Archive July 1, 2025

Test cricket is brilliant.

You may have known that long before England’s defeat of India in the first Test, or discovered it through what happened at Headingley.

Last Wednesday morning, the day after England strolled a chase of 371, there was a spike in social media engagement with posts giving love to the five-day game. “Test cricket is the best format”, “the Rolls Royce of our great game”, “there’s nothing else like Test cricket”. Naturally, there was a bit of Hundred bashing in there, too.

These outbursts of support each time there is a half-decent Test are a strange phenomenon, akin to a subculture being vindicated for a passion in something that would otherwise seem a bit weird. Like admitting to a love of Warhammer, pro wrestling or McFly (no, yes, sometimes – in case you’re wondering).

Compared with other sports, there is not the same fervour after a Premier League thriller, tense final round of a golf major or five-set epic at Wimbledon. Not the same need to proclaim “that is why (insert sport here) is the best”.

There are good reasons for Test cricket devotees to feel under attack, and therefore moved to defend their corner.

This is not meant to be a dig at franchise and short-form leagues. They can be excellent in their own right. In a competitive global market, it is remarkable that what is essentially a new sport has become so lucrative in little more than 20 years.

Where all the different elements of cricket should be able to rub along together for the betterment of each other, we have somehow landed in a civil war, almost exclusively fuelled by the game’s administrators.

Take The Hundred as an example. English cricket is right to have a franchise league and the money due to come in should be lauded as a fantastic opportunity for the sport in this country. Instead, The Hundred has never recovered from the awful PR of its launch, a message of ‘cricket for people who do not like cricket’. It alienated those already enthralled by the game, who are now stirred to protect their bit of it.

The fabric of Test cricket has been chipped away by poor scheduling and the pursuit of dollars, pounds and rupees. If it is eradicated to nothing, leaving a revolving roadshow of leagues, cricket will be infinitely poorer for it.

An obvious solution is to separate the calendar into dedicated windows for the different formats, just like football and rugby ringfence various times for international and domestic competitions. Now it is down to cricket’s governors to show the required guts and gumption.

The irony of Test cricket being under attack is the on-field product has never been so good.

Since the beginning of 2024, West Indies have won in Brisbane, England in Hyderabad and Sri Lanka at The Oval.

Even in the past week, away from Leeds, West Indies flirted with pulling off something special against the Aussies in Barbados, and in Zimbabwe 19-year-old Lhuan-dre Pretorius became the youngest man to make a hundred for South Africa. Keep an eye on him, a megastar of the future.

More broadly, runs are being scored faster, wickets taken more regularly, there are more close matches and fewer draws than ever before.

The run-rate across all Test cricket in the past three years has been 3. 60, the highest of any three-year period. Over the same time, less than 10% of Tests were drawn, down from more than 20% across the previous 20 years and more than 40% historically.

It is a disregard for draws that marks England’s Bazballers out as innovators.

It would be hyperbole to say they have saved Test cricket, still not unreasonable to say they have altered the perspective on the way it could be played – 37 Tests and counting since Ben Stokes and Brendon McCullum united, only one soggy draw among them.

Draws can be thrilling – some wonderful Tests have been drawn – but by being so bullish about not considering a stalemate as a possibility, this England team have added a thrilling aspect to the five-day narrative.

For those watching, it leaves the wonder of how England will attempt to force a result, regardless of the situation. For opponents, it leaves the fear of always being in danger, the confusion of what it will take to beat Stokes’ team. For England, it gives the clarity of thought to attempt and comfortably complete a run chase like the one in Leeds, removing the seed of doubt sewn by the safety net of a draw.

As an opening chapter of a 10-part story, comprising this India series and the Ashes against Australia this winter, Headingley was perfect, more than living up to the pre-match billing. There will have been plenty of other series with as much expectation as the two England are undertaking, though it is hard to remember a time when Test cricket has been in such sharp focus for a period of time as prolonged as the next seven months.

England were favourites at Headingley and could, probably should, have lost. India paid the price for dropped catches, a crucial Harry Brook wicket off a no-ball and a tail that refused to wag.

As a result, the tourists are in a muddle at Edgbaston. Do they play another one of their Jasprit Bumrah chips, leaving only one for the rest of the series? Will they find a place for magician wrist-spinner Kuldeep Yadav and simultaneously boost their lower-order batting?

England are settled, with the prospect of Jofra Archer returning for the third Test next week at Lord’s, the ground where he made his electrifying debut six years ago. Steve Smith and all that.

It would be good for the series if India won this week. Level at 1-1 is all to play for, 2-0 down is as good as over. The visitors will have to battle history – they have never won in eight visits to Edgbaston spanning 58 years.