Monday, February 10, 2014

Re-shaping the cricket globe

The big-three led by the BCCI may have forced their way in the recently-concluded International Cricket Council’s (ICC) meet in Singapore but in doing so, they have also severely compromised the apex cricket body’s long-standing vision, which reads: “As a leading global sport, cricket will captivate and inspire people of every age, gender, background and ability while building bridges between continents, countries and communities.”

In a sugar-coated release after the meet in Singapore on Saturday, the ICC also detailed the key resolutions passed. The meeting was attended by the chairman or president of each of the 10 Full Member boards plus three elected Associate Member representatives.

 “This decision comes after extensive discussions between members that I helped initiate and were given impetus through a position paper presented by the BCCI, Cricket Australia and ECB in early January,” ICC President Alan Isaac was quoted as saying in the release.

 “Since this time a set of resolutions have been drafted, negotiated and modified – based on a set of principles agreed by the ICC Board on 28 January – and finalized at the meeting today. There were eight Full Members who were in a position to support the resolution today and the two who abstained have pledged to further discuss the issues with an aim to reaching unanimous approval over the coming weeks,” read the statement issued by the ICC.

So let us just go back to the January 28 statement issued by the ICC. The subject line of the mail read “First day of ICC Board meeting concludes with unanimous support for key principles.” Among many “principles” which the ICC claimed had “unanimous support,” one was – “a need to recognise the varying contribution of Full Members to the value of ICC events through the payment of ‘contribution costs’. Within hours of the release, as many as three boards –Cricket South Africa, Pakistan Cricket Board and Sri Lanka Cricket -- went public with their displeasure and objections on many key issues. As it stands, the big three have managed to get the numbers in their favour. Have they managed to convince the cricketing fraternity?

 There is no doubt that a stronger India is a great thing for cricket at large. And, so for that matter, a stronger Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and South Africa will also do no harm to world cricket. The ICC restructure proposes many a good things, one among them is the FTP and the way Test cricket will try to pave way for the high performing Associate nations but, it also empowers the already powerful blocs rather than the disempowered. The so called custodians of cricket, led by the BCCI (read, not India), believe - they know and have a right to solve all the problem cricket is grappling with. This belief largely originates from the riches that cricket brings along and, it is the bigger slice of ICC’s revenue pie which is the driving force behind the structural revamp rather than transparency, accountability and inclusiveness.

 Among many points that the ICC’s Finance & Commercial Affairs (F&CA) presented in its “position paper” was that “members are providing their players and playing windows for ICC events," which constrained, "some members' ability to play their own events."  The statement in itself is a big farce considering how the BCCI and the Cricket Australia went ahead with successfully conducting their twenty-twenty leagues – the Indian Premier League and the Big Bash League.

No one should be against more money to cricketers or members getting a bigger share in ICC’s earnings, but to look at all the things with money being the only clinching factor, is equivalent to saying Tyson Gay must get more money on winning the race than an Usain Bolt, because America brings in more money to the sport.

Under the newly-laid structure, the BCCI is set to lead the ICC with N Srinivasan being the ICC chairman for a period of two years starting July this year, while Wally Edwards would head the Executive Committee (ExCo) and ECB chairman Giles Clarke would continue to head F& CA Committee.

The release issued by the ICC, or should one say the Big Three, further stated that “these roles will be for an initial two-year transitional period to 2016 only.” No one from the seven remaining ICC Full Members present in the Singapore meeting dared to ask why the three generous big brothers were not willing to share some burden of leading the three decision-making committees. This reminds me of the word “stepped over” from Francis Ford Coppola’s classic – The Godfather –II, where Michael Corleone, played by Al Pacino, is in conversation with his elder brother Fredo Corleone (played by John Cazale). Here goes the conversation:

 Michael (Pacino):  “I’ve always taken care of you Fredo.”

 Fredo (Cazale): “Taken care of me?  You are my kid brother. You take care of me. Do you ever think about that? Do you, ever, once think about that? Send Fredo off to do this, send Fredo off to that. Let Fredo take care of some Mickey Mouse nightclub somewhere. Send Fredo to pick somebody at the airport. I’m your elder brother Mike and, I was stepped over.” Sri Lanka, Pakistan, or South Africa are not the big brothers of international cricket but even the younger ones don’t like being bossed.

For the moment, the big brothers of international cricket may have put aside the concerns of rest of the world, but history suggests that if money had the power to silence every discontent and win friends – the world would had never witnessed something like 9/11.

 Looking at the track record of the BCCI, which has been asked to lead the restructuring (if you got to believe Alan Isaac), one fears for the things to come. I would be pleasantly surprised if all our doubts are proved wrong, but I won’t be surprised if certain practices of the BCCI makes its way to the ICC. Don’t be surprised if international cricketers are gagged from talking to media just like their brothers in India are.

As it stands today, the BCCI does not recognise the New Media/Online media and hence do not allow any accreditation in its event. So, there’s a possibility that the ICC takes cue from its self-designated leader and adopts the same approach. No qualms. There must be some substantial reason which forced Cricket South Africa to vote for a change which just couple of days ago was “fundamentally flawed.” But one thing is clear – the ICC has lost its moral authority of being cricket’s just custodian.

 Having said all that, the writer of this blog is still trying to decode what CB Fry once famously wrote:

 “Either you know what game of cricket is, or you do not. If you do, you can not accept the dictum…that in cricket, the end justifies the means. It is a lie that cricket is a business.”

Popular Posts