Day night test matches

This subject may have been handled earlier but I keep reading about day-night test matches. Of late even Steve Waugh seems to propagate the idea. To me there are just too many issues involved. Being a traditionalist I just can’t imagine people going out and staying at the stadium till all hours of the night unless one is a bachelor and/or incorrigibly bad at one's profession. Even home viewing would be a task. IMHO, it may be a viable business idea, yet it has nothing to do with the sport as such.

well night tests will at least allow one to see a bit of the match without hoping for a holiday or just not going to work/college

would also allow us to host tests in may

No point in England. Elsewhere there may be.

Its far too hot in May, TO. Maybe cooler during the night, if that's what you mean. Still it creates issues
1. The ball
2. The sightscreen
3. The clothing
4. Advantages accrued due to the toss.
5. Dew issues depending on the venue

Why not in England SS? I mean during the season.

Agree entirely mirch.

I suspect this is an attempt to further "commercialise" cricket in the misguided belief that TV audiences want and need evening matches ... regardless of the pitfalls a D/N test match would encounter.

Diehard Test fans don't bother about the time of play - no matter which part of the world they happen to reside in.

Problem areas would be -
Batting in natural light versus under lights... favouring the former.
The dew factor after sundown ... ball wobbling around, getting wet, never reaching the boundary after a decent hit. ...
Change the red for a white ball to suit night vision? in which case you'd have to have a new ball every 50 overs rather than the present 80 ...

The concept is fraught with complexities and no longer would the maxim "same conditions for each side" apply to Test cricket.

I personally hope that this idea dies on the vine.

mirchy wrote:Why not in England SS? I mean during the season.

Because the days are so long and the twilight is so long. Whereas in places say 30 degrees either side of the equator it gets dark quickly, here it doesn't. So you have a very long period where the natural light is not replaced by the articificial. In truth, we have this issue with D/N ODI matches, partially mitigated by the break between innings. But in June it doesn't get dark till 10!

The concept is fraught with complexities and no longer would the maxim "same conditions for each side" apply to Test cricket.

As much as I enjoy cricket in all formats of the game, test cricket remains sacrosanct, Merls. Changing the ball or altering the colour to suit the time of day will only add to the problems. Besides, I don't think test cricket can be marketed the way ODIs or T20s can, irrespective of whether it is played during the day only or D/N matches are introduced. It requires more attention individually than today's fast-paced society can give. The crcket-buff market is quantitatively immaterial commercially.

Shoeshine wrote:

mirchy wrote:Why not in England SS? I mean during the season.

Because the days are so long and the twilight is so long. Whereas in places say 30 degrees either side of the equator it gets dark quickly, here it doesn't. So you have a very long period where the natural light is not replaced by the articificial. In truth, we have this issue with D/N ODI matches, partially mitigated by the break between innings. But in June it doesn't get dark till 10!

Yes, I know. But the fading light during twilight hours, even in June/July, isn't adequate for any form of cricket, judging by how quick the umpires are in offering light to the batsmen during tests. Hence lights would have to be turned on latest around 7 pm and once again a solution would have to be found for the issues involving D/N matches.

I was actually looking for arguments for D/N games from those that think these should be introduced. Personally I'm hard-pressed to find any other than the commercial aspect.

Personally I'm hard-pressed to find any other than the commercial aspect.

Aye, got it in one I reckon.

mirchy wrote: But the fading light during twilight hours, even in June/July, isn't adequate for any form of cricket, judging by how quick the umpires are in offering light to the batsmen during tests.

I'd put that down to the Umps being a bunch of pussies these days, growing up watching cricket 15-20 years ago - test cricket was always played up till about 7.30pm unless there was really heavy cloud cover. And domestic cricket sometimes til 8.30pm.

Aye, the Tied Test (the first one) wouldn't have been completed if today's umpires were in charge. The light meters would have been out on a dozen occasions, and the game would have been called off early ...

I blame the TV companies too, they don't like play dragging on too long. Case in point was a test in the mid 2000's on Channel 4 dragging on past 6pm, so C4 simply didn't cover it and broadcast the scheduled Hollyoaks instead. Farqers.

JKLever wrote:

mirchy wrote: But the fading light during twilight hours, even in June/July, isn't adequate for any form of cricket, judging by how quick the umpires are in offering light to the batsmen during tests.

I'd put that down to the Umps being a bunch of pussies these days, growing up watching cricket 15-20 years ago - test cricket was always played up till about 7.30pm unless there was really heavy cloud cover. And domestic cricket sometimes til 8.30pm.

Yes, but then what explanation is there for the PAK/ENG test that was played almost in darkness. I understand the Paksters had been dilly-dallying from early afternoon, yet the umpires continued till the match ended. The light was so bad then that the fielders were having a problem.
Referring to the bold part; don't forget that the lights need 30 to 45 minutes before they are in full flood, making that way past 20.15. Should there be a break irrespective of the state of the match during that period?

lardbucket wrote:Aye, the Tied Test (the first one) wouldn't have been completed if today's umpires were in charge. The light meters would have been out on a dozen occasions, and the game would have been called off early ...

Wasn't that the case in the 2nd tied test in Madras too, Lardy? Not sure but I believe it was Maninder Singh who was given out on the last ball well past the play till time. That decision still carries a few question marks.

mirchy wrote:

JKLever wrote:

mirchy wrote: But the fading light during twilight hours, even in June/July, isn't adequate for any form of cricket, judging by how quick the umpires are in offering light to the batsmen during tests.

I'd put that down to the Umps being a bunch of pussies these days, growing up watching cricket 15-20 years ago - test cricket was always played up till about 7.30pm unless there was really heavy cloud cover. And domestic cricket sometimes til 8.30pm.

Yes, but then what explanation is there for the PAK/ENG test that was played almost in darkness. I understand the Paksters had been dilly-dallying from early afternoon, yet the umpires continued till the match ended. The light was so bad then that the fielders were having a problem.
Referring to the bold part; don't forget that the lights need 30 to 45 minutes before they are in full flood, making that way past 20.15. Should there be a break irrespective of the state of the match during that period?

I think you can put that down to Bucknor getting the sh!ts with Moin Khan and his timewasting.

JKLever wrote:

mirchy wrote:

JKLever wrote:

mirchy wrote: But the fading light during twilight hours, even in June/July, isn't adequate for any form of cricket, judging by how quick the umpires are in offering light to the batsmen during tests.

I'd put that down to the Umps being a bunch of pussies these days, growing up watching cricket 15-20 years ago - test cricket was always played up till about 7.30pm unless there was really heavy cloud cover. And domestic cricket sometimes til 8.30pm.

Yes, but then what explanation is there for the PAK/ENG test that was played almost in darkness. I understand the Paksters had been dilly-dallying from early afternoon, yet the umpires continued till the match ended. The light was so bad then that the fielders were having a problem.
Referring to the bold part; don't forget that the lights need 30 to 45 minutes before they are in full flood, making that way past 20.15. Should there be a break irrespective of the state of the match during that period?

I think you can put that down to Bucknor getting the sh!ts with Moin Khan and his timewasting.

Doesn't the light have to be offered to the batting side? Obviously they were never going to accept it under those circumstances.

That Test wouldn't happen again now. But JKL is right, it had everything to do with Bucknor getting sufficiently irate at the blatant time-wasting to punish them by making Pakistan stay out in near darkness.

Personally, I think that was a fair enough call too - if his actions had been fully backed to the point that every side knew it was going to happen to them, you'd see less of the pathetic timewasting we have now (and yes, England, I'm looking at you).

Will D/N tests increase attendances? Personally I doubt it. If it doesn't, what's the bloody point?

There was a pice in the Observer a week or so ago, which stated that both the Tories and Labour are committed to introducing Central European Time in the UK (possibly excluding Scotland JK!!), which would mean the time would be GMT +2 in Summer.

If that was introduced - test cricket could be played in natural daylight in the height of Summer comfortably until 9pm without the need for floodlights.

Lets get Finland test status. We could finish the game in a day.

mirchy wrote:Being a traditionalist I just can’t imagine people going out and staying at the stadium till all hours of the night unless one is a bachelor and/or incorrigibly bad at one's profession. Even home viewing would be a task.

Yeah, nobody wants to go to sport in th evening, that's why ODIs, football matches of various codes, tennis tournaments, and Olympic finals are all held exclusively during the day... In Australi, due to the three hour time sifference between the east and west, the Perth Test goes well into the evening on TV in the east. It's one of the best bits of the summer, getting home from the office and still being able to catch more than a handful of overs live.
[quote="Merlin"]Diehard Test fans don't bother about the time of play - no matter which part of the world they happen to reside in.[quote] This from someone who's worried about an inconsequential cricket forum that can't grow its membership. In many countries Test cricket is dying due to indifference.

Batting in natural light versus under lights... favouring the former.
The dew factor after sundown ... ball wobbling around, getting wet, never reaching the boundary after a decent hit. ...

As opposed to batting in the morning in some places when the ball moves around a lot, whereas in the later sessions it dows little or nothing? Or bowling because there's cloud cover on day one, and fine weather forecast on days 2-3... The dew factor means it couldn't be done everywhere, all year round, but then again, we don't play cricket everywhere, all year round anyway.

Change the red for a white ball to suit night vision? in which case you'd have to have a new ball every 50 overs rather than the present 80 ...

What if someone decided to try, oh, I don't know, a different coloured ball? That's something the cricket authorities should look seriously at...

By the way, why are cricket balls red? Because that's the colour of the dye the first manufacturers had at the time. Could just as easily have been blue, green, yellow, whatever, red was the first colour used.

The concept is fraught with complexities and no longer would the maxim "same conditions for each side" apply to Test cricket.

Yeah, as mentioned before, the conditions stay the same throughout Tests right now.

I personally hope that this idea dies on the vine.

And bring back the rest day, and timeless tests, and the old lbw rules, the days when teams could get away with strolling through 11 overs an hour, and bodyline, get rid of helmets... Change is always bad, as far as you're concerned, right merlin?

Shoeshine wrote:Because the days are so long and the twilight is so long ... But in June it doesn't get dark till 10!

Yet cricket finishes at 6, or half past... It's the same in some parts of Australia, play finishes at 6 (or 5.30) in broad daylight, with hours of sunshine still left in the day.

The frustration in England is when you get a rain affected day, with an hour added, plus the extra half hour, so they finish at 7:30 when there's loads and loads of bright daylight left. But hey, who gives a stuff about the spectators who've been there all day.

As for Taips point, it was noticeable in the Bangladesh matches recently, that although they were played in front of one man and his dog most of the time, when Bangladesh actually got themselves into a decent position in the second test (before caving in), the spectators surged in. It was packed for a while. D/N tests won't alter the reality there that they just need a decent side.

What about in India and South Africa? There's a lot of Tests played there in virtually empty stadia.

Shoeshine wrote:The frustration in England is when you get a rain affected day, with an hour added, plus the extra half hour, so they finish at 7:30 when there's loads and loads of bright daylight left. But hey, who gives a stuff about the spectators who've been there all day.

As for Taips point, it was noticeable in the Bangladesh matches recently, that although they were played in front of one man and his dog most of the time, when Bangladesh actually got themselves into a decent position in the second test (before caving in), the spectators surged in. It was packed for a while. D/N tests won't alter the reality there that they just need a decent side.

My point is that it won't really affect attendances in Aus, SA and Engkand.

Tests are a dying product in WI and England.

Who else is left?

Zat wrote:What about in India and South Africa? There's a lot of Tests played there in virtually empty stadia.

can't argue India Zat, but you well know the test crowds at Wanderers amd Newlands the past few years have easily outstripped WACA and the Gabba. Kingsmead is another story but there is a reason for that.