Yet, rather than lament this gap, perhaps Test cricket fans would be wiser to commend it. Scheduling Test matches during the IPL, as England learnt long ago, is to condemn fans to watching understrength sides. If England’s Test series against West Indies clashed with the IPL, for instance, Shamar and Alzarri Joseph would face a choice between earning far more or playing international cricket. History suggests that, for most cricketers, this is not really much of a choice at all. Far better West Indies play their Test series in England in July than, like in 2009 and 2012, play Tests in May with a depleted and underprepared squad; Chris Gayle arrived two days out from their first Test in 2009, then not at all for the contest three years later.

In a sense, Test purists who rail against the short formats are right: since T20 emerged, there has been a marked reduction in the amount of Test cricket played. From 199 Tests in the first four years of the 2000s, there were only 143 Tests from 2020 to the end of 2023: a decrease from an average of 50 Tests a year to only 36.

Yet by historical standards, Test cricket fans today are extraordinarily lucky. The current average of 36 Tests a year compares to 27 a year in the early 1990s, and only 15 at the start of the 1970s.

The salient question facing Test cricket today is really less of quantity than quality. Far from being an anomaly, the three-month gap between Tests should actually be viewed as a model for how the five-day game and T20 leagues can co-exist.

A future with, say, three annual windows for Test cricket of four to eight weeks each would build prolonged gaps between Tests into the calendar. But this would bring profound benefits for the five-day game.

Periods reserved exclusively for international cricket, with major T20 leagues only being played outside these periods, would encourage the game’s best talent to continue to play Tests. Suddenly the choice facing players would be between playing Test cricket and unpaid rest, rather than between five-day games and more lucrative franchise commitments.

Test windows would also ensure more continuity for fans. Spectators are most inclined to go to Tests out of habit; attending the match in their local city becomes an annual ritual, both a sporting and social event. Building on the success of the annual Boxing Day Melbourne Test and New Year’s Sydney Test, Australia’s prudent decision to allocate fixtures for the next six years, giving each venue a Test at the same time each year, is a model that should be followed.

Windows can create a sense of a festival of Test cricket, with one captivating game creating broader interest in the format. The simultaneous drama at the Gabba and Hyderabad in January, when both West Indies and England recorded upset victories, hints at what is possible. More Tests played in tandem would also help to promote the World Test Championship: a crucial source of context for the game outside Australia, England and India, and yet still not given enough support. Just as football fans follow the results of other teams vying for the title, Tests scheduled during a window could convey the wider story of the competition, giving supporters a reason to care about other countries. After, say, a day of watching England-Sri Lanka, English fans might switch over to West Indies-India, knowing that they required West Indies to win for England to get to the World Test Championship final.

Most importantly, Test windows, and the ensuing breaks between games, can create greater anticipation when matches do take place. Too much modern sport feels like it is mere contractual necessity. But when Ben Stokes and Kraigg Brathwaite walk out at Lord’s in three months’ time, the wait between the 2,537th and 2,538th Test matches in history will help to ensure that the game has what all the best sport needs: a sense of occasion.