During the World Test Championship final at Lord’s, a previously unthinkable discussion opened up among friends from a variety of backgrounds: Does Lord’s still justify its cachet as the home of cricket? The very question will be regarded as heresy in many quarters, but the heavy thought hung in the air.

At a meeting of the International Cricket Council’s executives committee in April 2025, the Board of Control for Cricket in India expressed its desire to host future WTC finals.

India’s motivations are clear. Hosting the event would cement its position as the powerhouse of international cricket. The BCCI argues that viewership and commercial revenue would be boosted, along with tourism. However, these would be jeopardized if India failed to reach the final. Attendances for matches in India which do not involve the Indian team are notably low. If the final continues to be scheduled for June, there is also the issue of the monsoon season. In order to hold it in another month, the existing crowded international and domestic schedules would have to be disrupted. It is probably too late to change the dates of the current two-year cycle and maybe for the two which follow.

In response to this challenge, the England and Wales Cricket Board and the Marylebone Cricket Club launched a charm offensive before and during the WTC final.

In January, the MCC invited the ICC’s Chair Jay Shah to join a new advisory board of its World Cricket Connects initiative. Launched in 2024 at Lord’s, the initiative gathers together over 100 people, including administrators, former and current players, coaches, players’ association leaders, media and broadcasting personnel.

The advisory board, comprising 13 members, has replaced the MCC’s World Cricket Committee. After its inaugural meeting at Lord’s, it will meet virtually throughout the year. How much Mr. Shah’s busy schedule allows him to participate remains to be seen.

He was very much in evidence at Lord’s, where he was feted by the ECB’s leaders. Together with the MCC, they ensured that the full pomp and circumstance associated with a Lord’s Test match was brought to bear. This included an invitation to ring the bell prior to the start of the match. As mentioned last week, rumors now abound that Shah was sufficiently impressed to the point where he will recommend to the ICC’s Annual Conference in July that Lord’s should host the next three WTC finals. If this motion passes, it will burnish the claim of Lord’s to be the home of cricket. It will also be a test of Shah’s omnipotence since the BCCI is likely to be disappointed.

His power and presence were encapsulated in the ICC’s 45-second video of the match highlights released after the final. This has not gone down well on social media. Fans expressed their disappointment by trolling both the ICC and Shah, who features in 11 of the 23 frames. A common reaction is that the video is a PR piece for Shah, to the exclusion of key players and moments. Other reactions have been even more uncomplimentary. There has also been adverse reaction to reports that he did not attend the World Cricket Connects forum, an event he also missed last year.

Topics for discussion this year included fan engagement, franchise cricket, growth in women’s cricket, sustainability issues, social impact and shortage of willow. All of these are topical issues for the game. Gathering together “the most influential voices in the sport” alongside a major match is perhaps something that only the MCC and Lord’s can achieve. An interesting aspect of this was that the heads of the main franchise leagues met together in person for the first time. One hopes that they talked about scheduling clashes.

This is a matter which should vex Shah and the ICC. His voice is indisputably influential. The World Cricket Connects forum and its advisory board have no power. Its purpose is to make recommendations to the ICC, which is under no obligation to address them. Inviting Shah to join the advisory board — and his acceptance of the invitation — looks a little odd. Should he be part of a board which will present recommendations to the governing body of which he is the chair? Perhaps his non-attendance reflects an acceptance of this duality and potential conflict of interests. Either way, neither party appears to have made a public statement.

If Lord’s does retain the honor of hosting the WTC final, the ECB and MCC’s overtures will have been successful. It is relevant to wonder what quid pro quo may be in the offing. Perhaps the imminent influx of Indian shareholding of The Hundred franchises, including the one held by the MCC at Lord’s, is playing a part in the decision-making.

The MCC retains a privileged position within cricket. It has been the maker of the laws of cricket since its formation in 1787. Although it maintains this position, law changes will only be made after discussion with the ICC. Until 2005, Lord’s was the home of the ICC, when it moved to Dubai. Both of these pillars underpinned Lord’s as the home of cricket.

Despite the partial removal of the pillars, players say that it remains an ambition to score 100 or take five wickets at Lord’s, for which the reward is to have their name etched on the honors board. There are famous players who have not achieved this feat. Sachin Tendulkar is one of them, along with Sunil Gavaskar, Ricky Ponting and Jacques Kallis. On their way to the field of play, each player walks through the Long Room, lined with MCC members, oil paintings and other cricketing artifacts, representing over 200 years of ritual, legacy, shaping and preservation of the game.

The ground symbolizes cricket’s rich heritage and tradition. It has moved with the times, choosing more modern structures to sit alongside the pavilion of late 19th-century vintage. These may not be to everyone’s liking, but spectator viewing has improved along with ground capacity. Unique among Test match venues in England, spectators are allowed to bring alcohol into the ground, but no fancy dressing-up is allowed, or musical instruments.

There is no other cricket ground quite like it. Sydney has a number of similar characteristics and a rich history; the Melbourne Cricket Ground has three times the capacity of Lord’s; the newly built stadium in Ahmedabad has four times more; Eden Gardens, Kolkata, is much noisier; and Newlands at Cape Town sits iconically in the shadow of Table Mountain. Cricket’s governing body now resides in Dubai, UAE, which has become the place to go for countries that require a neutral venue or an emergency outlet.

Compared with these and other venues, Lord’s continues to hold sway over them. MCC membership and ethos is idiosyncratic. The ground and its architecture reek of history and tradition. There are no crumbling facades, and plans for redevelopment of stands are constantly under consideration. The sloping playing area provides another unique characteristic and an additional test of a player’s skill set.

London’s multicultural population means that big matches that do not involve England are able to attract sizable crowds, unlike arenas in other countries.

Lord’s has evolved and endured, while maintaining its essence, grace, dignity, prestige and tradition. These characteristics and its place in shaping the game combine to support its accolade as the home of cricket.

In concluding the discussion with my friends, they were of the view that Lord’s still holds its status. They, along with many others, hope that the uniqueness of Lord’s is strong enough to ward off the competition from India for future WTC finals.