The Sheffield Shield has been doing it for over a century and County cricket has gone even shorter in the past. So should Test match cricket be reduced to four days?
News of the ICC’s plans to reevaluate the length of Test cricket has opened up every kind of cricketing can of worms.
Traditionalists hate it. Administrators love it.
County cricket matches were actually only three days in length for 98 years before moving up to the four-day format, which has been in used in Australian domestic cricket since the 19th century.
As the landscape of world cricket continues to change, forever becoming shorter and more explosive, Test match cricket is often forgotten about, being left behind in the modern smash and bash of the T20 era.
While you do get the five-day stonewalling draws – looking at you subcontinent – the rise in three or four-day demolition jobs is also growing.
Triple figure strike rates, 135-year old river oak stumps as cricket bats, and the attacking T20 mindset that continues to seep into the longest format of the game.
The time and patience of the modern audience for a drawn out 194 over third innings is passing by.
However, and it’s an important however, the tradition of the oldest format in the game is a long and illustrious one, something that a lot of old hats and cricket tragics are very quick to point out.
What about those thrilling last-day antics? Two wickets to win, 30 runs to defend and time running out in the final session?
What about the good old days when Tests were timeless, even going as far as ten days before teams had to give up so they didn’t miss their boat home.
Back in the early days though, teams would comfortably get through 120+ overs in a day, with less emphasis on bowler’s run ups and technique, as well and next to no drinks breaks.
Whereas now, the expected standard is 90 overs in a day, but even then it usually only hits mid 80s with a chance to make up overs at the end of the day.
Maybe four-day tests would have been fine when the amount of overall overs bowled was nearly half on top of what it already is.
It’s a matter of, how can you build such a thrilling contest in anything less than five days? Versus, five days just drags the contest out, you can get the same result in four with better, more fast paced action.
With the advent of day-night Test cricket, the chance for less days with longer sessions is a very real reality, and one that is becoming increasingly discussed between former cricketers all the way to your local yobo at the pub.
A huge factor in the overall discussion is money. Stadiums, TV, radio, tourism, advertising and even the players themselves all benefit from more cricket being played.
Television rights are worth millions and millions of dollars, so if the station is getting less cricket each test, then they’re losing advertising revenue, which in turn hurts the company looking to advertise.
Same with tourism, it’s one less day travellers can spend money in the host nation, it’s one day the players and the stadium lose from their revenue.
One less day may not seem like a lot, but with dwindling Test match crowds across the globe and the state of the format in limbo, could just one day be all in needs to survive?
What do you think Roarers – five days or four? Change, or remain?
john
Guest
I'm an american who just started watching cricket about a year and a half ago. test cricket is my favorite format because u really get to see everyone's skills come out. i'm a big stats guy and i like giving the players more of a chance to bowl and bat to see the stats pile up and actually be able to make reasonable comparisons between players. i haven't watched nearly as much test cricket as the other formats, but i would be on board to see at least 100 overs in a day if not 110 or 115. that way u could keep the match length at 5 days. i know the casual fans aren't super excited about draws, no matter the action that leads to one. it seems like a 4 day match would only lead to more draws, which can't be good for lifting the popularity of the format. at the end of the day, people who love cricket want to watch more of it. i guess it's up to the big wigs to decide if it's the true fans or the casual fans that are attending matches.
michael steel
Guest
Five days is the scheduled duration of a test match. Just because many test matches are so uncompetitive these days doesn't mean that should change. I just wouldn't be buying a ticket for the fifth day in advance. (Of course they probably refund you but that's not the point)
Eski
Guest
Yes another one so we now have johnno, anon and mike huber who speak for all young Australians All I need Is for mike and anon to tell what the next 3 generations will think and they will be in the same club as johnno
Rellum
Roar Guru
Yes and no. Saying people only used to watch Shield games because international players had come back is just falling into the modern attitude that people only care about international cricket. International cricketers used to come back as they wanted to do well for their state and try and win the thing and the fans followed their state team whether international players played or not as there was prestige in winning the shield. There was rarely big crowds but people still had a big interest in the game and the results. And I am saying CA favors the BBL with it marketing and does nothing to promote the shield. At least that pay for the One day comp to be televised.
James T
Guest
For me watching a great spinner ply their trade on a deteriorating day 5 pitch is more interesting than a 20 over slog off. Maybe expect the batters to learn how to bat in different conditions. I can't see how visitors struggle to play in oz, pitched seem to get flatter every year. For 4 day games if a signicant time is lost then generally so will be a result. Maybe it's an option for low ranked sides to give them less time to hold on for a draw.
Alexander Clough
Roar Pro
Only if you increase the amount of overs per day to around 110. This could be possible with the ever-increasing amount of floodlight use (start 30 minutes earlier, finish an hour later - not sure how it would work in dewey English conditions though), however it really relies on the weather being good for the duration of the test. If one, or even two days are lost to rain it can become catastrophic. Overall, it's an idea worth pursuing in my book - maybe trial longer over, 3 day games at county/Shield level before fully going ahead.
josh
Roar Rookie
The real issue isn't the BBL. Its the 24/7 365 day life of modern cricket. People went to Shield matches, when members of the Australian played in some rounds. It was a real chance to get an autograph, see the top guys play against each other. The current cricket schedule means, you play in the Shield get called into the Australian team and there you stay playing tour after tour.
Camo McD
Roar Guru
For scheduling, four days might be pretty good. Start on a Thursday and build up to a conclusion on a Sunday when people are a chance of watching rather than a Monday or Tuesday in front of five people. You could then fairly easily play matches in consecutive weeks. I have the feeling test cricket needs to move with the times. Test cricket was often scheduled over three of four days early on with uncovered pitches and four or five ball overs. There's no big deal reverting to four days. Outside of England and Australia the format is on its last legs and I'm sure a fair number of tests essentially cost both the boards and players money to put on and nobody turns up anyway. I would certainly give boards the option at least of scheduling over four days.
Jules
Guest
Spot on. I love test cricket but it's tough to deny that it is slowly dying.
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
I am the quintessential old relic having seen my first test while being schooled in South Africa in the mid 1960's The only reason suggestion like this are made is to make up for the limitations of the current day player. With the focus on batsmen, we used to laud at the ability of players to bat out a day or spent long periods at the crease grinding out defining innings. Now, I would struggle to think of many players who could even bat out a session, let alone a day! Rather than try to lift the standards in the game they instead want to modify it to cater for increasing mediocrity
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
That's fine but you then need to find a way to teach that to the new generation.
Dutski
Roar Guru
Let me see. Upsides of 5 days: more days to get a result. More chance for the pitch to play a role. More opportunities for a big innings or two. More cricket. Game can finish in less than 5 days if the wickets fall. Broadcasters have 5 days to sell advertising on. Upsides of 4 days: Less cricket. More appealing to people with short attention spans. More chance of a draw. Cricket associations pay to use the ground for one less day. Must be a bit old fashioned but I can't see the win here for players, fans or broadcasters. So who benefits?
anon
Guest
" But sitting either by yourself for 6 hours or so isn’t for everyone. And neither is dragging the kids along to sit in a stand for 6 hours while nothing really happens." That's how I feel about test cricket.
Rellum
Roar Guru
The is also the issue that CA has treated the comp with such contempt that I don't know many who see it as a serous competition anymore. Back when there where small crowds but media interest was high and we had live radio and even TV coverage also coincided with when every one saw it as a real comp. No one is going to go along to see glorified training games. CA even talks it down in my opinion compared to the effort they put into the BBL.
Mike Huber
Roar Pro
Anon " England haven't been competitive in Australia in 30 years " England beat Australia in Oz 2010/11. 3/1 . Since that series Australia have won 8 matches , England 9. The poms have been very competitive actually since 2005 and if it wasn't for Mitchell Johnson the 5/0 drubbings could of looked very different indeed . I agree with you about young Australians - to busy trying to be the next Justin Bieber , tattoos and all !
josh
Roar Rookie
The Shield is actually free. People don't go because there is zero atmosphere. The Gabba once allowed people to play on the field at lunch, that drew a crowd. Beyond that it's the catering staff, team managers and the retired old bloke usually. I've been to a few shield games. I enjoyed it. But sitting either by yourself for 6 hours or so isn't for everyone. And neither is dragging the kids along to sit in a stand for 6 hours while nothing really happens. Its a tough sell.
josh
Roar Rookie
I am sure a statistical analysis will show tests going to the 5th day (where play isn't significantly delayed by rain etc...) are pretty rare. And maybe its those occurrences that are more memorable than the 3-4 day tests. To be honest, if tests were reduced, it wouldn't change my enthusiasm, I'd still watch it, and so would everyone else.
Eski
Guest
Hahahahaha
anon
Guest
"People don’t go to shield games because they have work and other commitments during week" What about the weekend? People don't have a spare $8 to attend? Seems like a cheap summer day out to watch a fascinating form of cricket.
Kaks
Roar Guru
I love my Test cricket, would dread it if I got to see less of it.