Stepping back from the
malaise and inquests into English challenges against spin bowling or the form
of their middle-order during their 3-0 drubbing by Pakistan, the series has
highlighted worrying trends in worldwide Test cricket; namely the increasing
prevalence of erratic results, mismatches, batting collapses and the spectacle
ending prematurely.
It recalled South
Africa and Australia bowling each other out for 96 and 47 respectively on a
tranquil Cape Town pitch in November, Sri Lanka’s collapse at Cardiff, or
India’s whitewashes at the hands of England and Australia.
Since the First Test
of The Ashes in November 2011 there have been 51 Test matches played around the
world. 76% (39) have seen results, only 24% (12) drawn. This compares to an
all-time average of 65% versus 35%, a hefty difference and does not even
account for timeless Tests running until 1939. The 100 Tests prior (July
2008-November 2011) saw a ratio of 70-30.
While not advocating
drawn matches, more disturbing is the lack of Tests extending into a 5th day,
the hallmark of a mismatch or low-scoring affair. A full 51% of the last 51
Tests failed to enter the 5th day, 12% not even reaching the
conclusion of a 3rd day, with the worst offenders being
Australia, New Zealand and India.
Saeed Ajmal was chief tormentor of England batsmen in the UAE. Source: paddynapper
Perhaps most alarming
is the sheer amount of comprehensive defeats inflicted across the board. These
51 Tests saw 13 innings defeats and 10 more of between 8-10 wickets or by over
250 runs. Thus a full 45% of Test matches since November 2011 were
essentially non-contests. This is no time to blame the so-called ‘minnows’ of
Test cricket. Those predominantly on the receiving end were India, Australia
and Sri Lanka.
Is this the ‘Twenty20
Effect’ in action?
A number of exciting
recent Test matches (the India-West Indies tie or New Zealand defeating
Australia by 7 runs with no side scoring above 233) cannot disguise the fact
that Test cricket is being affected by techniques and temperaments increasingly
more suited to shorter formats.
Andrew Strauss aired
his “concerns about the state of test cricket” in October, declaring, "The
administrators are trying to recognise the primacy of test cricket, but there
is a real difference between saying it and making sure your actions follow it.”
The balance between
the three codes is currently out of kilter, as the diminution of England’s 2012
series with South Africa to three Tests demonstrates. The Test Championship was
jettisoned due to ICC Champions Trophy broadcast rights. As Twenty20
competitions take root, from the Big Bash to the IPL, the gradual yet
distinctive encroachment of shorter-form cricket is clearly influencing Test
batsmanship.
The Test calendar is being squeezed by Twenty20 tournaments such as the IPL. Source: SandFlash
The squeezing of the
cricket calendar to accommodate more Twenty20 tournaments and ODIs brings
reduced preparation time before Tests and difficulties for batsmen in adjusting
between different codes within ever-shorter series. Too many good sides are
being dismissed for low scores on decent pitches by generally solid bowling
units. In the past 51 Tests, teams have been bowled out for under 200 on 33
occasions.
The shot selections of
English batsmen in the First Test in Dubai pointed to a lack of application. As
Geoff Boycott thundered, “their brains went out of the window” with only Matt
Prior and Jonathan Trott demonstrating intent to “occupy the crease, show a
great deal of patience and accept that runs arrive at a slower pace.”
Similarly Michael
Clarke summed up Australia’s woeful collapse to 47 all out in Cape Town
stating, “Our shot selection was disgraceful…Apart from numbers 10 and 11, who
else even lasted 20 balls?”
Simultaneously we see
selection of players for Test cricket originally identified by national set-ups
for shorter forms or earmarked as “Twenty20 specialists”. One name stands out,
David Warner. The young Australian opener has much to prove, but a phenomenal
exhibition of hitting in his 69-ball century against India was a statement of
intent. His early success could convince other nations to fast-track
limited-overs stars into the Test side.
David Warner. The future of Test cricket? Source: paddynapper
The flip side of the
coin is Eoin Morgan, whose selection followed a similar path to Warner’s, but
is currently exhibiting the dangers associated. His unorthodox techniques, tailor-made
for Twenty20 cricket, are being questioned and his response has been to attempt
to manufacture his game into something it is distinctly not, a “traditional”
Test player.
India’s successive 4-0
whitewashes away to Australia and England serve as a warning. They have called
into question not just the enduring class of their stellar batting line-up, but
the quality of the next crop of Indian Test stars raised in the cut and thrust
of the IPL. As obdurate Indian batsman Aakash Chopra recently argued, the IPL
created a collapse in technique and concentration and “quite bafflingly, became
a parameter to judge a player for national selection”.
Cricket is witnessing
the first generation of Test players who have spent the majority of their
careers playing one-day and Twenty20 cricket. The squeeze is starting to be
felt.
First written for All Out Cricket
No comments:
Post a Comment