Who else is concerned about the future of cricket?

Roar Guru

By Vinay Verma, 18 May 2010 Vinay Verma is a Roar Guru

Tagged:: Cricket, Cricket Australia, Haroon Lorgat, ICC, IPL, Twenty20

Related coverage

India's Gautam Gambhir, center, is congratulated by Australian Brett Lee. AP Photo/Gurinder Osan

India's Gautam Gambhir, center, is congratulated by Australian Brett Lee as Indian V.V.S. Laxman, right, looks on as they return after end of play on the first day of their third cricket test match in New Delhi, India, Wednesday, Oct. 29, 2008. Gambhir scored his second hundred in consecutive matches with an unbeaten 149 Wednesday. AP Photo/Gurinder Osan

The ICC should be disbanded and the respective cricket boards go their own ways. They can then all live and die by the “market forces” they are so quick to turn to in defense of the indefensible.

The ICC has Haroon Lorgat as the front man. He is hamstrung by a committee that gives him power only to sneeze. Everything else is determined by a vote.

And no board votes against the BCCI (Indian Cricket Board), except perhaps the ECB (England and Wales). But when the majority is with India, then it is irrelevant if there are dissenters.

Just think for a moment that New Zealand, Bangladesh, the West Indies and Zimbabwe are so cash-strapped that they cannot afford to go against India’s dictates.

Sri Lanka are effectively second and third mortgaged to the BCCI. Their only administrator of substance, Arjuna Ranatunga, lost his job because he called the IPL “instant noodles”.

It is prudent to review who is sleeping with whom.

Australia, India and South Africa are the “owners” of the Champions League, the annual tournament that was won by Simon Katich’s Blues last October in India. The Indian Board (BCCI) is the majority shareholder and the boards of Australia (CA) and South Africa (CSA) have a minority stake.

The TV rights for the Champions League are in excess of a billion dollars for ten years. The three boards share roughly $100 million dollars a year.

The rest of the teams, and their boards, play only for the prize money.

The BCCI continues to make decisions more associated with a drunken sailor than an institution, arguably, holding the future of cricket in its compromised hands.

It has lurched from having only two Tests scheduled in 2010 to suddenly having another eight before the end of the year.

In 2008 the BCCI and CA signed a MOU that agreed to seven one day matches in India every year. This was, ostensibly, to maximize the earning potential that their cricket teams’ represented in the immediate short term.

Australia has been a willing partner in this exercise and, as a consequence, has exposed their players to premature burnout. The players are not beasts of burden.

Earlier this year the BCCI asked South Africa to play two unscheduled Tests. This was done so they could protect their number one status.

The BCCI has now asked Australia to play two Test Matches in October this year. This is welcome news for cricket lovers. But it does not remove the perception that the BCCI is doing this for ulterior reasons.

Brand India needs to be protected so that broadcasters continue to throw mega dollars at the BCCI.

The BCCI also realizes that it has dined out on the illustrious careers of Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman for the better part of two decades. This trilogy only has a few encores left and the BCCI wants to exploit this to the maximum.

Another compelling reason for this rescheduling is that the conversation will change from the IPL debacle to more cricket centric matters. Nothing has changed in the BCCI. Srinivasan, the secretary still owns an IPL team. He does not believe there is a conflict of interest because the BCCI ratified this ownership. This rationale suggests that anything the BCCI ratifies is to be accepted as sacrosanct.

The fans in India have been cheated by administrators more interested in running the red light than the safety of other road users. Their sin may be one of omission and this may in the long term be forgivable. But if the sins are of commission then their behavior is unconscionable. The sad part is that we may never know.

Cricket Australia will, in all probability, agree to the BCCI’s request for the unscheduled Tests. The low and slow pitches may not be ideal preparation for the Ashes to follow.

Cricket Australia has been pragmatic in its’ relationship with the BCCI as it realizes that the majority of cricket’s income lies with India. However, CA needs to prioritise its objectives and the recent talk in making more room for the KFC Big bash at the expense of the Sheffield Shield is going the excessive ways of the IPL.

The fans in Australia will not put up with second rate opponents like we had last summer. The Sheffield Shield struggles for crowds because the stars like Ponting and Johnson have to rest after their exertions on the International front. How can our young players like Smith and Ferguson progress if they are denied the opportunity to play with and against the established stars?

If we can find a window for the IPL then why not for the Sheffield Shield? How much money does a board really need to run cricket? Have we come so far that the end game is the bottom line and not the game?

I have been energized by the number of Roarers who have expressed their concern for the future of cricket. I urge them to speak out. In the end we will get the game we deserve.

Ask yourself: are you being served?

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

The Crowd Says (54) | Page 1 of Comments

Alders said | May 18th 2010 @ 5:34am | Report comment

Part of going when I was a bit younger was the atmosphere. You go now and you can’t do any of the old things you used to be able to do. Can’t buy a proper beer, no mexican waves, no beach balls, no beer snakes. I mean for young people this is mostly harmless fun. Sure, throw people out who are abusive or really drunk but this sort of thing was limited to certain areas so if you didn’t like it you didn’t sit there. It was usually pretty entertaining for the rest of the crowd as well.

You go now and you feel it is so regulated you fear not clapping in unison just in case it is banned too.

Reply
- Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 9:14am | Report comment
  
  Alders,the spectator’s union has long been ignored. You are right the prices of food and drink are outrageous. The moral police are running our lives and political correctness has gone too far. I have sat on the old Hill at the SCG in the 70′s and not once did I hear a racist remark. In fact I had people buying me free beers. I have sat in the Members and you get the odd “hoon” in there too. We pay good money to treat ourselves to a fun day out. It is an occassionn to meet friends and share the spirit.
  I can understand the security aspect but Administrators must consider the comfort of spectators.
  
  Reply
  - Alders said | May 18th 2010 @ 5:42pm | Report comment
    
    I couldn’t agree more Vinay. I actually live in the UK now but I come home around Christmas and put my SCG membership to good use. I also attend matches at The Oval. I can tell you things are far far more relaxed in the UK and it has become a far more enjoyable experience.
    
    Reply
Kersi Meher-Homji said | May 18th 2010 @ 7:16am | Report comment

Vinay,
I enjoyed your thought-provoking post exposing all the wheelings and dealings of international Cricket Boards.

But there is a contradiction. Genuine cricket lovers have been clamoring for more Tests and less limited overs internationals for years and blaming ICC and BCCI for it. Now two Tests are organised between two glamour teams Australia and India in India and you complain of burn out.

Perhaps, the intention of BCCI is to protect India’s No.1 ranking but I think playing against a strong Australia is more likely to make them lose their No.1 ranking.

We should have less meaningless one-dayers and more Tests, whatever the intention.

I agree with you that Australian Test cricketers should have more time to play Sheffield Shield cricket. And this can be achieved by making them play less one-dayers home and away. But let them play more Tests home and overseas.

Reply
- Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 9:26am | Report comment
  
  Kersi,yes it looks like a contradiction but the point I am trying to make is that firstly,the extra Tests are an afterthought and secondly,the BCCI has not suddenly become the “Lord and Protector of the sanctity of Test Cricket.”
  
  I also question the benefit Australia would accrue from playing on the low and slow Indian pitches just before an important Ashes contest. And make no mistake the Ashes are the most important factor for Australia and Australian cricketers. This is the one abiding and constant tradition in world cricket. I rember listening to the BBC in the 50′s and 60′s and it left a lasting impression. Richie Benaud coming around the wicket and bowling to Dexter..aiming for the rough..England went from 1 for 150 to lose a spellbinding Test.
  
  India’s rivalry with Australia can develop into something lasting and the last ten years has seen India as the adversary Aussies love to do battle with. Sending Australia to India in October,before the Ashes,is like asking HSC students to study for an examination with the wrong textbooks.
  
  Reply
Brett McKay said | May 18th 2010 @ 8:25am | Report comment

Vinay, straight onto the front foot from the red column!! Hard to argue with too much of this, good sir, and I think you make a very good point on the BCCI with “…it has dined out on the illustrious careers of Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman for the better part of two decades.” The mark of India’s power could well be how healthy (and wealthy) it is ten years after these three all retire. I’d add Virender Sehwag to that group, too.

Anyway, again, a very thought-provoking piece, and congrats on the promotion too..

Reply
- Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 9:38am | Report comment
  
  Ah! Brett, I love sparring with you and wish I had written something for you to disagree with. Brett,the question I ask is why do I have the perception that there is a “cosy” arrangement between the BCCI and CA? I did ask this question of Jack Clark,the current Chairman,and the reply I got was “we have a very good re4lationship” You may recall that Australia were fierce supporters of a World Test Championship two years ago. And from my understamding James Sutherland is still an advocate. Recently,Haroon Lorgat,the ICC chief has also endorsed his support. But all this broke down because the BCCI preferred a bilateral arrangement with countries where the TV revenue would be split two ways instead of the 9 ways a Test Championship would involve.
  
  Virender Sehwag is the Trumper of Indian cricket and more power to him.
  
  Reply
chris mackinnon said | May 18th 2010 @ 8:48am | Report comment

yes cricket is indeed in big trouble, fans want games that mean something and want international teams to be competitive.
the west indies
at moment there gaining momentum through there 20/20 and one day cricket, test matches they arnt very good at the moment.

icc has alot to blame for the sitaution they govern the game but when it comes to the crunch are happy to take the money but not put the hard work in to getting the game right. In one way giving the 50 over world cup and 20/20 world cup to the west indies was a success the ground facilities have been much upgraded, but with the bad high ticketing issues of the 2007 world cup and basically the cup looked empty.

australia missed out on the on hosting the 2011 world cup so the icc can make up for their losses of previous years and awarded it to the sub continent.

great example where the icc should help out way more is ireland, they have shown great progress and with given more games to play well things can happen. kenya played well in the 2003 world cup but where are they now, gone and forgotten.

Reply
- Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 9:48am | Report comment
  
  Chris,whilst the ICC is to blame it must be understood that the ICC is hamstrung because the respective board’s do not give it the power it deserves. I know that Haroon Lorgat cares about the traditions of cricket. What the ICC has done with the Associates and Womens cricket is to be commended.The just concluded Twenty20 WC and the last Champions Trophy were well run and short enough. The pitches too were an imprvement and the crowds reasonable.
  
  In the end it comes down to context and the nature of the pitches. It is about finding the right balance.
  
  Australia are the hosts for the 2015 World Cup and hopefully the pitches will be sporting.
  
  You make a good point about Kenya and this is where the ICC gets ahead of itself. Instead of running off to new markets like USA and China they should protect the investment they have already made in countries like Kenya. And for good measure help the “poorer” countries like West Indies,Sri Lanka,Pakistan and New Zealand
  
  Reply
Nicholas R.W. Henning said | May 18th 2010 @ 9:18am | Report comment

2009 / 2010 was an unexpected wake up call for cricket in Australia. It seems that ODI has suffered a stroke in Australia, and cricket in general is hurting.

I would like to hypothesise some of the causations of cricket’s current state in Australia. Yes, Twenty20 is a new product, but I just don’t understand why people have walked away from ODI in such numbers?

Is it because Australia has won three World Cups in a row? Or is it because the standard of many other ODI countries struggle against teams like Australia and South Africa?

As Mr Verma identifies in his article, there are some bigger issues with mismanagement at an international level.

But knock me over with a feather, I was at the SCG for an ODI in early 2010, and my good friend who is an SCG member was allowed to bring four guests, and the SCG still had considerable vacancies.

Other sports in the Australian summer calendar such as A-League football, and the spluttering NBL have had little impact dislodging cricket, but I am scratching my head wondering if cricket fans are too used to Australia winning or if cricket has somehow imploded at higher levels within Australia and internationally. Nicholas R.W. Henning – Australian Author

Reply
Hoy said | May 18th 2010 @ 10:12am | Report comment

Vinay, I love reading your articles and responses. Your thoughts are very much on the money in most aspects.

I would say a major problem I have with cricket these days as a spectator is the absolute death of the cricket season in the last few years. There has just been a massive saturation of cricket in the last 4-5 years, year ’round. It all began I think with those stupid games mid-winter in the Territory. From there it seems to have ballooned to a year ’round game.

I just can’t care anymore with the amount of cricket being played at the moment. There is just too much of it. The administrators are loving it to death I think.

Just my thoughts as a spectator.

Reply
- Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 10:24am | Report comment
  
  Hoy, as choices increase for leisure administrators ignore spectators at their peril. As spectators we have to demand better facilities and vote with our wallets. I also know that players do not like performing on an empty stage. They want to be more than just legends in their own mind.
  
  You are right,less is sometimes more. The top end matches are ok to promote U-19′s and countries like Banladesh and Zimbabwe. But I think these should be Australia A matches..which is exactly what CA are doing.
  
  Reply
Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 10:16am | Report comment

Nicholas,firstly congratulations on your book The American Dream and at the outset there are similarities between baseball and cricket. Or for that matter any sport.

Australia’s success in the ODI’s has heightened people’s expectations. Context is so primary. The paying punter does not want to see one sided contests. And the fare served by Pakistan in the ODI’s,and to a certain extent in the Tests, was desultory,to say the least. I did not attend the match you refer to because I was not convinced it was a contest.

As far as Australians getting used to Australia winning it is a question of context and is there anything riding on it except the money. I can see packed houses this coming summer because England have a good side and even if Australia are 3-0 going to Sydney it will be packed. There is an abiding rivalry here.

Reply
- Nicholas R.W. Henning said | May 18th 2010 @ 10:53am | Report comment
  
  Mr Verma, it is a nice relief that England will be in Australia which is just what cricket needs for 2010 / 2011.
  
  As you have noted to Hoy, Australia-A type teams need to help fill some of the calendar duties. This is a great stage for emerging Australian players, and valuable game play for visiting countries.
  
  My novel “The American Dream: From Perth to Sacramento” has plenty of cricket in it, as the lead character (Damian Hughes) plays baseball in the winter to complement his cricket, but his talent in baseball makes that the opportunity of a lifetime.
  
  I have another book which should be in print in the next 120-days, which is called “Boomerang Baseball” and Australian fielding coach Mike Young receives many mentions in this book.
  
  Finally, I would just like to say that I am impressed by your dedication to your readers (Roarers) in terms of providing responses and analysis. Well done Mr Verma.
  
  Reply
  - Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
    
    Nicholas,I would be more comfortable if you addressed me by my first name. I will certainly try to get my hands on your book as baseball is a fertile ground for cricket to explore. Many of our cricketers like Ian Chappell played baseball in the winter and cricket in the summer. Norm O Neill had a bullet arm and I can imagine him being a gun outfielder. You are right about Mick Young. He has added another dimension to the fielding. In fact this is one of the areas that T20 will help in improving Test Cricket. ODI’s speeded up the scoring rates in Tests and I feel that T20 will do the same for the 50 over game. The mistake the administrators must not make is to try and marry any of these. They are seperate and stand alone.
    
    Writers are no good without an audience and I am always enthused when someone takes the trouble to respond in a studied manner. The least I can do is reply.
    
    Reply
    - Nicholas R.W. Henning said | May 18th 2010 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
      
      With your blessing I am pleased to address you as Vinay.
      
      Greg Chappell receives a mention in my book. The best place to obtain my baseball novel is Amazon.com or an online seller, as it is printed in the US.
      
      I concur that cricket has three excellent stand alone products, all of which are interesting and complement each other well. I agree with Hoy that too much cricket may be an issue, in terms of maintaining fans and interest, but as you have noted an Australia-A could take on more of the load.
      
      I am a big fan of Australia-A, and games featuring Australia versus Australia-A in ODI games were edge of the seat action. But as you indicate perhaps Australia-A should be assigned to games against emerging countries or teams outside of the top six, which is clearly a win win situation for the visiting country, and Australian players wishing to push their claim for higher selection.
      
      Cricket is a traditional part of the Australian sporting landscape and it amazing how many ladies, including cute ones, follow the game closely.
      
      I feel that cricket needs to re-assess its priorities and take note of the fans talking with their feet during the 2009 / 2010 summer in Australia.
      
      Reply
      - Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 3:16pm | Report comment
        
        Greg Chappell is as great a student of the game as he was a cricketer. He has a great saying about coaching and cricket in general. It is a journey and should not be considered as a destination.
        
        Reply
sheek said | May 18th 2010 @ 10:57am | Report comment

Vinay,

There is an insidious cancer spreading through society – it is the bereaucrats or middle managers. They are mushrooming everywhere.

Enormous amounts of moeny are required to feed this burgeoning monster. Take for example, a recent team photo of the rugby league Kangaroos to play the Kiwis. Along with the 17 man squad were 12 support staff.

What do we need all this extra support staff for?

Thirty years ago, you would have had a photo of a 15 man squad plus manager, coach, doctor, trainer & physio. Okay maybe we need another physio plus perhaps one-two IT guys. But the rest of them…..?

This is just a small example. How big has both the ICC & IRB grown? Not to mention IOC & FIFA. What do all these extra people ACTUALLY do?

Extra meaningless comps are required to sustain them, that’s what.

I think the world is losing the meaning of sport. It saddens me. Sometimes I think for me, my favourite sports stopped around 1999, or 2005 at the latest.

Reply
sheek said | May 18th 2010 @ 11:43am | Report comment

Sorry Vinay,

I had to cut the previous post short. Yes, the crass commercialism of sport disappoints & saddens me. It’s always been there of course, but it seems to be getting out of control as more & more people put their nose into the money trough.

For a long time now, I find 12-14 test matches per year in both cricket & rugby annoying. Quantity at the expense of quality. Players can’t perform at their optimum for that many high intensity matches. They begin to “cherry-pick” when to perform at their optimum.

Self-preservation kicks in along with physical & mental fatigue. The quality drops while the TV networks, sponsors, mechandisers & controlling bodies rake the money in. The sports fan is being ripped off but hasn’t realised it yet.

He thinks getting sport 24/7 is an advantage, but fails to appreciate the value for his money is being eroded. A lot of the sport we watch is “chaff”, or filler. Then there’s the cost of buying tickets to watch matches live at the ground. Plus the associated costs of buying food, drink & merchandising gear for the kids.

We just had the T20 world cup but how many cricket fans were enthralled by it? Myself, I only caught the occasional highlights. There is so much sport, even the fans begin to “cherry-pick” what they choose to watch.

Sometimes I don’t know if it’s a generational thing with me, but a lot of what I see today leaves me dissatisfied.

Reply
- Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 2:53pm | Report comment
  
  Sheek,you are the keeper of cricket’s morality and the soothing sage of sport in general. Everything you say has merit. In fact you once chastised me for ” always finding good in man” I still try to do this but everywhere you look it is about the money.
  
  National well being is equated to the number of Golds a country wins. Britain is spending a staggering amount for the 2012 games. Just like China did. One wonders if the troubles in Greece stem from the money they spent on the Athens Games.
  
  The choice of channels in OZ is limited by Indian standards. In India you get cricket 24/7 and from all over the world. Including County Cricket. We actually are limited in our choices in Australia. I feel if cable was cheaper we would have more competition and broadcasters would be forced to lift their game.
  
  I know you are passionate about the longer form of Cricket and you made a point sometime ago that Captains need to take more responsibility off the field. Ponting is doing this now. Influential cricketers like Tendulkar and Ponting can have an important role in setting the agenda.
  
  Reply
chris mackinnon said | May 18th 2010 @ 12:53pm | Report comment

great topic we are discussing,another reason why icc struggling with things. the schedualing of tours some of them are rubbish for a long time in the 80′s the best team in the world was west indies they came out to australia nearly every 1 to 2 years. people wanted to watch the best. the tri series in australia died because there was australia, another strong team and the other team was weak, who wants to watch the non competitve cricket. until this happends as it happening now in australia one day cricket is dying. because cricket board is playing 5 game series against one team boring.

icc has 4 strong teams why arnt they tourning more to the big markets, why do teams have to play every 3 to 4 years apart,
i would love to see a for an example australia vs india vs england in a tri series, or why not have the teams play same amount of one day games and have a championship series at the end of the year

Reply
- Vinay Verma said | May 18th 2010 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
  
  Chris,the ICC is finalising the Future Tours Programme for the period beyond 2012 and it will be interesting to see how much “window” they are going to give the IPL.
  
  India has played Australia quite regularly since 1999 and they are due to visit here in the summer of 2011. This will probably be Dravid, Tendulkar’s and laxman’s last visit and may also be Ponting’s swan song.Something to look forward to. I think that there are five teams now that are pretty close..Australia, India, SAF, England,Sri Lanka. I would love to see the top four play for a Test Championship with 1 playing four and 2 playing three. The winners in a final and this would only take two weeks.All games to be played at Lords or Brisbane..It can be a different venue every year.
  
  Reply