Once one-day cricket had gained popularity it was only a matter of time until a still shorter version of the game came forth. Twenty20 was the name of the game and it would be foolish to predict that the process will stop here.

Twenty20 cricket still offers the probability of a team getting all out, as has been the case in many matches. The process of shortening will continue until the fear of getting all out vanishes altogether and batsmen can go about trying to hit every single ball out of the park. A game of still lesser duration won’t be viable. Probably Martin Crowe’s Cricket Max - where teams have two innings of 10 overs each - will be the successor to Twenty20.

Cricket started as a leisurely form of passing time. Initially the games would go on for many days until results were obtained. As time passed, competitive games started and a limit was imposed on the number of days for each match. The competitive spirit was rising - as was the fierceness in the competitions.

The desire to win led to bodyline bowling in the 1932-33 series by England against Australia, but cricket still remained a sport. Those who played cricket, played for the love of it and those who watched did so for the love of the game or as an admiration of the players. Even the journalists who covered the game did it because of their passion for the game, not solely for monetary gains.

The players who played the first international limited-overs game at MCG in 1971 as a time-filler when the Test match was abandoned due to rain could not have realised what impact it would have on cricket. Even when the World Cup started it was considered a one-off one-day tournament on the cricket calendar.

In the sub-continent, where people did not have many other sports to look up to, cricket appeared like a breath of fresh air. Kerry Packer was the first person who identified the high marketability quotient of limited-overs cricket and started the World Series. The game was now in a phase of transition from being a sport to becoming a source of entertainment for spectators. As people found it increasingly enjoyable, they wanted to cram more of it into less time.

While the quintessential cricket lover still remained faithful to Test cricket there were fewer additions to its fan base. With time, one-day overhauled Tests in terms of the followers - and the dollars and pounds followed suit. The cricket boards were forced to organise more one-day games in pursuit of big bucks.

As the world developed, people got busier and the change was evident everywhere. I recall one day as a boy coming home from school so proud after having batted through one whole day of a five-day match. And I remember another when I bowled 20 overs of off spin, leg spin and medium pace. Now in college, I have not seen a single game played over more than 25 overs, for the simple reason that I don't have the time.

Thus, once the trend had set in with one-day cricket, it was inevitable that a still shorter format would come to fruition. It would be wrong to say that market forces decided this fate because they have been and will always be driven by the crowd. This is how they survive, this is their job, and they have to move with the majority - they can’t stop for the love of the game.

The current players have a lot of respect for Test cricket but the newer generations are likely to be driven by the dollar. So the only possible way to save our beloved game is to move with the times and make minimum alterations required to pull the people back towards Test match cricket.. It may even require us to do look away from that most holiest of words - “tradition”.