Timed Out: The Future of Test Cricket

By Theo Payne

I have not always been a fan of test cricket. My first immediate impression was of a totally unengaging game played by boring people in white clothes. Not glamorous, right? Well, that’s how some players, or even whole nations feel about this most opposite format. There is much more to test cricket than that. But this is not a universal view. Could test cricket be gone in 20 years? And if so, where will it be at that time? 

We are going through a time of significant change in the cricketing world. Franchise leagues are springing up globally, each offering greater financial lures than the last. Yes, it’s great, cricket is spreading worldwide. Places such as the UAE (the ILT20) and the US (Major League Cricket) have launched their own T20 franchises (with the aid of the IPL organisations). But as more white-ball tournaments emerge, other, not so financially rewarding formats, are beginning to give way. This is the quagmire that test cricket is falling into. 

I have no doubt that the ‘big three’ (India, England and Australia) can afford to and will continue to play the longest format of the game for decades to come, but it is the smaller, lower paid nations that I am worried about. 

As is the case with most if not all sports these days, it all comes down to money. You can’t possibly blame the players for trying to make the most out of their playing days, but by going elsewhere, that leaves their respective nations with gaps to fill in their test and one-day sides. 

Take South Africa; a decent cricketing nation with undoubted potential, yet they are having to take seven debutantes to New Zealand due to several key players’ full, uninterrupted commitment to the SA20. This decision was described by Steve Waugh as “a defining moment in the death of test cricket.” Afterall, it is their choice, and a logical one at that, yet one that creates infinite problems for the selectors, and, as a knock-on effect, the whole of test cricket. I am surprised New Zealand hasn’t refused to play. 

This is a problem that is shared by other test nations too. For example, the West Indies have sent an almost ‘second XI’ to Australia, due again to the absence of major players such as Jason Holder and Nicholas Pooran, who are currently competing in the ILT20 league in the UAE. This reduces the chances that the series will be entertaining and competitive. Erring on the side of sympathy however, the West Indians are paid a mere $2500 per test match, whereas the most valuable Australians get paid up to £1,000,000, making it much more inviting. 

That brings us on to the more recent dilemma of two-test series. They are hardly test match cricket at all. It doesn’t give either teams enough time to get into the series and rhythm of test cricket. When they go into the first test having not adapted to the conditions, it will be an embarrassing defeat. They may haul it back to draw the series 1-1, or they may still be adjusting to the time zones and conditions and the series will end 2-0. 

Soon the only five-test series that will be left will be The Ashes and a few others crammed into a frantic 6-week window. These quick-fire cameos are a terrible advocate for test cricket. 

Central contracts are another matter altogether. Most cricketing nations have already offered their major players, if not all of their players, contracts but, understandably, some have said no. Their reason is simple: They want to keep themselves open for other opportunities. Yes, this does make them flexible, but it is their way of saying that they would rather play franchise cricket than play for their country in either ODI or test, and in some instances, even T20s. Despite this, central contracts can help battle player’s movement away from test cricket. 

If logic prevails, it is critical for the survival of the longest format that now or sometime in the future, India, England and Australia share some of their money with the less rich boards such as those of Sri Lanka, the West Indies or Afghanistan. This is vital for the survival of test cricket, as those nations are financially struggling and, without support, can’t sustain the rigours of test cricket. I have to say, this isn’t the only solution but, in my opinion, the most logical and hopefully effective solution. 

If, for any reason, this or something along those lines is not done, or, as I will mention later, T20 exhausts itself, I can potentially see test cricket dying out in the next fifty years. 

But in is not just the international game of red ball cricket that is under threat. The domestic game is also struggling. Many young, talented players such as Will Smeed have already declared themselves white ball specialists, a decision that is becoming increasingly and worryingly common.

The Bazball Factor

Bazball, oh bazball. The marvellous reinvention of the already versatile test cricket. Another branch to the pantheon of styles that have graced the game. There is the West Indies team of the 70s and 80s, there’s the Australia team of the 2000s, and then there’s Bazball. The way that Brendon McCullum and Ben Stokes have reengineered England’s approach to test cricket has been astounding. The transformation from a cagey, utterly unentertaining team that only one in seventeen tests to a fearless, ultra-attacking, close-knit group has been drastic; not to mention effective. Countless times they have answered the critics by winning against all predictions and overwhelming their opponents with their ‘no fear of failure’ brand of cricket. 

It is not just this, but it turns the general concept of test cricket on its head. If this method of red-ball cricket is taken up elsewhere, the way in which test cricket is viewed could be completely transformed and, in one way, it could be seen as some as a longer form of white ball cricket. This could be potentially what saves test cricket. 

Could this be the way test cricket is played in twenty years?

I was glued to the TV and spent hours listening to Test Match Special last summer. Whether it was The Ashes or the tests against Ireland, I was utterly enthralled by the extraordinary tactics exploited by the England test team. 

This display fully encapsulates the potential of test cricket. Whether it’s the deciding Ashes test at the history steeped Oval, or a quiet, almost unnoticed Division Two county match at Sophia Gardens, red-ball cricket has and will always be the greatest format to have ever graced the game.

 It would be a huge loss that would come back to haunt the sport of cricket, and one that would change our sport forever. 

The Future

But all is not lost, yet. I believe that test cricket will not diminish in England for a long while. It could just be a dip in the popularity of test cricket, not an unfamiliar occurrence.

Test cricket has had its ups and downs, and it is just part of sport. After the heated Bodyline series of 1932/33, test cricket, or The Ashes at least, was balanced on a knife edge. Despite the series, test cricket was patched up and soon returned to its former vigour. 

Some of the biggest, most influential players such as Ben Stokes and Virat Kohli have said that test cricket is the best format and should be protected, and I believe that T20 cricket has pretty much reached its full, limited potential. It will exhaust itself. People will soon grow tired of the same players being recycled again and again around the world for twenty years. Afterall, you can’t see much of cricket in just forty overs. 

Even if it is played by fewer nations, the countries that will still be playing it will play it to the same standard that we expect in the present day, and to still be playing it and thriving, they must be more than half-decent. In one way, test cricket would become a closer fought game as a result of some of the worse nations dropping out, a change that may prove to enhance the popularity of the format.

I’m not sure if it is just me, but I feel that the cricketing world doesn’t have the courage to say goodbye to the original form of the game. It has been the game of legends such as Sir Don Bradman. It is the only format (along with ODIs – similar in aspects) he ever knew, and I dread to think what his view would be on the franchise twist on the modern game.

I sincerely hope that in twenty, or even fifty years’ time, eleven English and eleven Australian players in white will be striding out to the roar of the Oval crowd, with the greatest rivalry in the history of the game tied at 2-2, the historic urn finely poised. 

Test cricket is a gem. A gem that cannot be lost and will always shine. Cricket just wouldn’t be the same without it.  

The One-Day Cup vs The Hundred

The One-Day Cup has been a brilliant, fairly popular competition for many years. The introduction of The Hundred, however, has meant that it has suddenly become a second team competition for trying out young players from their respective youth programs, and for newly signed players to get on the same page as the team. It is playing second fiddle to a format that is not played anywhere else in the world and is barely proper cricket. This is not the respect and amount of publicity it deserves.

This doesn’t mean that I don’t like The Hundred; it’s a great competition for growing cricket and bringing some money into the ECB, and it is fulfilling its duties well, yet the fact that it is chosen over a proper competition that has been around for decades is worrying, as it further illustrates the seemingly unstoppable rise of franchise cricket.   

Despite my liking of the One-Day Cup, I have not always been aware of what it has to offer. Whilst pootling around on my personal favourite of BBC Sport, searching for any cricket to follow/listen to other than The Hundred – I was growing bored – I came across a link far down the page saying: “One-Day Cup – listen to 8 live games.” I started listening and soon couldn’t stop. 

This was my not-so-glamorous discovery of the Royal London One-Day Cup. 

Even teams like Surrey – who have great squad depth – struggled in this years One-Day Cup. With key players such as Chris Jordan (Southern Brave) and Sam Curran (Oval Invincibles) missing, it was always going to be tough, but no one expected Surrey to do as badly as they did.

The fact that Leicestershire lifted the cup further shows how having a not as impressive squad has helped more recently, as it means that only a few players are picked up in The Hundred. This enables them to have pretty much their first team, therefore giving them the advantage of not having to introduce too many new players and reshuffle the squad.

However, on the other hand, the One-Day Cup has become an arena for new and upcoming players and old and now unused players a chance to shine, as we saw the likes of James Rew do last summer (his run of form began in the County Championship and followed on into his one-day game). 

Even so, is this enough to make its demise worth it, or could the One-Day Cup potentially be facing the same threat as red-ball cricket?  

But we can’t just write off The Hundred. As I have mentioned before, it has, in my opinion, lived up to the high expectations that it was set. And credit to it, it hasn’t just shrunk back and stalled. 

Yet there is one thing that I don’t quite get. It might as well be a T20 tournament. The difference in length of innings is twenty balls, a very small margin that could easily plugged up. By doing this, it would attract bigger names and earn more support from the public. The players will be able to hone their franchise skills as they will be playing the same format as every single other tournament around the world, not some new and alien game that lasts for just 200 balls. 

This change would make a big impact to the income and popularity of the competition. I think that I was a good bit of marketing to start with, but now I believe that altering the format slightly will promote the competition and draw in players not just from England, but from around the world. 

The Hundred has and continues to bring in big and diverse crowds, and its popularity is still on the rise. In the most recent edition of The Hundred, a record breaking 580,000 tickets were sold, a stellar improvement on the first two years of the tournament. The television numbers have also continued to rise, with the number of viewers on Sky Sports up twenty percent in the women’s and eight percent in the men’s. The Hundred is still on the rise; unfortunately for the One-Day Cup.

Compare this, however, to the IPL’s 1.47 billion digital viewers on the first weekend of this year’s competition, The Hundred still has a long way to go. Motivation for the One-Day Cup. 

So, which competition will prevail in this fight for the top spot in the franchise/domestic circuit in the summer. In five years’ time, will all eyes be turned to a prospering Hundred tournament, or will The One-Day Cup be the main headlines of the English summer?