There have been more meaningless Test series played in the past 10 years than ever before but, for South African fans at least, the current one between the Proteas and the West Indies in the Caribbean has extended the boundaries of decency more than any other. Perhaps broken them, in fact.
It may sound like a harsh judgment, given the achievements of the team in sweeping the one-day series 50 and dominating the Test series, and with the extraordinary records and achievements of Graeme Smith (7 000 Test runs), Mark Boucher (a unique “double” of 5 000 Test runs and 500 dismissals) and especially Jacques Kallis (11 000 Test runs and 35 centuries), there has been much to smile about.
But the fact remains that the contest is a mismatch and it doesn’t mean anything or count towards anything. When team sports are played largely for the benefit of the individuals involved and their personal records and satisfaction, they are invariably on shaky ground. Sport is, after all, in the entertainment business, although that concept was evidently alien to Shivnarine Chanderpaul during the second Test in St Kitts this week.
Chance to fix things
The wise men of the International Cricket Council (ICC) have another chance to do something about the situation this weekend when the chief executives and presidents of the leading nations gather in Singapore for their annual general meeting. Top of the agenda is the threatened appointment of former Australian prime minister John Howard as the organisation’s vice-president and president-elect in two years’ time.
Howard was nominated by Australia and (with some reluctance) New Zealand as the Australasian candidate. Unsurprisingly, South Africa and Zimbabwe were less than enamoured of the idea of being led by a politician of any sort, let alone one with some extreme right-wing views and a history of intolerance. The ICC, after all, is supposed to be an apolitical organisation.
The shady deals concluded in five-star hotel bars this weekend will, in all likelihood, result in Howard being confirmed in his new role, with Zimbabwe and South Africa withdrawing their objections in exchange for a meaningful place in the future tours programme (FTP). And who knows what South Africa might seek as compensation for backing down from an important point of principle? A review of the entire FTP itself would be a great place to start.
Further down the agenda for the annual meeting will be the institution of a Test championship. It has been raised and debated before and always dismissed (primarily by India and England) because it might interfere with their primary purpose, which is to look after themselves to the detriment of all others and to make as much money as possible to the exclusion of all others. Cricket’s administrators have never understood the notion of “collective health”.
Any meaningful Test championship would, of course, involve all teams playing against one another on a home-and-away basis in a given time frame — just like any other meaningful sports league anywhere in the world. But a variety of proposals on that basis were quickly filed in the “too hard” basket at previous ICC meetings, so now, by all accounts, there is something new on the table. It is a weak apology of a compromise, but it’s a starting point.
The suggestion now is that the top four nations contest two semi-finals and a final every four years over an 18-day period. And that’s it. Over and done with. Then it’s back to the four-year slog of trying to fit in tours to less desirable destinations in between lucrative Ashes series and anything involving India.
Making suggestions
There is another suggestion on the agenda that involves splitting the nations with official ODI status into two divisions, with promotion and relegation between them every two years. But all would automatically be included in an expanded T20 World Cup every two years, whereas the World Cup “proper” — the 50-over version — would become more “exclusive” and include only, perhaps, the top eight or 10 nations.
This formula, if adopted, will undoubtedly make limited-overs life more exciting for Zimbabwe, Ireland, Kenya and Holland — and potentially embarrassing from time to time for the West Indies, who might face the prospect of travelling to Kabul to play Afghanistan in years to come, but essentially nothing would change for the big boys. Except, hopefully, when the Test championship rolls around every four years.
If it is ratified, then it can only be hoped that it generates enough interest and enthusiasm among fans and administrators for them to realise that it might not be a bad idea to give Test cricket some context and meaning for the other three years.