tests are not dying, stop deluding yourself. The crowd figures I've posted for the 2010/11 Ashes series, and subsequent figures of other touring parties supports this. However, you just dismiss it with your asinine logic.
The empty stadiums in most tests in almost all the countries except Aus, Eng and SA shows the same thing. T20 and ODIs run crowded in these same countries. All you said was a meaningless bilateral series figures, which
clutching at straws are we? The Perth, Adelaide and Brisbane tests are nowhere near any holidays, and the Sydney test is post-New Year's.
Those tests had an average of 30-40k which even a minor IPL league game gets
India vs Pakistan is not even close to being a major rivalry. England vs Australia is the most significant, most acclaimed rivalry in world cricket
Eng/AUs rivalry has nothing as compared to the INd/Pak rivalry. The tension, excitement, entertainment far exceeds that of Aus/Eng. Even the whole world acknowledges that.
"Australian umpire Simon Taufel, who is set to stand in his final international game during Sunday's ICC World T20 final, termed the 2011 World Cup semifinal between India versus Pakistan as the "most exciting match" of his career."
Yopu might have good rivalries, not denying that but it never exceeds that of ind/Pak encounter.
New Zealand, definitely. Their test attendance rate is higher than their T20 and ODI's combined. Sri Lanka vs Pakistan, exactly. Nobody turns up to watch Pakistan. Sri Lanka had great attendance when Australia toured, and when England toured.
Wrong again. No proof, just delusional assumptions.
Case in point. NZ vs SA in Wellington. All reports of the 3rd test shows "sparse crowds", small crowd" etc
Whereas the NZ vs SA T20 match in Wellington got nearly 18k crowd (high in NZ)
Oh, and the same way, SL vs Pak ODI and T20 matches had much higher crowd figures than tests.
What all these show is that very few care for tests in these countries.
They played the T20 in a football stadium, not a test venue such as Kingsmead. Had the Australia/South Africa test been played at Moses Mabhida Stadium, rather than Kingsmead, there would have been an even greater crowd attending the test.
The whole reason why Kingsmead was dropped as a Boxing Day test venue this year is because of low crowd attendance
And, this was clearly said by CEO as one of the reasons why they dropped the test. In the same city of Durban, there were at least 47,000 attendance (whether it was held in a football stadium or not is irrelevant). Clearly, another delusional assumption that SA prefers test cricket.
Again, nobody would bother to watch the West Indies tour these days. They don't have any resemblance to a quality test side and are easily rolled through.
Ind vs WI ODI series in the same tour ran full houses
It is not West Indies that was the culprit but that it was a test
Oh, and WI performed better in the test series than the ODI series
T20 is scheduled in the evening, when the working class don't need to work. They aren't scheduled for a Monday morning.
Most of the popular sports around the world is designed this way. Soccer, tennis, NBA, NFL - you name it. Which is also one of the reasons why cricket will soon be defined by the T20 format.
No, test is not supreme but just another form of cricket. It just require a different skill set as compared to T20 or ODI. Nothing else.
T20 cricket is more entertaining and exciting, whereas test is mostly a boring format that is fast losing popularity, as seen by the above examples. T20 is spreading cricket around the world and making it a global sport, rather than in a handful of countries. Of course, it will take some time for other countries to become competitive.
Majority of cricket fans prefer T20 and it is more fun seeing a game played in a full stadium than on empty, dead grounds. These are the facts rather than delusional assumptions that you are making in trying to project test cricket as a definition of cricket. Those who try to think that test is a superior format are just a minority among cricket fans.