As a passionate cricket fan, I’m disappointed in the current drama unfolding between Cricket Australia and the Australian Cricketer’s Association (ACA). As a lover of Australian cricket, I’m disgusted.
Who is right and who is wrong? Is there really any side which is more right than the other? I guess that this is a matter of opinion. For what it’s worth, my feet stand firmly with Cricket Australia as the administrators of our national game.
Why? Because they’re the ones charged with ensuring the success of all levels of Australian cricket.
Like it or not, agree with it or not. The fact is that the health of the game in this country is the responsibility of Cricket Australia and the board – not the responsibility of those in the national team.
For many, the current divide between the two parties is somewhat confusing. Let me try and explain the situation as it stands. For the last 20 years, the players have shared in all revenue generated by Cricket Australia (CA).
It is called the ‘revenue sharing agreement’. It came about in 1997, at a time when Australia’s cricketers were still poorly paid. No one could argue that is the case anymore.
Last November, discussions began to try and confirm the new payment model for all Australia’s cricketers as the current MoU was due to expire the following June. The players representative, the Australian Cricketer’s Association (ACA) had preluded discussions by attempting to expand the current revenue-sharing system to include all digital revenue – in essence, seeking even more money.
Conversely, CA was proposing a change to the current structure. It was suggesting adopting a profit sharing system (whereby players would share profits between them – capped at $20 million) as well as fixed wages to all international and state players, including female players.
CA we’re proposing this because the revenue sharing model is outdated. Costs for running cricket have increased. CA want to invest more in grassroots cricket and in marketing the game.
Australia’s international stars are paid millions per year. Australia’s state cricketers are paid on average, more than twice the average Australian wage. Under CA’s proposal, Australia’s female stars would receive a pay increase of $100k per year.
So, what is the issue? It’s pretty simple: money. It’s what drives all workplace related angst. Don’t be fooled by any other rhetoric being spun by players or the ACA.
Indeed, their inconsistent messages simply provide further evidence of the fact this is purely financially driven. Dave Warner, the somewhat strange choice as spokesperson for the players said on the June 18 “we won’t budge from the revenue sharing model. We want fairness and equality for all domestic and female players.”
It was then made known that actually, domestic state players are for all intents and purposes, well paid and that as previously stated, the female players were due an increase of $100k under the CA model.
So, when former Australian opening batsman Michael Slater challenged another ACA spokesperson, Ed Cowan, last week on radio about the players perhaps being greedy, the reasoning had changed from it being about equality for the domestic and female players to being about “keeping a check on Cricket Australia and how they spend the money”.
Players now claim that it’s not about money at all but rather a distrust of how the administrators actually administer the game.
(AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)
This is when I start having a real issue. Are we expected to believe that Warner, Steve Smith, Mitch Starc, Glenn Maxwell, even Cowan really care about how CA ‘divvy’ up the remaining revenue? Does being an exceptional cricketer provide one with experience on being a sports administrator?
Of course it doesn’t. And only the bleedingly naive would believe for a second that the players are really concerned with the way in which CA administer the game. Indeed, under the current model, if you believe Cowan, the players must be extremely active in providing opinion on all matters from marketing and coach education to grass roots. Spare me.
The fact is that the players know that, longer term, it’s not in their best interests financially to eradicate the current revenue sharing model. It’s that simple. It does not for a second mean that they won’t be well compensated for their amazing skill and performance.
In this current climate, I often hear or read someone say ‘the players are the game’ as some sort of justification for their current demands. Utter rubbish. The game is owned by all Australian fans – not by the elite 15 contracted cricketers.
It’s a game that people love because of our proud history in the sport. The game is flush both financially and participatory at the moment because as fans and cricket lovers, we pay to support our national team, we pay to play because we love the sport. This has long been the case, even before Warner and co.
It must not be forgotten that these international players earn a large amount of money because of everyday fans. Because of the coaches and junior clubs that supported and nurtured them along their journey – because of the very system they are currently questioning and tearing apart.
For these players to even consider putting at risk Australian cricket fans’ greatest love – the Ashes – just demonstrates how far removed from reality they are.
I never thought I’d say this but I’d rather the Ashes series was cancelled than provide these self indulgent, pampered prima donnas with a cent more than they’re worth.
CA aren’t perfect and they will continue to make mistakes, but they must continue to stand firm for the survival of the sport in this country. It is their responsibility to run cricket. Cricket isn’t owned by the players. It’s owned by the wider cricket community.
Spud-053
Guest
it goes back further when Don Bradman was in charge and it went back even further then that to be honest.....officials getting too much power for the good of the game.... they remind me of a time when I first played football for a country club in Victoria and this person was telling everyone that cared to listen that he was a committee man of this particular club only to observe over the years he thought of it as status symbol in his community as he sure did nothing as a committee man always too busy to volunteer for jobs as a committee person should be volunteering to do those chores were way below his perceived station in life and thats what happens with people who are in charge of most elite sports today in Australia and probably the world if one took the time to look closely enough.
Spud-053
Guest
you say the cricket does not belong to the players well it sure does not belong to administrators as they have all top level sports thought and think it is about them once they are in powerful positions. Administrators are there to make sure the games/athletes of the various sports to be well looked after if it was not for participants of various sports there would not be any sport, so it must be the players who own the sports that they play.
Richard Islip
Roar Rookie
Excellent
Barry
Guest
Of course the players deserve their slice of the pie, bloody hell - anyone could run cricket in this country. I'm a small business owner and I have never been a member of a union, but it's obvious to me that the players would have been walked over if they didn't have the ACA. Stick together guys and girls, I can't wait for the Ashes to start, but I will happily go without watching the series played if it furthers your cause. Cricket is a sport, not a business
Rellum
Roar Guru
Yes, it was borderline false advertising, but I think that was more 9 than CA.
Big Daddy
Guest
Just saw the promo on channel 9 beaming pictures of Smith . Wishful thinking by CA and their cronies.
davros
Guest
There has been bad blood between players and board for quite a while now ..some of it goes back to Phil hughes and how that was handled . Thats y u are seeing such a push back now ..this has been festering for a while now ...and i think the players had a gutfull ...all they needed was this egomaniac clown peever on top of eveything esle pushing his disenfranchising agenda ..they are up for this fight no worries ! Also the obsession with the pink ball ...no matter how many times they said they cant see the ball ..it was just completely ignored ...in the name of the almighty dollar. Hands up anyone who wants to go out after a hard afternoon in the field and face starcy at dusk with a pink rock ..in the shield ...or international paceman in tests ? What peever and his goon squad are pushing is just plain disrespectful ...hes been on the board a dogwatch ....and hia come to put them in their place ...well w eshall see how that plays out ? Personally i think the whole board needs to go...i really dont see how you can have any productive sort of working environment after all this !
Big Daddy
Guest
Whatever the outcome of this dispute things will never be the same. The amount of distrust by the players will linger for a long time. Sutherland has no respect from the players because of his reluctance to get involved. Start earning your six figure salary. And Howard also has no respect because he is just a lap dog for the board.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
There is only one Australian team, if you ditch the Shield,, how can young players choose a sport with such a limited pathway? Or if they did, they'd choose being T20 specialists over Test cricket every time.
John
Guest
Couldn't agree more! These current players won't be around in 15 years but the game itself will be. More money needs to be given to club cricket!
davros
Guest
spot on perthrite !
ballychook
Guest
As CA are chartered with administering the game (as is so often said in this thread), they need to sort this mess out right now otherwise there will be no game to administer.
GJ
Guest
Maybe. I have taken a pro players stance. I was member of a union a very long time ago. I didn't actually join myself, my employer sorted my membership in order for me to have access to a site for a short term contract (3 months). 2 years later I realised I was still a member, and wanted to leave. I contacted the union and was told I had to be a financial member to leave. I back paid my previous 12 months membership and resigned. This pro player stance might have more to do with it feeling like big business is trying to take the game away and bully the players and by extension a lot of the fans into submission. CA by its structure operates without much governance. They have been slow to sell or market their long term plans for cricket and its future in Australia. There is widespread mistrust.
davros
Guest
its not hard James ..there is right and their is wrong ...there is fair and unfair ..their is peasant/serf and master ..or there is shareholder in the enterprise where you supply the product and generate the revenue .
davros
Guest
Starcy and Ussie signing audi deals must have sent a shiver up peevers spine ...wonder if his pulse rate went up yet ? The genie is getting out of the bottle now ...oh dear Peevs ..what have you done ?
davros
Guest
its one of my new fav words ...think i might have got it off a pom ...and it doesnt seem to register in the swear cancellation of post register ..you can pluralise it too ..as in more cockwomble from waffling cockwomblers :)
Rellum
Roar Guru
I actually think CA's long term plan, if they do actually have one, at least in regard to first class cricket is to morph the Shield/Test setup into 3 tiers, 1.The Test team will carry on pretty much as is now, 2.But instead of the Shield we will see an Aus A side playing other A sides in a world reserve system drawing from a contracted roster of 25 players. 3.Under that then you will have the under age Aus teams playing other national under age teams. I see them moving towards this model based on the increase in A tours being staged and their creation of more and more CAXI teams. They see any international cricket experience as much more useful than FC cricket. Chappell is also on record saying youth players need to be put in higher teams to gain experience. I am sure they would prefer to go down that root than keep the State cricket going. I also thing they want to expand the BBL league and have it run for much longer, T20 players I think will specialize then and any players coming through juniors who are seen to be geared for T20 will be snapped up by the franchises. All my opinion of course and hopefully I am way off the mark.
James
Guest
Reading the comments and the passion not so much for their side but against the other side just makes me think that most people already made up their minds about this issue well before knowing anything more than 'unions' on one side and 'not unions' on the other. I think we have alot of union men.
Big Daddy
Guest
Davros, Can you say cockwomble again - love it. It p****s the pommies on the site off.
Big Daddy
Guest
Typical sexist discrimination remark.