Cricket is just one game, right?

Casual up to mildly but not severely infatuated fans of cricket may treat it as a simple unitary sport – ‘cricket’. In many ways, this is true but in others it is not true, as the game is divided into two main formats – Test matches and One Day Internationals (50 over cricket). Currently, I will leave out the complexity of Twenty20 international cricket, a form of cricket in its infancy. Both prominent formats utilize a bat and ball, pads and wickets, 4s and 6s, and so on. However, in selecting players, one must distinguish between the two major formats.

The obvious difference in the formats of the game would be the time span. A Test match lasts five days, as many a casual person who has heard vaguely about cricket points out, ‘and it can sometimes end in a draw, what the hell is that about!’ with unfettering powers of genius observation. A One Day International lasts 50 overs per innings, totaling around seven hours over just one day. This timespan has a quite literal influence on both bowlers and batsmen. A batsman must bat at a sufficient speed for the shortened form of the game and a bowler must look to restrict rather than overtly take wickets. These differences may seem minor but if you consider the difference between attempting a lengthy rally in tennis and attempting to win a point, the difference may become apparent to the summer dwellers of Wimbledon.

I fear I have done an un-exhaustive job in convincing you that the formats are wildly different in the playing style required. However, this is not due to a short coming of the writer, such a thing is not possible, it is rather because I seek to keep this article short and therefore wish to move on to my next point which are some empirical examples and an analysis of such. On to the point made in paragraph two, a highly defensive batsman will have difficulty producing attacking strokeplay at a whim if he does not possess such a capability. Mark Richardson was a wall of an opening batsman. He had a resolute technique and a defensive temperament to match. However, put him in front of the white ball with a time limit on his runs and he floundered. In his 4 ODI innings, he mustered just 42 runs. Compare this to his excellent Test record of 2776 runs at 44.77 in Test cricket. I will not bore you with a similar analysis for other players. One example on the other side may prove sufficient and Mohammad Sami can fill such a quota. He was a capable ODI bowler, utilizing swing at high speeds. However, his lack of consistency proved his undoing as he accumulated one of the poorest records of a Test bowler to play as many Tests as he did. As a general rule, the slow medium pacer (see Chris Harris for more) would also appear to be a skill which cannot translate from ODI to Test cricket whereas, as previously mentioned, the resolute defensive batsman cannot make the opposite movement.

This is something that selectors must take more notice of when selecting a team. Performance in one format does not equal excellence in the other. It would sound obvious, but at the domestic level, if a player has excelled at limited overs and floundered at 4 day cricket than it should be an ODI call up that he is expecting rather than a Test cap. Similarly, although the 4 day format is the primary format of domestic cricket, if a player has performed well at 4 day cricket, he should not be a shoe in for the ODI team. This seems almost so simple that it is patronizing but tell that to the England selectors who selected Stuart Meaker based on 4 day cricket form for the One Day International series against India (Meaker had actually been poor for Surrey in the limited overs format) with pretty dire consequences in terms of his personal performance.

Of course, the caveat of ‘great’ cricketers such as Sachin Tendulkar, Glenn Mcgrath, Jacques Kallis, and so on, can be used to justify selecting a cricketer based on an aura of excellence rather than consistent performances in the relevant format. But let me ask you, did these players excel in all formats at all levels? The answer is yes and perhaps this answer as well as the rest of the article will convince international cricket selectors to be more prudent – as we all know they are avid readers of the Yorker Sports section.

Add Comment

You must log in to submit a comment.