Howard stabbed as India takes control of cricket
By Spiro Zavos, 1 Jul 2010 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- afro-asian bloc, Cricket, ICC, John Howard
107 Have your say

Former Prime Minister John Howard presents the trophy to his team captain Cameron White. AAP Image/Alan Porritt
The ICC has become a puppet for the Indian politicians and money men, some of them deeply corrupt, with the unprecedented opposition from the Afro-Asian bloc to the nomination of John Howard as its vice-president.
The vice-president serves two years in this office before taking over as president.
The objection of the Afro-Asian bloc was stated to be based around an objection to former politicians coming into the world of cricket politics, without having done previous work on their local and national committees.
Howard was otherwise engaged for over 30 years with a political career that saw him become a long-serving Prime Minister of Australia. Throughout that time he maintained a more than keen interest in the game and its controversies.
He spoke out again Murali’s controversial bowling action and even more strongly against the corruption of cricket and political life in Zimbabwe.
The fear of the Afro-Asia bloc is that Howard would try to impose some decent governance into the game by challenging the bunch of political thugs – there are no other words for them – who are currently running things right now.
The Roar was opposed to Howard’s nomination by the Australian and New Zealand cricket authorities on the grounds that it was New Zealand’s turn to provide the candidate. The New Zealand nominee, Sir John Anderson, a banker with a long history of cricket administration behind him, should have been accepted by Cricket Australia. But it was also accepted that Howard was a strong candidate who deserved to be accepted once his nomination was put forward.
Presumably, Sir John will be re-nominated, although I was told in New Zealand some months ago that he has a bad back and is reluctant to do much travelling.
He faces the prospect, too, of the black ball because of his courageous efforts in the past to rein in the disgraceful financial rorting of Zimbabwe cricket by the Mugabe-backed thugs running the game there.
Two years, Malcolm Speed, an Australian who was the chief executive of the ICC, set up an audit committee investigation into the financial dealings of Zimbabwe cricket. Sir John Anderson was on this committee. The audit was never released. Speed was sacked and Sir John resigned from the committee.
No one can be in much doubt that until the last 40 years or so that cricket was a white game. Read the analysis of the West Indian Marxist C.L.R. James and this truth becomes very obvious.
The game was run from London. England and Australian dominated the councils of the game. Even the playing colours used in Test cricket reflected this dominance.
The Packer revolt changed all this, even to the colouring of the clothes used by players. Power in the game flowed to where the money was, which was in television. This is still true but with the difference that instead of the money being in Australia, it now resides in India.
Indian television money, with the rotten addition from the gambling syndicates, now totally dominates the game.
New Zealand cricketers, to take an example, are now paid more than their rugby counterparts because of the money provided by ICC contracts which in turn are stoked up from the Indian game.
The advent of the commercialisation of Twenty20 cricket, taken to a height or commercial depth that even Kerry Packer could not even dream of achieving, has further entrenched the control of the game world wide by the Indian powerbrokers.
Where will this all end?
We have seen the pollution of the Olympic ideals with the politicisation of the IOC. FIFA is another example of how a commercially lucrative sport, in this case football, can be corrupted when third world politicians and wide boys move in and grab control.
Now cricket is plunging rapidly down the same vortex.
Jack Clarke, the outspoken chairman of Cricket Australia, is in no doubt that the insult to Australasian cricket and to John Howard, is going to take world cricket into dangerous waters: ‘I think it’s part of India’s power grab for world cricket. It’s important for them that the ICC does not have a powerful chairman and in my view the ICC will be diminished and based in Mumbai within two years.’
Hopefully, Sir John Anderson can be prevailed upon to be Australasia’s new candidate for the vice-presidency of the ICC.
Even if this happens it will be a struggle to bring some decent governance back into the game. These are trying times for world cricket as the black and white divide in the game is increasingly becoming a chasm.
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.
- Explore:
- afro-asian bloc, Cricket, ICC, John Howard

Rabbitz said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:25am | Report comment
Spiro, mate, when did you start writing comedy?
“Howard would try to impose some decent governance into the game”
Stop, you’re killing me. It’s the funniest thing I have heard in ages!!!
The Way It Is said | July 3rd 2010 @ 7:30pm | Report comment
Howard should have never been dominated. FULL STOP!
The Way It Is said | July 3rd 2010 @ 9:18pm | Report comment
Thank god that the little desiccated coconut didn’t get through as seeing him in the lime light again with Mrs Bucket would have been the end of cricket for me!
BigAl said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:27am | Report comment
Yea yea Spiro, but I mean that’s where all the wealth and power in cricket is – thats how things work.
.
.
Just get used it !
Walt said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:30am | Report comment
What, they didn’t want a divisive, manipulative, hidden agenda has been? Maybe he can spent some of his new found down time with pro-apartheid mates.
Vinay Verma said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Spiro,there is no argument from me on the ineptitude of the ICC. Men of unquestionable dignity and ethics have resigned from the ICC in disgust and the foremost among those is Michael Holding. And yes, Malcolm Speed was asked to go tend his begonias when he objected to the Zimbabwean irregularities.
But it is simplistic to call this a Black- White divide. The allusion to third world politics ,too, is at the very least streotyping of the worst kind.
My objection is not whether the BCCI,PCB or SL cricket admistration is compromised. I am on record as saying the Governance of these Boards is more than questionable and certainly politicised.
Cricket Australia and Cricket South Africa have been willing partners in India’s overt and covert dominance. Both these Board’s are sharing in the largesse emanating from the Champion’s League.
If you accept the Devil’s money then you should not complain if you get burnt.
And the ECB is not exactly pristine. Their shameless endorsement of Stanford exposed them as gullible at the least and greedy in the extreme.
CA has been naive in thinking that India would support them regardless. Australia’s politics and engagement with Asia( India, Indonesia) smacks of double standards. The Uranium issue is a case in point but that is another debate.
And Australia can ill-afford to mouth platitudes about governance when it is in the public domain that the Australian Wheat Board was complicit in bribes. This holier than thou attitude is counter productive in the dirty world of politics.
There are questions about how foreign students are “cash cows” for Australian Universities.
Australian Cricketers, their success and work ethic,are admired by people all over the world,including India. However our politicians and administrators do not share that same admiration.
If we are going to have a game free from politics then the game must be run by men of unquestioned integrity and cricket based experience, or at the very least another major sport. In the end Australia should not have “bullied” New Zealand into accepting Howard as the nomination. Peter Roebuck mentioned very early in the piece that Anderson was the best candidate.
Mini said | July 1st 2010 @ 10:39am | Report comment
If you use an article from Peter Robuck to back up your case then sorry, you don’t have a leg to stand on.
Apelu Tielu said | July 1st 2010 @ 4:52pm | Report comment
Vinay, and Howard was the PM when the AWB was caught.
Anyway, has not JH had enough of this power thing? It seems like the man has an insatiable appetite for power. Does he not have a wife? A family? After so many years in politics, why can he not take some time to watch a sunset or smell a few flowers, and give some other people a chance?
Brett McKay said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:31am | Report comment
An excellent article Spiro, though judging from comments already made this morning on the news feed article, I fear that Roarers are too focussed in their opinions of Howard the man/politician to see the real problem that inhibits world cricket.
Malcolm Speed and Peter Roebuck have both written excellent pieces in the SMH today too, they should be essential reading along with Spiro’s here..
lemo said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Brett – people feel this way because Howard was a blight on our country for so many years.
His political opportunism in not denouncing One Nation and then picking up where they left off is reason enough reason for him not to get this postion. CA were kidding themselves if they thought this wasn’t going to be an issue.
You have to remember Howard spent years vilifying people from these regions to further his political career and now expects everyone to forget it and move on. I couldn’t care less if Howard was the best candidate for the job, (and there is nothing to suggest he is) – this is bigger then any game.
Brett McKay said | July 1st 2010 @ 1:18pm | Report comment
Lemo, you’ve just highlighted my point. This is not about Howard, or what he may or may not have done in his previous job. And I’d imagine that Howard’s political moves were no more or less popular in Australia than would Sharad Pawar’s be in India anyway. Malcolm Speed in the SMH today writes of Pawar’s involvement in the running of the ICC to be token at best. And yet this man will soon be in the top job..
MarkR said | July 1st 2010 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
Brett- so are you saying that CAs rejection of the NZ candidate including during mediation was because they expected Howard to be able to ‘clean shop’ ?
Given the political nature of cricket this whole affair stricks me as incredible naivety from CA. I haven’
t reas the Kiwi papers yet but it’ll be interesting to get their viewpoint given the surprise that was expressed over Howard being prefered over a proven cricket administrator purely onh his being an ex-PM.
Brett McKay said | July 1st 2010 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
no, not at all Mark, and there is no doubt NZC were disappointed – rightly so – with CA at the time. If you see my comment below, I think Anderson may be just as “unsuitable” to the other 7 nations as John Howard. In fact, given Sir John Anderson was part of the commitee that exposed ZC for what it was (which he resigned from in protest after the ICC buried the findings), anything other than rejection of his nomination would be bordering on hypocrissy.
I agree with your point about NZ reaction, it will be interesting to read. The press statement issued last night was a joint statement from the CA and NZC Presidents: http://www.cricket.com.au/news-display/CA-disappointed-by-decision/21364
PB said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Totally understandable rejection of someone who had always been a White Man’s PM. Howard’s wishing he’d been a bit nicer to the boat people now.
Fanatic said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Spiro Zavos, this is the first time I am reading an article written by you. And the last one. Its clear that you are a racist when you say that “football, can be corrupted when third world politicians”. You are implying that everything a white man does is fine and everything else is either corrupt and rubbish. Mate, tell you, John Howard (b*s**rd) was against sanctions imposed on white apartheid regime in Africa and when it came to a black apartheid regime in Zimbabwe he was all for it. How much divisive and racist can one be. You need to check whats happening in your own backyard before accusing others. How corrupt are the likes of NRL and Australian wheat board are, everyone knows now. Uptil 1992 Australia and England had a veto power in ICC and they practically ran the board on their own whims. Now the tables have turned. Get used to it.
mahony said | July 1st 2010 @ 11:30am | Report comment
Australia is for the first time in its history actualy becomong a part of a global political game in both cricket and football. I say the first time, because despite our long involvement – the power is finaly shifting to the economic and demographic centre of the world – and away from the gerrymander club of former colonialists and their culturaly ‘western’ dominions. This is a true of football as it is of cricket. This power shift is challenging Australia (and Australians) in a variety of ways as Asian money, power and influence (sometimes corrupt) playout in our own domestic sporting markets in a variety of ways. The Australian sporting landscape (governance, funding, TV rights etc…) will be very different in a decade from now. Paranoia and racism will not stop this economic and cultural force.
PB said | July 1st 2010 @ 9:45am | Report comment
And it’s silly to harp about “third world politicians” moving in and “grabbing control”. Just because they don’t have the social graces of a Packer or a Murdoch to please Western sensibilities of appropriate corporate conduct; and yes, it is always very unseemly when the differences between “correct” old money and “corrupt” new money collide in a changing of the rules; but the rules of the “free market” have always been determined by those with the biggest wallet. Adam Smith insisted on the importance of a “good and moral society” to restrain rampant capitalism. Look at any professional sport you want; you can’t blame the third world for the firesale of those morals and values. The politicking is a symptom, not the cause.
mahony said | July 1st 2010 @ 11:33am | Report comment
Spot on from both a cultural and economic perspective. ‘Ssoccernomics’ (the book) could equaliy be applied to cricket in some respects.
sheek said | July 1st 2010 @ 10:03am | Report comment
Unfortunately a Greek philosopher made the following cutting remark on human behaviour, thousands & thousands of years ago:
Life is like the theatre, where often the best seats are occupied by the worst people.
Something about people in positions of power & prestige abusing their privilege. You see it all the time, everywhere.
Makes me think occasionally that a prerequisite for climbing the ladder to apparent success is to abandon a moral or principle on every rung…..
Ken said | July 2nd 2010 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
I preferred Douglas Adams description in Hitchhiker’s guide to the galaxy:
The major problem — one of the major problems, for there are several — one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem.
Art Sapphire said | July 1st 2010 @ 10:11am | Report comment
First world – corruption is called business
Third world – corruption is called corruption
Some people will never admit it.
The same people who are so full of themselves that they nominated a man who locked up people from cricket loving nations. Figure that out.
punter said | July 1st 2010 @ 10:18am | Report comment
How true!!!!
Tom said | July 1st 2010 @ 10:30pm | Report comment
I would add to this that what is called ‘lobbying’ here is corruption when it occurs in less developed countries. After all, I doubt businesses are giving money to political parties because they truly believe in the case.
Beast-A-Tron said | July 2nd 2010 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
Like it or not Art, Business is the best creator of wealth. It reduces poverty more effectively than any other institution we have, and that includes Government.
Notice that the third world ranks fairly poor on quality of life & socio-economic indexes.
I look back to pre-industrial times, before we had the corporation and mass production; I do not envy our ancestors.