PDA

View Full Version : The alternate history of what cricket would've been like, if T20 was the only form of the game.


Dan26
11 Oct 2010, 22:03
It's 1877, and the touring English side is about to play their first Test match against Australia. On a whim, both captains agree to codify the rules for the sport of cricket. A match will not continue indefinately until there is a winner, but will instead go for 40 overs - 20 overs per side.

This radical concept was new, but both captains agreed, that they would be the new rules of the sport.

The tour was a resounding success, with good crowds attending, with many spruiking the faster, exciting nature of the game, with the result all over in about 3 hours.

15 years later, at the conclusion of the tour 1892 tour, Lord Sheffield donated £150 to the New South Wales Cricket Association to fund a trophy for an annual tournament of intercolonial cricket in Australia. The three colonies of New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia were already playing each other in ad hoc matches of the three hour game, which now was the only way the game was played. The new tournament commenced in the summer of 1892/93, mandating home and away fixtures between each colony each season. The three teams competed for the Sheffield Shield.

This competition was a resounding success, and as the years went by Queensland, and Western Australia were added. The crowds boomed with attendances rivalling that of the newly formed Victorian Football League. People couldn't get enough of cricket. This 3-hour bat and ball sport was proving to be incredibly popular. Soon, it was mooted that new teams be added from the existing states to develop into a club competiton similar to the Summer to what the VFL was to the Winter.

As the years went by, the tours by the English team would still be made, but they were less frequent as the English had their own successful club competiton back home which was proving to be just as popular as the Australian version. Tours were still made, but the focus of the summer, was on the domestic competition, with international matches being enourmous events, but but not the backbone of the Summer.

By the 1930's the Sheffield Shield had 3 teams from Victoria, 4 from NSW, and one each from Qld, SA and WA.

Due to the exciting nature of the game, the United States had started to play it on the East Coast due to the British Colonial influence. Someone had tried to start a sport called "baseball" there in the late 1890's but cricket was proving too popular. Canada was a similar story with the locals loving the game of cricket.

As the years went by, more and more countries started playing cricket. By the start of the 1970's more than 60 countries were regular particiapants with strong local leagues.

Fast forward to 2010, and the Sheffield Sheild is in its 119th season. There are 16 teams, with two from WA, two from SA, 3 from Melbourne, one from Geelong, 3 from Sydney, one from Newcastle, two from Brisbane, one from North Queensland, and one from Tasmania. The season goes from October through to March with each side playing 30 matches (playing each team twice) with the top 6 contesting the finals series, with the two Grand Finalists making the Champions League.

About 70 other countries have similarly strong leagues, with the American league comprising 32 teams, and being the dominant summer sport in the USA. One of the biggest issues of the day is many of Australia's better players leave the country to pursue lucrative club careers in India, America, and even Europe. A limit of how many "foreign" players can play for a club side in a different country is introduced to keep leagues like the Australian league strong.

Once every four years, a World Cup is held. Every Summer the best of the Australian cricketers come home to particpate in World Cup Qualifying matches, with these matches being held in between the domestic matches, with the big World Cup tournament itself being held in a different country once every 4 years. England are not the only touring side anymore. In fact, it is not surprising for Australia, in any given Summer of World Cup qualifying to play teams from South America and Europe. The World Cup itself it the 2nd biggest event in the world behind the Soccer World Cup.

A lucrative Champions League tournament is held annually also, which generates massive amounts of money, with the top teams in the various World Club competitions participating.

The head of the ICC in 2010-11, John Smith sits down to with the rest of the executives to discuss the future of cricket, after the season has just ended. It is April 1st, and now that March was over, the MCG is to be used for the AFL for the next 6 months. The sport of cricket was so popular around the world, that they were all pretty content with the status of things. One of the younger executives suggested an idea:

Young Executive: "How about we introduce a new form of the game"

Smith: "That an intriguing idea. Personally I'm a traditionalist, and I like the traditional and only form of the sport. But what is your idea?"

Young Executive: "Well, what if we introduced a longer form of the game?"

Smith: "Longer? The game goes for three hours already. Name a sport that goes longer? A game of American Football maybe but that's it. The sport is long enough as it is"

Young Executive: "Well, what I was thinking, was what if both teams had TWO innings"

Smith: "What's the point of that?"

Young Executive: "For the novelty and excitement. And teams don't bat for 20 overs, they can just bat on and on and on...a whole day will go for 6 hours, so they could bat for two days, 12 hours, in theory."

Laughter circulates around the room

Smith: "Are you serious, young fella? And how long does the match go for?"

Young Executive: "For 5 days"

Smith: "Hahahaha.... Oh my God, you're actually serious? 30 friggin hours? But what if the match isn't decided in 5 days?"

Young Executive: "Well, we simply call it a no result. No one wins or loses"

Smith: "So, it's like a tie?"

Young Executive: "Well, not really. A tie is when scores are level. It's just a no result. I estimate a no-result might happen about one-third of the time"

Smith: "Look, I'm sorry, but is this some kind of joke? Sounds like a good way to make sure people don't turn up. Havn't you noticed that people turn up to our sport? Why would we change that. We have the best game in the world."

Young Executive: "Do you know what date it is, sir?"

Smith: "Yes, it's April the firs...oh wait... you got me! haha"

Young Executive: "April Fools! You didn't think I was serious did you! I'd have to be a moron to suggest such a preposterous idea!"

The board of the ICC had a few laughs then got back to the business of governing the World's second biggest sport, behind Soccer.

BarneyBent
11 Oct 2010, 23:05
And thank ****ing christ that's not how it turned out! :thumbsu:

apollo_creed
13 Oct 2010, 18:41
Not bad Dan.

BluesMan
13 Oct 2010, 18:55
ahaha awesome story, you should be an author for a kids book :D

But in all seriousness, why can't 1890 be 2010 in your story, and in 2110, we have a world comp which you speak of:thumbsu:

Dan26
13 Oct 2010, 22:17
The moral is that we tend to accept the things we have grown up with.

But think - if Test Cricket didn't exist, and we proposed that it be "invented" it would be laughed at. Because, let's face it, it's a riciculous concept, and a bit of a stupid game, when you really think about it's structure. A 30 hour game? Whcih 1/3rd of the time ends in a no "result"? Played in front of crap crowd in all all but two countries?

Surely if T20 was the only way the sport had ever been played, it would have been far more successful over the last 130 years than test Cricket has been over those same 130 years.

After all, in the 1970's one-day cricket as invented because of the "faults" with test Cricket. Fans demanded a shorter game.

It took another 30 years for us all to work out that a day of one-day cricket (100 overs) was actually longer than a day of test Cricket and an 8 hour day wasn't really shirt at all. So, T20 was invented, because of the "faults" with one-day cricket, and we now have the cricket game that cricket should always have been - 130 years too late, but we got there.

It's almost as if the game is improving in two gradual steps, but the traditionalists are holding onto Test Cricket and won't let go. But the very reason the other forms of the game even exist at all, were because of the perceived faults and problems that the 5 day game brings.

If T20 cricket was the oly way the game was played and it was just called "cricket" and it had bene played for over 100 years it would probably be the second biggest sport in the world by now.

Test Cricket will never branch out. Try selling the idea of test Cricket to an Americna or a Eurpopean - they'd laugh it off as a stupid, boring game, and who could blame them.

Illinois Nazi
13 Oct 2010, 22:37
Try selling the idea of test Cricket to an Americna or a Eurpopean - they'd laugh it off as a stupid, boring game, and who could blame them.

And the real moral of the story is that anything is worthless unless the Americans like it.

Mint Condition
13 Oct 2010, 23:04
Thankfully cricket was invented by the players for the players. Before sport was all about being popular for spectators and making a lot of money. Before everyone had a 20 second attention span. Twenty20 is fun but it removes much of the nuance and character from the game. It's like a caricature of a person.

Well written though and I do think the what if is pretty accurate. I think it's wrong though to say that a person who'd never heard of cricket would laugh off the idea of test cricket as stupid or boring. I think to anyone who likes chess over checkers or cryptic crosswords over quick ones or strategy games over snakes and ladders would find the concept of test cricket much more appealing than a simplistic twenty20.

Dan26
15 Oct 2010, 11:16
Twenty20 is fun but it removes much of the nuance and character from the game. It's like a caricature of a person.

Do you think if Twenty20 was the only way the game had ever been played(hence you wouldn't know what Test Cricket is) that you would claim that it lacks nuance and character?

It would be a 130 year old sport that would have developed its own tactics and it's own character over the decades.

Every other team sport that I know of that goes for 1.5 to 3 hours (i.e every sport) has their own nuances and characteristics that make those sports unique and interesting in their own right.

Admiral Afterworld
15 Oct 2010, 11:33
Cricket would probably be more popular if Twenty20 had started much earlier.

Illinois Nazi
15 Oct 2010, 12:01
If Twenty20 had always been the way, we would be missing a lot of the great things we have. Such as spin bowling. Or anything that arises from the condition of the pitch (which by now would no doubt be 100% synthetic in all matches). Or indeed anyone growing up wanting to be a bowler!

Mint Condition
15 Oct 2010, 12:37
Do you think if Twenty20 was the only way the game had ever been played(hence you wouldn't know what Test Cricket is) that you would claim that it lacks nuance and character?

It would be a 130 year old sport that would have developed its own tactics and it's own character over the decades.

Every other team sport that I know of that goes for 1.5 to 3 hours (i.e every sport) has their own nuances and characteristics that make those sports unique and interesting in their own right.

No, I agree with you, I wouldn't. I'm of course coming from the perspective of growing up with test cricket. I should have clarified that I think it lacks the nuance and character of the game as I know it. Twenty20 has it's own character and I enjoy it, I just recognise what it is, a rock n roll version designed for the convenience of the masses.

I agree with your what if scenario pretty much in full, I'm just glad things turned out the way they did! The only thing I slightly disagree with is the idea of test cricket being seen as ridiculous and boring to all the people of this alternate universe. That said, in this alternate universe I think the only way something like test cricket would start getting played is if it began at the grassroots level. No way the governing body would start it as a commercial exercise but I could imagine players and clubs thinking along the lines of 'lets play a longer game to really sort out who's the best...a marathon match'