Why cricket in Australia is at the crossroads

The question to ask is 'Am I a fan of cricket, or am I a fan of a particular cricket side' ?

I tend to agree with you about the ASHES killing cricket, and maybe the rugby wolrd cup killing internaitonal rugby theories very valid. As it puts to many fans me included into now just caring about the ASHES and becoming ASHES specialists. And the ASHES attracts fans from all walks of life that the sports of cricket gets lost as the ASHES becomes more of an event than a game of cricket perhaps, eg BARMY ARMY, endless celebritie interviews form people nothing to do with cricket, social pages of celebrities at ASHES. The ASHES has become like a melbourne cup carnival or an Olympics , attracting fans form all walks of life. But it is menaingful and draws emotion. When i was watching CNN on foxtel it was the lead sports story when it was on the ASHES. My theories or ideas to save test cricket are some such as. Get tough ICC on time wasting. Have like a yellow card/ red card sytem where players can be kicked out of a match , that's right sent off if you time waste badly at crucial stages doesnt matter if it is 1st over of match or day 2 50 over in maybe send them off if do liek a proffesional foul or bad tiem wastign at a critical time eg a loss of a wicket if the new batter gets changes to gloves after facing a few deliviries to slow down the temp of oppositon, or on day 5 eg ASHES(2009 England mucking around to save the 1st test,a nd australia would of donw the same.) they umpires should of had power from icc to say to Anderson and Paneser hurry up or you lose your wickets. and with gear only bat allowed to change rest of gear to bad if you don't have yourself together, if you have the worng helmet or gloves or spikes in your cricket shoes to bad. In rugby eg rod davies v samoa you can't change your boots until half time to bad if you supposedly have wet wether boots for dry wether fotty to bad, switch on. And same with fast bolwers who waste time, penalise them eg capping number of overs they can bowl, or banningh them from bowling for 20 overs if they time waste. and i could go on and on with example sot punsih players. And i would have a subs rule. 5 subs per innings and five only . But the player wont be banned form not bowling , as soon as he comes back on he can bowl. but capped at 5 per innings. so if you go over 5 per innings you are down to 10 men until that player comes back on. This idea it keeps bowlers fresh. And you can only do 1 subs at a time. This way you can keep fast bowlers fresh in the fight agaginst bat. And with test series eg eng-india the ICC if it is serious about test cricket continuing give the visiting team the right preperation . You need lead up matches a time consuming but nessicary evil. SO that team can adapt to local conditions to make it a fair contest. sacrifice ICC some meaningless ODI or t20 matches to give teams pre test match matches if you are serious about saving test cricket. So some ideas . but i think the ICC and BCCI have to get serious and treat test cricket with respect if it is to survive. otherwise it will just turn into test cricket being the ASHES, and that's it.

HOW ABOUT THIS CORPORATE BOX. Some bussines executive with media sales experience or sports administration experience, a ex test player eg Steve waugh shane warne, alan border, and maybe some one not nessicrily a player someone with junior development experince at a grass roots junior development level, like a operations or junior development officer, or a technical advisor eg john Buchanann. Just some ideas,but i don't really know.

Russ, great insights, brilliant points you make. Now another question for you and everyone; Please nominate who should be appointed to the "New" Cricket Australia Commission. Remember they have to bring the skills to deal with the very big issues challenging Cricket in Australia today. Names please?

Thanks Sheek ; well my feeling is that T20 will be done very well here in Australia after a bumpy start and it will be popular with teens. I thnk CA will recognise that the 4 day game and the Tests have a deep meaning for over 35's and they will make the experience of attending these more social, just as the English do for County games and Tests. So each age group enjoys their own game format. As for 50 over, only for the World Cup each 4 years.

Corporate, that depends a lot on how you define popularity. ODIs consistently receive the highest percentage of people who say they "like" the format. That's Hotelling's Law at work. ODIs capture people who like both longer and shorter formats. But, they have also got consistently lower crowds than the purer short and long forms of the game, probably because, when it comes to spending cash, people opt for what they like the most, not a compromise. Not that it is completely clear cut, there are people who like ODIs the most, and people (like myself) who like tests and t20 and not the in-between. Popular also depends on the audience and the form of popularity. Most respected amongst cricketers (emerging and playing) in Australia? Tests, clearly. Offering the best opportunities for career advancement? T20, clearly. Most respected amongst test cricketers outside the big-3 test teams? Harder to say, but probably ODIs, maybe Tests or T20s. Cricketers outside the test teams, maybe ODIs, probably T20. Most respected amongst fans of all nations? Tests, but waning as the opportunities to make a mark as a test cricketer become narrower. Test cricket is pre-eminent now because we can point to 130 years of great players, tracing a thread through the decades down to today. In 20 years time, if we are comparing 150 years of test players, from a narrow base of nations, and 25 years of T20 players from a broad and diverse range of nations, then that pre-eminence will be harder to maintain. Hence I disagree with Johnno in one respect. I think the Ashes is killing test cricket. Not because it isn't a brilliant spectacle (it is), but because it is dominating the attention of cricketing interest in England and Australia to such an extent, that people/players in those two nations are losing interest in any other tests (except India) and making interest in tests exclusive to 3 nations. Cricket was actually at this cross-roads once before, from the late 19thC through until WW1, when the choice for northern working class professionals was between popular short-form league cricket and elite amateur first-class cricket. And the first-class game won, by accepting professionals into their ranks and offering the incentive of playing test matches, by the influence of WG Grace playing as an "amateur" and through the celebration of aesthetic feats by Cardus and others. If test cricket becomes open to all cricketers I think it will survive, but I suspect there are a significant number of people who would rather it was dead and elite, than alive and played by lesser cricketers.

Corporate, Can I get back to you in 2017?! My heart says test cricket will endure. My head says the quick money to be made from T20 will win out. By the time administrators realise test cricket is better than they appreciated, it might be too late. Personally, I would punt T20 other than as an intro format for young kids, & as a social connect. But the best two forms of the game are test cricket, underpinned by Sheffield Shield, & 50 overs cricket. All these different forms of the game aren't adding long-term value, but merely mudding the waters.....

Johnno, you and SHEEK raise some very good points about where to from here for Cricket in Australia. I agree its going to be very challenging over the next few years, so all the more reason we must have a highly skilled group of commissioners who deal with these kind of issues every day of their working week. there is no doubting the effort of the current board members, only their capabilities to deal with the issues ahead. A question for you now; Which of the 3 game formats will be most popular in 2016?

It sounds like you needed to get that off your chest Sheek, well said, love your passion!!

i think cricket outside of the ASHES is a sport in trouble. The ODI'S and and test cricket are in big trouble. And T20 is still an unknown. It feels a bit bubble gummish and emaningless and a bit boring, and only a batsman game which is a problem. You have to include bowlers to, there has to be an even contest for bat and ball, like in rugby defence has to get rewarded. And test cricket or ODI'S surviving good luck I don't have the answers to those questions. Maybe make ODI'S pro 40 like they do in the UK. And in test cricket clean up all the time wasting.

Hi Corporate, Good article. Will changing to a commission really save Australian cricket? Or will that simply be compared to changing the seating arrangements on the Titanic? More importantly than a commission is actually what changes Crawford & Carter recommend. The structure of Australian cricket must change, this much we know. But how we best manage the path forward is the very tricky bit. I must confess I don't know how to progress into the future. If test cricket is no longer relevant to younger audiences, then get rid of it. Let's stop pretending we really care about it. On the other hand, if test cricket is still important to the psyche of many people, then for God's sake, let's get it back front & centre. Let's stop pretending test cricket needs to be propped up by a myriad of other forms of cricket. Test cricket & Sheffield Shield go hand in hand. So if Cricket Australia isn't going to give the Shield it's valued place in the pecking order, than forget about tests as well. I'm not necessarily against T20, but I reckon the BBL sucks. Really sucks. It's insidious. The teams are shamelessly manufactured. The BBL has no other intention than fleecing as many sports fans as quickly as possible. It doesn't even have the appearance of long-term permanency. Get in, make a huge buck & get out before everyone realises the whole gig is a wonton sham. Having said all that, I reckon the structure of the Shield must change from states to national city clubs. NSW Blues to Sydney Blues; Victoria Bushrangers to Melbourne Bushrangers, Qld Bulls to brisbane Bulls, & so on. Tasmania Tigers can remain the same so as not to offend either north or south islanders. You would then have the opportunity to grow the game down the track, introducing further teams from West Sydney, East Melbourne, Canberra, Newcastle, Gold Coast & other places. The original history & tradition is there (nicknames & colours), which you can build on. Not the gimmicky show we've had thrust upon us with the BBL.....

Spofforth, the big challenges before Cricket Australia's board today are no longer of an "administrative" nature, rather they are matters which determine whether cricket survives in Australia or not. For example; negotiating global media rights for the next 5 years will represent about 60 % of Cricket Australia's revenue. Looking at the backgrounds of the current directors on the Cricket Australia website reveals that not one director has commercial media negotiation skills and experience. The same can be said for all state cricket boards across Australia. If the board is out of it's depth in that negotiation your local junior cricket program may not be possible.

Sounds like Corporate nonsense to me. who could know more about cricket than the guys that have been on state or Cricket Australia boards for 15 years?

A supern piece TCB, congratulations. Come October, it will be CA's turn to see how genuine the governing body wants to be - fascinating all round.