The Border-Gavaskar trophy Test match series starts today. It’s likely that most of the five matches will end in less than the allotted five days. This has been the trend for the last several years.
This is not because one team is overwhelmingly strong. It’s happened because of a peculiar paradox that has come into being, created by television which requires snappy games to keep creating and retaining viewership.
In that it has succeeded. But as the viewership and retention through the match has grown, so have the costs of a broadcast. The BCCI, for example, charged $720 million for the broadcast rights for 2023-28. That’s nearly ₹6,000 crore.
The holder of the broadcast rights is expected to recover this and more from advertisements. But this is where the problem or paradox lies.
Having paid for five day games the company that pays for advertising often sees less than five days of broadcast. Sometimes it’s as little as two or two and a half days.
Deadweight losses
These lost days are called deadweight losses in economics even after you make contractual adjustments for them. These losses occur when either more or less of something is produced than required by the market.
Deadweight losses are important but completely neglected and ignored even though they benefit no one. They are what the term says: deadweight.
Many eminent economists like Alfred Marshall and John Hicks have studied them. This examination has been going on for nearly a century.
But as can be expected from economists, the problem is identified and now well known. But there aren’t any solutions because it’s too late by the time it becomes clear that you are faced with a deadweight loss. Indeed, that’s why it’s called a deadweight loss.
In the case of shortened Test matches this loss arises because something that should have been produced isn’t. Instead of five or nearly five days of cricket, fewer days are played without any substantial reduction in cost to the advertisers or the ticket buyers.
The options
There is a way of reducing deadweight loss in Test cricket. This is to recognise that the current playing rules, heavier bats and different balls, and shorter boundaries, stronger players have all increased the probability of less-than-five days matches.
It might be a good idea, therefore, to limit each innings to 100-120 overs per side by extending the playing hours till after dark. All good grounds have lights now. So at even three runs being scored per over, it will be a highly competitive game. Another way of reducing these deadweight losses could be that in the remaining time after the match ends, measured either in number of overs or hours of play, the two teams should play another match or matches. These could be T20 or 50/40 over games depending on how much time is left. Everyone will gain if more rather than less cricket is played.
As it is, viewership for Test matches and ODIs is a fraction of what it is for T20 games. That’s because the game is closer to baseball than traditional cricket. True, it still has more variety and variations but those are being whittled down steadily to cater to the needs of television.
That’s why some of this lost viewership for Tests can be recovered by innovation such as merging an ODI into a Test match that has ended in four or less days. After all, why should the players get extra days off when they have been paid so handsomely for playing for five days?
In sum, the current deadweight loss must be minimised.