As players lose faith in the four-innings game, Emma John says it's just not cricket
Kevin Pietersen's ego. Graeme Smith's hard-ass captaincy. Dale Steyn's 98mph delivery. Hashim Amla's batting. The possible return of Simon Jones. There are many reasons to be excited about England's Test series against South Africa, which began at Lord's on 10 July. One thing not on my list, or, I suspect, anyone else's, is how the outcome will affect the International Cricket Council's Reliance Mobile Test Championship, to give it its full name.
There's no shame, by the way, if you didn't even know that it existed. The Test Championship has to be one of the most aimless and characterless tournaments in international sports, given that: a) Australia always win, and b) it takes them four years to do so. Anyway, England and South Africa are currently in third and fourth places, respectively. Not that that means much, because they haven't played the same number of games, you see, so even this summer's result won't tell us for sure where they stand and - oh Lordy, are you asleep already?
The point is, our motive for watching the Test series is not the arithmetical possibility that it'll take England closer to a global trophy we've never seen, sponsored by an Indian communications company we've never heard of. Sure, we all love a quadrennial tournament, ever since the smelting of the Jules Rimet Trophy and the Olympic rings. But Test cricket is glorious because it is an anomaly: irregular series between ten nations with little else in common, each face-off steeped in its own historical context. (Cricket does have its own World Cup: but while most such tournaments are the ultimate in sporting evangelism, cricket's version can go unnoticed by all but its hardiest fans.)
This is something to remember while players and administrators alike go giddy at the sight of all the cash being helicoptered into the game by Texan and Indian billionaires. Every year, as part of a pre-season questionnaire, county cricketers are asked which of the domestic competitions they value the most. Every year, with nearly 100 per cent of the vote, the answer is the county championship - the first-class form of the game, which stretches four innings over four days, and is naturally considered the nursery for Test cricketers.
Fast-forward six months - during which a Champions League has been hastily arranged for the best Twenty20 sides in the world, with a payout of £1m for the winners - and the Professional Cricketers' Association has commissioned another survey. Surprise! Now only 62 per cent believe the county championship is the most important. If players can lose faith in the four-day form of the game this quickly, you have to wonder: how long before Test cricket itself is up for debate?
For many, the best way to ensure Test cricket's future is to give it a structure, a purpose. At the most recent meeting of the ICC, cricket's governing body, there was much discussion of these questions, including how to safeguard such important series as the Ashes. (Can you imagine a meeting at which Fifa discussed the need to "preserve" the World Cup?) There was even talk of a souped-up Test championship, to be held over two years.
These are strange times for the game, and you can't bet against anything - even the ICC coming up with a good idea. But I will continue to hope that Test cricket's tangled, historic and utterly anomalous existence remains just that.
Emma John is the deputy editor of Observer Sport Monthly
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
