We need to modernize this game!

By Amit - 1 Oct '02
October 1 2002

It is high time that cricket officials stop clinging to traditions. Any laws that prevents cricket from being played is detrimental to the sport and should be dealt with properly.

Lords, with its small white gate, the Ashes, and umpires in ties, with broad hats that sit lazily on their heads. Cricket is full of traditions. It does comfort a fan to know that the way cricket is being played today is still quite similar to how it was played 50 years ago. The purists would argue that practices like sledging, refusing to walk when caught by a fielder, and doctoring the ball so it does bewitching things have completely changed the game. But in truth, cricket has not changed much.

There are things in cricket that should never change. Who would like to see umpires completely removed? Although having human umpires leaves room for error, it is exactly those errors that add an edge to cricket. As Dickie Bird once said "There is no other sport in which the judgment of one individual can have such a profound impact on a game"

While other "Namby Pamby" sports (as Ian Botham would say) like baseball, have added vast amounts of protection, like gloves for fielders and chest pads for catchers, cricket still subjects its players to immediate danger by giving them only an ankle guard and helmet as they attempt to catch a 5 and 1/2 ounce object that is searing through the air at astonishing speeds. This sort of charm is unrivaled by any other sport.

However, fans of American football are a little luckier than fans of our sport. When they get up on Super Bowl Sunday, they know they will watch a game. A football fan can wake up in the morning, call his friend, and say, "Come and watch the game!" without any fear that unforeseen weather will cancel, change, or distort the match.

But we cricket fans are not nearly as lucky. Bad light, rain, tired umpires, and funny looking clouds are all reasons to cancel a cricket match.

But cricket fans are traditionalists, it doesn't matter that there are bright floodlights hanging overhead, ready to be turned on, if the irritating men in their white hats think its too dark then they will ask the equally irritating people with the willow in their hands whether they want to leave.

Now, would you rather be paid to sit in dressing room playing cards, or to hit a ball, risking injury and the disgust of an entire country if you mess up? The fact that you are a professional, that people have paid money and have planned their day to see you bat will not affect your thinking at all, or it doesn't seem to.

But I'm being cynical, there is "danger" to the batsmen and the fielder when it's raining and when there's bad light, isn't there? The "Gentlemen" who play cricket can't risk getting their whites dirty if there's a little mud on the pitch, so obviously they take the logical move by denying the paying fans any cricket.

In case I've been a bit too sarcastic for some of you, what I am trying to say is that we should forget about tradition, to a small extent, and start playing in the rain and using floodlights during test matches. The physical activity involved in cricket not nearly as hard or strenuous as it is in soccer or American football. However, these sports are played in rain, snow, and everything else except maybe a volcanic eruption.

The idea of cricket in the rain is not completely crazy, its been done before. There is a league in England where games are not cancelled when there is rain, much to the delight of the fans, the fact that a bowler could get injured or that there is mud being splattered right into the batsmen's eyes doesn't make a difference. If a cricketer is being paid, then they are being paid to play cricket, not to sit in a dressing room. Rain gives advantages and disadvantages to both sides, so a thunderstorm during a match will surely affect the way the players play, but it is unlikely to completely shift the balance in the favor of one team.

One of the most idiotic things about test matches is that they can be cancelled for bad light. What else are those large bulbs hanging over a stadium for, if not to light up the ground? ODI matches are much more strenuous, as the fielding standards and rate of scoring runs is multiplied. If people can play the more strenuous version of the sport under floodlights then what prevents them from playing Test matches under floodlights as well?

It is high time that cricket officials stop clinging to pointless traditions. If they are there for the betterment of cricket then they are not doing their job. Any laws that prevent cricket from being played is detrimental to the sport and should be dealt with properly.