Saving Test Cricket

It is nice to have the 3 levels of Cricket, corresponding roughly to sprint, middle distance and marathon events in Athletics. However Test Cricket seems to mostly survive on cultural links to the past. I don't have a problem with the duration of the game or the shortage of action, but there are problems which need to be, and can be, fixed:

• Timeless Tests had serious practical problems that were exposed in the last years of the 1930s. The solution of limiting Tests to 5 days and allowing draws has been worse (though it has produced the occasional exciting moment).
• Games need a mercy rule so that they don't go longer than necessary when they get one-sided. Teams batting on and on when they already have more than enough runs is bad for players and spectators.
• The deterioration of wickets through the course of a match gives an excessive advantage to the team winning the toss.

Luckily I have a simple solution to all 3 problems:

The solution is to have the two teams' innings in parallel (as near as practicable). Every 30 overs the teams switch over who is batting. Except that, when one team is behind on runs and has lost more wickets then they are given 2 consecutive batting segments. Here's why this solves all the problems above:

• The deterioration of the wicket is no longer a problem because it affects both sides equally. In fact it is a good thing because:
• Wickets can be made to start well but not last longer than 4 days so that wickets fall rapidly from the 5th day onwards. This stops matches going too long, but avoids the need for a time limit. It also encourages teams to score quickly while the wicket is good.
• This is a perfect mercy rule. The winning team would rarely do more than 30 overs batting beyond what is needed to win the match.

[30 overs is chosen to fit with the natural breaks in the game.]