Taking the 'Bollocks' out of Tests

But keeping the Respect

Discussion about the merits and demerits of ‘Bazball’, whatever it is, have been fascinating and absorbing. In the tiny context of cricket. There are many more important world events to claim our attention but the Ashes are well underway and, it’s hard to ignore.

    A brilliant article by Barney Ronay in The Guardian presented an entirely coherent argument that Bazball has become a ‘cult.’ Common consent of the definition of a ‘cult’ includes the unquestioning following of its mantra by its followers and constant repetition of its values. Those boxes have been firmly ticked.

    An equally emphatic, and opposite argument was presented by Lawrence Booth in The Mail in which he stuck firmly to cricketing facts and, with characteristic good grace, did not attempt to ridicule other views. England had won one Test out of 17 before the new approach, and 11 out of 14 with the new one. They lost the opening Test at Edgbaston because they dropped catches and missed stumpings which cost them over 200 runs. It was another entirely coherent argument.

    Brendon McCullum has spoken about the need for Test cricket to be ‘entertaining’ in order to survive, not just for audiences to continue watching but for the best players to be attracted to playing it. Part of that process, as I saw with my own eyes on tour in New Zealand earlier this year, involves the demystification of Test cricket.

    In the earliest years of the format Test cricket didn’t have ‘ultimate’ or ‘elite’ status for the players. They didn’t even know they were playing Test cricket. The title was appended retrospectively. But for the last century it has enjoyed exalted status, and still does, at least for the majority of international cricketers and supporters. 

    McCullum is right about the need for Test cricket to remain relevant in the entertainment business, and for players to embrace the concept that they are not just playing for themselves or their team-mates but for the public who have paid (a lot of money) for tickets or an equally significant satellite subscription.

    But the reverence for the format, as much as the players enjoy it and aspire towards it, can be counter productive. It often is, especially with players at the beginning of their careers. Reverence can turn to revulsion when the weight of the occasion, and expectation, drain the player of the instincts which got him there in the first place.

   It’s not only the players who can be awed by Test cricket. For 25 years I wore a tie on the first day (at least) of every Test, not because I felt compelled to but because I ‘wanted’ to. Like many watching, and playing, it felt appropriate to do something different to acknowledge a special occasion. No matter how ridiculous I looked in the extreme heat of Guwahati. (25 years ago.)

    The ‘New England’ (Bazball) approach is exciting and has undoubtedly attracted more viewers, confirmed by figures. Attracting viewers is one thing, but winning matches is more important. And here’s the problem with England’s disconnect with many of their supporters has come about. What happens in the ‘camp’, the changing room, is often best kept there.

    No less than five coaches, both lifestyle and cricket, sent me messages saying that the ‘not results based’ approach is for players only, not followers and supporters. It was formulated many years ago to assist players in letting go of their anxieties and play ‘as they always do’ but sharing that concept with their supporters is not smart. To say, publicly, that winning is not the team’s first priority cannot play well. And it hasn’t. But the concept is sound.

    The most important point about contextualising the Test cricket pedestal, rather than lowering it a little, is that its players are more likely to perform at their best. If they are more inspired than intimidated, they will be more likely to bristle than simmer.

    Blazers and ties, formality and function, addresses by Presidents and Royalty, the formal blah blah can be draining and dysfunctional. Add that to the daunting, ‘ultimate’ status of Test cricket, it’s no wonder that so many players have made slow starts to their careers – and so many have underperformed and disappeared.

    As much as players enjoy the special history and status of the five-day game, and all that it stands for, they may restrospectively enjoy the modernisation of it by Stokes and McCullum even more. After all, the Ashes are extremely important, but they are still games of sport.