Live Cricket Scores

Columns - Straight talk

Mindless scheduling making players opt for harsh choices

By Ian Chappell
Monday, June 04, 2021
Share
-


At the time the IPL was mooted in order to combat the rebel ICL, I felt the timing was right to have a round table meeting involving all the game’s stakeholders, from players and administrators to television executives and sponsors. The aim of the meeting should’ve been to hammer out a workable blueprint for the future so that all versions of the game could progress cohesively.

No unity of purpose

The foresight and unity of purpose were lacking and that golden opportunity was missed. Soon the administrators will have no choice but to accept the second best option; they’ll be forced into making changes.

The game seems destined to experience an occasional eruption resulting in a power struggle between players and administrators. Apart from the occasional nineteenth century battle of wills over bowling actions, the first major stoush occurred in the early twentieth century.

Up until then, certainly in Australia, the players had largely controlled the purse strings. The signs were ominous in 1909 when the Imperial Cricket Conference was formed. Then in 1911 there was a player revolt when Australia’s “Big Six” refused to tour England in a futile attempt to retain the control they had over the split of the takings.

When the Australian players lost that battle the administrators gained the upper hand and, consequently, a strong hold on the purse strings. This rapidly became a vice like grip until the World Series Cricket split in 1977 when the administrators’ stranglehold on the finances was finally broken.

Changed equation

In the aftermath of that revolution the players received better pay and conditions improved. Nevertheless, the administrators retained control over the players because representing your country was still a cricketer’s best way to fame and a moderate fortune.

That balance changed dramatically with the advent of the IPL. Unwittingly the administrators ceded firm control to the players in devising the IPL and once the inaugural auction was held the cricketers had more choice. Representing your country became only one of the options and in many cases it was far from the most lucrative one.

With T20 leagues popping up like daisies in spring not only are the players spoilt for choice but the now seriously overloaded international schedule wouldn’t be workable even if the administrators decided to adopt the Martian year to avail themselves of an extra couple of hundred days.

The current cricket schedule is on a par with the euro; it’s simply unsustainable.

If Pietersen does embark on a mercenary’s career and it leads to even further erosion of administrative power the irony won’t be lost.

Ian says

HAND IS FORCED

Cricket administrators must realize that it is the unworkable schedule – of playing international cricket as well as lucrative domestic T20 league – that, in many cases, forces players to make harsh choices.

WEAK LINK

I’ve held the view that something has to give if the game of cricket is to survive as a global sport and that the most likely casualty would be the fifty-over game.

INVETIBLE CLASH

The game seems destined to experience an occasional eruption resulting in a power struggle between players and administrators.

GOING NOWHERE

The current cricket schedule is on a par with the euro; it’s simply unsustainable.

HT Content & Syndication Services

 


Comments