Is Test Cricket Really In Danger?

Geet Behera

14 December 2015

India vs England, Nagpur 2012 – four spinners toiling and giving their all on a slow turner which was so slow that Ian Bell and Joe Root could have easily dozed off and still read the turn.

India vs New Zealand, Wellington 2014 – Brendon McCullum and BJ Watling batted India out of the game and series from a hopeless position of 90 odd for 5 in their second dig, trailing by 200 odd runs. Indian bowlers gave their all, but the pitch became truer and truer.

India vs England, Trent Bridge 2014 – India batted whole fifth day to save the test without any trouble, pitch termed as poor by the ICC for its extreme slowness.

Pakistan vs England, Abu Dhabi 2015 – A batting feather-bed nurtured two desperate (for different reasons) batsmen with double centuries and produced a dull draw in an era where test cricket has become quite result oriented.

Australia vs New Zealand, WACA 2015 – The fast bowlers’ paradise produced one of its most uncharacteristic surface, where batsmen from both team made too much merry for a true cricket fan’s liking. An absolute poor surface coupled with a lightning fast outfield provided a mockery of bowling.

India vs South Africa, Nagpur 2015 – A minefield of minefield, producing confounding turn and bounce from the very beginning, culminated in a huge defeat for the visiting team. Even after considering the home advantage factor, it was considered poor by the ICC.

All of these matches and pitches have one thing in common. They appeared as a blot on all the ongoing efforts to enhance the credibility and popularity of the Test format of this unique sport. They all presented an extremely poor advertisement for test cricket and provided genuine support to people who are advocating against the survival of the oldest and traditional form of the sport. The logic behind producing such surfaces was never fully understood, barring the last case which was done to provide the so called home advantage. Weather preceding the matches before may have something to do with it. But in this age of updated technology and ultra-awareness, it is naïve to think that the curators couldn’t produce a better sporting wicket than these dead pitches in countries famous for producing lively result oriented wickets.

The ever increasing murmur about the survival of the test cricket seems to get traction with the advent and popularity of the T20 format and different leagues associated with it. With it came a brand of cricket, where flamboyance and improvisation are the key foundation for success. People are getting more used to watch high adrenaline, 3 hours affairs of rampant cricket rather than the slow, serene grind of test cricket over days altogether, which can also be thrilling in its own way. But probably, we are missing the plot in analysing the challenges faced by test cricket.

The major inhibitor of the test format is not exactly the growing popularity of T20. Rather it’s the standard of cricket itself on display in this format, which is largely responsible for the recent rise in voices against tests. It’s true that T20 is more viewer and spectator friendly as well as generates more revenue and keeps the broadcasters happy too. But a strong image of the real test cricket would never do any harm to its image and would always be popular among the true cricket fans irrespective of T20’s popularity. If we project our attention in the same time frame as the above matches, battles like Lords 2014, Cape Town 2014, Wanderers 2013, Gabba 2014, Adelaide 2015 and Delhi 2015 presents a perfect picture of what test cricket is all about.

Such has been the aggressive nature of the players in this past decade that we have seen numerous matches reaching their conclusion long before the stipulated period of 5 days. Though it may appear quite a progressive evolution for a format termed as quite a lengthy affair. But it undermines the joys and vagaries of a match spanning over all five days, where all four results are quite a possibility and where winning is not always the motto. Life don’t always provide us with the opportunity of winning. Sometimes you’ve to survive and weather the storm. Test Cricket provokes your survival instinct and stretch it to the hilt. We don’t need to look too far behind to find a glaring exhibition of this aspect, as the recently concluded Delhi Test between India and South Africa showed us. South Africans showed us the thrill of a graft to tackle the rampaging Indian bowlers and nearly stole a famous draw. This is test cricket at its endearing best.  Not long ago, Sri Lanka and England played two gems of a test in England, with both matches going down the wire and Sri Lanka coming on top was the cherry on the cake as it countered the ongoing trend of home teams pressing their advantage to facile victories.

In contrast to the above two examples, the England – New Zealand series this year provided as much quality, but in a very different style. Attack was the motto for New Zealand and soon England was following their suit too, setting up a beautiful series of attacking and counter-attacking cricket. So, contrary to general perception, Test Cricket is not about defence only.

Test Cricket is not a choice between attack and defence. It’s about the talent, temperament, grit and application, players must show in order to achieve the objectives of the game. It’s not about doctored or benign pitches, early finishes, being number one team or anything of that sorts. It’s about playing it with a passionate attitude, when you are at fire or on the top of your opposition, or playing it with a ‘never say die’ attitude, when the chips are down. If you are good enough to win or dominate a match irrespective of the nature of the pitch, you deserved to be called great. But for the victory of the cricket itself, quality should be the primary concern of all the cricketers and various stake holders of this game. If we have to fight the pessimism surrounding Test format at the moment, we have to provide quality cricket to the spectators and bank on the same factors, which helped it reach the pinnacle of cricket viewers’ list. The charm never wears off.

Matches like Australia vs West Indies Hobart 2015 will do no good to the cause as it showed that scheduling of such series is nothing more than mere formality. Though the day-night test is a welcome move, strategists need to focus more on the monitoring of existing system and making it more competitive. ICC should formulate strategies which can force its members to produce quality rather than secondary strategies to win at any cost. People see matches because they are passionate about the game. People see matches as a form of entertainment too. Both the aspects can be accomplished, if players start showing their heart and play tough, competitive cricket rather than showing their skills enhanced greatly by the playing surface. That said, benign surfaces should be heavily punished too and ICC must look forward to prevention of such kind of poor advertisement of our beloved form of cricket.