One-day games should be reduced to lift standard in Tests

by A. C. de Silva

CRICKET: One-Day cricket seems to have come to stay for long. The Sweeping manner in which this type of cricket had won the hearts of the cricket loving public, forces many cricket followers to believe that it is about the good thing that had happened to cricket. With the financial success achieved through these one-dayers, the game's administrators the world over should now think in terms of laying emphasis more on the purpose and class of Test cricket. To lift Test cricket, the one-day games should be reduced.

These limited-overs cricket should not be overplayed. It should enjoy only the status of an off season game. These views were expressed by former Indian Test cricketer Erapalli Prasanna.

Then another former Indian cricketer - B. S. Chandrasekhar says that the most fascinating aspects of the game could be witnessed and enjoyed if only the game was played in the conventional fashion.

It may appear somewhat odd to hear these two great spinners airing their views on one-day cricket, as they seldom had taken part in it. While Prasanna had never played for the country, Chandra has appeared once. That was in New Zealand during India's twin tour of the West Indies and New Zealand about two decades ago.

Chandra went on to elaborate a point convincingly. 'But those were the days when one-day cricket did not catch the imagination of the players and administrators, especially of India. The first two World Cups, and a few internationals during tours were about the one one-day exposures during his period. 'Had the one-dayers been as popular and as important as they are now, I am sure I would have become stale. The crowded programme would certainly tell in the style of mental and physical preparation for an international encounter. That is why I suggest to minimise these one-dayers. Let there be a separate one-day series involving three or even more countries once or twice a year instead of clubbing them with a Test series.

One-dayers - little to offer

Prasanna, however, was of different view regarding the practice of having one-day internationals along with a Test series.

"A player with professional attitude should be accepting the realities. It is like going to the office and discharging your duty in the desired fashion".

That apart, Prasanna expressed identical views on major aspects.

Both felt the one-dayers, except from the entertainment value and fabulous money involved, have very little to offer the players, to show improvement in technique and other aspects of the game.

To safeguard the values of the game, the innings-specified cricket should be given more attention.

At no level of cricket there should be more than two over-specified tournaments for season. That would help the established as well as the aspiring talent to understand the demands of these two styles of games and also to prepare themselves suitably.

Too much one-dayers

Former Indian Test cricketer and captain Bishen Singh Bedi was of the view that in recent times there has been a little too much of this one-day stuff. He said that the reason for the one-day cricket can easily be explained by the fact that it is comparatively easier for the administration to run it and at the same time the public wants it.

The cricketers, he said, would like the longer duration game. But then the players all over the world have very little to say in the running of the game. This over-indulgence in one-day contests is definitely at the expense of the basic niceties of the game itself.

Bedi says that what hurts him most is that seldom any credit is given to bowlers in limited-over competitions. Their job is not to get wickets, but to check runs. If at all someone gets a lot of wickets it is only because of batsmen throwing their bats about. The game in any case has always been loaded in favour of the batsmen. But this makes it worse. There is very little chance for a bowler to establish his credentials.

There is hardly any cricketing logic in this type of game. Money makes it exciting. But Bedi wouldn't attach much importance to the performance in this type of cricket to judge the calibre of a player. And for that matter he won't attach much importance to the lack of success of any player in the one-day game. What should matter is the consistency in the five-day game.

Bedi went on to say that "to a class Test player, the switch to one-day cricket should not matter much. The one-day variety has become as much a part of the international scene as anything else that a modern cricketer has to make the necessary adjustments.

"I would hate to think that the traditional game would make room for the one-day slog. Perhaps to minimise stalemates some restriction on the number of overs could be introduced without disturbing the basic structure if the five-day game. We have to realise one thing: "Cricket is not a game to be played endlessly for fun", Bedi said.

Test cricket - traditional value

One-time cricketing great of India - Polly Umrigar has said that the main reason for one-day cricket's popularity is the nature of the game which is "result oriented".

It is either this way or that, and the public is satisfied. Another reason is the one-day game is a money spinner which enhances the finance of the respective cricket boards. Contemporary cricket scene has reached a stage where Test cricket and the abridged version go hand in glove going by the present trend, the weightage is more on instant cricket and this should not be allowed to gain the upper-hand.

Test cricket has traditional value and at all costs should be saved. It is for the establishment (the International Cricket Conference) to study and save the five-day cricket.

The one-day cricket has a stereo type, field pattern. The aim is not to give away runs taking wickets is secondary unlike in Tests where getting rid of the batsman is the intension.

Test cricket - an art

R. G. Nadkarni - another great cricketer of the past in India said that instant cricket came into the scene in order to save a dying game in England. It was a method to pay the professionals that instant cricket was introduced there. It was merely a compliment for Tests and other first-class games survive.

But now instant cricket has taken precedence over Tests. Cricket is an art and is spread over a time-lag and that is what Test cricket is. But now everybody finds limited over games more enjoyable.

Cricket has developed on the commercial lines. But how far can this go? I think it has crossed the limit and has come to stay.

It will be a sad day when Test cricket loses its charm. The one-day cricket is not only a complement but a part and parcel of any tour programme. It is for the I.C.C. to bring back the traditional value.

Limited overs game to dominate

One-time Indian opening batsman Nari Contractor who survived a nasty accident on the field, said that five-day cricket is a time consuming exercise. He asked: "Who has the time nowadays to spend five days and see a Test match? There is no point in seeing a Test on Sunday and miss the game on the other days. Whereas you have one full day of entertaining cricket in limited overs. There is not a dull moment.However, in one-day cricket one misses the art of batting and bowling. But to the players, a drawn match may be a very keenly fought battle in trying to save a Test.

I would not like to differentiate between the two types of cricket but I strongly feel that limited overs game is going to dominate in the future, Contractor said.