Bad light, bad umpiring, bad for cricket

The Test series between SA and Australia is quite sadly coming to an end. I find myself almost thinking was this even worth it for all concerned. Sunfoil sponsored the Test. When I first heard this I thought it was a sunscreen company to then realise it was cooking oil. What am I trying to illustrate here? A two-Test match tour is simply ridiculous. But that is not the topic of this article.

Up in Johannesburg I am not sure we are used to cricket games ending before 5.30pm, perhaps I have been in a twilight zone. Over these past four days, the games have finished early every day. What’s wrong with this you ask? Well in an era where we are concerned with the spectator value of a longer version of the game — under some level of threat from the pyjama cricket marketable called Twenty20 — we get people to pay reasonable money to come and watch their team do battle with the best of enemies, Australia in this case, but we are left stranded in the stands hoping, nay almost praying, that play will continue.

On the fourth day of the Test the Proteas captain and opening bowler displayed some resistance to this somewhat archaic practice of calling the game off due to “bad light”. In the past the batsmen were asked and given the option. Now the umpires simply make the call and as you can sense from the tone of this article I believe the umpires are very, very wrong. The South African players, on the fourth day, remained on the field signing autographs, a great publicity stunt but in some silent way this Test team displayed its irritation with the umpire’s decision to once again end play early. It is clear that a team will obviously show more irritation if the game is seemingly going for them, as perhaps Graeme Smith may have felt that with the Australians three down and chasing a target of 310.

This is something the ICC seems to review in dealing with technology. The lights being on through a transition from “light” to “bad” light can surely bring a session to its timely end and give the supporters value for their money. To not include the batsman and fielding captain in the decision is so old-fashioned, this is the era of democracy right? The era of consultation? Clearly not, well not in cricket anyway.

I for one share the SA players’ irritation and believe this must be changed if we are to keep this Test version of the game alive.