Opinion | Sambit Bal >> Time for tough calls Cricket must think seriously of how it needs to realign itself in a world changed by the IPL July 14, 2008 An odd coupling: the ECB's alliance with Stanford is a product of the success of the IPL © Getty Images These are tumultuous times for cricket. And seminal too. Cricket is a bit like molten lava at the moment: for sure the game is changing, but no one's quite sure what will emerge. It is a period of anxiety, uncertainty, fear and suspicion. And it also seems a time for knee-jerk decisions. Without doubt the monstrous success of the Indian Premier League has changed the landscape of cricket irrevocably. The good part of it is that it has managed to widen the base of cricket and opened up a new dimension to the commerce of the game. But while it is natural for other countries to be anxious about being left behind, they would be foolish to try and replicate the IPL, because the circumstances in India are uniquely different from those in the rest of the cricket world. Monopolies are unhealthy and the idea of building a counter-balance to the BCCI is worthy. But there seems to be a touch of desperation about the two initiatives, one formalised, the other embryonic, coming out of England. Allen Stanford, the Texan billionaire who by his own admission is indifferent towards Test cricket, and the ECB make the most incongruous bedfellows, and Stanford's US$100 million investment seems to be based on no apparent commercial or marketing logic - perhaps he sees it as a long-term investment in Twenty20, a game for which he sees a future in the US - and the $20 million prize for winning one match has the feel of a grand lottery. It makes the IPL lot seem like honest toilers. A proposal like this, it can safely be said, would have been treated with a great deal of cynicism, if not outright contempt, had it been made before the IPL. There is far more merit in the proposal jointly drafted by Keith Bradshaw, the Australian chief executive of the MCC - interestingly Mike Brearley, the MCC's president, has publicly dissociated the club from the initiative - and David Stewart, the chairman of Surrey. While Bradshaw and Stewart, who have apparently been working on the idea for months, will have applied themselves rigorously, the numbers do seem optimistic on the face of it. The proposal is a virtual clone of the IPL, but the problem is that there are some fundamental differences between India and England. English cricket simply lacks the scales in fan base, passion, and corporate sponsorship that the IPL managed to generate. Cricket in India is equal to, or perhaps even greater than, football, cricket and rugby put together in England. An English Premier League is a good idea in principle, but it must be based on realistic ambitions. And, of course, it cannot happen without a shake-up of the domestic structure and the sanction of the counties. The English cricket establishment must make up its mind about how many limited-overs competitions, and indeed how many Twenty20 tournaments, a season can absorb, and it must resolve how the wealth is to be distributed. The idea of the IPL sailed through the BCCI because the state associations stood to benefit equally from the riches, whereas in England's case at least half the counties have reason to fear they will be left with crumbs if the structure put forward by their affluent brethren takes form. But a far bigger question for the administrators, if they are willing ask it of themselves, is of how cricket must realign itself in the post-IPL world. It is staggering that the matter received no serious attention from the ICC board, which spent a massive amount of time and energy earlier this month to achieve almost nothing. Almost farcically, Sri Lanka's tour of England next year, swiftly arranged to replace the visit by Zimbabwe which figured in the calendar earlier, is now in danger of either being curtailed or being robbed of the presence of the star Sri Lankan players, who would rather fulfill their IPL obligations instead. Sixty-four per cent of the international players polled recently by the Federation of International Cricketers' Associations said they would consider giving up international cricket to play in the IPL. Depending on from where you look at it, Twenty20 is either the ultimate dumbing-down of the most cerebral of field sports, or the ultimate sexing-up of a game that's out of tune with contemporary life. Either way a space must be found for it because the crowds are loving the entertainment aspect and the players are loving the money. It is in the interests of the three major forms of the game - cricket is blessed that it can accommodate so many - that a healthy balance is found. It is tempting to write off the 50-over game, but it is still the financial bedrock of the game, and the World Cup is still cricket's biggest event, and the ODI format retains the ability to provide drama and thrills if the balance between bat and ball remains healthy. No more compelling evidence can be found of this than the recently concluded series between England and New Zealand. In comparison, the Asia Cup was a crashing bore because the bowlers were hardly in the game; it was not until Ajantha Mendis started flicking those mystery balls that the tournament came to life. The 50-over game need not die; it merely needs to be invested with a bit more meaning and purpose. A start can be made by reducing the numbers. Seven-match bilateral series should be the first to go.     The worlds of Test cricket and Twenty20 are so far removed from one another that the shortest form is not really a threat to the longest - in terms of viewership at least. In fact, the advent of Twenty20 just might present the opportunity to restore Test cricket to its rightful place   The worlds of Test cricket and Twenty20 are so far removed from one another that the shortest form is almost not a threat to the longest - in terms of viewership at least. Those who are drawn to the unique charms of Test cricket are unlikely to abandon it for the wanton and ephemeral pleasures of Twenty20, which they might allow themselves to indulge in occasionally. Indeed, there is hope that some of the new audiences might, in the course of time, develop a taste for Test cricket. In fact, the advent of Twenty20 just might present the opportunity to restore Test cricket to its rightful place. At its best, Test cricket is incomparably enthralling. But between unequals it can produce unending tedium. The Future Tours Programme was drawn up with the noble objective of providing equal opportunity to all members, but in reality the idea of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh participating in the same number of tours as Australia and India is simply a travesty. Mercifully, Zimbabwe haven't played Tests for more than 18 months. It's time to take the right call on Bangladesh. But the right calls might be too much to ask for. In these uncertain times, cricket could do with wisdom, sagacity and vision from its leaders. Unsurprisingly, none of these has been forthcoming. What has come to light instead are conflicts arising out of clashes of self-interest, which have made compromises seem the best possible outcome. Cricket has always been, and is likely to remain, a small society. The threat is that this society is getting increasingly fractured. The ICC is hostage to the narrow interests of its major constituents, and as a result, while cricket is in a flux, the game's global governing body remains in a limbo. Sambit Bal is the editor of Cricinfo © Cricinfo

 Read Comments (24)

	Email

Comments on this story

Comments have now been closed for this article

Read all 24 comments

Posted by HBt20 on July 16 2008, 11:02 AM GMT

What I don't really understand is why the IPL has to clash with the start of the English season? Can't the BCCI make the IPL shorter or finish earlier? If the IPL was purely a domestic competition then of course they can do what they wish. But as they are keen to attract so many big name players from overseas surely they have a duty of care to ensure that they don't negatively impact upon the structures of other countries and of course the future tours programme that is published years in advance. We had the fairly absurd situation here this year when Daniel Vettori, the NZ captain, arrived in the UK several weeks after his NZ team mates because he was busy playing in the IPL. And next year we hear that Sri Lanka may well send a virtual second XI because their star players are contracted to the IPL. What will happen in April & May 2011 when India tour West Indies? Will The well paid Indian stars be playing a WI 2nd XI at home whilst the less well paid WI players play in the IPL?

Posted by Irishfan on July 16 2008, 03:52 AM GMT

TestCricketRules--No one is saying that T20 will take over the world overnight. Rather, there should be a process that muscles cricket into the global market and brings more countries into the game. Face it, Test cricket does not serve cricket well. Some old men in white suits sitting on a terrace sipping tea and saying "Oh, cricket is a silly little sideshow." That attitude will not only keep cricket behind football, but it will see it overtaken by other sports, to the point where it will become only a sideshow, if people like you run it. And the passion for cricket in India is equal, if not greater than, passion for football in many countries. I will tell you as someone who has been around Europe and South America where football is popular, a loss is not treated with burning effigies and destroyed houses!

Posted by RohanMarkJay_TestCricketRules on July 15 2008, 22:10 PM GMT

I have to laugh at some fans of 20/20 cricket who think it will make cricket more popular than the truly international sport of Football.Facts first cricket is played at the highest level by only a handful of countries around 8 or 10 of 200+ nations. Even in india where cricket is No.1 sport where it followed with the most passion cannot compare anywhere near the passion that international football matches are followed by people in other nations around the world.My point is Cricket is a small sideshow played by just 8 to 10 nations.We must admit cricket will never be as popular as football.It hasn't been in a hundred years and it won't be in the next 100.So we should stop inventing these gimmicks to make cricket more popular and find a way to make 50 over and now 20/20 and especially Test cricket the highest form of the game meaningful and enjoyable to existing cricket fans instead of trying to rope in new ones by trying to make cricket sexier.In my opinion test cricket is a great game

Posted by AjaySridharan on July 15 2008, 18:50 PM GMT

Expected more from you Sambit. This drum has been beaten for a few months now. We all get it, Cricket will benefit with a healthy balance between 20/20, ODI and Tests, that the cricket boards are acting in self interest, that India is a different animal when it comes to fanbase compared to the rest of the world, and not to mention the deplorable levels of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh cricket. Put on your thinking hat and offer some alternatives.

Posted by RUSTOM on July 15 2008, 13:34 PM GMT

This is the age of life in the fast lane - fast food, email and the like. so, why not make cricket spectator-friendly too ? twenty20 cricket lasts for just above 3 hours, which still us much more than football, formula one and hockey. nobody has the time to watch a game of cricket for 8 hours at a stretch. i think, gradually one dayers have to be put away with. they are now seen as a run-of-the-mill 8 hour yawn. the contrast in the audiences of the odi world cup in march 2007 and the twenty20 world championship is testimony to the fact. so, let test cricket be the pinnacle for the sake of all those whining egg-and-bacon tie-wearing fuddy duddies, and let twenty20 be the staple form of the game. and yes, 7 or 8 different twenty20 leagues can co-exist at different times of the year - which will enable , say for example, an abraham de villiers to play for the delhi daredevils, the nashua titans or any other side without a clash in dates. the truth is that the future of cricket is twenty20

Posted by ahallnz on July 15 2008, 01:22 AM GMT

I am in favour of developing cricket but I am reluctant on the over promotion of T20. This form of the game puts too much emphasis on the first 6 overs of the team batting first. There is time in a 50 over to graft an innings if there is a poor start but not really the case in T20. Take for example the recent NZ vs England 20/20 - NZ got of to a poor start and could never really post a decent score. In a 20 over match chasing 6 an over is a walk in the park. Basically the game was over in the first 15 minutes. Why not look at the Pro40 league and adopt this?

Posted by Irishfan on July 14 2008, 19:29 PM GMT

Well said Jaysarkar! Most sports would love to have something along the lines of the IPL sensation going on now in their sports. But what does cricket do with this revolutionary product! Whine about it and try and marginalize it. Sorry to tell this to all you Test purist folks, but cricket needs to go global. No world sport can survive in this age with a solid base of only about eight or so countries. And the best vehicle will be T20! Simple. So stop whining, and be thankful, and start spreading the game.

Posted by inningsbreak on July 14 2008, 18:31 PM GMT

I talked about the need to have a few leagues across the world much like Soccer does in an article I wrote about a week ago. Please check it out at http://inningsbreak.blogspot.com

Posted by cricbufff on July 14 2008, 13:35 PM GMT

Well said mate. At this moment, I can only think of one thing here, a MAN watching three women fighting for attention - a WIFE, a MISTRESS & a STRIPPER. Each have their own problems, neither can stand one another, but each can given you exactly what you want....to clarify - the MAN - the cricket fan - the WIFE - Test cricket - the MISTRESS - ODI - the STRIPPER - Twenty20

Posted by JaySarkar on July 14 2008, 13:24 PM GMT

Cricket is managed and written about by people who appear to be myopic. In a world that is tottering on brink of fiscal meltdown, when cricket develops a product that appears to draw crowds eager to spend money(or rather the BCCI with due respect to ECB), there are those who appear as far removed from reality as Alice in Wonderland, who claim 'foul'.We've the ECB feeling 'angered' by choice of Brabourne stadium when tests are dying out in popularity. Sambit Bal writes the same old drivel about T20 having to be 'managed'. Who after all cares what a few administrators and journalists think if the players (64% at last count and growing) want T20 and crowds (at least in India for the time being, but who knows where else in future) wish to see it. Since when have managers become more important than the product and those who ply it? Let us get real and stop berating T20 and those who're trying to promote it - its the only sport that seems to be 'limiting' its popularity than promote it.

Watch our daily Cricinfo SportsCenter news round-ups Available on Cricinfo.tv     Fantasy cricket: India v Australia and Bangladesh v New Zealand Login to check the standings     Live scores, news & ball-by-ball commentary on your phone Cricinfo Mobile