ICC Is An Event Management Company And Doesn’t Run Cricket: Ian Chappell

ICC is an event management company and doesn’t run cricket: Ian Chappell (Image Source: IANS)

International Cricket Council: Former Australia captain Ian Chappell believes the International Cricket Council (ICC) functions like an event management company which doesn’t run cricket. He added that a two-tier system for Test cricket should have been in place, but now the focus is on solving other pressing matters related to the longer format.

“The ICC is widely regarded as an event management company. They should add "and not a very good one". On the subject of a two-tier Test system, former West Indies pace-bowling champion Michael Holding noted: "For all its faults, at least FIFA actually runs soccer. The ICC must run cricket.

“Therein lies a perplexing problem. The ICC doesn't run cricket, and unless there's a major change of heart, the financially desirable nations will continue to have a huge say in producing a self-serving schedule,” wrote Chappell in his column for ESPNCricinfo on Sunday.

Further talking about the two-tier Test system, Chappell remarked, “There should have been a two-tier Test system in place years ago. In reality only a limited number of teams are capable of competing long-term in the five-day game.

“West Indies earned the right to financial assistance with their capacity to draw crowds, and it's criminal they've been allowed to languish. A system that includes promotion and relegation is feasible but there need to be certain criteria attached before a team attains Test status.

“Those should include: Do they have a viable first-class competition? Do they have legitimate grounds for holding five-day games? Do the grounds have adequate facilities? Are they financially stable?"

Keeping all of this in mind, Chappell felt Ireland and Afghanistan shouldn’t be given Test status. “If a team meets those criteria - and maintains a high standard of play over a number of years - then promotion to Test status would be legitimate. However, most of the recent Test-appointed nations don't come close to meeting any reasonable criteria.

“For instance, could Afghanistan hold a Test series in their strife-torn country? Does Ireland have a realistic number of Test-standard grounds? Even setting aside the Taliban's reprehensible treatment of women, the answer to those questions is: absolutely not. Then why do they have Test status? Because in return for Test status they provide valuable ICC votes on important issues.

He also noted that the financial share of nations is also an issue whose solution hasn’t been found yet. “Then there's the major issue of the financial split. The big three - India, Australia and England - despite being the wealthiest cricket nations claim a large slice of the money divided among cricket bodies, and yet they agitate for an even larger share.

“India's powerful presence in the ICC is in direct proportion to their contribution of around 70 per cent of cricket's income. It's a complex issue to which cricket hasn't found a workable solution. Producing a player who performs well in Test cricket requires having a strong four-day competition.

“It's extremely expensive to run a four-day competition, and therefore not many beyond the big three can really afford the burden. It's one reason why T20 cricket flourishes. Running a successful T20 competition improves the financial capacity of a cricket body.

“India's powerful presence in the ICC is in direct proportion to their contribution of around 70 per cent of cricket's income. It's a complex issue to which cricket hasn't found a workable solution. Producing a player who performs well in Test cricket requires having a strong four-day competition.

Article Source: IANS