothing more than a glorified snoozing zone, such glum sentiments are not welcome. However, the calls for change they can’t be ignored. There was a time in the past when the mere mention of a tinker or two raised the eyebrows so high that a few have had accentuated battle-scarred foreheads ever since. Now, they just wince and grunt despairingly like prisoners do when they are short-changed on their daily dose of crack.
The sanctity of cricket is being adulterated, they groan in typical rigid tones. What is so sanctimonious about Test cricket anyways? Has it been baptised in Scottish Highlands spring water with no expiry date? Has it had some divine outpouring of sanctified blessings from some guru stranded in the Himalayas with no GPS? Cricket is evolving and Test cricket finds itself stranded on its own for its custodians are hesitant to tinker, timid to adapt, and tentative to evolve.
In a recent speech at the MCC Working Committee meeting, Rahul Dravid said: "Test match attendances around the world have dropped. You want to be playing in front of crowds. Apart from England, attendances are down." And that the crowds elsewhere are dwindling faster than Mohammad Kaif’s chances of making a comeback. Okay, I made the last bit up, but heck it’s true.
Australia too has drawn very healthy crowds for its home Tests. I guess they’re never short of an excuse to buy beer, sound each other off with strewths, gidday mate and not hesitate to hurl abuse while all the time talking about playing cricket in the true spirit of the game. English grounds are like stretched soup bowls with a max capacity of 28-29,000 at Lord’s while the MCG and the Eden Gardens, for example, can draw anything up to 100,000. In the context of stadium footprints, even 20-odd thousand at these huge stadiums in India or Australia look thin on the ground. So, let’s forgive Dravid this flawed observation and move on.
Do attendances determine the longevity or success of the game? Playing to empty houses isn’t much fun. Just ask Michael Bolton. Recently Hayden rued: “When Sachin Tendulkar became the highest run-getter in Test cricket (in Mohali last season) there were only a handful of spectators in the stadium. So, something needs to be done.” Something is being done, though it isn’t the ICC that is wasting its breath over this.
Lalit Modi, enfant terrible in the scheme of things, has blitzed the comfort zone. “One needs to go out and capture the fans. I think that's the most important thing right now,” he says and who can disagree with him. It is about retaining fan base and attracting new spectators. The ICC revels in inaction. As such, it neither has the will nor the desire to pull heads together and be proactive. Again, its ineptitude is in stark contrast to those who run the IPL.
The IPL, for all its crassness and overdose, has proven that allegiance can be bartered. Recent chilling admissions by Daniel Vettori and Gary Kirsten that players may choose IPL over country are a case in point. When Chris Gayle uttered those dreaded words a while back on not giving two hoots about Test cricket, he probably didn’t envisage others to feed off him.
Cricketers have a choice now. Something they haven’t been privy to all these years. No longer are they married for life to country. A divorce can be fashioned with relative ease and players are free to ply their trade at the expense of country commitments. Such a scenario can well determine the longevity and popularity of Test cricket in its current form.
Or will the organisers of Twenty20 leagues spell their own doom with their overzealous avarice? Lack of direction and strategy from the top tier can have a lethal effect on operations. Cricket is at the crucial crossroads. There is a temptation to treat Test cricket as a seriously ill patient in pressing need of a quintuple bypass.
Thankfully, Test cricket is not dying by any stretch of downbeat imagination. It needs some fine tuning; a bit of DIY to keep up with the times. It also needs the custodians to take a grip and ensure Test cricket takes precedence in the yearly calendar. A two-tier Test system wouldn’t be amiss either. Night cricket, coloured balls, and what have you do contribute in enhancing its appeal. One-sided contests can be avoided with the likes of Bangladesh shunted to the second tier. The pool of Test-playing nations can be increased by providing Test status for Kenya, Ireland and Afghanistan. This gives an incentive for the teams in the second tier to aspire for the top tier. Moreover, the ICC needs to work with the IPL and other leagues and not perceive them as a threat.
Twenty20, ODIs and Test cricket can co-exist and strike a common ground. The IPL needs an exclusive window. The magnitude of its lure and attractiveness is enormous. By no means is Test cricket dead and neither is it on course to a sudden arrest in its fortunes. However, the authorities must ensure that the exodus is restrained. Priorities have changed. This is what being professional is all about - having a choice. Test cricket is alive, but it needs to live and breathe easily without being suffocated by other formats. So, save on the obituaries for now. Nothing beats the balance Test cricket provides between bat and ball. Nothing can supersede the theatre, the drama, the enjoyment and the pride that one associates with Test cricket. Nothing can emulate its experience, but unless it embraces the changing times and demands, it runs the risk of becoming a forgotten experience. Cricket’s landscape is altering. It remains to be seen whether Test cricket gets on board or becomes a mere bystander and a victim of its apathy.
IPL is a domestic tournament and does not warrant an exclusive window, if it does, then so do any other domestic T20 tournaments with international players.
Test cricket is the only form to test a cricketer.
Posted by: faisal at August 4, 2009 3:58 PM
Khurram,
if Test cricket is the only form to test a cricketer then why are we playing only 5 days long why not 10 days so we can really test them. By the way a test match with out spectators who are they playing for????
Posted by: Arvind at August 4, 2009 4:17 PM
Well, get rid of the ICC. Test Cricket will be saved.
Posted by: J at August 4, 2009 4:54 PM
the ipl is indeed a domestic window that carries no official status beyond that, but the sheer weight of money that goes through it easily ensures that the Test level cricketers will not instantly jump up to sacrifice the chance to make thousands of dollars to bowl a quick 4 overs for whatever random franchise then get back to a relaxing indian vacation. If there is no window, then cricket will be competing against cricket, and there will be a strain against both the IPL and Test cricket. I'm no fan of the IPL, there's nothing in it for me, but looking at India's form after the IPL, it's certainly clear that it needs some more in depth scheduling by capable hands, that give it the room to be free of conflicts with national sides.
Posted by: Rajesh at August 4, 2009 5:14 PM
Nice recap of the State of Test Cricket although I feel the ICC is being criticized unfairly. In blaming the ICC, you already assume that the Test cricket is worth saving or rather worth protecting. Test attendance was on decline even before T20 cricket!
If not T20, younger generation would have flocked to other "fast" sports. Already, popularity of basketball (thanks to the NBA), car-racing, golf (being positioned as a sport for all ages), tennis (they are shrewdly using tennis babes) is on rise. Do you think fans falling for those sports can be convinced to watch Test cricket?!
The fact is T20 was a "disruptive" solution to Cricket's many problems. People attached to the old system always take some time to adapt as they are used to and they prefer marginal changes, not wholesale or disruptive changes since such changes shake their frame of reference.
Give it some time. It'll be alright. It's already alright.
Posted by: JPAl at August 5, 2009 12:25 AM
I agree completely with Khurram; a domestic T20 (the IPL) does not justify the whole of the cricket world standing still. Plus the IPL seems to be planning a second competitition ... and, who knows, a third and a fourth. How can anyone plan around that movable feast, even if they wanted to?
Posted by: Ashwath Sekhar at August 5, 2009 1:06 AM
I disagree with Khurram. Although the IPL was started as a domestic tournament. Its lure of money has made it an event of huge significance on the International calendar. Most boards and players from countries like New Zealand, West Indies etc are strapped for cash and until the ICC solves the issue of player salaries it will not die down. The only solution for the ICC will be to make the IPL a global circus with a playing window for 3 weeks a year or a biennial event which has a window for the current duration of the tournament. unfortunately money does make the world go around and if the ICC does not recognise this soon then we might see the first cricketing "Free Agents". The question of test cricket is best left to the players I would dearly like to know whether the players prefer to represent their nation in a test or a franchise in a sideshow.
Posted by: artinem at August 5, 2009 4:23 AM
I do not understand why there is so much hue and cry about the death of test cricket. I personally think test cricket is very healthy. We have had results in more than 80% of all matched played in the last 2 years. All matched played recently have been so interesting.
Sure, i agree, the attendance at the stadiums have declined, but that is not because people no longer like test cricker, its because people dont have so much time to come and spend 5 full days.
People are much busier in their lives and have other commitments. Still people come when they can and the rest follow the game on TV.
Posted by: artinem at August 5, 2009 4:25 AM
Also, the latest trend of all cricket writers has been to slam Mr. Lalit modi for anything and everything that goes wrong. If you do not have the courage to appreciate someone for the work that they have done, please atleast do a favour by not pulling the man down.
If this man is able to sell his product, it is because of his extraordinary marketing skills. So instead of blaming lalit modi, people who wish to promote test cricket or ODI's or anything else should learn some marketing skills from this man.
Posted by: K.V..RAJAGOPAL at August 5, 2009 5:16 AM
Yes, it is a good article and the Writer has gone in-depth to analyse the practical problems. i too agree with him that Test cricket is not dyeing but needs some finetunint. AQ crowd of 20,000 is a thin attendance in Eden Gardens, India whereas that is a very good attendance in New Zealand or England. Yes, IPL is a domestic tournament and it need not be given too much importance. Because of the heavy money involed, cricketers have a choice now. That is why criceters like Flintoff preferred to quit Test cricket and concentrate on T-20 and ODIs. Tedst cricket is the ultimate and it will survive. At any cost it should remain the first choice.
Posted by: Balachandhran at August 5, 2009 6:12 AM
Excellent article! I too agree that these elegies touted by the experts on Test cricket are far too alarmist in nature. But there certainly is room for improvement on the part of the ICC in terms of administering and scheduling. Now that is a massive understatement.
I dont know if the solution is to have a separate window for the IPL. Cricket is among the last games to still have a vibrant nation-based competition as opposed to organized club variants. Nationalist fervour is something that certainly has some value and not a little charm.
All this apart this article is timely and touches upon so many things that the ICC can look at. Great job, Sam. One last note - why do these experts only observe the poor attendance in Mohali? If they are so keen to note that why not note Chennai which will have its stadium full - no matter what the situation is. Lets just recognize that there are some centres which are better than others for Test matches rather than judge the whole country.
Posted by: Arsh at August 5, 2009 10:34 AM
Talks about death of Test cricket in India are overrated. Just log in to any Test match on Cricinfo. Most people who write in during the match and/or post comments on blogs like this one tend to be from India. Or log in to the lunch time chat on Cricinfo during the ongoing Ashes, you will have Indian fellas posting their comments/questions there too along with English/Aussie fans. We just love cricket regardless of who is playing or format.
Posted by: MartinAmber at August 6, 2009 12:24 PM
I like the style and the substance of this article.
I agree that the media coevrage of the "death of Test cricket" is overly alarmist. In fact, I think it has a life of its own, regardless of the evidence that is repeatedly put in front of cricket writers. Cardiff ought to have killed the 4-day Test argument; the ludicrous situation with the Lord's floodlights ought to have embarrassed those whio advocate day-night Tests; the Pakistan/Sri Lanka series was a compelling argument against the "death" of Test cricket in Pakistan, even though the side lost.
And, most importantly, the comments of those who know and love cricket suggest that interest in Test cricket is flourishing.
I will make a heretical prediction: Twenty20 will die before Test cricket does.
Posted by: raghav at August 7, 2009 8:16 PM
sam
very informative but im afraid the article isnt witty enough to pull of its verbose style. Though mildly interesting it isnt very well written. I hope you dont mind me saying all this.
Posted by: Terry Jones at August 9, 2009 6:29 AM
I think the main way to improve cricket is by creating MULTIPLE TIER cricket that wraps all 3 forms into 1 two year competition, as follows:
* 2 FULL Tiers, 6 teams per tier, home & away, 10 series (3 tests, 2 ODI, 2 T20 per series), 3 blocks of 3-4 series over 4-5 months.
* 5 Associate Tiers, 8 teams per tier, home/away, 7 series (1 test, 3 ODI, 2 T20 per series).
* 6 Regional Affiliate areas, two divisions of 5 teams per area, home/away, 4 series (3 ODI, 2 T20 per series).
At end of every 2 years:
* FULL: 1 v 2 for World Champion. 6&7 swop. 12&13 swop. 5 v 8 for F1/F2 spots. 11 v 14 for F2/A1 spots.
* ASSOC: 1st each tier swop with bottom of higher tier. 2nd each tier play against 2nd bottom of higher tier.
* AFFIL: Winner of each division => 2 groups of 6 => Semis & Final. Final winner replaces A5 bottom team, Final runner-up plays A5 2nd bottom team for A5/regional spots.
This would replace the current World Cricket League, Future Test Tours, etc. ODI&T20 World Cups would continu
Posted by: Anonymous at September 12, 2009 3:56 PM
The basic reason for poor attendance in India is the facilities at the grounds for the paying public, which are less than basic. While the facilities are basic, the tickets are now enormously overpriced.Even the stand opposite the pavillion, a place for the budding cricketers are overpriced. Another problem is the scheduling.Most Test cricket is played in September October or February March. While almost no cricket is played November December and January, the period when the weather is at its best.It is not the interest,there are other reasons.I have named some of them.Why don't the authorities think on these lines instead of just looking at the money to be made? Test cricket is in good health, but will be endangered if cricket of the type seen in the England West Indies series played in the Carribean continues.England is no less a culprit in this.
Post your comment
About this blog
'Inbox' will feature submissions from you with us playing gatekeeper as we do with the rest of the site. We will set no rules apart from
ensuring a certain quality that you have come to associate with Cricinfo. You may write on the aspects of the game that you
hold dear; about matters that rile you; about players, teams and trends; you may share your memories and views, and
you may so do so in 100 words or 500. The only tip we will give you is to repeat a line from
our style sheet: Brevity is not just the soul of wit, it is the heart of all writing.
Welcome. (Editor, Cricinfo)
RSS Feed
