Twenty20 turning players into million dollar babies
Roar Guru
By vinay verma, 18 Jul 2009 Vinay Verma is a Roar Guru
Andrew Flintoff, Chris Gayle and Andrew Symonds all have different reasons for forsaking Test cricket. However, the common denominator is money.
I have just returned from a quick trip to India and my worst fears have been realised.
Test Cricket in the sub continent is dead and the haste to bury it is both depressing and alarming. India has been utterly and irrevocably seduced by Twenty/20 and the love affair is no one night fling.
Cricket administrators, including Cricket Australia, seem powerless to stem the tide.
The TV rights for the Champions League Twenty/20 were in excess of 1 billion dollars and all participating boards will share in revenues between 8 and 15 million dollars a year for the duration of the contract.
The rush to sign overseas stars by Australian State sides all points to Twenty/20 being a bigger part of the Australian cricketing landscape.
The ECB is pushing ahead with its own Super Pro Twenty/20. Television Broadcasters are demanding Twenty/20 be played in prime time television.
This is the major reason for the push for Day/Night cricket.
These sentiments are not the ravings of a disillusioned cricket traditionalist. It is the lament of a realist seeing the basic fabric of the game being ripped apart by administrators who have been wined and dined too often.
The MCC seems the lone voice of reason and has once again implored administrators to organise a Test Championship. This was high on the agenda of Cricket Australia until it was jettisioned by the BCCI and consigned to cricket’s back burner.
The current Ashes series in England is sold out and it may well be the last time that Test Cricket evokes such interest.
Andrew Flintoff stated this week he is retiring from Test Cricket as his body cannot take the strain anymore. This was the same refrain from Adam Gilchrist two years ago.
They have both espoused the view that Test Cricket is the ultimate form of the game for them. Yet, the alacrity with which they have abandoned Test cricket leads me to label them as hypocrites.
I expect to see these players playing all year around in the various Twenty/20 leagues in India, Australia, South Africa and England.
The sad part is that these players are not exactly penurious.
There is concern among former cricketers like Ian Chappell and lately, Sunil Gavaskar, that administrators need to strike the right balance. Twenty/20 appeals to the vast majority of Indians who see the abbreviated form as a neat fit with their pressured lives.
The Indians are passionate about their cricket and it dominates their psyche.
Test Cricket on the subcontinent has to be promoted as relevant in an ever-changing world. Midweek Tests will not work.
Day/Night Cricket in India is an absolute imperative if Test Cricket is to survive.
The quality of the competition is also paramount. The viewers will not watch Bangladesh or the West Indies. The Championship of Test Cricket limited to the top six countries will appeal.
The administrators have a choice. Be innovative and change. Or just accept the money and lose the tradition. If this were to happen, it would be an insult to the memory of those that went before.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- What we do and don’t know about our Baggy Greens (112)
- Success of Twenty20 spells trouble for ODI cricket (106)
- Channel 9 commentators an annoyance this summer (102)
- One Day Cricket is suffering from Middle Child Syndrome (89)
- Cricket Australia must take a stand against racist spectators (89)
- Dave’s Warner-ful switch-hit panned by precious critics (84)
- Khawaja shouldn’t have been Shaun from the Test side (71)
- Clarke stars as Australia beat Sri Lanka
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Hall of Fame for Indian legend Gavaskar
- Sri Lanka to target ‘weak’ Aussie bowlers
- India backing Rohit Sharma to find form
- Game-by-game preview of round 19
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (6)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (6)
- Pakistan’s win over England a triumph of character (21)
- Steve Waugh is right about cricket’s succession plan (5)
- India vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (180)
- Let’s talk about selection, Test fans (28)
- Pakistan win shows what’s beautiful about the game (13)
Kersi Meher-Homji said | July 18th 2009 @ 9:53am | Report comment
You are on the ball, Vinay. In fact, I had expressed similar sentiments in my Roar column of 8 April 2009 titled: Is the IPL a mutant destroying the game?
Although a traditionalist, I am for Day-Night 4-day Tests, 100 overs a day.
The reason Test cricket appears less palatable to Indians these days is the fault of the organisers. The BCCI/IPL selected prime venues for IPL matches in 2008 and BCCI picked far away venues (Mohali, Nagpur…) for the Border-Gavaskar Test matches the same year. Although the series provided entertaining cricket with India winning, there were hardly any spectators.
Test cricket has to be promoted in India and IPL to be cut down to size (once every 2 to 3 years). I am not against T20 (if they are between countries) but am against the mushrooming of meaningless IPL club cricket.
vinay verma said | July 18th 2009 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Kersi- There is an agenda here. Nagpur just happens to be the home of Shashank Manohar the BCCI President and Mohali is the home of IS Bindra,now the special Advisor to the ICC.
It makes you wonder.
onside said | July 18th 2009 @ 1:16pm | Report comment
Test cricket itself is a multi million dollar baby.The game is financially unsustainable without the contribution
of other cricket derivatives.Even Shield cricket is a benefactor of short game largess. It cannot survive
without handouts.Huge stadiums are turned over to State cricket for four or five days in a row.The staff
outnumber the crowd most days.The games are not televised. And yet they must cost a fortune to run, all
paid for by the taxpayer and one day or 20/twenty cricket.The first day of a Test match in Australia is an
event,a must see ritual not unlike once a year racegoers at the Melbourne Cup. On the second day , and
every other day of a Test match you can sit anywhere you want in the cricket stadium. In Australia the
game is a cash cow for Chanel 9.I t costs little to produce and short style games rate highly.So given all
this ,what is wrong with elite players earning huge fees to perform.Cricket is live theatre.What is wrong
performers earning good money.They all have a shelf life.Test cricket and Sheild cricket have been on life
support for years. What is the situation like in England.How does the traditional version survive over there.
onside said | July 18th 2009 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
Kersi,
“meaningless IPL club cricket”. What does it matter. Its subjective.Some people read Mills and Boon ,
others Dickens.There is only one thing that matters,not the quality of the writing but,”did you enjoy it”
Some people might see a drawn Test that takes five days to play as meaningless, others are riveted
what they perceive as rewarding subtleties.Like wise the relative fast food IPL club version in India.
Did you enjoy it? Thats the only thing that counts really. Its the only thing that makes the till ring. And
as a stand alone product the till stopped ringing for Test cricket eons ago.
.
Dave said | July 18th 2009 @ 1:35pm | Report comment
Again test crowds in India against England were massive.
There is no international cricket in Pakistan at all. So it is not just test cricket that has a problem there.
Andrew Flintoff is not the first person to retire from test cricket.
Also, Ian Botham and Bob Willis are the only fast bowlers from who have played more tests than him, so I think he is allowed to retire
vinay verma said | July 18th 2009 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
All valid points Onside and Dave…I agree that everyone has different turn ons and likes and dislikes sometimes border on the parochial .
The point I am making is that if all we had was a Twenty/20 version than it is only a matter of time before it is replaced by an even shorter version. Test Cricket properly marketed and involving competitive teams can generate sustained interest. The last six tests against South africa and the previous eight against India provided just this. Test Cricket in the nineties and now is altogether more attacking than fifty or a hundred years ago. The one day game has injected bravado and innovation into what was once a staid game.
Again,I emphasise the point,that if Cricket Australia and ECB give into the demands of the BCCI and just roll over there will be no going back.
Administrators and cricketers cannot see ten years from now. I dont blame the cricketer wanting to secure his financial future. I am not against change and I welcome innovation. But the things that are worth preserving I am unashamed to stand up for. The tied tests of 1961 and 1987. The World Cup finals of 1975 and 1979. The World cup final of 1983,1992 and 1996 where India Pakistan and Sri Lanka came of age. Sri Lankans Jayasuriya and Kalu changed the first fifteen overs forever. Just as Dilshan and Pietersen are doing now.
The constant always has been Test Cricket. A good Test Cricketer can play all three forms. A good twenty/20 specialist will be just that. David Warner is a case in point.
Test crowds in India have been declining since 1992. The crowds for the India England game in Chennai was a show of appreciation for England having the grace to visit so soon after the Mumbai attack.
Ultimately the spectator will decide what is good for him but I suspect there is a silent majority out there that need to be alerted that if you treasure something you have to fight to preserve it. With the right balance Twenty/20 will strengthen Test Cricket. Too much and it will destroy it.
Dave,of course people are allowed to retire. Flintoff is not retiring from cricket. Only Test Cricket. His loss to English Test Cricket will be immesearuable. Tendulkar and Ponting on the other hand want to preserve themselves for Tests. And I suspect Michael Clarke and Johnson too.
Take any country…all its heroes are from Test Cricket first and one dayers second.
Dave said | July 18th 2009 @ 5:04pm | Report comment
Darren Gough did the same thing, he also had injury problems. He retired from test cricket and continued playing one dayers only. He was the same age as Flintoff and had played less tests and there was no 20/20 then to influence his decision.
Test crowds in India have been declining since 1992?
The test series agonist Australia in 2001 is one of the biggest test series in the history of the game.
The crowds for the India England game in Chennai was a show of appreciation for England?
How do we know that how did it compare with previous crowds at Chennai for India v England..
vinay verma said | July 18th 2009 @ 5:38pm | Report comment
Dave you are correct that the 2001 series in India was massive. One crowd pulling series in almost twenty years. Except for day two In chennai,2008, the crowds in Bangalore Nagpur and Mumbai were paltry. One of the biggest drawbacks for spectators in India is the amenities at the grounds. It is shameful that the BCCI with all its millions cannot even provide adequate toilets.
Forget the movie stars and the corporates…the average spectator doesn’t count. Kolkata which has the most passionate crowds has not hosted Australia since 2001. The BCCI accepts that Test Crowds are down and is currently upgrading its stadiums. It may already be too late to bring back the Test crowds.
Dave I dont have the exact figures but speaking to journalists who have covered the game for more than thirty years in India Test Crowds are declining at an alarming rate. Will see if I can dig up some figures for you because your questions are valid.
TV broadcasters generally dont pan to the empty seats .They concentrate on the areas where there are crowds.
Dave said | July 26th 2009 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
It looks like the series in1998/99 was pretty big as well
http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/410452.html
vinay verma said | July 26th 2009 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
Dave,this was the first time in 12 years and Chennai has long being regarded as the most knowledgeable and traditional Test loving crowds. Chennai is altogether more measured and leisurely compared to Delhi and Mumbai.
Dave1 said | October 13th 2009 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
looks like 1998/99 Kolkata: had the biggest test crowds of all time
http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/429333.html
“…….However, there have almost certainly been larger crowds, especially at Eden Gardens in Kolkata: after the stadium was rebuilt the capacity there was reputedly 100,000, and that figure is claimed (but no audited figures have been produced) for five one-day internationals (including the 1995-96 World Cup semi-final between India and Sri Lanka), and the first four days of a Test against Pakistan in 1998-99………”
Chandra said | July 19th 2009 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
TAM TRP ratings donot match with the author’s contention. The last test series at home V Australia which was played during working hours generated close to $ 25 M for 4 test matches. Advertisers invest in a test series on the basis of TRP ratings generated. They have data, you donot. In an economy that was growing close to 9% the pressures are enormous for people to skip work and watch matches in horrible grounds. However, the best way to know how many actually follow test cricket is to visit bulletin boards,ask cricinfo, visit office places with Televisions. In office places across the country, hundreds of thousands skip work for a few minutes to watch cricket. Ironically, the greatest fear for Test cricket is often expressed by writers from the West. Also, all players who have retired from Test cricket for other forms of cricket are also from the west. Probably, the bigger problem is in the west
. I suspect that while only 200000 australians stay awake to follow the ashes, more number Indians could actually be following the series. Strange but true
Chandra said | July 19th 2009 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Here are the TAM ratings for your reference
India v Australia, Bangalore, 9th october 2008, weekday, TAM: 1.4%
A total of 27 Million viewers for a maximum of 20 days of cricket
During the same period, the IPL had 31 mllion viewers (18 days)
India v South Africa, 2008, Total number of viewers: 48 Million – 3 tests
India v Sri Lanka, 2008, 50 Million – 3 Tests
The simple fact of the matter is that India matches are likely to be watched by more Indians than Bangalore v Chennai. The biggest impact on world cricket if ever there will be one is when India will have a very weak cricket team. The more matches we lose, the more unlikely that you will see people watching any cricket. Hockey folks know better…ask them….