In the first Test of the current series, Sri Lanka won the toss, batted first and scored 500-plus. A spineless Indian batting display in both innings led to a comprehensive defeat. Had India scored 44 more runs in the first innings, the Test could still have been saved.
In the second Test too, Sri Lanka won the toss, batted first and crossed 600 easily on the second day itself. Deja vu? But India (at 95-0) can still hope to touch the magical figure of 442 (to avoid the follow-on) and secure a nice boring draw.
Which brings up the question asked frequently by non-cricket playing nations: How can two teams play a game for five long days and still not have a result a large number of times?
Statistical highlights of India-Sri Lanka second Test
In the recently concluded football World Cup, it was quite frustrating when both teams did not score even after extra time in any match. But still penalty shoot-outs do bring about a result.
If only there was a similar solution for Tests!
ODIs have seen a lot of innovations since when they were first introduced: Reduction to 50 overs, day-night games, power plays, free hit rules etc. In the meantime the brand new T20 was also invented.
But Tests have by and large remained static for more than 100 years. Of course, some moves have certainly helped: The doing away of the 8-ball over, neutral umpires and the upping of the run rate by the Australians, something totally mastered by players like Virender Sehwag. But still a lot more has to be done and one should strive for a much greater results percentage in Tests.
A look at some of the things that have been discussed over the years…
Ban the Toss!
This was first suggested by the legendary Sunil Gavaskar and is not as crazy as it sounds. The proposal was simple: The visiting team would decide whether they wanted to bat or bowl first all the time.
What purpose will this serve?
Say a team is visiting India. The groundsmen would not make totally flat pitches because they would know that the visitors would bat first. They would try to make a sporting wicket: One that would aid both the batting and fielding team. Say a team is visiting Australia. The groundsmen would not make a green killer of a pitch for the very same reasons.
Since countries refuse to make sporting pitches by themselves, this rule would force them to do so. This would also counter the trend of all teams winning more frequently on home soil and lead to a level-playing field.
Forced First Innings Declarations
On flat pitches, the team batting first usually plays for two full days to shut out their chance of losing. Then the match becomes non-competitive. The other team is just catching up and trying to force a draw. If both teams had to declare their first innings after 150 overs, then there would be plenty of time in the match to ensure a result either way.
This would also bring slog overs into Tests. If a team plays out say 130 overs with a lot of wickets in hand, then there would be fireworks in the last 20 overs, making Tests more exciting.
Day-Night Tests
While you can do nothing about rain, you can surely do something about light. If all the Tests were day-night matches, then not only would you secure fuller stadiums, but time would not be lost due to bad light.
Of course, the biggest impediment for this: What type of ball to use? One experiment was done with pink balls. But not everyone was satisfied with the result.
Cricket being a multi-billion dollar sport, many more such experiments should be done to arrive at the right conditions for day-night Tests. There is no shortage of funds. The ICC should accept this in principle and pave the way for a solution.
Penalize the Negative Bowlers
While this may sound harsh, sometimes it is required to discourage negative bowling. How many times have you seen the bowler bowl wide of the off-stump and the batsman not even offering a shot! That totally kills the game and is the worst advertisement for Test cricket.
The ODI wide ball rules should be implemented in Tests too. That would mean more runs, more wickets and less boredom.
(Maybe Tests require the free hit too!)
India vs Sri Lanka
Crack the Scheduling Whip
While usually the host side decides which matches to play where and when, the ICC should have the veto power when it comes to the weather. How many matches have been played during the rainy season or during peak winters when light and visibility becomes a major issue?
Many a time the awarding of a match to a particular city becomes a political issue and the weather isn’t taken into account. The loser, of course, is cricket.
Follow-on at 150
The follow-on difference should be brought down from 200 to 150 runs. That will make things more competitive and force a result.
There’s nothing wrong in aiming for a cent per cent result in Tests.
It’s something that may well save this form of the game in the distant future.
The author is a Bangalore-based journalist and blogger.
