Why T20’s victory over intellectuals and purists?

However, the loss can still hurt a bit, and since Thursday, when India lost to England in the semi-finals of the T20 World Cup, the Indians have taken solace of sorts. Comedian Tanmay Bhat tweeted, “Test cricket is the real cricket.”

The fact is that the dominant version of cricket today is the 20-over version. Cricket is T20. It has eclipsed the one-day game as well. In which, you might ask if you’re the serious type. And I would say, “The only thing that matters in sports is popularity.” You may ask what about prestige. Reputation itself is not so prestigious anymore.

You might also like

Adani eyeing stake in Bengaluru airport

The Android of the smart home ecosystem is here

Why Mahindra & Mahindra is stopping tractor rides

Never mind the September quarter blip, Trent’s looking good

Test cricket is, of course, the most sacred form of cricket, but it is like most sacred things – there is widespread agreement on its sacred nature, but no one can say why, nor any deep-seated feelings that undermine its sacredness. Is. Most people who love cricket don’t watch Test cricket anymore, even though they can track match updates. It is more of an event than a game. They don’t even watch full one-day matches like before. In fact, had it not been for the 20-over version, cricket would have ground to a halt or shrunk in a distracted world full of drug addiction, where even Hindi films struggle to woo fans to theatres.

T20 has enriched cricket and deepened the love of fans. It is in the natural order of things that its birth was difficult. It was considered disgusting by the type of people who are very sure about what is disgusting.

T20 was born out of a local need in England, where youngsters found domestic cricket boring, mainly because it was. Stuart Robertson, a marketing manager for the England and Wales Cricket Board, suggested that a 20-over version of the game would attract people. It was not well received. Seven of the 18 countries’ presidents voted against it, and so the decision narrowly passed. Many prominent cricketers and writers scoffed at the idea. But, eventually T20 took the cricketing world by storm with the help of the Indian Premier League (IPL).

I was one of those people who was certain that the IPL would fail, but in my defense I must say that my argument was not that it was an inferior sport, but that for decades Indians had neglected domestic sports because they were not really play- lovers; Rather, they were in search of national pride and only watched international cricket. So, I thought, why would they watch the 20-over version of domestic cricket?

The victory of T20 is the victory of intellectuals and purists. One Day Internationals had faced similar resistance at various stages of the format’s development – ​​when floodlights were introduced, when the red ball was replaced by white, and when cricket’s whites were replaced by colored clothing. was given. Purists called it “pajama cricket”, a term that affected layers of society and inevitably infected pretenders.

In any field, purists are usually a class of people with old money who also have generally good childhoods, and therefore have reasons to love and imitate the world of their parents. His considerable influence in the media then affects middle-class hypocrites. A third type of purists are players who are direct beneficiaries of a particular tradition. Like Sunil Gavaskar has reason to consider the straight bat better than the helicopter shot. There was a time when good Test batsmen considered the reverse sweep to be a singular sanctity.

In every sphere of human life, these three types of purists are seen maintaining a sacred antiquity. They were present in the publishing industry, and scoffed at Amazon’s claim that it could sell books online. They were in the film industry, scoffing at Netflix’s approach to cinema that didn’t require movie theaters. Not too long ago, purists booed when a Netflix film was screened at an international festival.

In any field, purists destroy the old way of life until the criminal capitalists who are not amused by tradition create something new to save the old. They are derided as pure amusing clowns. Then the honest masses who haven’t read enough to pretend to be other people make that innovation a huge success. So the purists give up, grumble and finally accept the change.

I must admit that my fondest memories of cricket so far were in December and January when I was in Mumbai watching the live telecast of a Test series in Australia. I didn’t care if India played. It was a beautiful spectacle that didn’t require meaning or danger of adventure.

Therefore, I do not suggest that what purists try to save is useless. But what they oppose and what they insult is often precious.

Glorifying the intangible keeps tradition alive. For example, the central flaw in the consecration of Test cricket is that it is the true test of a batsman’s calibre. It is absurd that this hypothesis has survived for so long as Test cricket is full of great stoners whose mediocrity is exposed in other formats. A batsman needs to be more talented to do well in T20 than in Test matches. It is easy to survive mediocrity in Test cricket because the fewer strokes you have, the less you risk and the longer you last.

Patience is nature’s reward for mediocrity, in all walks of life.

Manu Joseph is a journalist, novelist and producer of the Netflix series ‘Decauld’.Elsewhere in Mint

In Rai, Vivaan writes on Sharan Lessons for India from the FTX Saga, Barry Eichengrin explains Trident of CBDC, Long Story Reveals How the Chinese Use Indians as front of scams,