Due to the influence of the shorter forms of the game Test cricket has seen an increase in the Runs per over scored. Just like how the fuss over T20 cricket is now; the fuss over 50 over cricket existed then. In spite of all this, test cricket has managed to survive thus answering claims such as “test cricket is on its last legs”. For starters, if anything has to die out it would be the 50 over format and not test cricket. Test cricket has managed to survive and will continue to do so.

Cricket has now become a profession, due to the lure of money in the shorter formats.

Arguably, cricket has become commercialized significantly and is on the path of globalization, mainly thanks to the two-year old Indian Premier League, better known as the IPL. Players are these days opting to play for IPL teams rather than for their country in test cricket. But the big question rises –

HOW DO CRICKETERS FEEL BEING AUCTIONED LIKE GOODS IN THE MARKETS OF MILLIONAIRES?

Not just money, technology has had a tremendous impact on the game too. In the early days, technology and cricket were a complete mismatch. Until recently, when the Umpire Review Decision Review System (UDRS) had been introduced to conduct matches in a fairer manner. There have been other significant additions to the game such as the Hotspot, Hawk-eye and the speed gun.

It is vital for the ICC to balance out all three formats—in particularly test cricket as change is inevitable.

A couple of pertinent points were raised during the discussion, which need to be acted upon rather swiftly keeping the future of the gentleman’s game in mind; the most important among them was undoubtedly with regards to patronizing the Umpire Decision Review System or UDRS, as it is better known as.

Not surprisingly, the committee has recommended that the Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS) be implemented during the 2011 Word Cup in the subcontinent and introduced “as soon as possible” in all Test series. While this is definitely a step in the right direction, there are number of obstacles in its path.

The biggest and most challenging aspect of the UDRS that the ICC is facing is the basic, unanimous acceptance of the system itself. During its trail run, it did not earn praise from all quarters. On the contrary, it was mired in controversy. The Johannesburg Test between England and South Africa earlier this year, when a caught behind appeal was turned down by Daryl Harper is still fresh in one’s mind.

But obviously, one wouldn’t want such mistakes to be repeated, especially during a major tournament like the World Cup, and at a time when the 50-over version is facing its litmus test. Of course, efforts are underway to standardize the technology in this context and reduce the chances of errors.

Even so, it shouldn’t be implemented unless and until the ICC is cent per cent sure that this is the very best they have to offer. If the not, the World Cup shouldn’t be used an apparatus to test it out.

Looking at a somewhat humanitarian aspect, it isn’t always fair on the players. As per the laws of the game, a batsman is entitled to stand his ground unless the umpire declares him out. However, during India’s tour previous Test tour to Sri Lanka, a number of the visiting batsmen, who were initially declared not out by the standing umpire, had to talk the long walk back following the decision being reviewed.

While the correct decision was made, it made the batsmen look like cheats even though they were playing in accordance with the rules. What the system also does is take away the human angle from the game. As Simon Taufel has always said, as an umpire he would like to test himself out in the middle rather than allowing the robot to dominate. This is one aspect the ICC must seriously keep in mind while implementing any technology in the game, leave alone the UDRS.

Another flaw with the system is the amount of time it consumes. As it is, a lot of it is lost when referrals are made for run-outs or even boundary decisions. The authorities cannot afford to slow the down the game further for the sake of the fans. Unlike in tennis, where decisions can be reversed in seconds, cricket is a much more complicated proposition.

To judge an lbw, the umpire will have to look at the path of the delivery judiciously – where it pitched, in which direction it is heading, as well as the height. In short, cricketing decisions are often complicated. Having said that, it is better to get a correct decision with a slight delay than give a poor decision in haste.

And so, it is crucial that ICC finds the fine balance so that the amount of time consumed is minimal, and rate of accuracy too is the highest, a herculean task, albeit one they need to master.

Recently, this rule has seen a change and that being the 3rd power play or also known as the batting power play is now in the hands of the batting side. The batsmen in the middle have a right to choose those set of 5 Overs anytime they wish to in the innings barring the first set of 10 Overs.

Although the batting power play was made so that it gives an edge to the batsman (not the first thing in favour of ‘em and be rest assured not the last). However, since its inception it’s only been working against the batsmen. Often in the punt to hit ‘em out of the ground; batsmen seem to lose their wickets which sets the tone for the remaining Overs. New batsmen come in and take their time to settle in and a look at the score board——whoosh! The power play is gone!

It is misunderstood that the power play should be taken when the team’s best batsmen are out in the middle. No, it should be taken when two batsmen are going well especially if one of ‘em is a big hitter. So that’s what should be done ideally speaking. However, that doesn’t tend to happen.

Most team keep the batting power play right until the end when they have ‘not much to lose’ i.e. even if the batting power play goes not as per plan it wouldn’t have a major effect on the eventual score. In other words it basically means under reliance on the power play or what critics would call ‘under utilization of the power play’.

What seems to baffle me is that if the batsmen are going to hell for leather in the last ten Overs whatever be the case then why waste the batting power play in that situation. It is all together a different matter if a team is 7 down by the 35th over and decides to keep the batting power play aside. However, that too could be a cause of concern as if less number of wickets have fallen that obviously means that a better batsman is at the crease and hence he will be able to make better use of the batting power play.

Hence, I would say that in most cases especially if wickets are in hand it is best that the batting power play is taken between the 35th and 40th over as there is a mandatory ball change in the 35th over in the innings. This will be a newer harder and more visible ball which would help the ball come on to the bat and could also be sighted with ease.

Test cricket was at its peak until the first ever 60-overs one-day international match was played between Australia and England at MCG in January 1971. Soon, this format of the game became so popular that the first limited-overs World Championship of Cricket was played in England just four years later, which West Indies won.

Ever since then, the one-day game has been prone to changes. For example, in the 1980s, the ICC reduced the amount of overs in a limited-overs fixture from 60 to 50, making the game more interesting for spectators. And till today, a one-day international (ODI) game remains a usual 50-over affair.

Since the era of commercializing cricket perhaps began in the 90’s, it was expected that the ODIS would be a hit among sponsors as well, who would be willing to advertise as viewers across the world are glued to their television sets watching a cricket match intensely as ever. More World Cup tournaments were held with coloured clothing introduced in the 1992 edition of the World Cup, which was the idea of Kerry Packer, the Australian who advocated cricket with coloured clothing as early as the 70’s.

White balls were introduced, making it possible to host day-night matches using white balls. Soon white balls were given the thumbs-up to be used in day matches as well which even required new, black sight-screens. Thus the one-day game became a favourite amongst every cricket lover.

But then came perhaps the golden phase of cricket. In 2003, a new version of limited overs cricket called the T-20’s was introduced in England. This format meant that unlike matches in which each team had to bat 50 overs, here the teams have to bat just 20 overs each or 120 balls in simple terms.

This implied that matches would get over quickly and runs would be scored at a faster rate. Twenty-20 became a hit in England and thus like the one-day game was spread across the world. And it has also become internationally-acclaimed when the ICC introduced the T-20 internationals concept in 2005. Since then, T-20 has taken the world by storm. It has reached heights as spectators would be more willing to watch a much more exciting and short T-20 game rather than a relatively boring and a longer 50-over game.

So the question rises – Can the 50-over survive for long?

It may not, as the inaugural T-20 World Cup in 2007 in South Africa, saw a large number of audiences in the stadium as well as on television, bettering the 2007 50-over World Cup in the West Indies by far. And to top it, India won the T-20 World Cup, resulting in more fan-following as India is a popular team in most cricketing countries.

As a matter of fact, the T-20 was a mode of cricket getting globalized and not just commercialized through India. Soon, the Indian Premier League (IPL) followed which was the Indian cricket board’s (BCCI) brainchild. And this tournaments played between the top 8 cricketing cities across India, became a hit amongst viewers across the world as well as international players in the first edition itself in 2008.

Then Lalit Modi, the IPL commissioner, made sure that the tournament took place in South Africa in 2009 despite security threats. South Africa, too embraced T-20s like never before. Looking at this, other countries like England and Australia are planning to form their own tournaments based on the concept of IPL as cricket then would reach to a new level in the countries due to the dwindling interest of people there in the one-dayers. The ICC too is reckoning whether the IPL must have a place in the future tours programme (FTP), which is basically the international cricket calendar.

However, the one-day game still has a place in cricket even if cricketers give importance to either test cricket or T-20s. The one-dayers determine whether a batsman is wholesome, i.e, if he can defend as well as attack, reacting to the situation as demanded. It shows whether bowlers are skilled enough to face challenges in test cricket. It tests the pressures of fielders, therefore one-dayers can determine fielding standards of a team.

So, the one day game can survive as long as the ICC gives meaning to it in its FTP. It could foster national pride within players as well rather than they wanting to play in tournaments such as the IPL. Or like Sachin Tendulkar suggested that the one-day format could be further revamped by making it like a longer T-20 in the test style where each team bats 25 overs in two innings each and are followed by strategic time-outs.

This makes the scoring rate faster like the T-20s and could rekindle the interest of audiences across the world. Perhaps more matches could also take place with top one-day teams clashing against each other, such as India, Australia and South Africa. The ICC has tried to make the one day game survive by the successful organizing of the Champions Trophy every two years in different countries. They have also taken a risk by making the game batting-friendly by allowing 20 overs of the power play for the batting side, i.e. fielding restrictions.

However, the one day format of cricket is falling apart thanks to all countries accepting T-20’s as the future of the game. T-20’s seem to be a practical way of playing cricket these days. With events such as the IPL, the one day game is nowhere at the moment. Even Tendulkar’s idea will take time to be implemented by the ICC and accepted by people warmly.

Reducing ticket prices won’t help if people aren’t interested and patient in watching 50-over cricket. So, its true that cricket needs to respect the 50-over format and recognize players appropriately for their achievements, like in the 90’s. The 50-over game can survive if the ICC doesn’t act like a puppet to the BCCI and respects the quality of cricket rather than the money involved in it. In fact, I believe that if 50-over cricket will grow money if its quality is good enough to appeal fans across the world.

Placid wickets: Flat decks are found in most stadiums across the world. This is due to the commercialization of the game as people like to see more runs scored. As the era has moved on, we see a gradual change from uncovered to covered pitches. In the times of English opener Geoffrey Boycott, the pitches were uncovered thus making batting extremely difficult.

However, in the recent era, pitches are covered to protect from adverse weather conditions. A stat to confirm the above – in the 1990’s, only Sachin Tendulkar, Steve Waugh, Brian Lara and XYZ averaged over 50 after playing 20 Tests where as in the 2000’s there’s been a increased rise in the number of batsmen averaging over 50.

Rules:
In order to help batsman take advantage of the new ball, the ICC, after the 1983 World Cup, introduced field restrictions which basically meant that only two fielders would be allowed outside the 30-yard circle for the first 15 Overs. This was tweaked a little when in 2005 when the power-plays were introduced which is an extended version of the field restrictions.

One bouncer per over: To add to this, in 1992, in order to control the aggressive nature of the bowlers, the ICC introduced the one bouncer per over rule. Not a very famous rule amongst the commoners, the ICC had banned bouncers for a 7 year period. However, they re-instated the rule. Thank goodness for that!

Free hit: The inception of the free hit in 2007 just after the Twenty-20 World Cup only added to the agony of the bowlers. Yet, another rule in favour of the batsmen. The free hit means that if the bowler oversteps, the batsman has an opportunity to play a big shot without any fear of being given out. The only possible way of getting out is a run-out. And worse, one run is already added to the batting team’s total (no ball).

Equipments: One of the ongoing issues that has sparked off a debate amongst experts being the size of the cricket bat. Bat widths seem to be growing year after year. The fact of the matter being if that can happen; then why can’t something be done to the 5 and a half ounce cherry. Why isn’t the ball made smaller/lighter? Why favour the batsmen?
The ICC is still to answer this.

Ground sizes: Grounds in South Africa, West Indies and New Zealand are too small in size thus leaving the bowlers with no margin for error.

One of the major reasons to this (batting friendly game) is the sponsors. Take for case Test cricket. The sponsors in order to fill in maximum commercial slots try and take the game to 5 days which doesn’t happen on a green wicket. The ICC needs to take heed of this and make cricket a contest between bat and ball and not a ‘video game’.