Cricket in its early days had bowling underarm rolling the ball along the ground, much like lawn bowls or tenpin bowling, and the batsman scooped the ball up with a bat that resembled a hockey stick. It took time before it was legal to bounce the ball, and before first roundarm and then overarm bowling was legal. Indeed, even when test cricket first came about in the 1870s, there were still a number of top level underarm bowlers going around.

 

The first major development in cricket, other than the rule changes, came in the emergence of W G Grace. He was, without doubt, the greatest player that the world had ever seen to that point in time, and this after his older brother Edward Grace had been touted as "possibly the greatest of all time". W G Grace, though, was miles ahead of Edward and on top of that he bowled well too.

 

W G Grace's emergence was important because spectators in England wanted to watch cricket. Sure, some had watched before then, but suddenly there was mass hysteria, the kind we now think of with regards to rock stars. The whole Grace family were loved in England, but in particular W G Grace was. And with his emergence, his father decided to make money out of it, by virtue of his owning the club where they played. Spectators had always had to pay to watch a match, but now they were being paid extra, with W G Grace and his brothers being paid in order to play.

 

The very idea of cricketers being paid to play outraged most cricket enthusiasts. Cricket had always been amateur and being paid was linked with cheating and corruption. But W G Grace was such a great player that in the end most people forgave him for it. There was eventually an inquiry but while W G Grace was undoubtedly guilty, they weren't prepared to ban him or penalise him for secretly accepting payment.

 

Eventually, professional cricket became more official, under W G Grace's guidance, and a number of players were openly paid to play. This led to outrage amongst the amateurs, who continued to play without accepting money. There was a lot of anger and heat in English cricket circles and a number of nasty rumours were spread about the professionals, and in particular about W G Grace, one of the nastiest being the accusation that W G Grace once was clean bowled then calmly turned around, replaced the bails and claimed that it was windy. This rumour almost certainly was not remotely true but the fact that that one persists today gives some hint as to just how nasty the professionals vs amateurs argument was.

 

Test cricket very nearly came about thanks to W G Grace, after firstly he went to USA and Canada in the hope of establishing regular international matches and then travelled to Australia, in what very nearly set up official international matches. But ultimately the first test didn't involve Grace, and the amateurs in England were very happy about this, as the first test cricket match was played solely by amateurs.

 

But Grace would play test cricket, albeit primarily in England. He would be captain of England and he did go on at least one tour to Australia.

 

Eventually, professional cricket in England would become so widespread that all county players were paid to play, decades before any other country introduced professional cricket. While international players in Australia and South Africa were having to hold down part time and full time jobs in order to afford to play for their country, English players, even if they didn't play internationally, could make a good living out of the sport, even without having a job to support it.

 

Don Bradman in Australia very nearly brought professional cricket to the country, when, like W G Grace before him, he sought to be financially compensated for playing. A stockbroker by trade, Bradman found it increasingly difficult to hold down a job when he had to play for Australia so often. Bradman eventually got a job with ABC radio to commentate on cricket matches. But the Board of Control for Cricket in Australia, the Australian governing body at the time, were angry at that, as it breached their rules for what jobs you could have. Bradman was told that he could work as a journalist but he could not comment on any matches that he was taking part in.

 

There was an argument but ultimately Don Bradman went on strike. The Australian team went to New Zealand in what was meant to be New Zealand's first ever test series, but without Bradman it was never authorised as being a full Australian side and hence New Zealand had to wait much longer to get test status. Bradman happily commentated on the entire tour, without taking part in it.

 

Bradman was allowed to commentate, but with the restriction that he could only comment on matches he was taking part in after the day's play, and there were restrictions on what he could and couldn't say. He was allowed to say how he thought he went but was not allowed to give hints as to team plans or predict what they were going to do.

 

Bradman failed in his attempt to bring professional cricket to Australia, or indeed internationally, and we had to wait some 40 years before Kerry Packer's World Series Cricket would pave the way.

 

In 1977, Australian businessman Kerry Packer argued that he wanted the right to televise Australian international test cricket matches live on his TV channel, Channel 9. But the Australian government-owned TV channel, the ABC, had exclusive rights and Packer had no right to ask for it. No matter how much money Packer offered, the Australian Cricket Board, then the governing body of cricket in Australia, refused to consider it. Even if ABC also televised it, still it could not be considered.

 

After the rejection, Packer had the idea to stage his own rebel cricket tournament. Knowing that international cricketers were severely underpaid, he offered comparatively large salaries to any cricketers who would take part, and a number of players from West Indies and Australia especially offered to take part. English cricketers were less willing, largely because they were already being paid domestically, but even South African cricketers were able to take part. South Africa was banned from playing international cricket due to apartheid but as these weren't official matches, there were no such rules.

 

3 teams were set up - West Indies, Australia and a World team, and they took part in a number of test matches, what Packer called "Super tests". The majority of the West Indian and Australian first choice squads took part. This meant that England, whose players largely ignored the tournament, were able to leapfrog both Australia and West Indies and become the dominant team in official test matches. In some cases, official test matches took part at the same time as Kerry Packer's super tests, and more spectators and viewers attended and watched the super tests.

 

While the focus was primarily test matches, Kerry Packer's league also largely introduced the concept of one day cricket. While one day cricket had existed as early as 1971, some 6 years earlier, and they had even had a World Cup in 1975, Kerry Packer's league introduced a number of rules for it, such as each bowler only bowling 10 overs maximum, a 15 over fielding restriction limit and stricter wide rules than apply in test cricket. This went a long way to introducing what we now know as one day internationals. He also introduced coloured clothing to boot.

 

After 3 years, Kerry Packer got his wish and was able to bid for the television rights to cover Australian test matches. Having won the right, Packer disbanded World Series Cricket, though he kept his one day tournament, the World Series Cup, albeit in a modified format, and now with Australian Cricket Board approval.

 

As a result of Packer's intervention, and the sheer difference in salaries, players started to realise that they were being underpaid. By the mid 1980s, players had argued with administrators sufficiently that they were now being paid enough that they no longer had to hold down full-time or even part-time jobs. With the amount of cricket being played increasing dramatically, they could not only make a living out of it, but could even get quite rich on it. Instead of just playing 1 or 2 tests per year, and some years nothing, suddenly it was up to 10-15 or even more tests per year, plus 30-40 one day internationals, and most players played all year round, with only a few small gaps effectively for holidays.

 

With the introduction of professionalism in cricket, players started to improve their fitness levels and dedication to the game. While fielding greats occasionally existed in the amateur era, they became increasingly commonplace. Difficult catches were taken as a matter of course, as were difficult run outs. Running between the wickets improved dramatically and player fitness levels grew dramatically. There wasn't any discernible difference in the quality of batting - or bowling for that matter, as, after a lot of analysis into techniques and the like, it was decided, and still is today, that it is more a matter of feel than anything that a computer can tell you. But fielding was a different issue entirely.

 

The rules also began to be changed such that injuries were less likely. When you only play 1 or 2 tests per year, suffering an injury doesn't matter a whole lot, but when that is your year-round occupation, efforts have to be made to try to stop injury. Protective equipment improved dramatically but also bouncer rules, no ball rules and changing the ball rules all changed to make it significantly easier for batsmen. Batting averages improved dramatically while bowling averages got worse.

 

It is hard to definitively state in numerical form exactly how much easier it is for batsmen but as an estimate, a batsman with a batting average of 50 today may have averaged only 44 in the pre-professional era (1970) and only 40 when there were uncovered pitches (1930). Similarly, a bowler today who averages 30 may have averaged 26 in 1970 and as low as 24 in 1930. It is not an exact science, of course, but that is the kind of difference between the difficulty of playing. Thus a player like Sachin Tendulkar, who averages 56 today, may have only averaged 44 in Bradman's day, while Bradman, if he played today, may have averaged as high as 115 or 120.

 

It isn't that batsmen have got any better or that bowlers have got worse, but rather that it is just easier to bat because of all of the rule changes. Yes, the improved fielding lowers scores, but the improved running between the wickets increases them again, so they cancel each other out.

 

The main difference in the professional era is the role of the wicket keeper. In one day cricket a wicket keeper would only get a slip for the first 5 or 6 overs and thereafter would largely be by themselves. This spread to test cricket, where they would often play with a 1 1/2 or a 2nd slip, and the keeper was expected to dive all the way towards 2nd slip to take a catch. Keepers still dropped catches as often as in the amateur era but they were going for so much more. Of course, fielding generally has improved dramatically but as an individual position, the wicket keeping position has increased dramatically. Much as how it is hard to imagine any amateur fielders being close to as good as the likes of Jonty Rhodes, Ricky Ponting, Herschelle Gibbs, or with catching Mark Waugh, Mark Taylor, Allan Border or Rahul Dravid, it is similarly hard to imagine any amateur keepers being close to as good as the likes of Adam Gilchrist or Mark Boucher. Of course, keeping has never been about statistics, and while statistics are used to measure every single other element of cricket, apparently Gilchrist and Boucher aren't the two best keepers of all time. Yet somehow Gilchrist manages to make virtually everyone's all-time text XI and one day XI as the keeper.

 

And then we get to the introduction of T20 cricket.

 

Players are already getting a lot of money, at least in the wealthier or more populous nations (not so much in West Indies or especially Zimbabwe) but the introduction of T20 cricket changed things again.

 

The first thing that T20 cricket did was to share the game with people who had low attention spans, in a lot of ways ultimately aimed at the American baseball market or indeed at the Olympic games. But from the moment that Allen Stanford decided to sponsor the West Indian cricket T20 league, we became aware of just how much money T20 cricket could generate.

 

Allen Stanford's efforts were cut short by him being charged with fraud and he undoubtedly made a loss with his investments, but the fact that 11 West Indian cricketers became instant millionaires was no small feat, when it was perhaps 50 times as much as they would make playing for West Indies for an entire year. And what this did, in a lot of ways, was to level the playing field.

 

West Indies is the second smallest in terms of population (only ahead of New Zealand) and also one of the poorer nations (or actually a group of nations), which means that their cricketers earn a lot less than players from the comparatively wealthy Australian or English teams or the populous Indian or Pakistan teams. Perhaps the WICB are corrupt as well, keeping money for themselves and not for the players, but at the end of the day they aren't being paid fairly in comparison to players from other countries.

 

Soon after Stanford's business fell apart, businessmen in India had a similar idea, calling it the Indian Cricket League (ICL), which, like Stanford's, was an unofficial league, but one which they hoped to get BCCI blessing. Unfortunately for ICL organisers and all the players who took part, not only did they fail to get BCCI blessing but all players who took part were banned from playing for India domestically or internationally and international boards were pressured to ban ICL players from playing for their country, something which the Australian and New Zealand boards at least agreed to, though the Pakistan Cricket Board didn't take such a stand.

 

The BCCI set up their own rival league, calling it the IPL, which was almost identical in structure and concept to the ICL. The two leagues ran simultaneously in a sense, only the ICL had a much longer season, since its players didn't have the burden of having to play for their countries (since they were banned). And the IPL ended up with huge money.

 

West Indian players such as Chris Gayle, Keiron Pollard and Dwayne Bravo, all excellent at T20 cricket, were able to demand huge salaries from playing IPL, while the amount that they earned playing for their country in comparison was a pittance.

 

A number of players became professional T20 players, such as Andrew Symonds and briefly Andrew Flintoff and there is the possibility that both Lasith Malinga and Shahid Afridi may go down the same route. Shaun Tait and Dirk Nannes also are largely T20 only players and more are emerging.

 

There are a lot of criticisms about T20 and IPL that it detracts from test cricket. Malinga and more recently Zaheer Khan suffered injuries that are attributed to IPL and T20 cricket, something which most recently has gone a long way to costing India their test series against England and possibly top spot on the rankings. Chris Gayle is being criticised for putting money ahead of his country. And many are criticising that players generally are in a T20 mindset.

 

But one day cricket improved scoring rates in test cricket, and in a sense rescued it from what otherwise looked likely to be the death of international cricket, after the introduction of Pakistan led to both Pakistan and India for a long time playing endless boring draws, batting very slowly, a curse that spread throughout the cricket world such that for 20 years or more all through the world draws were more common than results, but especially whenever Pakistan or India were involved, when more than 2/3 of the matches they took part in ended in draws. One day cricket not only gave us results in the one day format but over time also in test cricket.

 

So T20 cricket isn't bad for cricket. If nothing else, it levels the playing field between rich countries and poor countries. It gives players that option to be able to make money without needing to play for their country. And thus in a sense we go back to the old days of amateur cricket, whereby players had to make a sacrifice in order to play for their country, only now their full time job that pays for them to play for their country is the T20 arena.

 

But other sports have coped fine with club and international versions competing. Soccer, for example, the most popular sport in the world, has a huge club scene, whereby for the most part people are more interested in watching their favourite clubs than they are in watching internationals. Yet in big tournaments, such as the soccer World Cup or the olympic games, suddenly people care about the internationals.

 

We may end up with a similar situation with cricket, whereby international matches are comparatively rare and the focus is on club cricket as opposed to internationals. Where test cricket and even ODIs or T20Is are showcases for the best of the best and domestic T20 tournaments such as the IPL, SLPL or BBL become the focus of cricket viewers.

 

But whatever the result, T20 isn't going to kill cricket. It levels the playing field, adds money to the sport, and creates an extra option in moving forward. Proportionally more people follow cricket now than they did before T20 cricket came about and that can only be good for the sport.

 

By : Adrian Meredith