One suggestion to improve cricket in Australia

There’s a lot of anger, furore and hot air circulating at the moment in the wake of the review.

I’d like to add my own contribution to said air by suggesting a way to improve the culture at Cricket Australia that would be relatively cheap and easy to implement. It could pay massive dividends in improving the game and CA’s arrogance problem – make cricket.com.au a genuinely independent news source.

For the most part, I really like cricket.com.au. It used to be hard to navigate as a website but has improved out of sight in recent years. Its coverage of Shield cricket and women’s cricket is outstanding.

The site’s live streaming of games is a brilliant service, occasional technical issues notwithstanding. Their journalists have done some amazing in-depth pieces on players.

It has one glaring weakness, though – its news arm is severely hampered by being the official state broadcaster for Cricket Australia.

Now this doesn’t affect the majority of what cricket.com.au do – match reports, player profiles, general news updates, videos, etc. But it does for certain issues – notably any that might involve criticism of the executive or the board. It was particularly noticeable during their coverage of the culture review and the play dispute.

I’ll be upfront – I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes at that website, and I don’t know any of the journalists. But I do read cricket.com.au every day and whenever there’s reporting done on something like the culture review or the pay dispute you get the sense the journalist having to tip toe around the feelings of the executive.

The coverage is markedly different from non-CA outlets like Cricinfo and The Australian and if you don’t believe me please just read a bunch of samples from each on the culture review.

I don’t blame the journalists for pulling their punches – who wants to annoy their bosses? Any change on this needs to come from the top.

I understand that Cricket Australia’s executive and board want control over the ‘message’ they want to send out but is that the best thing for the game?

Indeed, is it the best thing for Cricket Australia? It may be the best thing for the top level of CA but that’s not the whole organisation.

Besides, Cricket Australia isn’t a real business – it deals in cricket. A sport. There aren’t matters of national security involved here.

Cricket Australia team performance general manager Pat Howard (AAP Image/Nikki Short)

Is there a good reason why the team at cricket.com.au be truly independent other than “the people in charge might get upset at criticism?”

Wouldn’t it be great if Cricket Australia could be held to account by its own publishing arm, like if the site could publish opinion pieces critical of the board and the executive?

Or be more comprehensive news service that honestly covered behind the scenes moves at Cricket Australia (things which can have massive ramifications)?

Or could be more critical of things like the ‘thirty-plus’ selection metric?

Would it really harm the game? Or Cricket Australia? Isn’t robust discussion a good thing?

There are ways of doing it. Fairfax has a specific charter of editorial independence for its papers – maybe CA could do something like that for its journos? Or they could simply start publishing more pieces critical of the board and the executive.

To be honest, I can’t see it happening. Managements of large companies – regardless of the industry – tend to love their control.

But it would be awesome so I thought someone should mention it.