Rampaging Roy Slaven and H.G. Nelson often use the phrase “When Too Much Sport Is Never Enough!” during their famous commentary sessions on Australian radio and TV.
I used to buy into that, especially with cricket. Back in the 80s and 90s, it seemed the Australian cricket summer was chock full of cricket, be it Shield games and Tests from October to mid-January, then lots of one day cricket to enjoy until mid-February.
Then along came T20 cricket and changed everything.
More to the point, along came cashed up domestic T20 tournaments and totally changed the cricketing calendar around the world.
In a recent piece, Tsat made this simple but telling comment.
“The IPL, as expected, is growing in size and will start to grow bigger and bigger, casting an ever-increasing shadow on the cricket calendar. With ten teams, the number of games will increase, and IPL will eat further into the summer cricket season of northern hemisphere countries.”
India cricket fans seem to have an insatiable desire to enjoy the IPL and franchises are willing to pay extraordinary sums to be involved.
In the recent IPL auction to add two new teams, an Indian multinational group paid approximately AUD$1.250 billion for one team (Lucknow), while another equity and investment firm paid a mere AUD$997 million for another team (Ahmedabad).
In this process, there were six cities shortlisted for consideration with many more missing out – this time round. It stands to reason these cities and others will want to be included in this competition in the years to come, so what impact might this have on cricket as a whole?
It’s safe to say the Indian Board will treat its cash cow with care, ensuring no international cricket is played by Indian teams during the two months this tournament lasts (27th of Feb to 21st of May 2022).
England will try to do likewise with its T20 Blast and The 100, ditto for Australia with the BBL. In fact, all nations involved in the eleven current T20 tournaments will want to protect their investment, by limiting international cricket, to free up its star players to become involved in these events.
Bear in mind, there are at least three other T20 tournaments slated to start within the next 12 – 18 months (one in Europe, one in the UAE and another in the USA) and the squeeze is going to be put on international cricket to find the time to play.
(Photo credit should read SAJJAD HUSSAIN/AFP/Getty Images)
At some point in the next three – five years, the ICC will need to make some decisions around where it sees cricket heading over the next decade and what role the ICC has to play, bearing in mind the he sums of money that are coming into domestic white ball cricket in particular.
The most obvious questions to answer are whether the ICC is the governing body and if so, what exactly does it govern?
Can it dictate to all countries the time allowed for these domestic tournaments? Can it direct countries to still play international cricket during these events? Can it put a cap on the number of current international cricketers getting involved in tournaments outside their own country? This seems to be presently managed by the various Cricket Boards, but there seems to be no consistent approach to how this is managed.
The biggest question that needs to be addressed is whether international cricket trumps domestic tournaments and that’s going to be the hardest for the ICC to sort out, given the massive amounts of money being put into all tournaments, but especially the IPL.
I don’t think there’s any reason why these various competitions can’t co-exist, as long as there is sufficient time to play both domestic and international series. If, for example, the IPL is set a maximum time frame of eight weeks for a domestic T20 tournament, it would force the organisers to get creative in how they managed this time and other aspects like expansion.
The ICC also needs to make a call on the future of international white ball series. All too often, teams are being asked to play ODI or T20 matches, which seem to be on the cricket calendar for no apparent reason.
In Australia’s schedule for January and February are series against South Africa (three ODI, three T20), New Zealand (three ODI, one T20) and Sri Lanka (five T20). I don’t get the purpose of these games, especially the T20s, given the T20 World Cup being played only a few months earlier and the ODI World Cup not taking place until October 2023.
I don’t believe any cricket is “meaningless” but it’s certainly hard to understand the need for these matches, most of which would have been forgotten shortly after they were played.
I also don’t think this process of the ICC being invested with authority needs to be antagonistic.
Clearly India is the dominant member, with such a massive audience and so much money, but Sourav Ganguly and the other BCCI Board members have to know just how important the involvement of all cricketing nations is the future of the game.
Naturally they want to make the IPL work, but they have to realise it works in large part because of the high quality international players it attracts.
If the BCCI is willing to be reasonable, then I’m sure some form of peaceful co-existence can be arranged. The same would apply to England, Australia and the other nations with their own domestic tournaments.
In an ideal world, the various cricketing Boards will work in harmony to maximise the profits from domestic cricket while making sure international cricket maintains its niche as the highest form of the game. The only way for this to happen is for the ICC to take overall control now.
I suspect interest in the sport will only grow and to make that growth both painless and manageable, the ICC must take control and set clear, firm guidelines that allow all to enjoy the various aspects of our great game.
If that happens then “too much cricket will not be enough”.
Lance Boil
Roar Rookie
Re international T20 Please God make it go away!
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Can it direct countries to still play international cricket during these events? Can it put a cap on the number of current international cricketers getting involved in tournaments outside their own country? Good questions Paul, An Indian dominated ICC, of course could exert pressure for this, to the extent of modelling all international calendars around their own. Many suspect that to be the face of cricket from 2030 onwards as you rightly noted the huge appetite for domestic only in India. I suspect the short term is as I intimated last year, National boards will lose control of players and contracts. Most likely is players being selected on short tournament based contracts for national teams, especially for white ball as full time 20/20 players need not play meaningless national T20I's just to prove their bona fides for a T20WC. I don't believe the ICC will have any bearing on that, it'll be more a free market decision from players who see their earning potential and then National bodies needing to change their expectations, merely for available players.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Nah, I know you're not that bad ... just an everyday average bloke really ...
sheek
Roar Guru
Sad, you have no idea. Go & read my cricket posts going back to 2007. Educate yourself about me.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Why don't we play an ongoing game ... you name an occasion where Steve played a defining innings against a top side or in Ashes cricket and then I will do the same ... see who runs out first. We can even vary it by naming an occasion where one or the other failed in such key situations and then the other matches it ... Are you in?
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
The only thing I'm weeping at is your sheer stupidity in the way you bow down to stats and then deny doing so.
Paul
Roar Guru
Sorry, but how are they beholden to the Boards? If anything, the Boards are beholden to them. Much of the revenue each Board gets comes from the ICC run tournaments, ie the World Cups. The ICC stitched up a deal worth billions of dollars https://cutsinfo.com/icc-global-funding-model-explainer/ Sure India is extremely well off thanks to the IPL, but that's not so much the case with the rest of the Boards. Put it another way, if the ICC pulled it's funding because some Boards wanted to dictate terms, it would seriously hurt them financially.
JamesH
Roar Guru
Yeah I hear you. It's crazy, even factoring in that COVID has exacerbated the issue. Something has to give somewhere. FWIW I think you're right that 50-over cricket could eventually fall by the wayside due to the growth of T20 tournaments. It's almost the logical consequence. I just worry about what that means for the quality of test cricket.
Paul
Roar Guru
Yeah, the Alice Springs wicket has been a mixed bag. There was a lot of anger in Darwin at the time of this Test because a condition to play it was the drop in wicket that was basically managed by the curators from down south. They shipped the pitch up only weeks before then rolled the c**p out of it, so it would hold together and the end result was a pretty underwhelming wicket. Taking a pitch from wintery conditions in Melbourne to the tropics was never going to end well. What was even more annoying was the comments from the Australians about the facilities, especially the practice wickets which Steve Waugh raved about (maybe he was being kind, but they were still good to practice on).
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Fair point. My concern is we have two white ball formats squeezing the schedule -and competing for interest against FC/Tests. This is next summer for example: 1) The T20WC is in Aus in Oct/Nov 2) ...yet we're also supposed to be on a 4 Test tour of India in Oct and early Nov. 3) Then ENG and SAF are currently scheduled (could change) to be playing 6x ODIs in Aus in Nov and Dec. 4) Presumably the BBL will also start in December as per usual. And across all of that there are supposed to be 5 Tests, all in Nov and Dec for Aus home summer. And Shield. I expect the Oct India Test series will be rescheduled to March 2023. But it's still a huge log jam of T20WC, 6x ODIS and BBL - all through Oct, Nov, Dec and Jan.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
Yes, but they are beholden to the boards and not independently able to run the game. They can basically only do as much as the big three allow, the big three just have to do enough to get a few mid-size full member nations onside to essentially dictate everything.
JamesH
Roar Guru
I worry that if 50-over cricket dies, we lose the link between T20s and first class cricket. As much as people bemoan the effect that T20s are already having on players' approach and skills in the red-ball game, so long as we have three formats there is still incentive for players to hone a broader technical skillset. Take away 50-over cricket altogether and we are left with only two very different beasts. I suspect we would then see players start to gravitate towards one or the other from a younger age, widening the gulf between the two available formats. And seeing them as two separate pathways is fine to a point, but the money, fame and even time constraints will make T20 cricket a far more attractive option. What effect will this have on the already declining quality of first class cricket in Australia? And what does that mean for tests? National pride in the baggy green will only go so far.
Tempo
Roar Rookie
Yes, I'm probably being to harsh on Darwin (I think it's the Alice Springs pitch I was actually thinking of there). But, the pitch did not get rave reviews when used in test cricket (see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2004-07-03/teams-blast-darwin-pitch/2003490 and https://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/214660.html). If it's slow and low, that requires a very different style of cricket to the main Aussie grounds. We see that in the BBL where the regional grounds often result in attritional cricket.
Paul
Roar Guru
"Allan Border Field or a cow paddock pitch up in Darwin?" I can't speak for AB Field but there's no way the pitches in Darwin can be called cow paddocks. The training pitches alone are some of the best in the country and they've used various Darwin grounds to stage all manner of tournaments over the past 2 decades, including hosting all States, New Zealand and playing Tests. It'd be easy to host T20 matches there and the guys would get very good practice, but it won't happen for all the wrong reasons.
Tempo
Roar Rookie
I agree, in an ideal world that's right and playing in India then is not great preparation. However, what sort of grounds would they be playing on in August/September? Allan Border Field or a cow paddock pitch up in Darwin? Australia hasn't played a white ball fixture at any home ground other than the SCG/Manuka since 2019. At least playing some matches at home will allow us to test out combinations/strategy for Australian conditions prior to the home World Cup, where for once the Australian public will be paying attention to our T20I team! The frustrating thing is that we will probably send out a second string side for these fixtures, which would win me back over to your point of view. I do believe that we should be putting close to our best side out in every match (resting 1 or 2 players max), and reduce or space out the fixtures if that isn't possible (or select players only in 2 formats). I guess to me that's the main drawback of these fixtures in Jan/Feb because you can guarantee test players will be resting from many of these fixtures.
qwetzen
Roar Rookie
Good piece Paul. Going by the amount of money that CA spends promoting the Shield, ie. none, I'm beginning to suspect that the day is coming when they (and the other Boards) abolish it, leaving only 50 & 20 over sloggos.
sheek
Roar Guru
Pale Roarer, I just read something this very morning, which obviously I am meant to share with you. “History is not there for you to like or dislike, it is there for you to learn from. And if it offends you, even better, because you are less likely to repeat it. HISTORY IS NOT YOURS TO CHANGE OR DESTROY”. That last sentence is the most critical of all. Anyway, as much as you don’t like it, the history is rock solid: mark Waugh had a test average of 41.82; Steve Waugh a test average of 51.06 & Don Bradman for all his supposed ‘padding’, a test average of 99.94. Read it & weep…
Paul
Roar Guru
"Wouldn’t playing T20Is in Australia be better preparation for the T20 World Cup in Australia?" For sure, but what do we gain from playing these matches in Jan/Feb, when the main tournament is on in October? Far better to play in Australia in August/September but instead we're going to tour India.
Paul
Roar Guru
"The ICC don’t have the authority to take charge." Really? That's at odds with what they claim on their homepage "The ICC is the global governing body for cricket. Representing 106 members, the ICC governs and administrates the game and works with our members to grow the sport." The last phrase is particularly relevant to this discussion. Growing the sport is not limited to allowing cashed up businesses take over the game for their own profit. This is where the ICC needs to do as it's claims and govern for ALL nations, not just a select few.
sheek
Roar Guru
Wow! Anyway, the reason Mark Waugh’s test average is so far below his brother Steve is because he didn’t produce consistently enough, irrespective of the state of the game. I’m fully aware of anomalies (eg, Voges & Ryder, etc). There are always anomalies/exceptions in life to keep us on our toes. No, I’m not going to play your game of manipulation. And yes, you’re still trying to manipulate the stats. Finally, you’ve lost your cool. You know what that means…..