Player-official partnership on the decline
THE FOURDAY TEST IS A CONCEPT THAT HAS TO BE SOLD, NOT FOISTED ON PLAYERS LIKE A COMPULSORY SCHOOL UNIFORM
Throughout the ages cricket has been known for it’s enduring partnerships --- Hobbs and Sutcliffe, Lawry and Simpson, Greenidge and Haynes, Tendulkar and Ganguly and that’s only a few of the revered opening combinations.
On the bowling side there’s the Bodyline duo of Larwood and Voce, accompanied by some of the most feared pairings in the game --- Hall and Griffith, Lillee and Thomson, Roberts and Holding, Marshall and Garner. Then there are the wily combinations of O’Reilly and Grimmett, Laker and Lock and the evenly balanced one of Warne and McGrath.
These are all well known pairs that don’t even require first names to be easily recognised. Nevertheless, cricket has seemingly overlooked the most important partnership and it’s time this oversight was rectified for the future good of the game.
That’s the partnership which should exist between players and administrators. It was obvious during the recent dispute involving the players and Cricket Australia that the most important ingredient missing from the negotiations was respect.
Hopefully, following this unseemly dispute there will come the realisation that for the game to grow in the future this has to be a partnership.
In my experience of dealing with and then watching cricket administrations from afar, they’ve always suffered from one major failing --- the lack of understanding for what it takes to play the game successfully at the highest level.
In general, administrators are loath to heavily involve ex-players in the running of the game. The easiest way for administrators to overcome this flaw is to utilise the knowledge that is readily available by acting in partnership with FICA, the international players’ body.
A classic example where this would work really well is the current discussion on the merit of four-day Test matches.
The only way four-day Test cricket will become a reality is by administrators consulting with players to ensure they are on-side. The four-day Test match is a concept that has to be sold, not foisted on players like a compulsory school uniform.
Four-day Test has a lot of merit. Matches could run from Thursday to Sunday with the likelihood of a result on the weekend, which would appeal to television companies. And four days of play would allow more rest in between games.
However, to achieve a viable framework for four day Tests it’s going to take compromise from both players and administrators. I understand that the first reaction of some players is to retain five-day Tests. That’s basically the way the game has operated since the second World War and it’s understandable current players would want similar opportunities to their predecessors.
But to remain relevant, Test cricket needs to change gears from a gentle jog to a high-speed sprint to keep up with the times.
The first point to make in selling this concept would be to underline the need for Test cricket to reflect those changing times. To do this the administrators have to convince players that they are genuinely interested in preserving Tests and appreciate that cricketers generally desire the ultimate challenge the longer version presents.
Given a lot of thought and the mood to innovate, Test cricket could rebound in the 21st century. However, to achieve a desirable result it will require a combination of expert knowledge and solid business acumen --- the basis for a sound partnership.