No Eden Gardens, No Wankhede for Border-Gavaskar Trophy: Is India’s Test calendar missing its anchors?

It is an anomaly that should invite reflection.

Australia, India’s principal modern rival, has not played a Test at Eden Gardens since 2001, nor at Wankhede Stadium since 2004. Two venues central to India’s cricketing narrative have remained absent from one of its defining rivalries for over two decades. Nagpur, Chennai, Guwahati, Ranchi, and Ahmedabad will host the five Tests of the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, which will end a busy 2026-27 home season for India.

The explanation lies in policy. The Board of Control for Cricket in India distributes international fixtures across State associations, balancing exposure and revenue within a vast ecosystem. The intent is equitable; the effect, though, is increasingly indiscriminate.

Such uniformity does not sit easily with the demands of Test cricket, which draws strength from continuity of setting. In other Test-playing nations, venue allocation follows a recognisable pattern rather than administrative rotation.

England stages the bulk of its matches at traditional centres, often with a sense of sequence; The Oval, for instance, routinely hosts the final Test of the summer.

READ: Border-Gavaskar Trophy 2026-27 Schedule: Australia tour of India—full list of matches, dates, venues

Australia anchors its calendar around a stable group of cities, with fixtures tied to tradition, most notably the Boxing Day Test at the Melbourne Cricket Ground and the New Year Test at the Sydney Cricket Ground.

India, by contrast, has hosted Tests at 28 venues overall and at 19 different grounds since 2000, a spread that offers flexibility but limits enduring associations. Until the 1980s, the BCCI operated with six designated Test centers—Mumbai, Kolkata, Delhi, Chennai, Bengaluru, and Kanpur—with Mohali added in the 1990s. The expansion over the past decade has broadened access but also diluted continuity.

The consequences are evident. Recent seasons have produced uneven attendance outside a small cluster of venues. In an era where broadcast is central, visual emptiness carries its own cost, diminishing the sense of occasion. Frequent venue changes also prevent pitches from developing a recognisable character, reducing the strategic continuity that has historically defined home advantage.

It was in recognition of this drift that the then Indian Test captain Virat Kohli, during the 2019 home series against South Africa, argued for limiting India’s Tests to a set of “strong centres”. The suggestion may be reductive for a country of India’s scale, but the concern remains valid. Redistribution alone cannot address declining engagement.

A more considered approach would distinguish between marquee and routine scheduling. Not all Tests carry the same weight, and high-profile series warrant stability in venue selection. Emerging centres can remain part of the rotation, but established grounds, by virtue of history and proven demand, should anchor contests that define the calendar.

Scale is not a constraint but a case for sharper curation. Without hierarchy, distribution risks diluting the very occasions it seeks to sustain.

Published on Mar 27, 2026