HereBlogs / eudy's blog / Who is really to blame for the disinterest in test cricket?
Who is really to blame for the disinterest in test cricket?
Critics argue that Test Cricket would die & would be replaced by a more swashbuckling form of game (20/20).Recently the likes of Ian Chappell,Peter Roebuck and the entire Australian media accused M.S. Dhoni of being the prime culprit & there was widespread criticism of his 8-1 field setting on the third day of the Nagpur test. Stats revealed that Aussies were only able to score something like 172 runs in the entire day's play & termed it as "disgusting leadership" which made the game boring & insured that most of the stands were empty.
But is it Dhoni's job to insure that people who just understand one language of game (bang-bang)don't lose their interest in test cricket? Purist would argue that sometimes the non scoring battles are just as exiting. Personally my best memories in tests comes from the Melbourne test in 1999 on the 2nd day post lunch session, where i witnessed three greatest in the battleground. Mcgrath & Warne versus Sachin.There wasn't an abrupt rise in scoring rate but Cricket was at its immaculate best.(Sachin did score a century in that inning,i think 119.)
We should also realize that there exist some people known as cricket administrators whose job is to protect & promote the game.There is also a Marylebone Cricket Club (M.C.C.) whose job is to protect the spirit in which the game is played & make desirable laws. If an eight-one field is such an offence then make laws against it.If BCCI people issue ticket for entire 5 days play & not on individual day basis then its not Dhoni's fault.If the new stadium is situated 20 kms off the stadium its not Dhoni's fault. He was simply 1-0 up in the series & was asking Aussies to seize the initiative & hold the bull by the horn.What is wrong with that? Further he wasn't even asking his bowlers to bowl a negative line like Nassar Hussain did in bangaluru. Administrators have pricing strategies at their disposal to prevent shutting of doors on fanatics of game & still make reasonable revenues.First these issues should be addressed and then should we try to blame cricketers who are playing within the legal guidelines of the game.
- Flag as offensive
- eudy's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- | Email this page
with you that its the admin's job to make sure that people come to the ground to watch test cricket.. and least they could do in this last nagpur test was selling the tickets at a reasonable price and on a day-t0-day basis.. they were selling the tickets for the whole test match and the cheapest ticket was for Rs. 750.. no wonder there was no one to watch the match..
just to take your point further, i think its the purists like ian chappel who are at fault here.. by saying that dhoni's tactics were boring and thus wrong, they are actually highlighting (and that too wrongly) that test cricket is getting boring..
in fact this is what test cricket is all about.. its about captains making strategies off the field and then the bowlers and batters executing them on the field.. and then we see a battle where each team fights with the other's strategies and mostly its the better team that comes out as winner..
i would any day enjoy the 3rd day's play at nagpur than watching a part time bowler bowling to a part time batsman in an ODI game.. this is what now mostly happens in the middle overs of an ODI.. and BTW, the more used term for these part time bowlers and batsmen is an all-roounder!!!
couldn't agree more...vaise w.r.t. ian chappell's comments,we all knew how aussies regained border-gavaskar trophy back in 2004.nobody was complaining back thn..ooh i forgot,they were on t losing side back thn...
And Even Gilchrist, the Liar, admitted in his column in TOI that the defensive tactics won them the 2004 series. This was in reply to Zaheer Khan's comments after the first Blore test.
Hypocrisy goes hand in hand with Arrogance.
I don't agree completely to the fact that it is only the Admin's job to attract crowds. It is the player's responsibility to ensure the same as well. Remember sports is entertainment (IPL is the extreme), and everyone involved in it is responsible for providing it. It involdes administrators, players, selectores, coaches, Media, everyone.
IPL is a media created giant as well as media realises the huge profits in it. So media is at equal blame for not promoting test cricket (You can argue that they have no business interests and are not directly responsible for it).
While Dhoni's tactics were effective, I must admit they were boring, not defensive( Defensive is what Ashley Giles did when England toured India). I switched off the TV cos I got bored during the 8-1 field placing. The balance between tactics and entertainment is very hard to maintain. But the person to be blamed for th 8-1 field is the pitch curator. If the tracks are not friendly to both bowlers and batsmen, this is what we will get. Same happened in Delhi as well. If pitches are dead, test cricket will get killed.
I like watching test matches that happen in Australia, probablybecause of the sporting wickets which give more results. So the Indian curators can take a cue out of it.
very true...a captains job is to win the match while abiding by the rule book... he is not at all responsible for generating interest in the game or increasing revenue for the authorities....
keeping ticket for all 5 days is probably because it gives people a choice for the day people want to come to the stadium...single day tickets can turn out to be very unfair...but still authorities need to figure out a way to increase attendance at the venue....
but all tickets need not b 5 day ones...u could have strategic price discrimination with some tickets for daily basis n some 20-30% for full 5 days just in case sehwag's nearin 400 on 2nd day evenin
by single day tickets being unfair??
this is how it is done everywhere.. tickets are sold on a day-to-day basis and although i am not sure but i guess there might be tickets for the whole of test match as well. in fact, the tickets for the days on the weekend are normally priced higher than other days.
i dont see anything wrong with selling single day tickets.
Prices are not going to increase\decrease interest.
The format probably needs change given the fact that 5 days is too much to invest for a game.
i think the prices do play a very important role..
btw, this might sound a bit extreme.. but i would suggest that BCCI should provide the test match tickets for free or may be at an extremely low price..
they anyway are going to earn money from the TV and the money from ticket sales is anyway not much..
free/low priced tickets will make sure that there are more people in the stadium.. and then BCCI can probably get more money from the sponsors (for putting their banners in the stadium, etc.)
also, more people means more demand for food/water etc.. BCCI can also make money by charging higher from these vendors.
Disagree, I think captain's are responsible to provide entertainment as well.
You can win matches and entertain as well, the toughest challenge in every form of Sports
Dhoni was definitely not in fault while putting an 8 - 1 field for the Australian Batsmen. That is a strategy which was very effective and it was the australians who refused to take any chances. I am even supportive of the strategy of negative bowling, from the leg side when the opposition is attacking a lot. They are within the laws of the game. In fact, I remember distinctly it was the English team that employed it against Tendulkar and got him out stumped (then the first time in test cricket). At that time I thought it was brilliant strategy from Nasser Hussain, but my sentiments were not shared by lots of Indian commentators, like Shastri, Gavaskar, Harsha. I guess defensive and "boring" strategy is disgusting only when it is employed against one's team
That said, the primary reason of low test match attendance was having the matches at places like Mohali and Nagpur. I attended a day of the test match at Bangalore, on a day when India was wobbling but the ground was pretty much full. I agree with the comments that have appeared in Cricinfo, that we should have only a few centres for test matches, the cities that have such culture.
u'v hit the nail on the head man...culture is very important...i think chennai should have been a venue...atleast eng is playin in mumbai...i'm not against negative tactics but i feel 8-1 field is still more acceptable thn 1-8(off 1 n leg
for the following reasons-
1. normally most bowlers (seamers) bowl over the wicket so by the 4th day the majority of the rough is on the leg side of the batsman rather than off.
2. i feel scoring options are more in case of off side esp on a slow 3rd day wicket.( but this is subjected to style of play).
but still i feel that if so many people are against it then laws should be well defined.
could not agree more.
with eudy that bowling wide outside the off-stump is very different from bowling on the leg side.. this is because, a batsman can still play the balls wide off off-stump by doing some shuffling and taking minimum risks.. just imagine a batsman like azhar or laxman.. they would have definitely played their shots even if the balls are wide...
however, if the balls are on the leg-side, then there is almost no chance for the batsman.. unless he takes a huge risk and try to play inside-out..
but i agree that if its within the rules, then we can not criticize a captain for employing that strategy..
but i guess such strategy is definitely wrong if done on the first day of the test match.. this is what sri lanka used to do under ranatunga and this is what england did against india.. and that is why i think england's strategy was a bit negative..
and on day 5, when india was struggling to save the test match.. and more importantly when SAchin was expected to break the record, the ground was pretty much empty
So, I guess the culture is not the only thing that matters.. its the facilities on the ground which are of greater importance.. i dont think watching a cricket match in a ground in india is enjoyable.. there are n number of problems which the spectators have to face.. so, i guess BCCI needs to do a lot for attracting the crowds (especially for test matches).
cultures would keep on changing but yes if we observe tests in england or aus u can relate it.but yes if cricket doesn't have the quality thn nothin can help.by culture i mean awareness bout t game.t scoreless(or low scoring) battles r most enjoyed by these people.i mean its gives great joy to see a batsman picking up wrong ones or observing t ball so closely that he can make out the difference b/w conventional n reverse swing...
the last part you mentioned, that cannot be enjoyed inside a stadium, that requires technology we have today and is more appreciated on T.V. Since grounds cannot provide technology, they need to provide people present there the value for their time and money. And that is positive cricket.
i think the facilities in the stadium is the most imporant factor.. the people should enjoy watching cricket..
there should be covered stands (so that people dont have to sit under the hot sun) and the seats should be more comforatable.. i am not asking for the leather sofa seats, but at least they should be something better than the hard concrete.
also, there should be better management of the transport facilities and the parking space.
unless all these things are there, people wont come to watch test cricket.
as u rightly said, things like good defensivie shot/swinging delivery cannot be enjoyed in a stadium.. and thats why test cricket will never match on the entertainment factor of T20 or an ODI..
therefore, positive cricket or not, people wont come unless they feel comfortable in the stadium.
I think the ground had pretty average attendance on Day 5 as well, not as much as the weekends.
Dhoni was definitely not in fault while putting an 8 - 1 field for the Australian Batsmen. That is a strategy which was very effective and it was the australians who refused to take any chances. I am even supportive of the strategy of negative bowling, from the leg side when the opposition is attacking a lot. They are within the laws of the game. In fact, I remember distinctly it was the English team that employed it against Tendulkar and got him out stumped (then the first time in test cricket). At that time I thought it was brilliant strategy from Nasser Hussain, but my sentiments were not shared by lots of Indian commentators, like Shastri, Gavaskar, Harsha. I guess defensive and "boring" strategy is disgusting only when it is employed against one's team
Partially agreed. Dhoni's tactics were not defensive and playing of side deliveries is not that hard playing leg side deliveries pitches way outside the rough.
That said, the primary reason of low test match attendance was having the matches at places like Mohali and Nagpur. I attended a day of the test match at Bangalore, on a day when India was wobbling but the ground was pretty much full. I agree with the comments that have appeared in Cricinfo, that we should have only a few centres for test matches, the cities that have such culture.
Delhi had average attendance, I think.
But I agree to your point. Test cricket in only select big centers, ODIs everywhere else.
Being defensive in strategy is not necessarily wrong and not always negative. In fact in many cases, being defensive allows you to withstand pressure for a long time and play at a higher level than what your talent would allow. So when England comes to India with no good spinners in the team, it makes sens for them to minimize the effect the Indian batsman would have. A nice way was to bowl on the leg stump. The batsman has to hit against the spin or inside out and it would require taking risk. Granted, it is easier to score runs in off side line than leg stump line, but the intention is the same. You may call it negative, defensive, etc. but it is within the laws and spirit of the game. What dhoni did and what nasser hussain did was to say the onus is on you guys, so make runs by taking risk.
Bangalore 5th day was on Monday, its is highly unlikely that you would see the same crowd that you see in weekends, in any part of the world. I was there on Saturday and despite the facilities, it was wonderful. The facilities have not suddenly gone bad, what has changed is that you have now more cricket to watch at the same venue, and test match does not rank high for people who do not have the culture to understand it.
if eng comes n starts bowling -ve line it shows that they r nt here fr a win.what india did was different.they askd aus to take risks if they wantd to retain t trophy.
but yes if eng is 1 up in series thn i would understand the -ve line.
T20 is the best and Yuvi is God.
Yuvi is vying for God status in ODIs as well.
Seriously!! And now he is taking wickets too
) By the way, Sehwag too has been in amazing touch recently.
Australia, for dominating the sport and making it boring
And now India, for doing the same for the years to come (hopefully)
The all-so attacking Aussies started the trend of having a Third Man and Sweeper Cover from very early into the innings. That is counted as good tactics but not defensive. Oh the irony !!To Ian Chapell's credit he calls the above tactics defensive as well and has thrashed Ponting a few times for this.
i always think that even if attacking, there should always be a fielder at third-man boundary..
yes, having a sweeper cover is a bit too much..