It’s been been over two months now since the last time England have played a Test match. It’s a frustrating quirk of this year’s schedule that we have two tour after New Year’s, but none before. (Except the current half-trip to India.) It’s good for the players, as they need time off, but it is frustrating as a fan not to have Test cricket on. One-day cricket isn’t the same. I like it, but it’s not as good. (And I don’t just mean when England are playing.) One-day cricket still takes all day, and despite the best efforts of the ICC still has incurably dull middle overs. And it fails to have the ebb and flow of a Test match; it’s not a true measure of skill. It’s not a Test.
I absolutely adore Test cricket. It, and first-class cricket in general, are far and away the most beautiful, not only of cricket, but of sport in general. Football calls itself the beautiful game, but it isn’t. Test cricket is. There is simply nothing that compares to the rich nuances of a test match. Test cricket is the only sport in the world where subtle tactical changes and gradual shifts in momentum can play a huge role days after the fact. There is nothing in the world as gripping (or as bad for the fingernails) as the slow burning climax to a close Test. The finales of the Edgbaston and Cardiff Ashes tests are burnt into my memory as clearly as if they had happened yesterday.
Test cricket also brings out the tragedy of a lone hand better than any sport. Rare is the footballer who scores a hat trick on the losing side and in a T20 a quick 60 will often win a match regardless of other player’s failings. But this is not true in Test cricket. England’s 4-0 whitewash of India over the summer was full of incredible feats, but one of the most memorable was that of Rahul Dravid refusing to give in as his team-mates collapsed around him. In each of his centuries in England Rahul Dravid stayed at the crease for longer than three football matches back to back, and his team still lost. The only other sport that has something like this is baseball, where a pitcher can perform brilliantly, but still lose. Test cricket is the only sport where you have to maintain complete concentration days at a time, knowing that any lapse could be disastrous.
And the beauty of Test cricket does not lie merely in the knowledge of the match, or the individual heroics of the players. The play itself is often visually stimulating as well. Even those with no knowledge of cricket can appreciate the simple elegance of Michael Vaughan playing a cover drive. You don’t need any background to sense the hostility of Allan Donald bowling to Michael Atherton. (Or to be mildly amused by Atherton’s ‘defiant’ face.) You don’t, or at least very seldom, see such things is the shorter form of the game though. Cover drives take a back seat to slogging and bowlers don’t have time to get stuck into a batsman. A lot of the beauty is lost in favour of big sixes and superficial entertainment. (Like cheerleaders; what idiot decided that a cricket match needed cheerleaders?)
It faintly annoys me that there should even be a cause to defend Test cricket. The fact that it is the best form of the game ought to be self-evident. It is fuller, richer and more exciting than any other sport on the planet. Twenty overs of slogging (with or without an additional thirty overs of knocking the ball around the corner for a single) cannot possibly compare to a full five day Test of a cricketer’s ability. And yet, some people think there is no need for Test cricket! They call it ‘antiquated’ like it’s a bad thing. Test cricket is antiquated in the best possible sense of the word. Test cricket is antiquated in the same way that Elgar and Tchaikovsky are antiquated. Their music is still performed and sold to this day because it is the best there is. It will still be performed in another hundred, but today’s pop music won’t be. Test cricket is the gentleman’s game, it is fair play made corporeal, it is cricket!
What it isn’t is ‘boring’. How anyone without the excuse of not knowing how the game is played (every game looks boring if you don’t know what’s happening) could possibly claim that it is baffles me. (Here the comparison to classical music comes again; both are called ‘boring’, but by only those with no concept of beauty .) In India, supposedly the biggest cricketing nation on earth, limited overs matches are more popular! India has had a considerably negative impact on Test cricket, from insisting that the IPL be given priority over everything to scuppering the DRS. With India’s financial might there is a danger of players, especially from the smaller nations, eschewing Test cricket in favour of more lucrative T20s. It would be a great shame if this happened. Testing Times is a great idea; the ICC need to give more financial support to Test cricket. Whilst I don’t think that Test cricket will ever disappear, (at least not whilst Australia and England still play cricket) the prospect of a return to the days of only three nations playing test cricket (or to the current set up in women’s cricket, where Tests are few and far between) is one to be avoided at all costs.