Decade Review 2009

Where is the game headed?

Twenty20 can save or destroy cricket. India, the financial backbone, must lead the rest into the decade with responsibility and vision

Harsha Bhogle

Comments: 23 | Text size: A | A
Fans watch the game on the television in a street corner, Kolkata, April 19, 2007
In India, the demands of advertisers have been put ahead of the needs of the viewers © AFP
Related Links
Teams: India

Another year slips by, this time accompanied by a decade; another reference point gets created. For that is all that a date in a dynamic world really is; just a little dhaba, a little coffee shop on the way for us to rest and reflect in. It is not a natural inflection point, for change does not wait for a date in a calendar. But reflect we must and ponder over what lies ahead because these are tumultuous times. The last two years have challenged existing thought like few other years in the game's history have. They set the agenda for the year, the decade, ahead.

There are many questions we seek answers to, but inevitably every question is but an offshoot of one: What format will dominate? And inevitably, therefore, how will the carrier of the format, the medium, react? Twenty-overs cricket, and our acceptance or rejection of it, will shape the decade ahead. Like nuclear power, it can either save our world or destroy it, change it forever. And like nuclear power, it needs to be harnessed for the development of the game.

Already 20-over cricket is emerging as the saviour of the game. In India, the money it is bringing in is leading to better stadiums. In course of time it should lead to better spectator amenities. It is taking the game into the smaller towns and empowering young players hungry for opportunity. Never before have as many people been able to make a living playing cricket. Soon Australia and South Africa too will start to benefit as revenues from the Champions League allow them to develop cricket better and compete with other sports. In the next 10 years, as leagues evolve around the world, this model could get replicated everywhere; maybe not on the scale that India's population has allowed for, but it will allow more players to enter the system and give them a standard of living that might otherwise have been denied to them. They may not earn millions but they will do better than they might if there had been no customer-friendly cricket league.

But 20-over cricket cannot be allowed to become the monster that devours everything else. It must tingle the senses, and that can only come with occasional denial. It must, like the seductress, present itself occasionally but not surrender, and that is why I believe this decade will lead to the creation of windows for Test-match cricket. I am not very sure if a Test-championship model will eventually be sustainable, since inevitably commerce will demand that the best play against the best often. A one-sided Twenty20 game gets over in three hours, but a one-sided Test match can be difficult to market. And so I foresee fewer countries playing Test cricket, but in doing so, actually making the format stronger. It could well lead to the sustenance of a format that is so dear to all of us.

There is a fear that the decade ahead could lead to the rise of the freelance cricketer. Currently, in spite of what cricketers in Australia say, that fear seems unfounded. Only two are treading that path at the moment, and to be honest, neither Andrew Flintoff or Andrew Symonds had an option. The ultimate glory, of playing for the country, will not lose its lustre and only those that are denied that honour will turn freelance. To that extent, national teams will not lose key players. The could-have-beens or those slightly past it will turn freelance but I do not see thoroughbreds going that way in the prime of their career.

What it could lead to, though, is a bit of confusion over team-mates and rivals, especially if you play for your franchise teams more often than you play for the national side. In the eyes of a fan, is Didier Drogba more Frank Lampard's team-mate than Wayne Rooney is?

Twenty-over cricket cannot be allowed to become the monster that devours everything else. It must tingle the senses and that can only come with occasional denial

The second half of the decade gone by showed India using its economic might to have things its own way. Going ahead, this translates into opportunity but also into responsibility. India has to evolve from being the money leader to becoming the thought and performance leader, and play a more mature role as a custodian of the game. It is a serious challenge, as state associations are increasingly run by people who have neither respect for nor interest in the game. They are drawn by attention and power and therefore must leave the crucial aspects of the game to followers, not all of whom will keep cricket uppermost. Who looks after pitches, for example? Who cares about the dwindling stocks of spinners? At the centre, the BCCI is actually enjoying some of its better years, but it needs to worry about the satellite bodies, and that will be Indian cricket's greatest challenge in the years ahead.

As the decade ended, the carrier of the game, its financial backbone, appeared in urgent need of a debate. India's power comes from the money television brings in, but networks are increasingly stretched by the amount they have to pay for rights. Inevitably, then, they must bow to commercial demands, and that means advertisers must get their due. But it also means that the game is sighted increasingly rarely. Viewers must now fight their way through swarms of advertisements to watch the game they so love, and as someone who broadcasts on the game for a living, I know Indian viewers often miss out on some of the nicest moments. And so we need to achieve this equilibrium between the stakeholders: the networks, which have improved the quality of coverage greatly; the advertisers, who fund everybody; and the viewer, who must see more cricket. The search for this equilibrium could well define where cricket goes in the next 10 years.

Television is also funding the increasing role of technology in the game and that is a tenuous relationship. Clearly technology is becoming better, but it is far from becoming foolproof, and the use of Hawk-Eye to adjudicate lbws is dangerous. In the next year we will all have an idea of what the players think but also what the umpires think. I suspect, though, that we cannot go too much further with what we have at the moment. There are still unresolved issues with technology and with those who control it, and I won't be surprised if there is a move towards giving the umpires a little more power and only using technology in the most obvious instances.

What I look forward to the most, though, is to see the game grow. Towards the end of the decade, cricketers from Afghanistan showed what sport can achieve in areas of conflict and resultant strife. There are many cricketers waiting to be discovered, many flowers being born to blush unseen. Cricket's real achievement in the decade ahead will be to reach out to those and offer them a ray of hope and a game of cricket.

Harsha Bhogle is a commentator, television presenter and writer


Comments: 23 
Posted by Lukesh on (January 2, 2010, 20:44 GMT)

A beautiful article by Harsha Bogle. "Twenty-over cricket cannot be allowed to become the monster that devours everything else. It must tingle the senses and that can only come with occasional denial, I agree with you 100% in this matter in that one of the things that makes T20's exciting is that conventional cricket is not a game with cheerleaders or fireworks blasting everytime the batsman hits a six, so when a T20 is played the fans are always ready to line up to watch it.

Posted by Madhusudhan on (January 2, 2010, 16:15 GMT)

This Team India and BCCI is completely focussed on IPL. Team India lack skill, inspiration, motivation and fitness to play Test Cricket. These curators, coaches and BCCI officials are working for IPL growth rather than Cricket growth. Until IPL is thrashed Team India is not going to perform well in other tournaments. IPL is completely meaningless and obsolete Tournament. Test, ODI & T20 Cricket is great to watch between Countries unlike IPL which is between mixture teams. Test Cricket is ultimate to watch on sportive pitches. But IPL is making these pitches Lifeless.

Posted by jamshed on (January 2, 2010, 12:22 GMT)

Responsibility,vision and the BCCI ? I'm afraid, Harsha,the BCCI has more profitable things to worry about.

Posted by D on (January 2, 2010, 9:39 GMT)

If BCCI has its say in World cricket the way it is today, I guess India will be playing only T20 cricket and meaningless ODI's on dead sorry!! good batting wickets. Skill anyway goes for a toss in T20 a good T20 cricketer wont even make a test 50 in Australia or South Africa or England unless he is a proven test cricketer, on our wickets of course even a tailender can make a double hundred so we leave that out. Its a 3 hr excitement which no one remembers after a day. But if thats what BCCI wants, thats what will happen, we will continue to watch ugly graphics and noisy ads to such an extent that the actual time that one sees a clean screen on TV for cricket is less than the ad time this is apart from the cacophony at the grounds in the spectator unfriendly stadiums in boiling heat.Anyways for true cricket lovers we can watch test cricket being played outside the subcontinent and that is the future I guess so and sadly it seems true!! Its cricket pre 1932!!

Posted by Stiaan on (January 2, 2010, 8:51 GMT)

Lately cricket has become more about the spectators and the money than anything else. We want to play test cricket at night now so that more people can come and watch. Where we used to play 5 test matches in a series we now only play 4 but with 2 T-Twentys. Isn't it about the competitiveness of the game? There will never be one dominating side in this format. It's either your day or it's not. I for one have never seen one team consistently performing in T20. T20-cricket is mainly supported by the people looking for a good night. T20 is dull and repetitive cricket. But it definitely has it's impact on the game. Just listen to the commentators in the test series between SA and England. SA are going at 2.9 an over and Kepler Wessels starts moaning that it's too slow.

Posted by Ravish on (January 2, 2010, 5:38 GMT)

Harsha, I disagree with you. India should just play IPL for 8 months in a year and forget about international games. Just play 8 weeks of T20, 8 weeks of 40 over format, and 16 weeks of test cricket all in franchise format. Just let the franchises own players for the whole 8 month season with championships in all 3 formats. Franchises can sign experts for each format and in many cases they can be used across formats. Players get paid their market value depending on how valuable they are and how many formats they can play. Test cricket experts can choose that format. It provides good livelihood playing cricket for far more domestic players in India than what current international format can ever hope to provide. It also can make sure that all formats can survive in harmony.

Posted by Paul on (January 2, 2010, 2:24 GMT)

Harsha, your fifth paragraph claims that the fear of freelance T20 specialists seems unfounded. I hope you're right, but I'd feel a little more convinced if you'd included at least one fact in support of this conclusion. I think the only reason we're not seeing more of them is that the Global Financial Crisis curtailed the growth of large-scale T20 cricket. But for the GFC and the 2009 Indian seurity problems, IPL 2 would have be bigger than IPL 1 and there'd be no stopping it.

Posted by Sidhanta on (January 1, 2010, 23:29 GMT)

The path has been laid in this article. ICC will do no harm if they read this Harsha classic.

Posted by Shafat on (January 1, 2010, 22:36 GMT)

Now that there is twenty20 being played by sides studded with stars in the IPL, can we ask for the same sides playing one-day and first-class cricket? That would put Tendulkar-Jayasuriya-Pollock against Ganguly-Ponting-McCullum in formats where skill, endurance and experience will affect the results, built up over long periods with thrillingly laborious vicissitudes as in recent competitive Test matches.

Posted by B on (January 1, 2010, 21:10 GMT)

T20 is a fad much like alternate post-season gimmicks in various sports in the US. Its main performers are otherwise non-starters in other versions of cricket - technique takes a back-seat. Further,to cater to Indian spectator needs, wickets are tailor-made for batsmen and boundary-hitting at the expense of quality bowling. Combine this with the voracious appetitie of the Indian public for cricket at the expense of other sports, and a general lack of alternate entertainment. All this leads to the sad spectacle of T20 accentuated by abysmal leadership in Modi and co. that is leading to quick destruction of cricket. Youngsters of today may prefer the hip-gyrating dances of Helen, Silk Smitha and others over the traditional arts such as Bharatanatyam, Odissi and Kathak, and only irresponsible leadership and unbridled greed such as that exhibited by Pawar and Modi will cater to the former and kill the latter. Indians should gain self-respect and stop pandering to this form of cricket

Posted by shimoga on (January 1, 2010, 19:40 GMT)

T20 game is the "gulli-danda" of cricket. I hope BCCI will comes its senses and cut down the IPL games to half it's length. It is too long and too boring. It is destroying cricket. As I have said before, each major ICC cricketing nation should play three tests, three 50 over ODI and one T-20. This will cover about a month or slightly more of travel for the visiting team. Givem a month's break to spend time with their families and then have another series. THis way more matches can be played with different nations. BCCI should market the games to both Dish and DirectTV so that cricket lovers all over thw world can watch all the games.

Posted by Rajaram on (January 1, 2010, 19:04 GMT)

Read Harsha Bhogle's article carefully - utterly two-faced - On the one hand he says,"I believe this decade will lead to the creation of WINDOWS FOR TEST CRICKET",and in the same breath, says,"It could well lead to the sustenance of a format (Test Cricket) that is SO DEAR TO US". From creating windows for Twenty20 cricket,he advocates windows for Test cricket!!?? Oh,I forgot,Harsha Bhogle is smacking his lips from the additional moolah he will make from commentating on more Twenty20 games - wonder who selected him to do commentary - he has never played or coached international cricket, and his commentary is so lousy, it shows how shallow his knowledge of cricket is!

Posted by abe on (January 1, 2010, 18:54 GMT)

India will not dominate cricket in the next decade. Apart from winning one World Cup in 1983 and one Twenty20 by the skin of their teeth, what else has India achieved? Despite the millions pouring into Indian Cricket they remain a home-winning country. They will destroy their talent by focussing on Twenty20. This is baseball...not cricket...Modi...lay off before you destroy this great game.

Posted by Omar on (January 1, 2010, 16:32 GMT)

Great article. So here's my theory: 1. "For anything to survive over time, a need for it must exist." 2. So how do we establish the need for 'test cricket' while we stare into a future of T20 'devouring everything'? 3. Ans: We need to increase the importance of the results from test cricket (but we have to believe it is the wall that stands between cricket and it's spiraling evolution to a state not too dissimilar from baseball (uggh! disgusting thought)). 4. Ques: How do we create an artificial need? 5. Link the success of test cricket to success in T20 and ODIs. 6. One idea: Use the existing system of Test nations (i.e. exclusive club). Establish a minimum test playing requirement for each country. Have only 7 test playing nations, the top 7 based on results, the boards and players of which get special deals from ICC, special cuts from revenue generated from T20, ODIs and players get automatic invitations to special ICC tourneys. I have more ideas but I'm only allowed 1000 char.

Posted by Mina on (January 1, 2010, 13:29 GMT)

Heading nowhere: I beg to differ that "20-over cricket is "emerging" as the saviour of the game". Stadia facilities in India remain appalling. The contempt with which the 'authorities' treat spectators, is there for all to see. The 'ordinary cricket follower' is not recognized by the 'Tzars of Cricket". The die-hard cricket watcher does not have a roof over his head The blazing Indian sun in league with the scorching display on the 20-20 fields. If Lalit Modi can organize tournaments out of thin air, and (like Hanuman) transport the game from one continent to another - single-handedly, and instantly; surely it is not too difficult for him to uproot the old - and 'turn things around' - immediately ( in terms of better amenities) - for the common cricket fan ?

To propel India into a 'Champion's League' in sports grounds? Must another decade 'emerge' - before the patient, accommodating Indian fan is acknowledged ?

"Only the best" will do. For the champion cricket fans.

Posted by Rajaram on (January 1, 2010, 12:58 GMT)

It is disgusting how ICC is mutely,impotently,watching IPL destroy Cricket. Mohammed Yousuf is the only one who has had the guts to say that Twenty20 will destroy Pakistan Cricket.He should know- he has played in all forms of the game.Australian cricketers do it differently- Mitchell Johnson, Michael Clarke,Ricky Ponting, simply don't play in the IPL.They put their Country first-Tests and ODIs.India has not learnt from the great batsman Sachin Tendulkar who has declined to play Twenty20. He is rightly fearful of his technique going to pieces in the Wham-Bam - only Sloggers allowed - Bowling Machines invited, not bowlers, game.Worse still is the temerity of BCCI and IPL to openly flout ICC rules regarding pitches,and insist on playing the IPL matches at the death trap- Ferozshah Kotla ground.The only way other Cricket Boards and FICA can teach a lesson to this mercenary,Lalit Mod,is is to tell cricketers that their medical treatment will be null and void if they play at the Kotla pitch

Posted by Ani on (January 1, 2010, 7:41 GMT)

An excellent analysis! I think its time to work out a "window" for Tests so that these matches can be held on a regular basis, between the best teams and players where all these matches will be meaningful. Talking about windows for IPL seems irrelevant - (a) they will go on regardless of a window or not - it is the Tests that need protection and (b) ultimately the IPL only needs about 40 intl stars - as there can be no more than 4 per team. Hence, a window for such tournaments is not sustainable for the 100 odd International stars. I would completely support a club-based approach, where the T20 approach should be extended to the "Test" format to spread the base. Simultaneously, it is extremely important to review how to make a Test more watchable through minor changes in the format. I feel Cricket can really grow in stature in the future but it is essential to oversee how Test matches can be part of that scheme.

Posted by rahul on (January 1, 2010, 7:26 GMT)

i would like to see fewer odis this decade.coz pitches around the world(except a few) have nothing for the bowlers .only the relative batting strengths of teams are tested.i sterngly feel test championship with a two tier system (with relegation) is the only way out .also the international venues with higher percentages of draws must be given lesser priorities.venues providing sportying wickets must be rewarded(not like the one in delhi) .

Posted by Ram on (January 1, 2010, 6:08 GMT)

Isn't Dhoni spot on? that we need to ensure a minimum of tests for every team? that is the only way we could do something about it. come to think of it.. if something had gone wrong and india not climbed to the top of test ratings after th SL series, would anyone have wanted those two extra tests vs SA?? Goes to show where 'ad-ministrator' interest really is..

Posted by Srin on (January 1, 2010, 5:11 GMT)

Important points all, but my views differ to some extent. "window for test cricket" - no, it should be the other way, test cricket should be primary - it is soul-sustenance for cricket, in my humble view. "... state associations run by people who have neither respect nor interest for the game" - disturbing, especially in light of the recent Delhi pitch fiasco. Cricket broadcast in India is horrendous, at least for me and I generally watch it with the volume muted and I don't have any hopes of it improving in the near future. It is a tragedy considering that the Indian team is playing so well now.

Posted by SAPAN on (January 1, 2010, 4:46 GMT)

nice one Harsha,i am totally agree to your thought for surviving test cricket.i think "less is more",if we emphasis on playing less cricket with tougher teams it will offer more quality.Teams like India,Aus,S.A should play more home test series so that the test cricket remains the pinnacle of cricket.But i also dis-agree to some are demanding of shortening the longer version but it will not make the longer version more result oriented because most of results come in last 4-5 sessions.I hope in a decade ahead India will dominate cricketing world more as a strong contender than as a sponsor of cricket.i think ICC should put a protocol on the players not to play for more than 2 league cricket teams. we will see more of players will follow the path led by flintoff and symo.ICC should spread the cricket all across the world.they just allow them to participate in world cup but after that no cricket is offered to them.for them it is like a leap year ,always play at the interval of 4 years.

Posted by Jogesh on (January 1, 2010, 4:34 GMT)

Its a tricky one which one is the best format, to strike a balance between all the three is the need of the hour.20-20 brings lots of innovation both in batting and bowling but we can not keep our eyes shut for pure cricketing skills that is harnessed in the longer version of game. So only 20-20 will be a overkill in and dour boring if batting circumstances becomes little bit tough.We can not favor one department of cricket (batting) and form all the rules of the game that put the other (bowling) in backfoot. Then it will rather a competition between one team's batter and other teams batter to reach a finishing line with both racing in same track in different time. As far as Money and BCCI is concerned we need to improve cricket infrastructure. Its the spectator who indirectly involved in the money making but governing body is least bother about this section of cricket. In India still the cricket viewing from the ground is far from enriching experience.Hope new year brings better ideas

Posted by Ravish on (January 1, 2010, 3:28 GMT)

Can we all take a deep breath and give a timeout for this topic for a couple of months? We have been hitting this same topic (T20 vs the rest) for the last 2 years ever since India won the T20 WC in 2007. In the process of worrying about the future, we have forgotten to cover the present day cricket and appreciate the present. Indian players each play about 14 T20 games per year max all in a span of 6 weeks and then it is done unless it is a WC year in which case add another few games in 2 or 3 weeks. That's it. A total of 6-8 weeks in a year. I am presuming the ratios are same or lower else where in the world. However, why are we covering and hitting the same topic 365 days-an-year as if the world is coming to an end? What about talking about cricket played during the rest of the year? They are quickly forgotten after the game and only revisited may be once at the end of the year. So my humble advice to everyone is take a deep breath and give it a break on T20 discussion.

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
Harsha BhogleClose
Harsha Bhogle Harsha Bhogle is one of the world's leading cricket commentators. Starting off as a chemical engineer and going on to work in advertising before moving into television, he is also a writer, quiz host, television presenter and talk-show host, and a corporate motivational speaker. He was voted Cricinfo readers' "favourite cricket commentator" in a poll in 2008, and one of his proudest possessions is a photograph of a group of spectators in Pakistan holding a banner that said "Harsha Bhogle Fan Club". He has commentated on nearly 100 Tests and more than 400 ODIs.
More in 00 -09
  • Ponting voted Player of the Decade
  • Australian captain beats Jacques Kallis to be voted cricketer of the 2000s
  • 'This one's extra satisfying' - Ponting
  • Cricinfo's Player of the Decade title is "a great honour and a great thrill" for Australia's captain
  • Laughing boy
  • Like Bradman before him, Ponting turned the opposition into ball-ferriers, delighting in his mastery all the while
  • Gilly and Baz go bonkers
  • Flintoff's Edgbaston magic, a Tendulkar gem, that 434 chase, and the IPL's fiery start feature in the second part of our performances of the decade
  • Ricky rampages, Shoaib sizzles
  • One of the greatest Tests of the decade, four World Cup performances, a seven-for, and a blazing double feature in the first part of our performances of the decade
Latest News Specials