Testing times
With shorter versions of the game gaining popularity among spectators, sponsors and players as well, the ICC is mulling over restricting Test matches to just four days. Abhijit Chatterjee analyses the reasons

Minnows Bangladesh recently tasted their first Test victory against West Indies when they defeated their much stronger rivals on home ground. The ICC may decide on a two-tier system with the stronger teams playing more matches among themselves and the so-called weaker teams only playing with each other Photo: AFP

The phenomenal success of Twenty20 cricket and the IPL may have proved a shot in the arm of many cricket boards but this success has also sounded the death knell for the Test cricket if the rethink going on in the International Cricket Council (ICC) on the future of Test cricket is anything to go by.

If the international body has its way, then Test cricket in its present form may not survive for long with a four-day version replacing it soon. The puritans might throw up their hands in disbelief, but the ICC is going ahead with its plan to change the way Test cricket is being played.

In the early days of the game, Test matches were spread over three to four days. There have been some ‘timeless Tests’ as well. The last one was played in 1939, which did not end even after a predetermined maximum time. In recent times Australia played a six-day match against a World XI in 2005. It was sanctioned as an official Test match by the ICC, though the match reached a conclusion on the fourth day.

Puritans, who see Test cricket as the sublime form of the game given the long-drawn competition between bat and ball, would certainly mourn the demise of the five-day game but the modern-day follower may not be greatly disturbed.

Lack of spectator support (even in the Indian sub-continent where jam-packed stands was the norm for Test matches even as late as the 1990s), lack of support from sponsors who see the instant games bringing in more money as well as the lack of commitment from the players themselves are the main reasons which may bring about a change in the way Test cricket is played, at least in its present form, before the year ends.

The ICC president, Mr David Morgan, was the first to hint that Test matches might be reduced to four days so as to "protect and enrich the game".

To add to the discomfort of the weaker teams, the ICC has also hinted that henceforth Test cricket could be played on a two-tier basis with the stronger teams playing more matches among themselves while the minnows would have to be satisfied with playing among themselves.

The ICC chief was not the only one who was advocating four-day Tests. James Sutherland, chief executive of Cricket Australia, has confirmed that the issue of a shorter version of Test matches was a part of the strategy discussions during the recent ICC meetings.

Sutherland was, however, quick to say that the concept of shorter Tests was not a "developed thought" but indicated the willingness of the game leaders to rethink on five-day games.

The ICC chief was of the view that it would not be too difficult for the players to make a mental shift from five days to four. He has also indicated that the international governing body would also be inclined to recommend Test match play at night. But that would be possible if the issue of a ball, which would last full 75 overs under lights, was sorted out.

Morgan was gracious in his endeavour to keep the spirit of the game alive by saying that Test cricket would still be played in white clothes even under lights!

And Test cricket under lights may happen sooner than later because of the television rights of the game because that is where the moolah is, as the day cricket does not garner high TRP ratings.

Despite being seen as slow and boring, Test cricket has become more combative in recent times. According to figures available, in the past 10 years only about 25 per cent of the 465 Test matches played have been drawn. Since 2000 nearly three-fourth of the matches played have yielded a result, while in the decade (1990-1999) before the percentage was 65 per cent.

But Test cricket is losing out is apparent from the figures. In 2004 only 51 Test matches were played. The following year 49 games were played while in 2006, 46 Tests were conducted. In 2007, 31 games were played (but then this was also the year of the World Cup) while in 2008, 47 Test matches were played.

This year only 17 tests have been played till now. That may be because of the just completed World T20 Championship and the Champions Trophy to be played in South Africa in September.

Despite the declining number of Tests, the result rate has improved in recent times with strict implementation of the rules about overs bowled and a better drainage system in most grounds. The ICC is also experimenting with having floodlights during the day to speed up the proceedings in case of bad light.

But does the game need more tinkering? The ICC would probably say yes while the puritans may disagree.

The ICC president, in his quest for the lucre, has conveniently forgotten that it was under the directions of the ICC itself that so-called weaker teams like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe were granted regular membership to the ICC. (It is a different matter that the regular membership of Zimbabwe has been delayed for the time being).

But then again the moot point is that if these teams are debarred from playing against stronger rivals, how will they gain experience and raise their standards.

Test cricket is the ultimate test of skill, fitness and mental strength and contests between teams under different conditions. If in England it is the seaming ball, which tests the skill of the batsmen, in India it is the spinning deliveries that can make the most competent batsmen sweat. Modern day cricketers, who play more number of innings under a variety of conditions, are able to adjust more quickly than players of previous eras but the fact remains that Test cricket is the ultimate test of a cricketer’s skill.

If India are able to negotiate the seaming ball in England and conquer the hosts or if England are able to read the spin of Muthiah Muralitharan in Sri Lanka then the victory is all the more creditable. By reducing Tests to a four-day affair, it would be difficult for most teams to plan a long time strategy because a draw under trying circumstances is as good as a game won.

A five-day game sees a lot of ups and downs. Even a good score in the first two days is no guarantee that the opposition will able to save the game in the remaining three. But will the four-day games give the same kind of luxury to any team like that of batting over two days? Things will only become clear once the new dispensation comes into play.

Some old-timers have reacted sharply to the ICC plan. Famous Pakistani player Javed Miandad is of the view that the ICC plan would make the game a "trash". "Don’t kill the charms of Test cricket," was his advice to the ICC. Maindad also pointed out that by reducing the game to four days even a mediocre team would be able to hold out to its much stronger opposition, an issue that the ICC is attempting to address.

But former Indian opener Arun Lal, now a permanent member of a television commentary team, was of the view that Test cricket "is fast becoming unfashionable and tedious for the younger generation." This called for the change.

Change is a way of life and the game has already undergone many changes. From the timeless Tests in 1939, the game has now been restricted to five days. Let us see if the four-day format can bring in the crowds. Because without experimenting there is indeed no solution! Let the ICC have its way, at least for now.