Day-night Test cricket is the future. In recognising that, India’s cricket board has displayed both awareness and pragmatism. New Zealand, who are touring later this year, might have been presented with a fait accompli — their cricket board first heard of it when India made the announcement — so clearly old habits die hard. If players or boards object, they can be paid a special bonus as was done on the only occasion a Test was played into the night.
That inaugural day-night Test in Adelaide last November was either a roaring success (New Zealand captain Brendon McCullum) or one where sighting the pink ball was difficult (Australia’s Mitchell Starc). The nay-sayers had a grocery list of complaints: the durability of the Kookaburra ball, the difficulty of seeing the seam, the artificiality of the turf which had to be ‘doctored’ to reduce the wear and tear on the ball, the late finish everyday and more.
These are all genuine problems, but in waiting for perfect conditions, cricket has often lost out. Day-night Tests might add an extra degree of difficulty to the sport, at least initially. But these are still Test matches, and to suggest, as Kevin Pietersen has, that they will have to be recorded differently merely points to an obsession with statistics. Overcoming varying conditions is, after all, the essence of Test cricket. And, the format needs all the help it can get.
Cricket administrators have generally been conservative, tending to look at change with suspicion. Each generation convinces itself that the game has remained unchanged and that it is in everybody’s best interests to leave it that way. This is the fallacy of tradition.
Evolution The game has evolved continually. Not only will W.G. Grace not recognise T20 as a version of the game he played, he will not see Test cricket either as the same. Wickets are covered, grounds are not dangerous, sixes don’t have to clear the ground, stumps are an inch taller. The ‘Spirit of Cricket’ section was brought into the laws only in 2000, and this, Grace observed in the breach!
Every change met with resistance; then the wheel turned again, and yet another generation resisted changes in the mistaken notion they were protecting the game before finally accepting. Night cricket, coloured clothing, the third umpire, use of technology, code of conduct, the match referee, placement of advertisement on the ground, electronic boundary hoardings, Danny Morrison — any one of these things we recognise as part of the game today might have caused earlier generations apoplexy. Today’s revolutionary is tomorrow’s establishment, as happens so often.
The basic problem with night Test cricket seems to be the pink ball, and it does not take a great leap to imagine the manufacturers improving its quality and strength. A survey in Australia among those who played first class cricket with a pink ball last year revealed that 75 per cent felt that it did not provide a fair contest between bat and ball.
The solution is not to jettison night cricket but to ensure that a fair contest is provided. Sometimes cricketers can be conservative too, and prefer the status quo . Familiarity breeds contempt for the new. Why tempt failure in a new environment when success in the old one is guaranteed?
A refreshing counter to this argument is provided by the great South African fast bowler Dale Steyn. “You want to test your skills against all that,” he has said, referring to the unfamiliar conditions of night cricket: the ball, the pitch, the atmosphere.
Myriad challenges in India In India, there will be other challenges: the dew, for one. Super sopper, ropes and chemical sprays have all been tried, but so far there has been no foolproof method. One presumes that necessity will be the mother of invention here. While it is a black-and-white case in the shorter format, with captains deciding to bowl on winning the toss, in the five-day game the challenges will be more subtle. The changeover time, as natural light gives way to the artificial is a tricky period to bat and captains will try to work around that. Likewise with the dew.
It may not be all good for the game initially, nor for the players, but things will settle down over a period, making the transition all the more interesting. Cricket has adapted before. Different conditions also mean that the danger of homogeneity as presented by similar tracks in pursuit of full action over five days, will be met with a modicum of uncertainty. Uncertainty, happily, is the basis of all competitive sport.
The Test will have another problem — the game starts in New Zealand around 10 p.m., and that is not good news for television there. But night Test cricket is expected to bring in the crowds. The match in Adelaide which lasted just three days attracted 123,736 to the ground and millions on television.
How good will it be in India? The best way to find out is to try it. Lights, action camera have all to come together. Worst case scenario? The optimism was misplaced. But status quo can be restored easily enough.
