2-match Test series - makes sense?
Bidipto Datta
Cricket Text Commentator at Sportskeeda || Sports | Youth Affairs | Technology | India i.e., Bharat
Right friends, it's perhaps the most straightforward question we can ask. What is your take on 2-match Test series in a WTC cycle?
One-offs are fine, one-offs happen for a reason or the other and we're all for that. Australia and England are going to play a one-off Test in 2027 to mark and celebrate 150 years of this format. So, that's totally fine.
Ireland and Zimbabwe played a one-off Test very recently and that was great too, because we got to see two teams in whites who generally don't get that opportunity or that backing, monetarily. So, the chance they got was good enough to show people concerned what they are made of.
But what's with this 2-Test thing? New Zealand, South Africa, the West Indies and a few other teams are playing more and more 2-match Test series these days. Why? Do they deserve it?
No, it's not about how good or bad the teams are. Any side can go through ups and downs. The down-phase can last long also. So that better not be held accountable all the time. But we are not sure how a 2-match Test series helps anybody for that matter.
Just think about it, you win the 1st Test and then lose the 2nd, or, you lose the 1st Test and then win the 2nd, what happens? The series is drawn, right? Then why not give yourself the chance to break this deadlock by playing another match?
We're not trying to apply complex logic here, we're keeping it plain and simple. Here's another thing. If you're an away team and happen to lose the first game, can you win the series? No. Do you get the chance to visit that country again in the next six months for another Test series? No. You have to wait for another three to four years for that, right? Then why wouldn't you want a third game?
领英推荐
If the question is all about money, which many think it is and we don't necessarily object, why don't these teams play more and more 2-match Test series in a calendar year? Fine, play at least five 2-match Test series then. But then, if you can play five such series, you can easily increase a match more in one series, can't you?
So as much as the problem is with money, it is also to do with interest and will. If you're interested in playing more and more Test matches, you will fight for it, no matter what. Won't you? If you're uninterested, you'll find plenty of reasons, or should we say, excuses.
For example, the West Indies continue to play less and less in whites. Can't the board do anything about it? It will tell you it can't but actually, if it wants, it can. If it wants help from countries like India, England and Australia, it will take it. If it wants help from the ICC, it will take it. But it will make sure that the team plays more Test matches.
That may involve taking a few risks but if that risk is worth the reward, nothing like it! But, the safer route is to overlook this format and if anything, focus on something else.
Do focus on that something else, but why at the cost of Test cricket? Nothing happens for the sake of anything. It's all about the will. It rarely happens that money raised from a franchise-based T20 tournament is spent on Test cricket. It rarely does.
So, after all this, let's get back to the original question. What's your take on 2-Test series, for WTC cycles in particular?