& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

The honey-pot of cricket and business as unusual

Sharif As-Saber
The reform package crafted by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and endorsed by England Cricket Board (ECB) and Cricket Australia (CA), has generated angry reactions from around the world. Such a move can divide the cricketing world and compromise the credibility of cricket.
Despite the slow internationalisation of the sport, enthusiasm about cricket started picking up since Bangladesh became a full-fledged member of ICC in 2000. It created a prospect for the 46 cricketing nations affiliated or associated with ICC to eventually get full membership status while raising the optimism of transforming cricket into a global sport.
However, the recent proposal intends to resurrect the three-nation exclusive cricket guild originally established in 1909 by England, Australia and South Africa—with India replacing South Africa!
Why did India, Australia and England propose such an extraordinary overhaul of international cricket? Over the years, cricket has become a source of massive income for national cricket control boards and ICC. Betting, gambling and the sales of tickets and broadcasting rights have become important factors in driving cricket as one of the leading money-spinners in the sporting world. At the same time, financial scandals or irregularities involving players, teams, local organisers and other stakeholders are increasingly becoming commonplace in international cricket.
Arguably, greater ability to control international cricket could essentially make it easier for these stakeholders to milk the cricketing cash-cow with much less accountability and transparency. According to former Bangladesh skipper Rakibul Hassan, it is nothing but the extreme commercialisation of cricket over the last two decades or so which is responsible for making cricket subservient to money and profit and prone to corruption.
The most powerful cricketing trio now wants to control the 'honey pot' to benefit themselves more than the others. They are putting increasing importance on T-20 carnivals as the new-found source of income and do not want to limit the scope of these earnings by playing test matches at periods dictated by ICC. One-dayers are usually played together with tests. By introducing a two-tier test regime, they would be able to manipulate international cricketing schedule across all three types of the sport to their advantage and optimise their incomes.
India, being the number one cricketing revenue earner, has already started dictating terms on where and with whom they play. This has created some bitterness in relations between South Africa and India. India is now trying to woo other member countries by inviting them to sign bilateral future tour agreements at the ICC meeting next week. Given that this offer has been floated just before the critical voting for the proposed amendments, it could be termed as bribing or bullying, violating ethical norms of both ICC and BCCI.
The proposed reform could be considered as the most controversial one ever raised in the ICC board by any of its members! It is different from Kerry Packer’s "World Series Cricket” that shattered the cricketing world and was rejected by ICC. There is, however, a common denominator between the two—money! Packer wanted full rights for Channel Nine to broadcast international cricket in Australia, whereas the present-day 'big three' want to benefit themselves financially more than other members through incorporating amendments to the ICC constitutional provisions!
The Federation of International Cricketers' Associations (FICA) has expressed its concerns and rejected this proposal. According to its Executive Chairman, Paul Marsh: "It is not in the best interests of the global game” and "will only serve to strengthen the 'big three' countries whilst the rest are left to wither on the vine.” The extent of disappointment among cricket fans worldwide at the triad's move has already been reflected in the ESPN Criclnfo.com online survey on the proposed reform. As until Sunday morning, nearly 80% of almost 80,000 respondents disapproved this latest move by the 'big three.'
If implemented, the proposed reform could destabilise the international cricketing fraternity and would marginalise cricket as an elitist and exclusive sport, while millions of cricket-crazy fans from full-member countries such as Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and emerging cricketing nations from all over the world will lose interest in international cricket.
With a prospect of becoming a part of the 2024 Olympics, cricket does not need this controversy. Instead, ICC should follow the ground rules of FIFA, which are based on inclusiveness, equity and competitiveness, and incorporate more countries into its fold rather than shrinking its domain. In order to make it happen, a provision for an equal number of test as well as other types of matches for each team should be in place during a calendar year, with venues equally distributed across all full or associate member nations. It will create the much sought-after 'level playing field' for all cricketing nations. Otherwise, the passion and love for cricket of millions of fans around the world will be lost to money, greed and national interests of the few!
The writer Is the Head of Geopolitics, Business and Government Research Cluster at RMIT University, Melbourne.