Bradman Oration November 19, 2009

Greg Chappell fears for Test cricket's future

  shares 33

Greg Chappell has delivered a blunt message to cricket's administrators: Test cricket is under threat from Twenty20 and something must be done to save the traditional form of the game. Chappell believes the situation is so severe that there could come a time when only four or five nations play Test cricket, with the weaker countries focusing purely on 20- and 50-over games.

The former Australia captain and India coach was in Melbourne on Thursday to deliver the annual Bradman Oration on the state of the game and he painted a worrying picture for the five-day format. He said while iconic tours like the Ashes retained their importance, many other series had lost relevance and administrators should focus on the quality of cricket played, rather than the quantity.

"I'm of the belief that we can support the three formats but obviously we have to give a very long and hard think about how best they work together," Chappell said. "I have a belief that we need to make each series, whether it's 20-, 50-over or a Test match series, a lot more relevant.

"I think the format that is under most pressure with 20-over cricket coming in is Test cricket. It has been struggling for some time. Economically, some countries find it very difficult to be competitive and therefore it affects economically the viability of Test series between some countries.

"I have a feeling that Test cricket is going to reduce in size rather than grow in size. I can see the time when perhaps there will only be four or five major countries playing Test match cricket. It's another reason why I think 50-over cricket needs to be supported and given a rethink because 50-over cricket could well become the Test cricket of the future for a lot of cricket playing countries.

"There are only probably four or five countries that have the critical mass and have the infrastructure that will allow them to produce competitive Test match teams on a regular basis. That is a problem. That's been exacerbated by the success of 20-over cricket."

"I can see the time when perhaps there will only be four or five major countries playing Test match cricket"
Greg Chappell

The prospect of separate divisions in Test cricket, which might help ensure matches are closely fought, was not an idea that sat well with Chappell. However, he believed that the introduction of day-night Tests, which appears to be a certainty when a suitable ball is developed, could help regenerate interest in the five-day format.

"If you want people to come, then obviously you have to fit into their lives, not hope that they will fit into the life of cricket," Chappell said. "I have no doubt that in the not too distant future we will see Test cricket played under lights and played at night time when it's easier for people to come."

Chappell's comments have come at a time when the ICC is considering ways to keep the public interested in Test cricket. An MCC survey recently found that only 7% of cricket followers in India regarded Test cricket as their preferred form of the game, while ticket sales for Australia's SCG and MCG Tests against Pakistan this summer are 20% down on the Tests at the same venue last season.

Brydon Coverdale is a staff writer at Cricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY Barks1986 on | November 22, 2009, 6:20 GMT

    A two-tiered test cricket system has to be looked at. There are only 8 nations capapble of producing competitive test match sides Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa, Sri Lanka and the West Indies. The other countries not quite up to scratch including Zimbabwe and Bangladesh should play in a structured sub-test level competition.They will get better at playing cricket by playing against each other and against B-Sides from some of the top nations like Australia, England and India. The format would be 3 or 4-day games like Shield crciket in Australia. If countries like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe perform well over a number of years and have the infastructure to support continued growth then i would give them temporary test status and review them after a couple of years competing with the big boys. The days of Matthew Hayden making 380 gainst Bangladeshi bowlers and Murali taking hundreds of wickets against hapless batsmen should be brought to a swift end.

  • POSTED BY 2.14istherunrate on | November 21, 2009, 23:24 GMT

    I cannot for the life of me imagine how just a diet of 20/20's is going to satisfy any professional cricketer. It ain't gonna satisfy too many fans either(real ones that is). Hell 20/20 wouldn't satisfy most weekend players. As for ODI's the formulaic nature of them makes it hard to imagine them being the main course. There may be something wrong with Tests or rather pitches, but although the numbers are down in some countries, I bet the TV's and radios are on everywhere. Money is important,yes, but it is not the only thing in life.The unfolding nature of the plot of a Test match makes it irresistable as a good novel, and even the now vilified Ahmedabad Test was only a draw for certain in the last 2 sessions. In any case I would take a punt on India being involved in more draws in the last 20 years than most other sides. Time not to throw in the towel over Tests I believe, as they will probably outlast 20/20 by a long way; time merely to consider how to make more amusing pitches.

  • POSTED BY lucyferr on | November 20, 2009, 21:47 GMT

    "Chappell believes the situation is so severe that there could come a time when only four or five nations play Test cricket, with the weaker countries focusing purely on 20- and 50-over games."

    Hellooooo... why is this a problem? That sounds like the Promised Land to me. Can we hurry up and get there, please?

  • POSTED BY universe on | November 20, 2009, 18:21 GMT

    No, it's not T20 cricket that will kill test cricket but the likes of pitches in India and Pakistan will. The bowlers just go with the motion, runs are piled and you know it will end in dull draw even before the start of 5th day. You can't disagree cricket is boring then. The fun is when the bowlers are asking questions, batsmen's temperament is tested. Test cricket should be played on green, bouncy, turning, I mean bowling pitches. Result should be there.

  • POSTED BY vik56in on | November 20, 2009, 17:28 GMT

    In reality it is BCCI's record breaking television deals that is killing Test cricket.They have signed televison deals which pay them for the number of days of cricket played.So BCCI wants cricket to be played for the whole 5 days.Anything less than 5 days will dent their earnings.Hence the idea behind DEAD PITCHES and 7 centuries and a dull draw behind the latest Indo-Sri Lanka Test match.Hats of to Australia ,South Africa and Sri Lanka which still see a duty towards Test cricket and realize that it still is the foundation of cricket.

  • POSTED BY vik56in on | November 20, 2009, 16:29 GMT

    It is heartening to know that another cricketing great has realized the immediate danger to Test cricket.After Indias Gundappa Viswanath,Greg has aired his fears too.Cricket's heart India has seen a dangerous decline in its Test schedule having played only 4 Tests this calendar year.This is the result of corporates being given a free run.Media cos like cricinfo too has a duty towards preserving Test cricket by regularly highlighting pitfalls of modernisation of the game.Making day night Test matches and allowing children free acess to the grounds are some good options to preserving Test cricket

  • POSTED BY Quazar on | November 20, 2009, 12:23 GMT

    As @Hassan pointed out, if Test Cricket could survive when only 2 nations played (and that too when they went on for 6-7 days), then surely the future of Test cricket isn't as bleak as some English and Aussie commentators describe. Being Indian, I can tell you that though ground attendance at Tests is poor, millions of people watch on TV...and even keep checking the score (on Cricinfo) from work. I think the 2 most vulnerable regions are the WI and NZ...but even there I would bet that if their authorities properly utilize the cash flows thrown up by T20 and ODIs, they can very much keep First Class and Test Cricket in decent shape.

  • POSTED BY thounder on | November 20, 2009, 10:19 GMT

    there is nothing can save cricket accept pick some boring stuff out of it ..when they talk that test cricket is the game of temprament .what kind of temprament is this .subcontinet pitches are good for temprament .what the jolk .made top green pitches for test .where bowler also can prove some thing .and batsman can say proudly i made a century .you can see the score of last ind vs srilanka .answer is all over it .put some new rules . like every team have to400 runs in one day of test match ..if some team cant to do this givethe teme some minus points.at the end if match is draw ..give the plus point team win

  • POSTED BY tfjones1978 on | November 20, 2009, 7:07 GMT

    I think Day-Night cricket could be good for the sport. However in addition to a multi-tier structure, I think test cricket needs to be session by session instead of innings by innings. Thus as now each team gets two 10 wicket innings, but each team gets time batting and bowling each day (team with the least runs in game bats next session). Make a day 25,25,20,20 overs (instead of three 30's) where each session the other team continues batting from where they left off, with first 50 overs prior to 6pm and last 40 overs after 6pm (eg: 2pm-9:30pm). This would have the following advantages: (1) Each team gets even go at wicket each day. (2) One-sided matches end quicker (eg: A 180 & 120, B 3/301 compared to A 180, B 5/450 stumps Day 2). (3) Closer matches easier to see (eg: A 4/270, B 5/303 compared to A 450, B 1/100 at stumps Day 2). (4) Less player injuries (each team field 1/2 day & bat 1/2 day). (5) Day&Night balls can be used (6) Toss doesnt win match (like 5th test Aust vs Eng 2009).

  • POSTED BY Peligrosisimo3 on | November 20, 2009, 6:54 GMT

    When you have a test match like the one occuring in India right now(India vs. Sri lanka) it's easy to see how the interest in test cricket can diminish. I mean what's the point of all these massive scores?I personally think that the first innings should be limited to 100 overs. Whats the point of scoring 7 hundred and change runs. Ridiculous! If the pitch is flat then score you runs in these 100 overs and get a lead.I would bet my house, two cars and swimming pool that this match would end in a draw. If we want to break world records then we should do it in the second innings winning matches.

  • POSTED BY Barks1986 on | November 22, 2009, 6:20 GMT

    A two-tiered test cricket system has to be looked at. There are only 8 nations capapble of producing competitive test match sides Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa, Sri Lanka and the West Indies. The other countries not quite up to scratch including Zimbabwe and Bangladesh should play in a structured sub-test level competition.They will get better at playing cricket by playing against each other and against B-Sides from some of the top nations like Australia, England and India. The format would be 3 or 4-day games like Shield crciket in Australia. If countries like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe perform well over a number of years and have the infastructure to support continued growth then i would give them temporary test status and review them after a couple of years competing with the big boys. The days of Matthew Hayden making 380 gainst Bangladeshi bowlers and Murali taking hundreds of wickets against hapless batsmen should be brought to a swift end.

  • POSTED BY 2.14istherunrate on | November 21, 2009, 23:24 GMT

    I cannot for the life of me imagine how just a diet of 20/20's is going to satisfy any professional cricketer. It ain't gonna satisfy too many fans either(real ones that is). Hell 20/20 wouldn't satisfy most weekend players. As for ODI's the formulaic nature of them makes it hard to imagine them being the main course. There may be something wrong with Tests or rather pitches, but although the numbers are down in some countries, I bet the TV's and radios are on everywhere. Money is important,yes, but it is not the only thing in life.The unfolding nature of the plot of a Test match makes it irresistable as a good novel, and even the now vilified Ahmedabad Test was only a draw for certain in the last 2 sessions. In any case I would take a punt on India being involved in more draws in the last 20 years than most other sides. Time not to throw in the towel over Tests I believe, as they will probably outlast 20/20 by a long way; time merely to consider how to make more amusing pitches.

  • POSTED BY lucyferr on | November 20, 2009, 21:47 GMT

    "Chappell believes the situation is so severe that there could come a time when only four or five nations play Test cricket, with the weaker countries focusing purely on 20- and 50-over games."

    Hellooooo... why is this a problem? That sounds like the Promised Land to me. Can we hurry up and get there, please?

  • POSTED BY universe on | November 20, 2009, 18:21 GMT

    No, it's not T20 cricket that will kill test cricket but the likes of pitches in India and Pakistan will. The bowlers just go with the motion, runs are piled and you know it will end in dull draw even before the start of 5th day. You can't disagree cricket is boring then. The fun is when the bowlers are asking questions, batsmen's temperament is tested. Test cricket should be played on green, bouncy, turning, I mean bowling pitches. Result should be there.

  • POSTED BY vik56in on | November 20, 2009, 17:28 GMT

    In reality it is BCCI's record breaking television deals that is killing Test cricket.They have signed televison deals which pay them for the number of days of cricket played.So BCCI wants cricket to be played for the whole 5 days.Anything less than 5 days will dent their earnings.Hence the idea behind DEAD PITCHES and 7 centuries and a dull draw behind the latest Indo-Sri Lanka Test match.Hats of to Australia ,South Africa and Sri Lanka which still see a duty towards Test cricket and realize that it still is the foundation of cricket.

  • POSTED BY vik56in on | November 20, 2009, 16:29 GMT

    It is heartening to know that another cricketing great has realized the immediate danger to Test cricket.After Indias Gundappa Viswanath,Greg has aired his fears too.Cricket's heart India has seen a dangerous decline in its Test schedule having played only 4 Tests this calendar year.This is the result of corporates being given a free run.Media cos like cricinfo too has a duty towards preserving Test cricket by regularly highlighting pitfalls of modernisation of the game.Making day night Test matches and allowing children free acess to the grounds are some good options to preserving Test cricket

  • POSTED BY Quazar on | November 20, 2009, 12:23 GMT

    As @Hassan pointed out, if Test Cricket could survive when only 2 nations played (and that too when they went on for 6-7 days), then surely the future of Test cricket isn't as bleak as some English and Aussie commentators describe. Being Indian, I can tell you that though ground attendance at Tests is poor, millions of people watch on TV...and even keep checking the score (on Cricinfo) from work. I think the 2 most vulnerable regions are the WI and NZ...but even there I would bet that if their authorities properly utilize the cash flows thrown up by T20 and ODIs, they can very much keep First Class and Test Cricket in decent shape.

  • POSTED BY thounder on | November 20, 2009, 10:19 GMT

    there is nothing can save cricket accept pick some boring stuff out of it ..when they talk that test cricket is the game of temprament .what kind of temprament is this .subcontinet pitches are good for temprament .what the jolk .made top green pitches for test .where bowler also can prove some thing .and batsman can say proudly i made a century .you can see the score of last ind vs srilanka .answer is all over it .put some new rules . like every team have to400 runs in one day of test match ..if some team cant to do this givethe teme some minus points.at the end if match is draw ..give the plus point team win

  • POSTED BY tfjones1978 on | November 20, 2009, 7:07 GMT

    I think Day-Night cricket could be good for the sport. However in addition to a multi-tier structure, I think test cricket needs to be session by session instead of innings by innings. Thus as now each team gets two 10 wicket innings, but each team gets time batting and bowling each day (team with the least runs in game bats next session). Make a day 25,25,20,20 overs (instead of three 30's) where each session the other team continues batting from where they left off, with first 50 overs prior to 6pm and last 40 overs after 6pm (eg: 2pm-9:30pm). This would have the following advantages: (1) Each team gets even go at wicket each day. (2) One-sided matches end quicker (eg: A 180 & 120, B 3/301 compared to A 180, B 5/450 stumps Day 2). (3) Closer matches easier to see (eg: A 4/270, B 5/303 compared to A 450, B 1/100 at stumps Day 2). (4) Less player injuries (each team field 1/2 day & bat 1/2 day). (5) Day&Night balls can be used (6) Toss doesnt win match (like 5th test Aust vs Eng 2009).

  • POSTED BY Peligrosisimo3 on | November 20, 2009, 6:54 GMT

    When you have a test match like the one occuring in India right now(India vs. Sri lanka) it's easy to see how the interest in test cricket can diminish. I mean what's the point of all these massive scores?I personally think that the first innings should be limited to 100 overs. Whats the point of scoring 7 hundred and change runs. Ridiculous! If the pitch is flat then score you runs in these 100 overs and get a lead.I would bet my house, two cars and swimming pool that this match would end in a draw. If we want to break world records then we should do it in the second innings winning matches.

  • POSTED BY tfjones1978 on | November 20, 2009, 6:36 GMT

    I think that ICC should create a multi-tier competition that wraps all 3 forms of the game into it. Each tier could have 6 teams every 2 years. Each series should be home & away (5 series with 4-6 tests per series). Competition points for top 2 tiers should be 60% tests, 30% ODI and 10% T20I regardless of number of matches played per series (with more points for ODI & T20I in lower tiers). I believe this would: * Improve image & following of cricket in all 3 forms. * Provide many sudden death series, as each match affects position & position means something. 1v2 final, 5v8 playoff, 6 demoted, 7 promoted, 11v13 playoff, 12 demoted, 13 promoted, etc. * Give upcoming teams matches against better skill (like current Ireland) and give struggling teams easier matches (like WI, NZ, Bang & WI). * Promote & Demote teams based on performance and not politically based decisions.

  • POSTED BY ramkip on | November 20, 2009, 6:01 GMT

    There are two options. One option is to ensure that Test cricket survives but only a few nations play it as it requires a lot of skills. Here as Greg mentioned lower ranked teams and more importantly countries like Irelad, Canada, Dutch etc will never be interested in playing test cricket and the GROWTH OF CRICKET STOPS. Instead encourage T20 (not ODIs) and more and more nations will embrace cricket. Who cares for a game played for more than 8 hours or days? If people talk about skills that are exhibited in Test cricket are good, then the skills shown in T20 are even better and plays more level playing field for more countries to embrace cricket. For more than 100 years, we have only 8-10 countries playing Test cricket. Change to T20, we will have more than 30 countries playing cricket.

  • POSTED BY cricket_just on | November 20, 2009, 4:34 GMT

    Does it really matter if the sub-continent and a few others don't play Test Cricket. I would suggest that it is irrelevant. Those who wish to play the REAL game will, and thoase of us who enjoy the challenges and exitement of Test Cricket will continue to watch. Yes, I agree that the game needs to change, especially the ability to play at night, but do you have one ball or two balls; one for day, and one for night, if so is there not an inbuilt unfairness anyway as any ball will behave differently due to the different climatic conditions between night and day. Lastly let the sloggers carry on, they will never make good test cricketers, and they are only in it for the money, but there again that is only synonimous with most of the younger generation in any walk of life these days. A pity, we may have to endure a Cricket Crisis instead of a Financial one, and I know the one I will back

  • POSTED BY NBRADEE on | November 20, 2009, 1:44 GMT

    So, perhaps the Windies captain was more shrewd than rude in his comments about Test cricket. Everything in life comes under evolutionary forces in time, and Test cricket is no different. Many of today's young people in the Caribbean have grown up knowing a strife-ridden team beset with horrible results, so there's every bet that encouraging persons to play the game in this part of the world will be based on money issues. Which young man/woman wants to play anywhere in the world in front of empty stadia for six hours a day for x dollars, related to y stress induced from exposure, long bowling spells, etc. when they can earn x + y dollars for 1.5hrs work and y - n stress, ensuring that they can play the game till 40+ as MLB players do, making gazillions of dollars??? How many sponsors will rush to be part of an unconfirmed tv audience for games which have no definitive result, whole days lost to rain and empty stadia and games missing marquee players (outside of Aus, Ind, Eng & SA)???

  • POSTED BY Browndog1968 on | November 20, 2009, 1:42 GMT

    I don't know what the issue is. I believe there are already too many test playing nations. Let's reduce it to 5 nations, being Aust, Eng, Sth Afr, NZ & West Indies and finally get away from the corruption and manipulation of cricket by the sub continent power brokers. Let them have their 'Mickey Mouse' formats and leave the real game to those who truly appreciate fine art over a quick buck.

  • POSTED BY rohanbala on | November 20, 2009, 1:18 GMT

    Mr Greg Chappell is right... ICC should seriously consider implementing changes in the playing time (day/night) in order to bring in more crowds or perhaps restrict the first innings to 125 overs per side and the balance over to the second innings (weather permitting).

  • POSTED BY wix99 on | November 20, 2009, 0:24 GMT

    I think Test cricket could be improved by breaking it up into two divisions. One of the problem is contests between the top and bottom nations are two one-sided and meaningless. The top five nations should regularly play each other in division one with a championship table. Similarly all other cricketing nations -- this could include the likes of Holland and Kenya -- could play in division two. Every few years the top team in division two could play the bottom team in division one to challenge for a place in division one.

  • POSTED BY Hassan.Farooqi on | November 19, 2009, 23:42 GMT

    I totally disagree with Greg. There were times when only England and Australia played test cricket. In worst case, these two countries would continue to play test cricket, although I think India, Sri Lanka and Newzealand would also continue to play test cricket.

    I suggest test cricket be expanded to 6 days. With no chances of a draw, no team will play for a draw!!!

    The only format of cricket in danger is ODI. It does not make sense anymore. It does not have the tradition of test cricket, nor does it have the time-affordability of T20. I think Australia would be the only country left that advocate ODI.

  • POSTED BY GDFactor on | November 19, 2009, 21:13 GMT

    Everyone raises good points here. My thoughts are that the issue with most test matches I see are the pitches a) Pitches too easy for batting. What's wrong with a par score of approx 350 for the first innings - this can be achieved in approximately a days play. Averages of 45+ would mean something. b) Pitches without character, formerly in Australia different conditions in Syd,Mel, Bris, Perth, Adelaide, now too similar. Otherwise: Too many meaningless matches that are not competitive. To use an example of teams touring Australia in summer, the itinerary should look something like: 1. 2 first class warm ups (Aus always win at the gabba cause visitors are not prepared) 2. 3 tests (5 tests when playing a top 5 nation) 3. 3 T20-s 4. 5 ODI's

    And a second team doing the same if 3 tests, or if 5 tests then add another T20 and 5 match ODI series only ( no tests) Easily adapted to other nations.

  • POSTED BY aramdharry on | November 19, 2009, 20:05 GMT

    First of all, if you want Test Cricket to be more viable, keep the interest of the public, and strengthen itself, then you have to make the game equally more competitive and balanced. You need to give the bowlers more of an added benefit, firstly we need faster pitches, these pitches today are so batsmen friendly, they make the game look like a walk in the park, and give the batsmen a lot more confidence and advantage. Let the Pitches have some sense of striking and instilling fear in the Batsmen. Telling them that if you want to stay in this game, you have to be able to prove yourself, demonstrate your skills and technique.

    Secondly, these games must produce much more results, whether it be win or loose, and whether they last the full five or finish in three days. Again bring back faster and more fearful pitches.

  • POSTED BY jkhokhar on | November 19, 2009, 19:04 GMT

    Interest in test cricket may be revived by implementing regulations forcing less batsman dominated test cricket. ICC may standardize rules to create fast (Glued) pitches, may design kind of a system where runs are calculated as a sum of runs scored per ball to encourage fast runs making. ICC may bring forward regulations, resulting in match decisions rather than captains opting for a draw, for example, the current test being played between India /Sri Lank can be interesting if India declares in their 2nd innings offering Sri Lankans a target of 200 odd runs to chase from last 30 overs .... if i know this situation happens tomorrow, I would watch this game.

    J. Khokhar

  • POSTED BY Balldinho on | November 19, 2009, 18:35 GMT

    I've always said I don't know how cricket can count itself as an International sport when they only allow 10-11 nations to play each other constantly. It gets repetitive and boring. 20/20 and 50 Overs is allowing us to see new Players, new teams/countries which creates an air of excitement because its something WE the fans haven't seen before. And its true Test games are always empty in the Stands, the recent Aus/India series had packed stadiums for each game. Even going back to the England vs West Indie ODI series, those games were sold out and had a LIVELY carribean atmosphere (That you simply don't see at Test matches anymore). I honestly think the administrative powers have only themselves to blame if Test dies, trying to keep it between the original 10 for so long, and not having a Championship for Test teams to aim for, i suggest MASSIVE change if they want fans to acknowledge the format again!

  • POSTED BY TwitterJitter on | November 19, 2009, 16:31 GMT

    I agree with Chappell's assessment that test cricket is on the wane in many countries. It might survive in a few countries. In other places, I see 50-over game replacing tests. It has already to some extent in India. India will more and more play only 50 overs and may be 5 tests in a year. I see this happening in the subcontinent though there won't be official declaration that test cricket is dead. It might survive in England and Australia. In SA, it will wane slowly but it might not extinguish as soon as it will happen in subcontinent. I see 15 years from now only England and Australia playing test cricket among themselves and a host of nations playing 50 overs as a substitute for tests. People here accuse someone or other for it but wake up and smell the coffee. Even if you like test cricket, it is not hard to recognize that increasingly consumers and advertisers are moving away from it. Cricket will lose a few fans and add a few more. Natural/ Forced Evolution!

  • POSTED BY TwitterJitter on | November 19, 2009, 16:20 GMT

    Subra is absolutely right. Produce more pitches like Ahmedabad and the popularity of test cricket will soon reach below 1%. I watched with interest for the first two days and then when I realized that there is no life in this pitch, I stopped following. It was so bad that Indians were bowling negative line to contain SL from scoring. Have more pitches like this and we wonder why India never produces genunine pace bowlers! No one wants to break their back bowling fast in domestic games on these pitches. Naturally they will take to batting. It might not be a bad idea if India stops hosting test matches altogether than hosting matches on these absolutely dead pitches. There should some contest between bat and ball. This pitch has no turn, no pace, nada.. The only bowler who could generate something out of this is Welegedara and hats off to him! Dhoni was bowling part timers because he did not want to kill the backs of his pace bowlers on this wicket.

  • POSTED BY Lennon_Marx on | November 19, 2009, 15:22 GMT

    All the more reason to open the floodgates to allow more test playing nations. Think here especially of Ireland and Holland. Yes the Indian subcontinent (and potentially New Zealand and West Indies) may eventually tire so much of test matches that they basically refuse to play them, but in Ireland and the Dutch you have a population that will be able to to take advantage of storylines from visiting test teams (imagine an Irish-English/Australian/South African test series or the The Dutch play South Africa) and let's be honest even the idea of the visiting teams taking their nation seriously will do the world of good for both. Also maybe encouraging career domestic players from the big 4 (and maybe Pakistan) to move to weaker nations in sort of a professional guest a la some of the club leagues in England and Australia to give weaker teams one or two semi-world class players, especially in the transition phase between associate and test nation to ease the jump to the big time.

  • POSTED BY Subra on | November 19, 2009, 13:14 GMT

    And produce a few more pitches like Ahmedabad and we can start working on the tombstone! Boards that produce such placid pitches ought to be fined heavily - but is the ICC capable of taking on the almighty $BCCI?

  • POSTED BY brlara on | November 19, 2009, 13:05 GMT

    It is indeed true that test cricket will become a history certainly after 40 or 50 years. I would certainly believe that ICC can earn a hell amount of money through 20 20 and 50 overs game where they spend a portion of profit in promoting Test cricket without expecting profit out of it. All the cricket lovers who enjoys Test cricket are under a big confusion that whether to enjoy the T20 fantasy or to worry about the detriment in the game the T20 is going to cause in future. Nice article,

  • POSTED BY bd_zindabad on | November 19, 2009, 10:59 GMT

    Getting sick of his test cricket rants. would appreciate it if he is only seen and not heard.

  • POSTED BY del_ on | November 19, 2009, 10:12 GMT

    This should not be new news to the ICC. I have held the same fears for the ultimate form of the game for a long time. T20 should be limited to domestic competitions as a way to raise money for the domestic cricket - that way India can continue their horrendous butchering of the game in the IPL like they want and the fabric of the game will not be torn apart by an already overbooked schedule and ridiculous bi-annual T20 World Cup. I mean, who the hell do the ICC think they are kidding holding it every two years? Not even the ultimate in the FIFA World Cup or the Olympics are that presumptuous. It is a blantantly obvious money-grab, devalues T20 and the rest of cricket by association.

  • POSTED BY quietcordial on | November 19, 2009, 9:22 GMT

    Test Cricket is what every child in Australia grows up hoping to play. It was refreshing to hear David Warner interviewed on Sydney radio recently stating his desire to break into the NSW 1st Class side as his aim is to play Test Cricket. T20 cricket has a lot to offer and is a fine way to showcase the talents and skills of the world's best players. However, Test Cricket must always be at the top of the ICC agenda as it is the ultimate in physical and mental toughness. What other sport offers the ebbs and flows of high quality Test cricket.

  • POSTED BY Sudzz on | November 19, 2009, 9:07 GMT

    With due respects, Ashes are not that iconic as its made out to be. This time around as well the contest was between two very mediocre sides and one of them won. That it became interesting is just a by-product.

    That being said, I agree with the sentiment that Test Cricket is indeed under threat and that there is not much of a chance that the viability of test cricket will improve anytime soon. If anything like GC says there is a very real chance that countries will abandon test cricket for T20 and an occasional ODI game.

    The issue clearly is that the ICC has no marketing plan around any of its assets, if you contrast that to say the FIFA they market all of their events separately and therefore they find takers for all events including beach soccer, under 21 etc etc and the audiences are different for each variant.

    The ICC has to wake up and smell the coffee rather than spending inordinate amounts of time trying to help the IPL add more money to its coffers....

  • POSTED BY atuljain1969 on | November 19, 2009, 9:00 GMT

    Mr. Chapell should not fear for death of Test cricket, it was due since long, as this kind of sport is never played over 5 days at any level of cricket , from school to college to domestic championship. So no cause for worry. No other sport is being differently at top level and at school level, be it Basketball, soccer, volleyball, tennis, table tennis, badminton,swimming,golf !, hockey,atheletics you name any sport apart from test cricket no where is any distinction. So this result is only natural. May we still find it hard to come over colonial past. We still want to be nostalgic when there are no takers.

  • POSTED BY paramthegreat on | November 19, 2009, 8:38 GMT

    that prediction remains to be seen . For me , T20 will grow, even though about 30% of the people find it meaningless, its fun in todays hectic life . Would we rather watch a Test Match over 5 days or watch 3 hrs of stuff and get it over with? However, IMO, test cricket is really the best test of a player.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY paramthegreat on | November 19, 2009, 8:38 GMT

    that prediction remains to be seen . For me , T20 will grow, even though about 30% of the people find it meaningless, its fun in todays hectic life . Would we rather watch a Test Match over 5 days or watch 3 hrs of stuff and get it over with? However, IMO, test cricket is really the best test of a player.

  • POSTED BY atuljain1969 on | November 19, 2009, 9:00 GMT

    Mr. Chapell should not fear for death of Test cricket, it was due since long, as this kind of sport is never played over 5 days at any level of cricket , from school to college to domestic championship. So no cause for worry. No other sport is being differently at top level and at school level, be it Basketball, soccer, volleyball, tennis, table tennis, badminton,swimming,golf !, hockey,atheletics you name any sport apart from test cricket no where is any distinction. So this result is only natural. May we still find it hard to come over colonial past. We still want to be nostalgic when there are no takers.

  • POSTED BY Sudzz on | November 19, 2009, 9:07 GMT

    With due respects, Ashes are not that iconic as its made out to be. This time around as well the contest was between two very mediocre sides and one of them won. That it became interesting is just a by-product.

    That being said, I agree with the sentiment that Test Cricket is indeed under threat and that there is not much of a chance that the viability of test cricket will improve anytime soon. If anything like GC says there is a very real chance that countries will abandon test cricket for T20 and an occasional ODI game.

    The issue clearly is that the ICC has no marketing plan around any of its assets, if you contrast that to say the FIFA they market all of their events separately and therefore they find takers for all events including beach soccer, under 21 etc etc and the audiences are different for each variant.

    The ICC has to wake up and smell the coffee rather than spending inordinate amounts of time trying to help the IPL add more money to its coffers....

  • POSTED BY quietcordial on | November 19, 2009, 9:22 GMT

    Test Cricket is what every child in Australia grows up hoping to play. It was refreshing to hear David Warner interviewed on Sydney radio recently stating his desire to break into the NSW 1st Class side as his aim is to play Test Cricket. T20 cricket has a lot to offer and is a fine way to showcase the talents and skills of the world's best players. However, Test Cricket must always be at the top of the ICC agenda as it is the ultimate in physical and mental toughness. What other sport offers the ebbs and flows of high quality Test cricket.

  • POSTED BY del_ on | November 19, 2009, 10:12 GMT

    This should not be new news to the ICC. I have held the same fears for the ultimate form of the game for a long time. T20 should be limited to domestic competitions as a way to raise money for the domestic cricket - that way India can continue their horrendous butchering of the game in the IPL like they want and the fabric of the game will not be torn apart by an already overbooked schedule and ridiculous bi-annual T20 World Cup. I mean, who the hell do the ICC think they are kidding holding it every two years? Not even the ultimate in the FIFA World Cup or the Olympics are that presumptuous. It is a blantantly obvious money-grab, devalues T20 and the rest of cricket by association.

  • POSTED BY bd_zindabad on | November 19, 2009, 10:59 GMT

    Getting sick of his test cricket rants. would appreciate it if he is only seen and not heard.

  • POSTED BY brlara on | November 19, 2009, 13:05 GMT

    It is indeed true that test cricket will become a history certainly after 40 or 50 years. I would certainly believe that ICC can earn a hell amount of money through 20 20 and 50 overs game where they spend a portion of profit in promoting Test cricket without expecting profit out of it. All the cricket lovers who enjoys Test cricket are under a big confusion that whether to enjoy the T20 fantasy or to worry about the detriment in the game the T20 is going to cause in future. Nice article,

  • POSTED BY Subra on | November 19, 2009, 13:14 GMT

    And produce a few more pitches like Ahmedabad and we can start working on the tombstone! Boards that produce such placid pitches ought to be fined heavily - but is the ICC capable of taking on the almighty $BCCI?

  • POSTED BY Lennon_Marx on | November 19, 2009, 15:22 GMT

    All the more reason to open the floodgates to allow more test playing nations. Think here especially of Ireland and Holland. Yes the Indian subcontinent (and potentially New Zealand and West Indies) may eventually tire so much of test matches that they basically refuse to play them, but in Ireland and the Dutch you have a population that will be able to to take advantage of storylines from visiting test teams (imagine an Irish-English/Australian/South African test series or the The Dutch play South Africa) and let's be honest even the idea of the visiting teams taking their nation seriously will do the world of good for both. Also maybe encouraging career domestic players from the big 4 (and maybe Pakistan) to move to weaker nations in sort of a professional guest a la some of the club leagues in England and Australia to give weaker teams one or two semi-world class players, especially in the transition phase between associate and test nation to ease the jump to the big time.

  • POSTED BY TwitterJitter on | November 19, 2009, 16:20 GMT

    Subra is absolutely right. Produce more pitches like Ahmedabad and the popularity of test cricket will soon reach below 1%. I watched with interest for the first two days and then when I realized that there is no life in this pitch, I stopped following. It was so bad that Indians were bowling negative line to contain SL from scoring. Have more pitches like this and we wonder why India never produces genunine pace bowlers! No one wants to break their back bowling fast in domestic games on these pitches. Naturally they will take to batting. It might not be a bad idea if India stops hosting test matches altogether than hosting matches on these absolutely dead pitches. There should some contest between bat and ball. This pitch has no turn, no pace, nada.. The only bowler who could generate something out of this is Welegedara and hats off to him! Dhoni was bowling part timers because he did not want to kill the backs of his pace bowlers on this wicket.