I was saddened by the news that Sri Lanka wanted to postpone their home series against South Africa next year. No matter how they dress it up, it reads as a blatant disregard for Test cricket, signalling to the cricket world that they are interested only in T20 and ODIs. For a leading ICC nation to go through a whole year playing just four Tests, against the lowest ranked sides at that, is ridiculous.
I don't blame South Africa for agreeing to the request. A series requires two teams so it's none or both! Graeme Smith's side have risen to the top in the prime format by playing fewer Tests than the other major teams like India, England and Australia, so having more of a break in their winter will come in handy. Much has been made of the sparing use of Dale Steyn to prolong his career as the best fast bowler on the planet, so this will give him more of a rest, the poor thing. Incidentally, Shaun Pollock delivered 39,000 first-class balls in his 17-year career, compared with around 19,000 for Steyn in nine years, so the latter has bowled his share. However, Steyn will never get to fling down 22,000-odd balls in short-form cricket,as South Africa's highest Test wicket-taker did.
Back to Sri Lanka: their stock has fallen in Test cricket in recent years. They may be rated number one in Twenty 20s but are ranked six in five-dayers and reached the final of the 50-over World Cup. Is this the real reason why Sri Lanka Cricket wanted to cut back on Tests in 2013? Is it because a few T20s and another tri-nation series involving India brings in shedloads of TV cash and spectators? I suspect it's both.
That begs the question: if they don't like Tests, why not step down and let another nation replace them in the Test-playing family? They can still play against India and Pakistan to their hearts' content and allow Ireland or Afghanistan the chance to develop. That's what my heart tells me. However, cricket is a business for those with hard heads. If Sri Lanka quit Tests, would the West Indies be far behind? And India? We would probably then end up with two different organisations running the two or three different formats. They would inevitably be in competition for dates and, when you factor in the IPL, BBL, etc, etc, chaos will ensue and Test cricket would face oblivion because it's harder to schedule five-day series than three-hour ones.
So I have to admit that Sri Lanka, or any other nation, have carte blanche to withdraw from the 'difficult' Test series. I know their fixtures against South Africa have been rescheduled but how many more times will such postponements happen in the future? I fear this is the first of many.
