TEST CRICKET – The ROAD Ahead

Where is cricket headed? I wish somebody knew. And if you are a lover of Test cricket, the signs from the last year are terrifying.

Brett Lee has chosen the shorter forms of the game over Tests. Kevin Pietersen has said Test cricket could be dead in 10 years. Chris Gayle proudly declared that he will not be a wee bit sad if Test cricket met its demise, while he was still the captain of the West Indies Test team. And Gary Kirsten expressed similar fears, if not in the same words. As far as West Indies goes, honestly no one will be surprised if the players gave up on playing as an international team altogether, and became T20 freelancers. Muttiah Muralitharan, who had a realistic shot at 1000 Test wickets, decided to hang up his whites, though he will carry on playing one-day cricket till the World Cup in 2011. And thereafter he will focus solely on Twenty20 cricket. Murali had a frighteningly simple explanation - Test cricket is “hard work”.

Perhaps things are not as bad as they sound. Lee's decision is understandable. He has got the game for Test cricket but not the body, and maybe he would have made the same decision, even without the existence of the IPL. Pietersen is given to theatrics at the best of times. And in a team sport, the high of representing the nation would perhaps always be stronger than the lure of cash for most players; after all, international cricketers are not exactly on the verge of starvation.

But even if you are not paranoid, this is, without doubt, the most volatile and unsettling period there has been in cricket. Almost everything - tradition, faith, beliefs, and loyalties - is open to re-evaluation. In many ways it is cricket's hour of reckoning, but sadly, there are no clear options to choose from.

Dennis Lillee bowling with a 9 man slip cordon - One of the most beautiful sights of Test cricket

Cricket has always been the most unusual of sports. Grand, subtle, nuanced, cerebral and leisurely, it cannot be followed as a passing hobby (and I’m not talking about a T20 circus). Test cricket demands devotion and engagement, and those willing to submit themselves are rewarded handsomely, for it is a treat for the senses. As a sport it has been in conflict with the pace of modern living for quite some time, but at the same time it is a reassuring affirmation that all good things are timeless. Also, no other sport is as rooted in national identity as cricket. Match-winning performances in bilateral Test contests have always been topping a cricketer’s achievements despite the rampant commercialization of the game in recent years- there IS something very noble about representing your country.

 

All this is being challenged now. The conflict between Tests and Twenty20 is stark and severe. Twenty20 has no past and it needs no context. It's a game without a pause and it relies on brazen entertainment. And the IPL is doing its best to subvert and even obliterate national identity. None of this is necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it can be argued that all of these are contributing to make cricket a more contemporary and accessible sport. The reality for cricket is that it can afford neither to leave its past behind or to close its eyes to the future. For those who run the game, the way out of the fix is to find the middle path and to be able to do that; they must rise above parochial interests and their egos.

The biggest opportunity knocks in the form of the Future Tours Programme for 2012 to 2020. It could be one of the most important documents in the history of cricket. The next decade will be decisive for cricket, and the FTP can act as a significant statement of intent from the administrators.

The IPL is seen by many cricket boards as the single most disruptive factor in international cricket. It challenges the bilateralism, and it is beyond most of the national boards to match its financial power. This concern is also tinged with envy. There are no two ways about it. The IPL isn't about to go away. And inevitably the realization is slowly seeping through that there can only be one of its kind. The logical way forward would be to create a space for the IPL in the international calendar. It shouldn't come down to a moral choice between cash and country for the players. That's not fair. But equally, special status for the IPL must come with strings attached. It can start with the recognition that it is more than a domestic tournament. Being part of the international calendar should mean that its schedule is regulated just like the other international tournaments. With its television audience, India has the market, but it needs the rest of the world to supply the talent to keep a tournament like the IPL attractive. As cricket's undisputed leader, the Indian board bears a moral responsibility towards world cricket, but it is also in its own long-term interests.

Still, the IPL is only part of the issue. There would have been fears about the future of Test cricket even if the IPL didn't exist. The truth is that without quality, Test cricket will wither away. The ICC needs to preserve it as the highest form and to retain its appeal, Test cricket must be played at the highest level. Cricket's reality has changed. Test cricket between unequals, and between those not skilled enough, will draw no viewers, and will be a strain on the international calendar. A Test series between Bangladesh and West Indies would only serve as another nail on Test cricket’s coffin.

Several ideas have been floating about, relating to how to make Test cricket more attractive, including a Test championship and cutting the length down to four days. The main problem, however, is not the length of matches .Those who like their three-hour entertainment  will still find a four-day game much too long, and those who like Test cricket will continue to be drawn to it if the central contest - between bat and ball - remains absorbing enough.

 

In order to survive, and prosper, Test cricket must cut out the under-skilled, not chop a day. The dream that Papua New Guinea and Namibia would one day play Test cricket was always a false one. For associate nations, there is no better tool than Twenty20. If anything, Test cricket needs to get more elitist: more four or five-match series between the top countries; no two-match series; and a second tier below the top seven, with the seventh spot being rotated on a promotion-relegation basis. It will mean some radical changes to the structure of the game, and it will surely not be well-received politically. 

But if hard choices are not made now, there might not be a second chance of survival for this wonderful game.