Writes Mukul Kesavan,
No, doomsayers like me don’t dislike Twenty20 or the IPL: we’re scared that they’ll make our cricketing passions obsolete. As we fret about the future of the four-innings game (Will the Ranji Trophy survive? How will we nurture future Test cricketers if it doesn’t?), it might help if we begin by recognising that we aren’t alone. Historically, what is happening to cricket today has happened to other forms of entertainment – music, for example – in the past.
People who prefer Test cricket to the limited-overs forms of the game are often called “purists”. This is the wrong term: fans of Test cricket don’t see the long game as the “pure” form of the game; they think of it as the classical form. It is classical because it is a codified, cultivated form of the game, distinct from both local/popular/primitive forms of bat-and-ball games as well as modern abridged variants such as ODIs and Twenty20. Classical also in the sense of being authoritative and definitive. Rahul Dravid, for example, chose the players for Vijay Mallya’s franchise on the principle that good Test players ought to be able to play Twenty20 cricket because the four-innings form teaches the Test player a classical technique that can be turned to any purpose, a style for all seasons. He was horribly wrong (as we now know) but this was more than an individual error: it represented the collapse of the classical ideal in cricket.
Well, the fact remains that test cricket is an anachronism in today’s world. In practically no other sport, teams slug its out over five days. Sure, it gives test cricket its special flavor but that is not a sufficient reason for it to survive if people are not interested in watching it. I was skeptical of IPL’s success but by all accounts it seems to be doing well. And there is at least some degree of club loyalty: Dhoni was jeered in Mumbai. If T20 is what interests the majority of viewers and let’s face it–it is the Indian cricket fan who really matters–then so be it. No sport, no art can be kept alive perpetually by artificial means. It may be disappointing for people Like Kesavan or me for that matter, but sport cannot be elitist and popular at the same time. Cricket must deliver what its market demands.
Two minor quibbles with Kesavan’a article. First, the analogy of classical music isn’t the most appropriate one. Classic music doesn’t need the infrastructure or investment of a test cricket. A few thousand followers, an elitist tag to attract the uppity corporates, and of course, some hugely talented and respected musicians is enough. Second, I still remain unconvinced that Bangalore’s travails can be explained only by team selection. For one, Dravid himself seems to be doing quite well. For another, it’s not as if the one day specialists–Misbah-ul-Haq and Craig White–are setting the stands on fire. And the Hyderabad team, packed with big hitters isn’t doing that well either.
Filed under: Cricket
