Cricket Australia: Sitting on the Fence

"The time is coming where you have to choose between what is easy, and what is right"

Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

It didn't take a rocket scientist - or a banking executive - to figure out that Australian cricket has both structural and talent issues. A 4-1 thumping in our last Ashes series, mediocre World Cup campaign and a captain with a positively Reiffel-esque batting average over the past three series (21.5) is proof enough for anyone with even half an eye and a tenth of a brain that Australian cricket has reached its lowest point since 1985.

While Ricky Ponting's tetchy leadership, Mitchell Johnson's latent outswinger, Greg Chappell's insistence on youth and Andrew Hilditch's residence in a fantasy world have contributed to this state of affairs, the root cause lies with James Sutherland and Cricket Australia. For too long they have tried to have their cake and eat it too by chasing the financial gains of Twenty20 and also lauding a the benefits of a competitive Australian Test squad.

By chasing both, they will achieve neither.

On one hand, commissioning Don Argus to report on their cricket management structures sounds good, even curative. But doing so while the other hand throws so many resources into the nascent Bigh Bash League (BBL), Cricket Australia is endorsing two policy decisions which negate the other. It is another curious leadership decision from CA whose actions indicate they are chasing the Goose that lays the Golden Eggs while paying only lip service to Test standards.

For much of the past twenty years as pitches become more standardised worldwide, cricket has degenerated into two groups: the "haves" and "have-nots". The "haves", fuelled by television revenue, good attendances and growth economies include the regular suspects: South Africa, England, India , Australia and perhaps even Sri Lanka. The second tier includes fallen powers West Indies and Pakistan, as well as New Zealand, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

More accurately, these two groups could now be defined by the cricketers they produce. The West Indies' best now favour the shortest form, while the best of New Zealand, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe often eschew their nations to tour the world as T20 guns-for-hire. The fundamentals of creating world-class players in both formats require player pathway systems so different that only the mega-wealthy institutions in world cricket can afford the time it takes to do so.

courtesy: telegraph.com.au

World cricket hasn't so much been divided along lines of Test quality, but on the type of cricket on whcih each nation has focused. If kids are developed where T20 is prioritised, it results in a bunch of individual talents and a poor Test team. Where a Test technique can occasioanlly benefit T20, the reverse is rarely, if ever, true. To acknowledge any speculation David Warner has what it takes to play Test cricket exists is to question the value of life itself - the man bears as much resemblance to a Test opener as my 94-year old grandmother.

By dividing it's attention between a Big Bash league with privately owned franchises (eeeugh - I hate that word in relation to cricket) and an Argus report recommending that the best 66 players play Sheffield Shield cricket at any one time, Cricket Australia is, dividing it's resources in an attempt to promote the game. By doing so, they've ignored the great rule: punters love success, and in Australia that means a strong Test team.

If Divide and Conquer still applies on the battlefield, so too is it effective in the marketplace. CA has already done the dividing, leaving it now open for conquest by a crowded Australian sports market which asks supporters to invest more than ever.

Let's not forget that private ownership as a model has only worked in Rugby League and never in the long term for any other sport. In fact, News Limited, after pioneering SuperLeague, now still owns the entirety of the Melbourne Storm and North Queensland Cowboys, as well as 69% of the powerhouse Brisbane Broncos. Rupert Murdoch, like Packer before him, got what he wanted out of setting up a rival competition. The hideous failures far outweigh that partial success as the names Christopher Skase, Dr. Geoffrey Edelsten, Eddie Palmer and his beloved Brisbane Bullets and the Victoria Titans weigh heavily on Aussie fans' consciousness.

courtesy: news4u.co.in

The heavily-publicised BBL, intent on chasing dollars, imports the likes of Kieron Pollard and new fans will involve suspending first-class cricket during December, Australia's busiest Test month. How can Australia rebuild with the best First Class talent they have when that talent is not receiving games?

Cricket Australia has been forced into a position that all cricketing countries now must face: chase dollars, or what you feel is important. It's a nice coincidence when those options are one and the same. In Australia's case, that is unfortunately not the case. While paying lip service to the importance of Tests, CA has done everything but say "we're here for the dollars" by instituting a flawed BBL model at the expense of First Class cricket.

courtesy: zimbio.com

Only four years ago Austrlaian domestic cricket was the strongest on the planet - now no more, as players chase the dollars (and no-one's blaming them). Australia simply can't follow the Indian model (IPL) because there isn't enough support - or money - to go around. That Australian domestic cricket - or more crucially, given how many eggs are in it's basket, the new BBL - can't get a look-in on free-to-air television is a damning indictment of what Australians think about the grass-roots. Cricket captures the imagination in the backyard, when Australia plays and never through the likes of Gary Putland and the Melbourne Stars.

CA, to use the most cliche of cliches, is trying to have it's cake and eat it, too. Rather than committing - by dint of playing talent (like England has with Tests) or financial need (as the West Indians have done with T20), Australia continues not to choose its battles and try to succeed at everything.

The smaller countries of the world faced this challenge first, as New Zealand and Bangladesh have all but admitted for years that their best chance of attaining any success has been in the One-Day arena. Why else would players like Scott Styris choose to retire from Test cricket but not from the short format? Pakistan and the West Indies are already producing more guns for hire than good quality Test players. It's saddening to realise that the same is true of Australia.

As India wrestles with the impending doom brought about by Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag and Laxman's respective entries into Valhalla, even that powerful nation will, in time, face the same challenge. While England will not remain immune forever, the structures in place around the game in it's birthplace may allow a defence against the irrepressible schism that threatens to divide cricket.

It's true of any business struggling in a crowded economy that you should choose either to expand your services, or focus on doing what you do best. For 125 years, Australia has produced the best Test cricketers in the world. Over the past decade, that trend has been reversed as players are seduced by the quick runs and quicker bucks available.

In a recent revealing podcast on Test Match Sofa, Australian cricket writer Gideon Haigh revealed that the first priority of the Australian cricket team wasn't to win matches but to publicise the sport in Australia. When it comes to branding - the honeypot into which Cricket Australia has fallen - it is a simple fact that Starbucks produces coffee, Asics produces quality running shoes, Sri Lanka will deliver turning pitches - and Test cricket has been elevated to its highest form by teams from the Great South Land.

For Cricket Australia to forget that would be shameful.

Reaction to the Argus Report: Keep Calm and Carry On

by Ben Roberts

Hold your horses, keep a lid on it, do not get ahead of yourself, there is still a long way to go.

Yes Andrew Hilditch is now relieved of his duties as the chairman of selectors, Tim Nielson stood down and at the very least Greg Chappell has been chastised for inappropriately seeking to meddle in team matters. All three have a lot to answer for regarding poor performance, but do not start looking at them as scapegoats, there is more needing improvement in Australian cricket before it is out of the woods.

Cricket is by far and away the hardest game to govern effectively. To begin with are Australian cricketers employees, therefore beholden to the wishes of the CA board or are they private contractors able to ply their trade on terms that they set? If it was the former then no-one would play the game as CA is hardly an employer of choice, if it was the latter than we would have 10 to 20 Kieron Pollards coming and going with abandon depending on the direction of the fiscal winds.

What we do have is something that swings in the middle where the wishes of the national authority, state authorities, private enterprises (IPL and the like), and the ICC; not to mention the 'assets' in the middle the players who all have their own desires as well. You try and draw a line between the competing objectives of these parties and make it straight. If you can succeed I feel there is a role negotiating peace in the middle east awaiting you!

courtesy: heraldsun.com.au

Throw into the mix now the latest initiative (yet to begin) is the Big Bash League where T20 becomes the central focus of the domestic fixtures. The BBL has required time, effort, and resources requiring the engagement of external parties (throwing another interested party into the governance mix) only for the Argus review to come out and criticise the focus on the quick buck in T20 over the longer forms of the game. Whoops!

We still have a CEO and Board of CA who appear dysfunctional and calls for a spill of positions will not die down for a while. The self interest extends further to the state associations who rightly, left to fend for themselves, will always make development and selection decisions based on the betterment of the state teams until there is some incentive to service the national side.

Finally despite the problems in the administration of the game how much of this can be blamed for the poor performance of the A grade cricketers in the Australian team. Did it really influence Messrs Ponting, Hussey, Clarke, Haddin etc. to the point in which their performance appeared suited to levels well below first-class that Hilditch was delirious, Chappell arrogant and Nielson confused? Of course not. While not optimal, these guys have been hitting cricket balls since they were knee high to a grasshopper and have natural talent in bucket loads, they are responsible for their own performance ultimately. Plenty of cricketers from less fortunate environments then them have succeeded despite poor administrations (take for example their current opposition who had civil war to contend with also).

Despite the release of the Argus report, it will be a while before Australia can truly challenge to be top of the cricket world again. It starts with the current series followed by the coming summer. The winds of change have begun, but do not expect a hurricane.

An Open Letter to Cricket Australia

by Balanced Sports columnist Ben Roberts

Dear Cricket Australia,

As a cricket fan who grew up loving the greatest era of Australian cricket ever, throughout the 1990s and 2000s, I run the huge risk of being labelled the fairest of fair weather supporters by writing this. But I continue at this great personal risk. From now I am reneging my emotional attachment to the Australian Cricket team until further notice.

This has zero to do with the on-field exploits of the players who, despite the home loss of the Ashes and the World Cup are now faced with a need to improve, still retain my utmost respect. It has everything to do with the failure of the Cricket Australia administration.

Cricket administrators hold more power and sway than any other sports administration, and this has been a truism since W.G. Grace was in short pants. Many have received honour of the highest order in the game despite never having graced the field at the highest level. But the influence of the modern administration of Australian cricket has plunged to such a depth of crises that I struggle to understand how it can pull itself from without radical overhaul – an overhaul that appears as likely to happen as a Sachin Tendulker first ball duck.

My Sunday perusal of the sporting media has identified one decision and one practice of Cricket Australia that completely boggles my mind as to how they can be considered acceptable in themselves. This is apart from the fact Australian cricket is supposedly going through a full scale independent review into the current situation. A review that I have previously highlighted is made more toothless by the day with major decisions being made without consideration of review findings!

Cricket Australia and the Australian Cricketers Association, holding a permanent loggerhead relationship, have this week agreed to roll over their memorandum of understanding on playing conditions. In a world of consistent practice and fixtures this would be unremarkable and may evoke a little applause. But with the advent of the new Big Bash League a constant MOU focussing on getting players as much money out of the T20 cash cow as possible, coupled with an extended T20 fixture, simply shifts more money away from the first-class and List A games and into T20.

As I heard Gideon Haigh point out, you are now considered more valuable by Cricket Australia if you can slog 20 runs from 10 balls than for crafting centuries. Cricket Australia, have you not realised that the crowds and ratings are still incredibly strong for Test cricket whose quality needs a strong first-class game? Or did you go to sleep while the rest of the cricketing world watched a tremendous festival of 50 over cricket in the recent World Cup?

As a CEO James Sutherland continues to be your greatest accountant. There is no doubt that with a weak board Sutherland appears to hold you over the barrel on the basis of continued short term income results. Not a bad effort for an organisation that ostensibly is supposed to be non-profit driven. But this is the extent that Sutherland’s accounting knowledge ends, his knowledge of appropriate governance practice is seemingly non-existent as the second piece of news I came across indicates.

This far reaching (yet weakening) review is apparently being hamstrung by Sutherland’s presence at all interviews being conducted. The idea of an independent review or an audit is that an unattached set of eyes are presented with information and seek to understand why particular decisions are made. Sutherland’s presence, and therefore influence over information provided by pressurised employees being interviewed, is the final nail in the coffin of a review that has already been cut off at the knees. Clearly controlling and concerned for his future, Sutherland’s behaviour paints to me a character with less than a passing interest in honesty and transparency.

Cricket Australia, if your board had any sort of fortitude it would be holding its senior management to greater account than it is, and this is a great shame. Please look to your counterparts at the ECB, trustees of the strongest domestic game in the world, for some idea of what it means to invest for the future. I cannot stop applauding some recent decisions of the ECB, and for England fans this will continue to be reflected on the field. Based on this I need to make this step of withdrawing my emotional support for Australian cricket team until such time as there are changes at Board and CEO level.

I love cricket too much to stay away. Short of spiritual or familial pursuits it is almost unarguable that a summers day attending the cricket for me borders on perfection. My regular match day attendance will remain as the next cricket season rolls on, but when it comes to emotional investment in the national team I must hold back. This will cost me in the times of success, as I cannot permit myself to enjoy them fully under such restriction.

It has been a wonderful relationship for all these years Cricket Australia, but until you grow up we must remain only acquaintances.

Yours Previously,

Ben Roberts

Image courtesy: zimbio.com

Ben Roberts also writes at Books with Balls, where you find reviews of books that guys read.