Test attendances in decline? Maybe, but not for lack of interest

In recent years many thousands of column inches have been filled by writers bemoaning declining attendances for Test cricket worldwide, and on that basis hypothesising about the impending death of the format. In this article I will attempt to explain why Test audiences vary so much. I will also argue that the chances of Test cricket ending any time soon is about as high as that of the Mayan prophecy being proved correct, and that there are in fact many reasons to be positive about continuing interest in the oldest form of the game.

So, what exactly is the current situation? The common conviction is that whilst grounds remain full in England and Australia, crowds are in serious and potentially terminal decline elsewhere.

The first part of that statement is largely true: most Tests in England still sell out, and large audiences are also common in Australia (although the current Test in Hobart is not a great example of that). One reason for this is that matches are played at a relatively small number of grounds, most of which have long traditions of hosting annual Test Matches. People get into the habit of buying tickets for a day of their local Test each year, and so there is less impetus to attract supporters who haven’t come along in the past. This filters down to younger generations, who first get taken along by their parents and then take on the ritual themselves. A second reason is that cricket supporters in these two countries perhaps have more flexibility to take days off work to watch the cricket than their Asian or West Indian counterparts, allowing grounds to be full on weekdays. Finally, scheduling is good on the whole, with a lot of Test Matches over the holiday season and weekends.

Those Tests which struggle to draw crowds in England and Australia are largely exceptions which prove the rule. Grounds like the Swalec Stadium, the Rose Bowl and to a lesser extent Bellerive Oval have a lesser Test Match tradition than Lord’s, Old Trafford and the SCG. Matches at these venues have also often been played off peak, and against less attractive opposition. Consequently, attendances are lower with weather less conducive to cricket-watching and people more likely to have to work. So, yes, Test attendances do remain good in Test cricket’s two most ancient dominions.

But what about elsewhere? The logical place to start is India, where a diet of limited-overs cricket has supposedly taken over, resulting in a significant in interest in Tests. I would contest this thesis. Interestingly, attendances remain highest where Tests have long been played – good numbers turned out for the recent matches at Mumbai and Kolkata, and Bengaluru also does well. Although we might not have the 100,000 that would watch at Eden Gardens twenty years ago, this can easily be explained by massive changes to Indian society. Back then going to the match was the only reasonable way for the then vast majority of poverty-stricken Indians to follow the cricket without waiting for the paper the next morning. Now, with the Internet, satellite television and an increase in wealth, less people feel the need to make the effort of spending a day at the cricket. A sufficient number still do though, particularly when England, Australia or Pakistan are in town. Despite not quite half-filling Eden Gardens, the crowd for last week’s Test would almost certainly have filled Lord’s and was almost certainly the highest in terms of total number of spectators for any Test Match in 2012. In line with the pattern identified in England and Australia, the worst crowds are at grounds in areas with no Test Match tradition – Nagpur and Mohali are key examples, both located some distance from large population areas and both experiencing large numbers of empty seats for Tests. In the recent past the BCCI have also often done themselves few favours, scheduling Tests to run Monday to Friday on some occasions, and thus robbing themselves of the days when most people attend.

The link to limited-overs cricket is worth examining in more depth. Although Indians undoubtedly have a greater love for the short formats than English fans do, it is worth considering that attendances for a Test are spread over five days. This is a simple fact which is often forgetten when commentators attempt to compare turnout for one-off ODIs and Twenty20 Internationals with attendances for individual days of a Test. The same spectator is unlikely to go to more than one day of a Test, so its surely logical that for an ODI, where all spectators have to attend at the same time, the crowd on that one day will be higher than for any individual day of Test cricket. In fact, this is far from being purely the Asian phenomena that people think it is. Even in England ODIs almost always sell out despite the perceived preference for Tests.

The pattern in Sri Lanka, West Indies and Bangladesh (a lack of reccent home matches mean I’ve left out Pakistan, but they’d probably be in this group) is closest to that in India. It is in these countries and New Zealand where Test attendances are most embarrassing. However, in none of these were huge daily crowds commonplace at any point in the recent past. Economic constraints on supporters are probably the main issue here – in the West Indies, attendances are regularly considerably higher at weekends and on public holidays. But new stadiums built away from town also unsurprisingly do badly, such as the Sir Vivian Richards ground in Antigua and Hambantota in Sri Lanka. It should also be noted that even one-day matches don’t usually produce anything like a full house in these nations, so radical ideas like day-night Tests are unlikely to make a marked difference, particularly once the novelty wears off.

South Africa and New Zealand are outliers. New Zealand’s pitifully poor crowds are best explained by a pure lack of interest in the national team in a rugby mad country. It is here, more than anywhere, that you feel day-night Tests could actually make a difference. South Africa is more confusing. Their crowds are rarely as strong as England’s and Australia’s despite a good team, the popularity of cricket, and their grounds have hosted Tests for years. A potential explanation is that the Test-hosting tradition was interrupted by Apartheid, after which limited-overs cricket established itself as the fashionable format to take the family to. Economic factors may also play a part. But, overall, they also could do better.

We’ve established that crowds in England and Australia are better than elsewhere, and offered some explanations for the perceived decline. I’ll now turn my attention to why I think Test cricket has a bright future everywhere, with the possible exception of New Zealand.

Whilst the multitude of ways to follow Tests in the 21st Century, now including Cricinfo, Twitter, Satellite TV, Digital Radio and iPhone apps might be playing a part in keeping some people away from the ground, it can only be increasing interest in the game. Some years ago most England overseas tours were given only minimal coverage, and hence received little public attention. These days we can follow them as closely as we can home Test series. I have no reason to believe that this is not the case in India and also elsewhere. One observation of mine is that many of the micro-bloggers moaning about a lack of support for Test Matches won’t attend a Test Match themselves each year, despite following the format extremely closely. I’m willing to bet that they would have done twenty years ago.

Things can be further improved. This could be done by ensuring that every Test Match includes guaranteed play at the weekend, and so starts no earlier in the week than Thursday, with the exception of matches played over holidays. In addition, Test cricket should be kept away from big grounds with no Test Match tradition. Nagpur and Mohali should thus be consigned to one-day matches. This shouldn’t mean that Tests should exclusively be played where they always have been, but new grounds should be carefully picked and not be so big that they always appear half-full or worse.

Overall, I firmly believe that Test cricket has a bright future. Any perceived decline in attendances has been exaggerated, and should not necessarily be equated with declining interest in the longest form of the game. On the contrary, I believe that Tests are being followed by more people than ever before, and that this trend is unlikely to stop soon.

Pretty accurate , Shelsey . Not sure Tests have ever been hugely attended in NZ anyway...Rugby , racing and booze is how a Kiwi friend described the national interest

SA is the odd one out. Too many people on low wages ? I must ask some of the SA work colleagues...

alfie wrote:Pretty accurate , Shelsey . Not sure Tests have ever been hugely attended in NZ anyway...Rugby , racing and booze is how a Kiwi friend described the national interest

SA is the odd one out. Too many people on low wages ? I must ask some of the SA work colleagues...

Sorry for replying only now.

I don't think our test attendance is bad. If you look at Newlands is almost always sold out (rugby or cricket) when I want to go there (Well I am only there over vacation time, that's probably why). In Centurion when I go there is always good attendance, but I only do it one day over a weekend. Wanderers too.

I am also pretty sure St George's Park will have good attendance, the cricket community is strong there. I have no idea of Kingsmead.

Our biggest problem is I would say less than 10 million people interesting in cricket. With by far the largest fan base the southern provinces (WP,EP). In WP I will find people acively playing or has played either cricket in almost any group, with the other sport being rugby. In Gauteng people are more rugby/soccer bias in my opinion. I haven't met anyone that is actively playing cricket in my stay in Gauteng. In Gauteng it looks like people prefer watching the shorter format's in the stadium. Also transport and parking is an issue at Wanderers, you basically park in the street.

Interesting. I was quite impressed that people came out for the New Year Test, being v NZ (although it was, of course, the holiday season).