It was Bill Clinton who said “the price of doing the same old thing is far higher than the price of change”.
For a game which is considered by many to be quite conservative, cricket has been positively entrepreneurial in the way it has changed over the past 40 years.
When I was growing up, Test cricket, played in cream clothing in daylight, was the only option available for someone who wanted to play the game. Black and white television was the only option if one couldn’t get to the game. The game had become moribund and was in dire need of excitement.
The intervention of Kerry Packer and World Series Cricket in the late ’70 saw the introduction of the white ball, coloured clothes, black sight screens for limited over games plus multiple cameras from all angles for its coverage. The players loved it and so did the public.
Not everybody embraced the change though. Traditionalists were up in arms that the devil incarnate, Packer, had hijacked their game.
The worst predictions did not come about and the game gained strength. Batsmen, who had been considered to be pedestrian, developed new skills and upped their run rate. The new skills were then transferred to Test cricket, which enjoyed a rise in popularity.
This began to change in the 90s when administrators around the world preferred the cash-cow 50-over game. At the start of the new Century, twenty-over cricket began to demand its place in the sun or under the moon. Test cricket was in danger of becoming a part-time player.
Cricket Australia’s Chief Executive, James Sutherland, has been a leading proponent of day/night Test cricket for some time. The biggest hurdle to overcome for day/night Test cricket is that the white ball was not able to survive the rigours of 50 overs, let alone the need to get through a minimum of 85 overs in a Test innings.
Well researchedA lot of research, time and money have been spent by ball manufacturers on trying to develop a coloured ball, other than white, that could replicate the characteristics of the red ball.
The biggest issue is that leather, when tanned, comes out as a dull grey colour. Tanned leather takes the red dye very well and becomes red, so when the shine goes off the ball, it is still red and is still easily seen.
A light lacquer is all that is required on the red ball to be shiny to start with and, by the application of some perspiration or saliva and a hefty dose of elbow grease, one side can be maintained in good condition in most environments to gain natural swing.
With some specialist management, which includes keeping the ball as dry as possible, it can be maintained to create reverse swing.
The problem with white and most other colours other than red is that the leather does not accept the colour and remains grey underneath. As the colour gets abraded by the pitch surface, it is removed and the ball becomes grey again. Depending on the type of pitch surface, the grey then begins to take on the colour of the surface and becomes harder to see.
While the red ball is always contrasted against the surface, no matter its colour, the batsman is able to pick up the length of deliveries more easily than when the ball starts to adopt the colour of the surface. This problem is exacerbated under lights.
With the research that has been done, it is believed that the pink ball is as close as one can get to the characteristics of the red ball and still be easily seen in daylight and at night under lights. No doubt the change of playing conditions from day to night will create some challenges for the players, but they will have to keep adapting. The envelope has to be pushed if Test cricket is to maintain its pre-eminent position.
Unless I am a poor judge, I believe the people of my old home town of Adelaide will throng to the Adelaide Oval later this month (Nov. 27 to Dec. 1) for the first official day/night Test between Australia and New Zealand.
In this era, people do not have the luxury of taking time off from work to go to one day let alone multiple days of Test cricket. It is imperative that the game acknowledge this and becomes more accessible.
No doubt there will be many traditionalists who will decry the move, but if the game does not adjust to the needs of the paying public, the price of not doing so will be a hefty one indeed.
