Making Test Cricket more competitive

Why can’t we make test cricket more interesting? Why can’t ICC think of promoting test cricket like the way they promote T20 cricket?

The answer is simple; money. Cricket boards promote T20 because it attracts crowds and thus, these large numbers increase the inflow of cash. The crowds however, prefer watching the fastest and the smallest version of cricket. They don’t have enough time to watch cricket for a whole day let alone five days of test cricket. So, in order to make test cricket interesting, it should remain fast paced, thus accomplishing not only to seize the attention of the audience, but allow them to remain interested through the entirety of the game. The main aim should be making this format more interesting and increasing the competition between teams. With the increase in competition, crowds will automatically be attracted and ICC can use that opportunity to increase their revenue. Rather unfortunately, cricket boards nowadays prefer having more limited over matches because it helps them clear all the expenses, therefore, every other small or big cricket board has their own T20 league.

Firstly, it’s the ICC’s job to think and find out new ways of making test matches more compatible. So how can every other match be as compatible as the Ashes. my personal opinion allows me to believe that changes should be brought about in their laws. ICC was thinking of reducing the number of days from 5 to 4 in test matches last year to make test cricket more engaging and interesting for the crowds. Personally, I see this as a bad idea, because it could take away the charm of test cricket. I guess you shouldn’t mess with the laws that were made in the 18th century. It can change history resulting in new players to not enjoy test cricket properly; especially the old-fashioned game which would normally end in the last session of the match. We should retain the 5 days tradition, because there are a lot of small formats that are being introduced and are being played all over the world. An example of such would be the T20 format, which has decreased the standard of cricket and is also being played on club level. It doesn’t just end there; cricket boards are finding innovative ways to introduce shorter and faster formats of cricket for example the T10 league.

Moving on, a 4-day test match is a nod for me on international level, however it wouldn’t be a bad idea on domestic or club levels.

An idea that comes to mind is dividing the teams into two divisions; The first division can have the top 8 teams that will play each other in both home and away series in two years’ time. After 2 years, last 2 teams will be relegated from division 1 and top two teams from division 2 can be promoted to division 1. The top 3 teams in division 1 can play the champions league or something of similar sorts. In this, top 3 teams will then compete against each other for the trophy. In the second division, decreasing the number of days in test matches from 5 to 4 wouldn’t be a bad idea. As this division will be played by those teams whose performances are not up to the mark and they will then fight for 5-day test matches.

There are a couple of positive points for cricket when you implement this plan. Firstly, it will result in reducing the number of meaningless test matches, because each and every team will be fighting for those points. It would be as though a test league that would take a 2 years’ time period to end. Teams will fight for the number one spot, whilst other teams will fight to get in the top 3. I would not just end there, however; good cricket teams do not like to be relegated as their reputation would be damaged and relegation would mean no 5-day cricket for that team for 2 years.

Implementing this plan will cause an increase in competition and average teams will be provided a chance to improve themselves in order to stay in the top 8. Ashes will become more interesting; Pakistan India series will take place and personally, I am 100% sure that it will be watched more and gain greater popularity than the Ashes.

Now, to attract spectators, you have to improve the product. In this case, product means the standard of cricket. This can be accomplished by improving the balance between the bat and ball. Batting shouldn’t be easy in test matches. No one loves seeing a team score 500 runs in an innings, because frankly put, it becomes boring. Seeing a team fight for runs in a test match would be fun to watch. To achieve this, you have to support the bowlers, by giving them benefits in test matches; for instance, by playing with Duke balls in every match. Duke balls don’t lose their shape, unlike the Kookaburra. This way, the ball will be able to maintain its shine and swing. Later, during the innings, it will be easier for the bowlers to reverse swing with the Duke ball. Kookaburra balls also reverse swing, however, but the negative point is that Kookaburra ball loses its shape; also the shine of the ball fades and the seam changes. Due to this, umpires have to keep an eye on the ball and change the ball when needed. Duke balls used in every match can help fast bowlers show their talent by implementing it.

Batsmen are provided with excessive safety equipments. The question then arises as to why there is a limit on the bouncers being bowled in an over. There should not be any limit on bouncer bowled in test matches. Any bouncer bowled over the head of the batman should be a no ball; however, no limit should be implemented on bouncers bowled at head height. I would love to see ICC finishing the limit on the bouncers as it would give fast bowlers a good chance to express their talent.
I agree to the fact that the limit is for the batsman’s safety, but if two bouncers are allowed in an over, then why not six? Why play test cricket if you believe that your life is endangered by giving freedom to bowlers? In short, I would love to see freedom given to bowlers and the batsman so that we can see an excellent player. Restrictions on bowlers make it easier for the batsman and restriction on batsman will make it easier for the bowlers and no one will be able to differentiate between an average player and a world class player.

The wickets must remain uncovered at night unless it rains or something happens due to which the pitch must be covered. I am aware that it may be a risky decision and no one would know what would happen, we only know one fact: that uncovered wickets overnight will result in making batting difficult for the batsmen, due to the overnight dew, which will increase moisture in the pitch and also lead to a significant increase in swing, thus creating difficulty for the batsmen. Fast bowlers are not the only ones to obtain benefits, as the spinners will also see an increase in spin: thus making batting difficult.
I am unsure about implementing the idea of uncovered wickets, as it may give the bowlers the upper hand and may also disturb the balance between the bat and the ball. However, there is no harm in trying it. While it may be a risky decision, but
there’s no doubt that cricket will become more interesting.

I believe if these plans are to be implemented, the competition in test cricket will increase, which will lead to an increase in the standard of test cricket and more investment would be made towards test cricket.