Somewhere in the depths of Steve Waugh’s 720-page magnum opus, Out of My Comfort Zone, published a decade ago, lies a passage on the impact of one-day cricket on the Test format:
“Contrary to popular belief, one-day cricket didn’t erode batting skills – it improved them. Batsmen expanded their repertoires, invented new shots and got into the habit of being positive and proactive in everything they did.”
Watching David Warner bat on Day 1 of the second Test against New Zealand and Waugh’s words were being played out live, in front of our eyes. Only they didn’t apply to one-day cricket; they applied to an even shorter version – Twenty20.
As Australia looks to embark on the fifth edition of its Big Bash League, how fitting that one of its biggest exports should be plying his trade, and dominating, on what has long been perceived the pinnacle – Test cricket. Introduced as a crass, colourful and temporary boost to the dwindling cricket crowds more than a decade ago, many – myself included – were quick to dismiss its merits.
The ride hasn’t been entirely smooth – no success story would be complete without its hurdles. The Indian Premier League, introduced amidst great fanfare and swathes of money, saw the Americanisation of a game to a degree that many thought had gone too far. Loud music, scantily clad cheerleaders paraded before braying crowds, and flashy gold-rimmed kits overflowing with sponsors logos became the norm. Conflicts of interest, corruption and match-fixing allegations have been rife throughout.
Yet the IPL is now the most watched and lucrative in the cricketing world. The broadcasting rights almost exclusively drive the treasure troves of the BCCI, and from this their position as the superpower of world cricket. Like it or loathe it, Twenty20 cricket is a world force. Not only has it changed the game, it’s changed the powerbase of the game – unthinkable only a decade before.
It’s easy to equate Twenty20 cricket, or any new innovation in the game, with big money alone. Cricket Australia, with the BBL, are adamant that it isn’t so. They promote the BBL as a pathway into the sport – a way to attract new fans, young, old, male, and increasingly female too.
This year sees the launch of the inaugural women’s BBL, the WBBL, and already the overseas stars, headline sponsors and broadcasting rights are honing in. In the women’s game, with a paucity of Tests and longer format games to revere, Twenty20 cricket is the face, and the future, of women’s cricket.
T20 now, once the frontier of change, has evolved into the fuel that lights the fire of cricket worldwide. Last month an unthinking reference on social media to David Warner and Aaron Finch as ‘big-hitting T20 bully boys coming good in the longer format’ received a justified rebuke. A quick referral of the stats shows that Warner now has 15 centuries from 45 Tests – a ton every three matches. As Geoff Lemon notes, of all batsmen with 1000 runs in the history of Test cricket, Warner’s almost at the top of the tree.
How easily the label of T20 bish-bash-bosh is ingrained on one’s memory. How should a Test match batsman play, we wondered? Not like Warner, whose longest Test stint amounted to just 174 balls until his marathon innings earlier this month.
How hard we all tried to dislike Warner and his brash approach. Yet this man, whose Test debut came almost three years after his first T20 International outing, is now ranked fifth in the world. Shorter form cricket, as Waugh observed, hasn’t “eroded batting skills”, it’s created one of the best Test batsmen of this generation.
Every change in a game challenges our perceptions of what cricket should entail. The pink ball is now the topic du jour. Why? It doesn’t behave like a cricket ball should. Longevity in the ball’s shape, hardness, swing and sight define how we think Test cricket should be played.
But is there really something that Test cricket should be but that ODI cricket should not, and which allows the one-day game to get away with a white ball? Before 1975, it was without question that one-day cricket should be played in white clothing. My generation on the other hand, born in the Nineties, has grown up knowing only that this format should be played in coloured clothing with white balls. Mike Selvey in The Guardian questions why we are even debating the pink ball. Why is it not already the case that Test cricket should be played with a white ball and coloured clothing?
The concept of what cricket, in all its formats, should and should not be is dynamic. Some change may prove detrimental further down the line – many of us believed T20 would be to the more prised longer formats.
Warner, Jos Buttler and AB de Villiers are but a few who continue to challenge that assumption. Questions, probing and scrutiny are integral to this unique sport, but so too is change. T20 cricket, a radical move a decade ago, changed the game for the good. Who knows what a splash of pink might do.
b
Guest
If Johnson was already considering retirement but hadn't made up his mind completely, the Perth pitch is what would have pushed him over the edge. After last years rubbish, both the Gabba and Waca pitches are probable why we aren't getting another year or two out of Johnson. I bet now he is wishing he stayed for one more test though, the first decent pitch in two homes seasons and it comes just after he retires.
Johnno
Guest
Grimmace the C10 guys to a good job. They have a bit of banter, but it's more what I'd call a good-balance between serious stats and a bit of banter, but it's done at a good pace. It doesn't go intellectual like Ian Chappell or Richie Benuad levels, but they have a bit. Tubby/Warnie/Slats/Brayshaw/Mark Nicholas are a disgrace. Mark Nicholas does actually think about the game, but doesn't get much chance to show it as 9 ask him to dumb it down.
Johnno
Guest
Proffessor I enjoyed watching Boycott bat too. I like concentration and strategy and valuing your "WICKET" something the younger generation aka Gen-Y don't have. I liked Boycott's chess like attitude to test-cricket, and he saved the silly stuff for the pyjama parties.
Professor Rosseforp
Guest
I would watch Geoff Boycott bat any day of the week. He could be devastating on the rare occasions he unleashed his range of shots, and was an early star of day-night matches in coloured clothing. But in test cricket, he was one of those rare players who realised that he had 5 days to bat, unless he made a mistake. And it is that mindset that many younger batsmen have lost. An opener who can last through the better part of the first day can virtually ensure his team cannot lose, even if he scores few runs. Paradoxically, I think many bowlers have learned from 1 day matches that they can bat much longer than they had thought, and they tend to play within their limited abilities -- often being very difficult to remove.
Clavers
Guest
mmm .... actually he just dipped below Gavaskar and Hayden when he got out for 1. :S
Clavers
Guest
If you mean that Perth pitch I disagree with you. The ball was seaming and swinging. Lyon was getting turn and spit. And Johnson was bouncing batsmen out on the afternoon of the fifth day. The batting was just very good.
Clavers
Guest
Why is Shaun Marsh coming in ahead of Voges when his batting average is barely half of Voges'? (33.1 versus 61.2)
Clavers
Guest
You think so? He happens to now have the highest batting average of any opening batsman in at least a generation, having recently moved ahead of Gavaskar, Hayden and Graeme Smith. And he seems to be getting better. That stat makes most criticism sound rather nitpicking.
Clavers
Guest
Ten year olds and Americans.
Andy
Guest
Yeah i have no problem with T20 as entertainment and if it brings in money for tests thats fantastic but we shouldnt try to make T20 more than it is skills wise like the article is trying to do. You have to be a freak to be good at all 3 forms, or just bat on roads all the time, in T20 patience is a massive vice, in tests patience is the greatest virtue. I do disagree though that faster scoring and more wickets in tests is necessarily a good thing. I love watching batsman grind away at nothing an over for an hour when needed. I think it is one of the greatest displays of sporting skill there is, like watching a union team 10 meters from the try line being stopped again and again, or getting punched by George Foreman for 7 rounds, waiting.
Andy
Guest
I dont think he missed the mark, i think he is completely right. One day cricket is long enough that you have to be both patient and attacking, you cannot afford to just swing that bat and be content with scoring 25 of 10 balls or so. In T20 if you did that regularly you would be a decent middle order 'batsman'. In T20 you dont need to be patient, if you can face 10 balls and absolutely cream half of them you have done enough for the team.
Johnno
Guest
Alan, are you saying you'd rather watch T20 and Dave Warner, than read steve waugh, or watch Geoff Boycott and Mike Atherton bat? Do you like excitement in life rather than slow things in life. Are you saying Steve Waugh is out of touch with T20 and the younger players. Do you prefer T20 culture and Dave Warner, than watching Geoff Boycott bat?
Andy
Guest
But they are not playing cricket, they are playing T20 which is very different. Being able to play cricket means you can play all forms, in the same way that beach soccer players are not really footballers in that the skills are similar but different enough that they dont easily translate. If people get into cricket because of T20 and then expand to all forms that is great but i really do think we need to differentiate between cricket and merely being a T20 player.
Andy
Guest
Seriously, you think T20 has improved batting skills? I think T20 is great fun and should remain but i dont see how you can argue that it has improved batting skills even a little.
VivGilchrist
Guest
Look at the West Indies. T20 has actually weakened there Test team. Pollard, Bravo, Gayle, Russel, are not interested in playing Tests. No T20 and these guys would be fronting up on Boxing Day.
Perry Bridge
Guest
likewise for many of us. He's still taken a while to get his overall approach right - and perhaps only now after the Ashes where he kept throwing it away needlessly.
Perry Bridge
Guest
If you have kids then T20 is up your alley. If you get a little sentimental and like seeing the odd recently retired player still going around - then T20 is your alley. T20 - attendance is cheap and quick - it's as big a time investment as going to the footy. Doesn't kill off an entire day. And zinger bails are really cool. Especially in the back yard as the dusk is setting in and the flood lights haven't fully taken over but we transition from the red tennis balls to the regular yellow/green tennis balls.
Brendon the 1st
Guest
The crowds weren't down were they? Wasn't the GABBA test a record crowd for these two sides?
b
Guest
Perhaps the crowds were down in the last two tests because the fans are disgusted over the pitches that were on offer, not because it was test cricket? Teams can hardly manage 90 overs now, it's unlikely they'd get the 100 done, and there would be no time left at the end of the day to make up overs. There is already a world ranking system, and winning captains already chase victories. But there will never be a finals series for cricket, for the same reason test cricket will never be an Olympic sport, the game is too big for those things. Having an optional 5th day won't work. The whole point of the four day idea is broadcasting. TV people won't want to have optional programming for a day, they want the game neatly packaged and over in four, and their regular programming to take over. To have an optional day five we may as well stick to five day tests. If one can't understand the drama of a draw, then one cannot understand the point of playing for five days, or four days for that matter. Take these people's money with T20, but they aren't the ones we should be looking to please with test structure.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Warner is a better batsman now that he leaves some of the T20 theatrics in his kit bag. I think T20 ad tests can co-exist. But I don't agree that T20's influence on test cricket is all positive For mine the administrators have got it wrong thinking that because fans like seeing quick and easy runs in T20 that we'll love five days of it in test cricket. So we get flat lifeless pitches that unfortunately produce flat lifeless tests - albeit scored at 5.5 an over.