'Cricket Must Move Forward'

"It’s not good enough for cricket to simply hold its ground -- it mustmove forward." That was Ehsan Mani’s message to the cricket world in hisfirst speech as ICC president at its business forum meeting at Lord’s onJune 19. Mani spoke to Outlook moments after his inauguration:

Congratulations on your appointment as president. How do you feel?

It is a great honour for me. It is also a great honour for Pakistan. Itrecognizes the contribution that Pakistan has made to the cricket community overthe years.

You take over when the going is not smooth for the cricket community withrespect to issues such as the refusal by Indian players to sign certain clausesin the World Cup contract and the question of political and security-driven boycotts of the Zimbabwe and Pakistan tours. Is there going to bea change in ICC policies with regard to these issues?

There are always challenges in cricket. That is part and parcel of the game. When Malcolm Gray took over the ICC had to tackle thechallenge of corruption that had crept into the game. When Mr Dalmiya took overbefore that in 1997, the ICC only existed on paper. It had no financial resource,didn’t have the muscle to become a global body.

Today, the challenges aredifferent. There are no immediate solutions to these problems you mentioned,specially the contracts issue. Decisions that have tested the unity of the ICCand its members have been taken. But, that does not mean that we cannot find asolution acceptable to the member countries and in the largerinterests of the game and commensurate with the vision that all member countrieshave as part of the ICC.

With regard to Zimbabwe, the ICC’s position is very clear. We are here to runthe game and promote it. We do not get involved in political decisions ofcountries. Only governments and politicians takepolitical decisions. Pakistan has had a problem over the last two years andcricket has suffered there. Virtually no cricket has been played there over thelast two years and this, as you know, is because of the geo-political problemscaused by events following September 11. That has subsided now. Now, Pakistan isgoing to host three tours. Bangladesh, South Africa, and after New Zealandfinish touring India they play five matches in Pakistan. That is excellent forPakistan cricket.

What about the issue of compensation for the lost tours that the PakistanCricket Board is taking up with the ICC?

The best compensation anyone can get is to start playing cricket again. Asfar as financial compensation is concerned, the executive board of the ICC isclear on this. The ICC does not have any money of its own. Everything that the ICCgets is earmarked for different things. Money goes into two main streams -- developmentof the game and money back to the members who develop the game in their owncountries.

What the board decided was that in the case of specific need of acountry, the ICC would act as a lender of last resort. If a country isthreatened with bankruptcy, then the other members are willing to put money intothe ICC to assist the fellow member. Pakistan has been offered that assistance,and the PCB has thanked the members for their gesture and said it does notneed the money at this stage. The PCB has suffered incrediblelosses because of the cancelled tours by Australia, New Zealand, West Indies andspecifically India.

Let me branch off to a point you raised just now -- that the ICC has no moneyof its own. It is six years now since the ICC became a modern, global,corporatised institution. Don’t you think that it is time something is done tochange this scenario?

$550 million passed through the ICC between 2000 and 2007. We at the ICCare not here to create a big financial empire. We create wealth for the members.Every penny that the ICC raises goes back into cricket. $100 million of the $550 million -- the money we raise through the Champions Trophy -- will go directlyinto development of the game in the affiliate and associate member countries.

The money that we get from the World Cup -- the best part of the $450 million -- willgo into the full member and associate member countries for development ofthe game. If cricket is to survive it has to compete with other sports. In thesub-continent, cricket has no competition. So, the development priorities aredifferent. In these countries, what we lack are top infrastructurefacilities -- high-performance coaching centers, academies. Therefore, in ourcountries, the thrust of development is looking at the infrastructural gains.

But, in England, and in some other countries, cricket is competing withother sports such as football and rugby. If you look at the Sunday Times on agood day, you’ll find cricket on page 20 of the sports section. This tells yousomething. What the England and Wales Cricket Board has to do is to go outand attract the young kids who go into other sport.

Are you hinting about the Twenty20 Cup?

Among other things, yes. It is a brilliant move. It means that cricket isforward looking.

You talk about cricket competing with other sports. When you compare thestructural relationship of the ICC with full member countries, specially withrelation to revenue generation and distribution, to that of FIFA’s relationship with its member associations,the major difference is FIFA’s structures are very centralized.

You have to look at the structure of the ICC now and where it stands in thecycle of development. Ten years from now it will be a different game. Ten yearsago, the ICC used to run on a budget of less than 100,000 pounds a year. Today’soperating budget is over $30 million. There was no central body, the MCC usedto run the ICC.

What is important today is the way the ICC is structured in terms ofthe executive board -- that lays down the policies -- andhow it operates. The commercial office of the ICC in Monaco is its only management body that implements policies laid down by the executiveboard -- one member from the ten full member countries and three directorsrepresenting three associate countries. So, it is the member countries that laydown the policies. In the long run, I am very clear that members will have toyield more power on a variety of issues to the central body. It has tohappen. Only then can the ICC go forward.

Do you see that happening in your tenure?

Yes. It will happen. In fact, it happens every day. This is the first time that the ICC has run a World Cup called the ICC World Cup.This shows that the members have the confidence in the ICC to be prepared to take part. You ought to gain respectif you have to win power, and it shows that the ICC has gained the respect andtrust of members.

Let me bring up another analogy with the FIFA. In their international programme,the member associations of FIFA own television rights only for the friendliesand a few other tournaments, and not for the World Cup or Confederation Cupqualifiers. Considering that the ICC has a World Test and one-day championshipin place now, do you think that it is time television rights for every Testand one-day series that is part of this programme be owned by the ICC?

The FIFA has got 200 or more countries playing football. The ICC has 89members, only 10 of them play at the highest level. The structure and needs ofcricket are different. At the same time, at the ICC, we are constantly lookingat the way Test and one-day cricket is structured in terms of where theownership should lie and whether it should be programmed centrally.

On whether or not ICC should own all Test and one-day cricket, we are of theopinion that the ICC ought to leave behind money to countries to run their owncricket. Imagine India without any money at the board level! It may change inthe future. Every country has its own rights and we don’t want tostep on those. At the same time, the partnership that the ICC has with theGlobal Cricket Corporation has added real value for members. The 1999 World Cupgave $51 million to the members to share. This year, we have given over $193million to the members.

Last year, in the board meeting of the ICC Development International atMonaco, there was a commercial presentation by Major League Baseball. This isclearly an indication of cricket trying to get into new markets and structureitself on successful global governing bodies of sport.

Yes, we are looking at the structures of other governing bodies of sport withan open mind. We have to take cricket to new areas and new markets like theUnited States. We are working very hard to stage World Cup matches there in2007. If we don’t do it, cricket will get blocked out in the United States.Just the sports revenue market of the US is $100 billion a year.

The ICC is talking about raising $ 550 million over seven years. That puts intoperspective the gap we have in this area. The game needs money to move forward,for development, to set up proper structures for the ICC and its members. We are not in a position to just play cricket and saythat we are not interested about the money.

More than money, there is the larger issue of rational and modernstructures coming into conflict with traditional beliefs. In the process of theICC becoming a modern rational governing body, there is also the problem of conflict with the huge cultural investment in cricket, which dates back to the1860s and 1870s. How are you planning to cope with this?

We have to move out of the colonial origins of cricket as a game that camefrom England and took strong roots in the erstwhile colonies. The fact that we have 89 members in the ICC is indication ofthat we are moving out.

Also, if you look at the full member countries of the ICC, you see such adiversity of cultures, traditions and beliefs. We have to move forwardrespecting all these cultures. The important thing is to get kids attracted toany one form of the game, which will inevitably generate interest in thetraditional structures of the game as well. I am happy that the ECB has takenthe initiative in this direction by starting the Twenty20 Cup. Australia and NewZealand have also experimented with a two-innings version of limited overscricket.

There are cultural diversities within the full member countries as well.Countries such as South Africa and England are doing well to provideaccess to youth from underprivileged cultural and economicbackgrounds. Others such as India, Australia and New Zealand do not seem tohave done enough to provide access to Dalits, tribals, Aborigines and Maoris. Isthe ICC planning to do anything about this?

This is part of the development of the game. These communities have nottraditionally played cricket. They have played sport such as football,Australian Rules Football and Rugby. If social opportunities for thesecommunities are increased, more and more members of these communities can lookto cricket as a career. Part of the ICC's development programme talks abouttaking the game to underprivileged communities in countries which havetraditionally got access to cricket at the highest level.

With regard to the possible resumption of cricket ties between India andPakistan, and knowing that the Indian Government will zero in oncricket as the first casualty in the event of anything tragic happening inbilateral relations between the two countries, does the ICC still intend topursue its non-interventionist policy?

We cannot force any government to play cricket with any other country. Whatis important here is that the cricket boards of India and Pakistan are in favourof playing cricket.

Can the ICC and BCCI work towards a non-representative Indian team playingcricket against Pakistan in such an eventuality? Almost like the Britishathletes participating in the 1980 Moscow Olympics under the Olympic flagfollowing the official British boycott of the event.

There is a difference between the two situations. In 1980, the BritishGovernment announced that it would not be sending a representative team to theOlympics and advised its athletes not to participate in the Olympics due topolitical differences that Britain and the United States had with the Soviet Union.The British Government, however, did not prohibit its sportspersons to travel tothe Soviet Union. The Indian Government prohibits cricketers to go to Pakistanand play cricket, and in this situation, the ICC cannot do anything.

The most recent entrant to Test Cricket, Bangladesh, has been adisappointment. What does the ICC propose to do?

The performance of Bangladesh has been disappointing. The ICC will work veryclosely with the Bangladesh Cricket Board and the Asian Cricket Council over thenext two years to assist in the development of the game. Thisinvolves setting up of a high performance training centre, running specialistcoaching camps and appointment of an international coach for the Bangladeshunder-19 team. Over the next two years, there may also be a reduction in theamount of international cricket Bangladesh will be playing, particularly outsidethat country.

(The author does research at the Warwick Centre for the Study of Sport, UK)