MUMBAI: This is certainly a surprising development. Not in the manner the Big 3 of world cricket gave the royal ignore to the International Cricket Council’s call for Expressions of Interest (EoIs) to host ICC events in the next cycle of 2023 to 2031.
There were enough media reports indicating that the BCCI, ECB and Cricket Australia were decidedly cool to ICC CEO Manu Sawhney’s letter of February 13 written to all ICC’s full and associate members requesting for submission of EOIs.
What comes as a surprise is Pakistan, Malaysia and a consortium involving the West Indies and the United States make up the three interested full and associate members of the world body to have come forward with an EOI to host the governing body’s events, as per a report in Times of India.
Of the three entities, only Pakistan and West Indies have cricketing pedigree. What neither have though is MONEY. Both cricket boards being in dire financial straits.
There is a caveat in the case of Cricket West Indies. It is safe to assume that the financial guarantees are coming from the as yet undisclosed US partners. And with all things cricketing, it is equally safe to assume that said US financial guarantors have Indian antecedents.
As for Pakistan, the less said the better. It is already clear that IF the ACC Asia Cup, which the Pakistan Cricket Board is scheduled to host in September, goes ahead, it will be held at a neutral venue. Any ICC event awarded to Pakistan would immediately face a massive reduction in revenue potential because the strife-torn nation is a no go for world cricket’s Big Daddy BCCI.
Which leaves Malaysia. One can only presume that the South-East Asian nation has submitted an EoI for a “non-World Cup” ICC event.
Be that as it may, between a rock and a hard place is where the ICC is positioned currently on the matter of EoIs.
Coming to the source (presumably from the BCCI) who spoke to TOI. “England and Australia have refused to participate. India did not even bother responding. Even New Zealand has told the ICC very clearly that there won’t be any EoIs until the ICC chalks its international calendar for the 2023-31 rights cycle,” said source told the daily.
The strongest opposition of course has been to ICC’s proposal to host an ICC event every year. In SportzPower’s view, the BIG 3 members are justified in arguing that holding a global event every year would reduce the prestige and value attached to winning a World Cup.
Where ICC CEO Manu Sawhney is possibly on a stronger wicket however, the TOI source’s objections notwithstanding, is his declaration in a recent interview to Reuters that the ICC was considering carving out the Women’s ICC rights separately.
There should be a caveat here as well, in SportzPower’s considered opinion. That proposal would have greater financial heft if the Women’s ICC events are hosted in Australia, England, New Zealand or South Africa (in that order). At least in the short term. Why? India may be the financial centre of world cricket, but the bald truth is that it still has some distance to traverse when it comes to women’s empowerment in the sporting arena.
As Harmanpreet Kaur, India’s limited overs captain noted in a recent interview to Mumbai Mirror: “The things we have grasped in last two-three years, England and Australia have been doing from long before.”
Kaur believes India’s domestic structure is “five-six years behind” Australia and England, but adds that increasing awareness and popularity of women’s cricket, central contracts and better facilities are starting to make a difference.
“Definitely we are five-six years behind them in these aspects,” she said. “But now girls have understood their responsibility towards being fit. Earlier there used to be huge difference between a domestic player and what is expected at international level. But now some 30 girls are given individual programme by the BCCI.
“So when one of them is picked for India, she is not clueless of what is expected of her. As we keep improving our domestic level, the performances at international level will improve. That is why I said we are five-six years behind these teams because our domestic set-up is not as good as it should be.”
