Back to back Tests

We hate back-to-back Tests. You've no time to take in the first match before the second has started. Marginal supporters know that there'll be another match before long and don't pay as much attention.

To us, a Test is the most important thing in sport. The idea that people think they're ten-a-penny makes us do our angry face. We're doing it now. Three Tests in a row smacks of getting them out of the way. Tests aren't to be zipped through. They're to be cherished and pored over.

What standard will the cricket be anyway. Test match cricket's the ultimate test of skill, is it not? Isn't that where the name comes from?

Imagine that in the first of the three back-to-back Tests between England and New Zealand next year, the pitch is as flat as a pancake (because they usually are these days). England bat for two days or so and rack up 600 plus. England's bowlers now set about trying to dismiss New Zealand. They dismiss New Zealand once and enforce the follow-on. New Zealand bat again and England win late on the fifth day, or maybe it's a draw.

After a couple of days off, the second Test starts. New Zealand win the toss and elect to bat. Steve Harmison takes the new ball. He's knackered before he starts, the pitch is flat again and he knows he's got a long stint ahead of him. Is he going to charge in and bowl the ball at 90mph?

Is he bollocks. He's going to pace himself. Voila, Test cricket's of a lower standard.