Its like Test cricket exists so that its rules can be exercised rather than for the cricket itself. Cricket is constantly looking for situations where it can apply one of its myriad rules to stop a game rather than looking for reasons why the game must continue in the interest of not looking completely stupid in front of the spectators.
So here we propose a more tolerant set of rules when the game must stop.
When a Test match result is on the line, everything must done within every one's power; or power to stop a game must be taken away from everyone; to ensure that a result is achieved.
Add to that; presence of flood lights and a full stadium; then while calling off the Test as a draw the umpires must ensure that one of the following circumstances exist. That too beyond reasonable doubt...
- There is an earthquake. The existence of which should be verifiable using snick-o-meter. After the earthquake has passed and no damage is visible to the stadium, and the floodlights are still operational and standing, play shall continue as if nothing is amiss.
- Ravi Shastri and Sunil Gavaskar take turns speaking 'less than profusely' about the IPL and BCCI respectively. All cricket must stop to witness such an event.
- There is a terrorist attack and someone directly involved with the game is at risk.
- It is raining so heavily that there are visible puddles on the pitch and it can be verified by spectators that they weren't caused by English players urinating on the pitch. Monty Panesar pissing while dealing with a bouncer does not count.
- Sachin Tendulkar is cutting a cake somewhere in this world. At which point, the game will stop at once so that everyone can get a chance to witness the great event on TV.
Cricket must stop only when getting on with the game involves serious risk to human life.