World Test Championship Final Spotlights a Format at a Fiscal Crossroads
This week’s World Test Championship (WTC) final between Australia and South Africa at Lord’s is more than just a cricket match—it’s a litmus test for the viability of the game’s most storied format. With the eyes of the cricketing world trained on the historic venue, the fixture is being hailed as a celebration of Test cricket. Yet beneath the fanfare lies an urgent question: can this romanticised, slow-burning version of the sport survive in the modern, money-driven era?
For much of its 148-year existence, Test cricket has stood as the pinnacle of the game. Revered for its nuance, complexity, and ability to test the temperament and technique of players like no other format, it has long been seen as the purest form of cricket. But the financial foundations underpinning this grand old format are increasingly fragile—and the cracks are widening.
The WTC: A Work in Progress
The ICC introduced the World Test Championship in 2019 with the goal of injecting relevance and structure into bilateral Test series. Former ICC chairman Greg Barclay, who stepped down in 2024, considers the WTC a necessary evolution.
“If you have context, relevance and a bit of jeopardy the fans get far more involved in it,” he told BBC Sport.
The WTC uses a points-based system over a two-year cycle, with teams playing six series—three home, three away. Yet criticism has persisted, mainly around scheduling disparities. Not all teams play the same number of Tests or face all potential opponents, which compromises its competitive integrity.
As Johnny Grave, former West Indies Cricket CEO, noted: “We have a WTC where, if you’re being really honest, the most valuable fixture—India versus Pakistan—never happens.”
Adding to the inconsistency is the exclusion of Zimbabwe, Ireland, and Afghanistan from the WTC framework, effectively marginalising smaller Test nations from the game’s flagship competition. Warren Deutrom, CEO of Cricket Ireland, has expressed interest in joining the WTC, but only with increased ICC funding.
“To be very blunt about it, if there was a change in the funding structure then it is something which we would give serious consideration,” Deutrom admitted.
The Franchise Temptation: Players Chasing Financial Security
For the ‘Big Three’—England, Australia, and India—Test cricket remains financially attractive. England’s Ben Stokes reportedly earns £2.47 million a year from his central contract. But beyond those three nations, the rewards pale in comparison to franchise cricket.
Nicholas Pooran’s decision to retire from international cricket at 29, despite never playing a Test, is a case in point. He earns $2.5 million from a single IPL season—more than ten times what top players in the West Indies earn annually from their central contracts.
Grave, now CEO of Major League Cricket, remains an advocate for Test cricket but acknowledges harsh economic realities.
“Players will make decisions about what’s good for them and their livelihoods and their future financial security,” he said.
A ring-fenced ICC Test fund has been floated in the past to incentivise red-ball cricket. While Barclay is sceptical about subsidies, Deutrom sees potential in allowing boards to allocate funding based on their strategic needs.
New Markets, New Hope?
Talk of expanding Test cricket into new frontiers has circulated for years. Former ICC CEO Malcolm Speed once dreamed of a Test between India and China. While that dream still seems distant, there is precedent for rapid growth: China, once a snooker backwater, now boasts 300,000 snooker halls and a world champion.
The ICC sent a delegation to China last year, though not specifically to promote the Test format. Still, future Test-playing nations like Nepal, UAE, Scotland, and the USA are being monitored. But enthusiasm alone isn’t enough—without financial incentives or domestic red-ball infrastructure, their pathways remain blocked.
Deutrom has called for a less “precious” approach to hosting Tests. “Perhaps we could remove some of the preciousness around how everything has to be done—with 24 to 30 cameras, Super Slo-mo, DRS, etc.”
The Revenue Question: Time for Redistribution?
The economics of Test cricket are stark. The ECB’s £880 million broadcast deal with Sky Sports is a lifeline for English cricket. A sold-out Ashes Test can tip a county’s financial year into profit.
But for the rest of the Test world, revenues are shrinking. Grave argues that the imbalance created by satellite TV deals in the early 2000s has entrenched inequality in the system.
“The majority of Test cricket will just be played by three teams if we don’t change the model,” he warned.
Grave has championed a more equitable revenue-sharing model. He noted the irony of Cricket West Indies having to pay $1 million to tour England, without seeing any revenue in return. Flying players to Australia at $25,000 a head only exacerbates the financial pressure.
Four Days and Eight-Ball Overs?
Given the practical and financial pressures, innovations are being considered to adapt Test cricket to modern realities. Barclay is open to the idea of four-day Tests, particularly to ease scheduling congestion and lower broadcast costs.
Grave even floated the idea of 25-over sessions using eight-ball overs to ensure Tests finish over four days without sacrificing playing time.
“You’d have 400 overs—and that’s probably plenty of overs for all teams to bat twice and have a meaningful contest,” he said.
Shortening matches could also appeal to broadcasters and casual fans, particularly if games start on a Thursday and conclude by Sunday.
So, Is Test Cricket Sustainable?
In the truest sense, yes—Test cricket can be financially sustainable. But only if the existing model evolves. That means:
- More equitable revenue sharing
- Greater ICC investment in lower-ranked nations
- Reduced costs and fewer logistical hurdles to host matches
- Flexibility around match length and playing conditions
- Leveraging the financial might of T20 to reinvest in the longer format
Barclay remains optimistic. “To allow it [Test cricket] to fall away, or in any way be compromised, I think would be at a massive loss to cricket as a sport.”
But Grave is less romantic: “Is it sustainable in its current model? Almost certainly no.”
The WTC final is a grand showcase for the game’s oldest format. But beyond the floodlights and fanfare, the future of Test cricket will depend not on its past prestige, but on smart business decisions, structural reform, and a global commitment to keeping the longest format alive.
For now, the question isn’t whether Test cricket deserves to survive—but whether the game can afford for it not to.
