ICC weighs pink ball switch to save Tests from bad light

A Test match can lose its rhythm for the dullest reason in cricket, bad light. One minute, a batter has settled in. Next, everyone walks off because the red ball has become too hard to pick.

Now ICC wants to test a fix that sounds simple, but could change Test cricket’s old habits. If bad light stops play in a daytime Test, teams may be allowed to switch from the red ball to the pink ball.

The idea is not approved yet. It will need discussion at the ICC Board meeting in Ahmedabad on 30 May. If cleared, the rule could come in from 1 October.

Pink ball enters daytime Tests

The proposal is built around one familiar problem. Red balls do not show up well under floodlights. That is why day-night Tests use the pink ball from start to finish.

Under the new idea, a match that starts with the red ball can continue with a pink ball when light worsens. This would apply only at grounds with floodlights.

There is one big condition. Both captains must agree before the switch happens. That gives teams some protection from sudden tactical shocks.

Still, cricket knows this will not be a small change. The red ball and pink ball do not behave exactly the same. Bowlers, batters, captains, and umpires all understand that.

The pink ball can feel livelier under lights. It can swing more at certain times. Batters may find it harder when the ball is newer or the surface has moisture.

That is why captain consent matters. Without it, one side could feel the game has changed halfway through a contest.

Why bad light hurts cricket

Bad light has irritated fans for years. Test cricket already fights for attention in a crowded sports market. Few things annoy viewers more than players leaving the field while floodlights are on.

A full day in Test cricket should have 90 overs. In reality, bad light often eats into that target. The lost overs then create pressure on later days.

For fans in the stadium, the frustration is direct. They paid for a day’s play. Instead, they watch covers, officials, and players waiting.

For television viewers, the damage is softer but real. A tight match loses heat when play stops without rain. Momentum drains away.

Players also feel it. A batter who has survived a tricky spell must restart later. A fast bowler who has found rhythm may lose his edge.

The ICC proposal tries to protect the one thing Test cricket cannot afford to waste, playing time. That is the heart of it.

But the fix must feel fair. Test cricket depends on conditions changing naturally. Cloud cover, pitch wear, and old-ball movement are part of the format.

The question is whether a mid-match ball switch protects the contest or disturbs it. That debate will not disappear quickly.

Captains get a decisive say

The consent clause is the most interesting part. It tells us the ICC knows this idea sits in sensitive territory.

Captains already carry tactical pressure in Test cricket. Now they may also carry responsibility for keeping play alive in poor light.

Imagine a team chasing 180 late in the day. The batting captain may prefer to walk off. The bowling captain may want the pink ball and floodlights.

In that situation, agreement may not come easily. The rule could work best when both teams genuinely want more overs.

It could also create a new kind of negotiation. Umpires will still judge light. Captains may then decide whether the match continues with a different ball.

Sourav Ganguly, who heads the ICC Cricket Committee, attended the meeting where these proposals came up. His committee’s role matters because playing conditions cannot change on vibes alone.

Cricket has seen pink-ball Tests before. India’s day-night Tests have shown how quickly sessions can tilt under lights. Fans remember collapses as much as contests.

So administrators will have to answer a basic sporting question. If the ball changes, how close must it be in age and condition?

A 40-over red ball cannot simply become a fresh pink ball. That would punish batters unfairly. Match officials will need a practical method.

Coaches may enter ODI drinks

The ICC is also looking at a change in one-day internationals. Head coaches may be allowed onto the field during drinks breaks.

At present, substitute players carry drinks. They must also be in cricket clothing. Coaches do not get the same access in ODIs.

T20 internationals already allow coaches to speak to players during breaks. The ODI proposal brings the 50-over format closer to that model.

This is not just about a coach giving a pep talk. Modern cricket runs on match-ups, data, and quick tactical shifts.

A coach may want to tell a batter which bowler is likely next. He may remind a captain about field changes. He may flag a scoring pattern.

For players, this can help. ODIs stretch over 100 overs, and plans can go stale. A short, clear message can steady a dressing room’s thinking.

But there is a balance to keep. Cricket should not become remote-controlled from the boundary. Captains still need authority in the middle.

The best teams will use this access lightly. The weaker ones may overdo it. Too much advice can confuse players under pressure.

Shorter T20 breaks, sharper checks

Another proposal targets T20 internationals. The break between innings may come down from 20 minutes to 15 minutes.

That sounds minor, but broadcasters care deeply about match length. Fans do too, especially on weeknights.

T20 became popular because it moved quickly. Long pauses hurt that rhythm. A 5-minute cut keeps the event tighter.

Players will have less time to reset. Bowling sides must plan quickly. Batting groups must move from chase calculation to execution faster.

The ICC is also considering Hawk-Eye support for umpires to monitor suspect bowling actions during matches.

Illegal bowling actions remain one of cricket’s trickiest issues. An action can look doubtful in real time, but proving it needs care.

Technology may help officials spot warning signs earlier. Still, cricket must avoid trial by slow-motion suspicion.

The debate around Pakistan spinner Usman Tariq during the 2026 T20 World Cup showed how heated this area can become. Once an action comes under public discussion, pressure builds fast.

A technology-led check could bring more consistency. But players also deserve a process that does not damage reputations unfairly.

For ordinary cricket followers, all these proposals point in one direction. The ICC wants fewer dead minutes, faster formats, and cleaner decision-making. That is sensible. But cricket’s charm lives in its fine margins. If the pink ball helps save lost overs without bending the contest, fans will accept it. If it starts deciding matches, the argument will begin before the next bad-light stoppage.