Cricket is, and always will be, a game played over five days or four innings. While, there are other forms of the game that are played over shorter periods of time, the latest of which is twenty20, none of these truly represent the traditional nature of the sport.
While these variations of the game contain the fundamentals of cricket, they lack the key qualities that make the game great. Much like flag football or sevens rugby, the limited overs versions of cricket are fun to play and watch and may even attract new audiences to the game.
But what is missing from these games is the genuine contest between bat and ball, the dramatic twists and turns that inevitably happen over five days of competition, the x-factor that is a wearing pitch, and the ability of the true greats of the sport to showcase every skill in their repertoire.
While twenty20 has taken the world by storm, one must ask how much longer the novelty of watching the world's best batsmen try to hit sixes every ball can last. A six, in isolation, is thrilling to witness. It can free the batsmen from the shackles of tight bowling, change the momentum of the game, add pressure to an already troubled spell from the bowler, or simply just entertain the masses. But when sixes become the norm, not the exception, they can quickly lose their appeal.
What would happen if the game of soccer suddenly started to produce 20 goals a game? Would fans and players continue to celebrate every one with the same vigor that they do now? I doubt it, they would lose some of their magic and they would mean much less.
The history of cricket is littered with memorable performances. Sir Donald Bradman averaged a staggering 99.94 runs an innings over the duration of his career. That is almost 40 runs an innings better than the next best in history. As a comparison, Babe Ruth or Ty Cobb would have needed a batting average of .392 to match Bradman, Michael Jordan would have needed to average 43 points per game and Pele would have to have scored 3.7 goals every time he played.
If test cricket didn't exist, the career of Bradman would have been reduced to a mere sideshow, a few cameos lasting no longer than two hours. It would be like only watching Tiger Woods on a driving range.
Few cricket fans in the West Indies will ever forget watching Brian Lara make an astonishing 400 runs against England in Antigua. It was an innings of immense concentration, glorious stroke play and precision timing. But this innings would only be possible in test cricket. In more than three decades of 50 over cricket nobody has managed even a score of 200, not to mention how much harder it would be in 20 overs.
Bowling too is an art that can only truly be appreciated in test cricket. A key element for a bowler is the ability to work out' the batsmen. By this I mean that truly great bowlers don't expect a wicket every ball they bowl. Often a bowler will suck the batsmen in by bowling several balls in a similar spot on the pitch and at a similar pace. He will then change one small aspect of his delivery, say the speed of the ball or the direction of the swing. This will often lead to the dismissal of the unsuspecting batsmen.
In the twenty20 format, a bowler is forced to produce a different ball almost every time he bowls, otherwise his predictability will result in a sharp rise in the run rate.
Should this new form of the game emerge dominant, I fear for the future of the test format. In this age where sport has become big business, money talks. If those in charge of the game can earn more in a three hour slogathon' than they can over five days of artistry, they will. Forget beauty, tradition and technique, they will always run a distant second to money, power and instant gratification. This is a sad reflection of society in general.
But twenty20 has its place, anything that brings extra money, fans and players into the game has got to be a good thing. However, it needs to be controlled and used as an additive to the game, it must not become the driving force behind it.
If test cricket were a fine meal, twenty20 should be the little bit of spice that gives it a bit of 'pep'. As every good chef knows, too much spice will inevitably spoil the entire dish.