Friday, 4 May 2012
BIG QUESTIONS - Bas Zuiderent
Wednesday, 11 April 2012
the BIG QUESTIONS interview - Binod Das (Nepal)
In the fourth in the series of BIG QUESTIONS interviews, focusing on leading associates players in period 2000-2010, Binod Das of Nepal, once recognised as the best seam bowler outside the test arena, offers his insights into development issues, the primacy of test cricket, the role of the ICC and Nepal’s lost opportunity of playing in India.
What have been the biggest changes in the game for associate players since you started your career?
The overall standards has gone up. Early in my career the ACC trophies or the associate tournaments were not that competitive but now every team has improved its standard.
How significant has the introduction of professional / semi-professional contracts been in bridging the gap between the leading associates and test nations?
Unfortunately we still haven't got a contract system in Nepal in spite of doing so well at associate level but I do believe that a contract system is essential to bridge the gap between associate and elite players. To play like a professional you need to be treated like one.
Nepal played in the inaugural season of the Intercontinental Cup. What difference would it have made to the development of cricket in Nepal had they stayed in that competition?
It would have definitely benefited the players in terms of improving their skills and talent. I don't know why we were deprived of playing that tournament after doing so well. We were able to beat UAE, Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore as well but for no real reason we lost our place in the tournament. I think this does not go well with ICC’s slogan of spreading the game and “GLOBALISATION”.
Do you think the winners of the Intercontinental Cup should get an opportunity to play a test match against the lowest ranked test nation? Is a two division test championship a good idea?
I’m sure that it would be a good way to promote test cricket because you cant have just 10 test playing nation for ever and to bring in new teams they must give associates as much exposure or even more exposure than test teams to prepare them for bigger stage. I believe the two division test championship is certainly a move in the right direction.
How important is the T20 format in spreading the game and how can associates best capitalise on this?
Since It is the shortest and most popular format T20 is very important in spreading the game all over the world. It does not require too much technical expertise so even a less capable players can compete against the better ones. In this way it gives associate players an opportunity to showcase our talent against the best the business. It is the best bet for associate nations to upset the test playing nations.
Should leading associates, and leading associate players, focus on T20 for the greatest opportunity to be competitive or should the ultimate aim remain promotion to test cricket?
I believe that if you are a good player you can play any format of the game. T20 is great fun but we must not forget that Test cricket tis the ultimate challenge and honour as a player. People might praise Suresh Raina for his heroics as a T20 player but he will never gain the respect that Tendulkar or Ponting have got until unless he plays well in tests. So its the choice that we need to make. Money or Fame? For me, a good test player can play well in T20’s but even the best T20 specialist will struggle in test cricket. So players should aim to play test cricket and this will bring success in T20.
Is Test Cricket a realistic ambition for associate nations?
I would like to believe so because if it is not there wont be any more test playing nations and I don’t think this is acceptable for cricket. So It is obvious that these associate member countries should become test playing nation sooner or later but for that to happen soon associate nation boards and players need to put in a special effort. Funding is a big factor that can help.
Nepal have an excellent record at Under 19 level. Are there any reasons why this has not been reflected in such success for the full national team?
There are many reasons including lack of a professional or semi professional structure, players’ migration for higher studies, Ex-pats playing for other countries at a higher level and lack of domestic cricket. These have all contributed to the slump in performance at senior level.
Nepal have a proud record of developing home-grown local players. Some other teams rely heavily on ex-pat players qualifying through residency or a passport. Should the ICC do more to make teams more representative?
I think the ICC and ACC have recognised this issue because only development of local players will help improve cricket in a substantial way. You cant depend on Ex-pats for a long period of time as they will not be there for ever. It is your native players that will carry you forward. So yes I do believe that a lot more work needs to be done to achieve this.
Should Nepal play in Indian domestic competitions like Namibia do in South Africa?
Absolutely. In fact it should have happened a long time ago. Had we started playing in India in 2002 or 2004, I’m sure we would have qualified for a world cup. If the ICC and ACC can help facilitate this soon, you can expect Nepal to be close to world cup participation. And I believe it will be a great help for Nepal cricket. Our cricket association needs to take the initiative and try to get us into the Indian domestic league.
ICC figures show a huge increase in player participation over the last decade. In your experience what are the most effective ways of spreading cricket to new people/communities?
For a new community or country to take up cricket they need to be provided with basic playing facilities and assistance needs to be given for their continuous development. The ICC have a huge role to play. In my view the ICC should also recruit a local administrator in all countries who would look after the local development and functioning of the board. This would be similar to the regional development manager but for each country. They would report to the ICC about continuous development.
At times, I feel associate boards are not run properly and a qualified development manager would help them function better. The ICC should also work on customising cricket as to the needs of different countries e.g. Night cricket for middle east countries and shorter formats for American countries.
What role do test nations have in raising standards and offering support to associate and affiliate nations in their region?
Their biggest contribution would be to let neighbouring associate countries play in their domestic competition. They could also help improve their domestic infrastructure and playing facilities.
Should the ICC target lucrative markets such as USA or China or give every member an equal opportunity to progress?
I feel all member countries should get an equal opportunity but the US and China markets will provide extra funds that can be used to promote cricket in other lesser developed countries. There is no harm in targeting lucrative markets but others nations should not be deprived.
What is your most cherished memory on a cricket field?
Playing the U19 world cups and beating teams like Pakistan, Bangladesh and South Africa. A win on the cricket field is always cherished.
Who is the most talented player you have played with?
There are a lot of talented players but if I have to name few, Gyanendra Malla, Paras Khadka and Sharad. There was another player who didn't play enough feel, Sandeep shrestha. But we have been blessed with many other talented players.
if you were asked to select an all time Nepal XI what would it be?
It is really tough to choose 11 players out of hundreds of very good players. Please forgive me if I miss out any fellow players or team-mates, I can only select XI. The following is based on the group of players i played with.
My all time Nepal Xl is:
1.Paresh Lohani
2.Kanishka Chaugai
3.Gyanendra Malla
4.Paras Khadka
5.Sharad Vesawkar
6.Mahboob Alam
7.Raju Khadka
8.Ganesh Shahi
9.Basant Regmi
10.Shakti Gauchan
11.Binod Das
12.Dipendra Chaudhary/ RajKumar Pradhan
What are your future aspirations in the game?
As a player my immediate aim is to do well in World Cricket league Division 4. We need to reach division 2 as soon as possible. I have attained my level 3 coaching badge so I will be involved in cricket in some capacity in future as well.
Monday, 9 April 2012
The BIG QUESTIONS interview - Tim de Leede (NL)
In the third in the series of interviews with leading Associate players in the period 2000 - 2010, Tim De Leede, of the Netherlands, shares his views on development issues, the potential of T20 to spread the game and the best Dutch XI
What have been the biggest changes in the game for associate players since you started your career?
When I started we trained once a week for six weeks before going on tour. When I finished it was four times a week.
How significant has the introduction of professional / semi-professional contracts been in bridging the gap between the leading associates and test nations?
Huge. We used to get 200 and that would be enough to win the game. Nowadays 300 is sometimes not enough. Batting standards, in particular, improve dramatically when you train a few times a week.
The ICC have increased funding for leading associates to help them become more competitive at world cups. How effective has the High Performance Programme been and what else could be done to bridge the gap?
The HPP programme is/has been fantastic for the leading associates, but unfortunately the ICC have not supported this with a long term vision regarding associate participation at World Cups. They do not complement each other which is a shame.
is the Intercontinental cup a popular competition with the players and to what extent is it crucial as a testing ground for potential promotion to test status?
Test status is the ultimate form of cricket and therefore the most difficult to be competitive in. Associates should play four day cricket and when the domestic competition is strong enough they should play two day cricket as well. But do not expect countries like Ireland to walk into Test cricket and perform as well as they have done in the 20 and 50 over formats. In the Netherlands most players are still amateur and it is difficult for them to take time off work. This means that they prefer to play the T20 and 50 over matches and competitions. So no, The Intercontinental Cup is not popular in this respect.
Do you think the winners of the Intercontinental Cup should get an opportunity to play a test match against the lowest ranked test nation? Is a two division test championship a good idea?
The winners of the Intercontinental Cup should get a match against Bangladesh and/ or Zimbabwe to judge their progression. Having a divison two is only interesting if the leading associates can field their strongest teams.
How important is the T20 format in spreading the game and how can associates best capitalise on this?
T20 can make cricket into the second biggest sport in the world. And by reducing the numbers of associates participating in the T20 World Cup the ICC have made a huge mistake. In the Netherlands T20 is the only way to keep cricket alive!
Should leading associates, and leading associate players, focus on T20 for the greatest opportunity to be competitive or should the ultimate aim remain promotion to test cricket?
They should focus on T20 and the ICC should allow at least six associates in the T20 World Cup. With the small base cricket has in The Netherlands Test cricket is not an option.
ICC figures show a huge increase in player participation over the last decade. In your experience what are the most effective ways of spreading cricket to new people/communities?
TV exposure. The Netehrlands do not get cricket on TV so few people know what it is. We have a fantastic sponsor but their focus is cricket in India and the Middle East. Fair enough, but it does not do anything for cricket at home…
Is Test Cricket a realistic ambition for associate nations?
For Ireland yes, if they can hang on to the likes of Joyce and Morgan. When the base is broad people show an interest in cricket, including TV and sponsors. After another ten years Test cricket is an option.
What role do test nations have in raising standards and offering support to associate and affiliate nations in their region?
Help them out with anything. We have been playing CB40 for two seasons now and the players have become so much better. But our under age groups go the the UK and always play good opponents and are a well looked after. Associates have to help themselves as well I guess by arranging tours and development opportunities and not waiting for the big brother to come and help.
Should the ICC target lucrative markets such as the USA or China or give every member an equal opportunity to progress?
It is all about money and the sponsors of the ICC will have indicated that they should move in to these countries for economic reasons. Fair enough, but keep supporting the smaller countries who already have a platform.
What if your most cherished memory on a cricket field?
Qualifying for World Cups was always great. But what it is all about is the friends I have made all over the world. They do not remember you as player, they remember you as a bloke.
Who is the most talented player you have played with?
Nolan Clarke and Ryan ten Doeschate stood out. A different generation but the same hunger to do well every time the walked onto a field. Internationally, Steve Tikolo.
if you were asked to select an all time Netherlands XI what would it be?
Steven Lubbers, Roland Lefebvre, Asim Khan, Nolan Clarke, Jeroen Smits, Luuk van Troost, Bas Zuiderent, Ryan ten Doeschate, Peter Cantrell, Edgar Schiferli and I would like to play myself as well…
What are your future aspirations in the game?
I coach the U12 and U13 and love that. Will do some more coaching in future but the family is the main priority.
Friday, 30 March 2012
The BIG QUESTIONS interview - Bjorn Kotze (NAM)
In the second in the series of interviews with leading Associate players in the period 2000 - 2010, Bjorn Kotze, of Namibia, shares his views on development issues, bridging the gap to the test nations and raising participation levels.
What have been the biggest changes in the game for associate players since you started your career?
The biggest change to associate cricket in the past few years has been the acceptance of a much more professional attitude towards the game. One only has to look at a team like Ireland to see the massive strides that they have made simply by adopting a professional attitude towards training, nutrition, fitness, etc.
How significant has the introduction of professional / semi-professional contracts been in bridging the gap between the leading associates and test nations?
Contracting players has definitely made a difference to the standard of skills of the associate players. Instead of only being able to practice for two or three hours after a full days work, these players can now practice and play full time which means more time spent on developing skills.
The ICC have increased funding for leading associates to help them become more competitive at world cups. How effective has the High Performance Programme been and what else could be done to bridge the gap?
When Namibia qualified for the 2003 World Cup we were included in the High Performance Programme and this made a massive difference to our cricket. Suddenly we could afford a full time coach, physio and fitness trainer. We were able to improve our training facilities and to use the funds to promote and develop the game in the country.
is the Intercontinental cup a popular competition with the players and to what extent is it crucial as a testing ground for potential promotion to test status?
The Intercontinental Cup is very popular among the players. Its probably as close to test cricket as most of the Assosiate players are ever going to get. Four day cricket tests character, fitness and stamina and this is what all players want to be measured against. And playing against the other leading associates in the world and doing well in four day cricket is a very satisfying experience.
Do you think the winners of the Intercontinental Cup should get an opportunity to play a test match against the lowest ranked test nation? Is a two division test championship a good idea?
I think its a very good idea to let the winner of the Intercontinental Cup play against one of the lower ranked test sides. It would give the players great experience of what test cricket is really like against the "big boys" and it will also be a carrot for the other associate teams to improve their games.
How important is the T20 format in spreading the game and how can associates best capitalise on this?
T20 seems to be the way forward for cricket in general at the moment. So its definitely a big draw card for the associates to improve their T20 game since its more likely that associates will be included in this format than in the other two. There are also so many T20 competitions being played around the world that its a great oppportunity for Associate players to gain valuable experience in this format in different parts of the world.
Should leading associates, and leading associate players, focus on T20 for the greatest opportunity to be competitive or should the ultimate aim remain promotion to test cricket?
For any player the ultimate goal will always be to play a test match, but realistically speaking I think T20 is the best way for an Associate side to gain access into global compititions against full member countries. Its the kind of format where anything can happen and upsets can easily occur.
Is Test Cricket a realistic ambition for associate nations?
For most associates test cricket will remain a dream that is beyond reach. In order to play test cricket there must be a competitive first class structure within the country and most associates only play first class cricket against each other. Certain associates (Ireland, Scotland, Holland) have an advantage as many of their players get to play in the county leagues in England.
ICC figures show a huge increase in player participation over the last decade. In your experience what are the most effective ways of spreading cricket to new people/communities?
The most effective way to spread cricket to a new market is to have success on the field. We saw this in Namibia prior to the 2003 World Cup. The interest in cricket sky-rocketed because of the success of our national team and our inclusion in a world event. But obviously having dedicated coaches and a well driven cricket board wich is geared towards development also play a huge role.
What role do test nations have in raising standards and offering support to associate and affiliate nations in their region?
Full test nations have a large responsibilty towards the associate nations. In Namibia the SA Cricket Board supports us pretty well by allowing us to play in one of their first class, one day and T20 competitions. I'm not sure how it works in other countries but allowing associates into certain competitions within a full member country can only benefit the associate and cricket as a whole.
Should the ICC target lucrative markets such as USA or China or give every member an equal opportunity to progress?
I think every associate has the right to the same funding and effort from the ICC. Whether you are playing for Namibia or for Hong Kong or China each player wants to achieve the ultimate goal of going to a World Cup. So each team should have the same opportunities as any other. The fact that the USA or China have such large populations does not always guarantee success as could be seen by the performance of the USA team at the recent World T20 Qaualifiers in Dubai.
What is your most cherished memory on a cricket field?
The one memeory that I will always have is the match against Scotland in 2001 in Canada during the ICC Trophy where we qualified for the 2003 World Cup. To come back from the brink of defeat in that match to actually win it and qualify was probably the single best moment of my whole career.
Who is the most talented player you have played with?
I have been fortunate enough to have a very long career and have played with some very special players. Gavin Murgatroyd was very very good in his prime and could have played for any side he wanted to. Gerrie Snyman is also incredibly talented and is one of those rare breeds who can bowl really fast and can take any attack apart with the bat as well.
How crucial has involvement in the South African domestic tournaments been for Namibia's development?
Playing in the South African Domestic competitions is absolutely vital for Namibia. If we didn't play in these competitions we would only play a handfull of games a year and there would be no opportunity to groom younger players in the longer and tougher versions of the game. It gives us an opportunity to play against high quality opposition on a regular basis in a variety of formats of the game.
What are your future aspirations in the game?
At the moment I don't really have future aspirations in cricket. I retired at the beginning of 2011. But I would like to take up umpiring at a later stage.
What have been the biggest changes in the game for associate players since you started your career?
The biggest change to associate cricket in the past few years has been the acceptance of a much more professional attitude towards the game. One only has to look at a team like Ireland to see the massive strides that they have made simply by adopting a professional attitude towards training, nutrition, fitness, etc.
How significant has the introduction of professional / semi-professional contracts been in bridging the gap between the leading associates and test nations?
Contracting players has definitely made a difference to the standard of skills of the associate players. Instead of only being able to practice for two or three hours after a full days work, these players can now practice and play full time which means more time spent on developing skills.
The ICC have increased funding for leading associates to help them become more competitive at world cups. How effective has the High Performance Programme been and what else could be done to bridge the gap?
When Namibia qualified for the 2003 World Cup we were included in the High Performance Programme and this made a massive difference to our cricket. Suddenly we could afford a full time coach, physio and fitness trainer. We were able to improve our training facilities and to use the funds to promote and develop the game in the country.
is the Intercontinental cup a popular competition with the players and to what extent is it crucial as a testing ground for potential promotion to test status?
The Intercontinental Cup is very popular among the players. Its probably as close to test cricket as most of the Assosiate players are ever going to get. Four day cricket tests character, fitness and stamina and this is what all players want to be measured against. And playing against the other leading associates in the world and doing well in four day cricket is a very satisfying experience.
Do you think the winners of the Intercontinental Cup should get an opportunity to play a test match against the lowest ranked test nation? Is a two division test championship a good idea?
I think its a very good idea to let the winner of the Intercontinental Cup play against one of the lower ranked test sides. It would give the players great experience of what test cricket is really like against the "big boys" and it will also be a carrot for the other associate teams to improve their games.
How important is the T20 format in spreading the game and how can associates best capitalise on this?
T20 seems to be the way forward for cricket in general at the moment. So its definitely a big draw card for the associates to improve their T20 game since its more likely that associates will be included in this format than in the other two. There are also so many T20 competitions being played around the world that its a great oppportunity for Associate players to gain valuable experience in this format in different parts of the world.
Should leading associates, and leading associate players, focus on T20 for the greatest opportunity to be competitive or should the ultimate aim remain promotion to test cricket?
For any player the ultimate goal will always be to play a test match, but realistically speaking I think T20 is the best way for an Associate side to gain access into global compititions against full member countries. Its the kind of format where anything can happen and upsets can easily occur.
Is Test Cricket a realistic ambition for associate nations?
For most associates test cricket will remain a dream that is beyond reach. In order to play test cricket there must be a competitive first class structure within the country and most associates only play first class cricket against each other. Certain associates (Ireland, Scotland, Holland) have an advantage as many of their players get to play in the county leagues in England.
ICC figures show a huge increase in player participation over the last decade. In your experience what are the most effective ways of spreading cricket to new people/communities?
The most effective way to spread cricket to a new market is to have success on the field. We saw this in Namibia prior to the 2003 World Cup. The interest in cricket sky-rocketed because of the success of our national team and our inclusion in a world event. But obviously having dedicated coaches and a well driven cricket board wich is geared towards development also play a huge role.
What role do test nations have in raising standards and offering support to associate and affiliate nations in their region?
Full test nations have a large responsibilty towards the associate nations. In Namibia the SA Cricket Board supports us pretty well by allowing us to play in one of their first class, one day and T20 competitions. I'm not sure how it works in other countries but allowing associates into certain competitions within a full member country can only benefit the associate and cricket as a whole.
Should the ICC target lucrative markets such as USA or China or give every member an equal opportunity to progress?
I think every associate has the right to the same funding and effort from the ICC. Whether you are playing for Namibia or for Hong Kong or China each player wants to achieve the ultimate goal of going to a World Cup. So each team should have the same opportunities as any other. The fact that the USA or China have such large populations does not always guarantee success as could be seen by the performance of the USA team at the recent World T20 Qaualifiers in Dubai.
What is your most cherished memory on a cricket field?
The one memeory that I will always have is the match against Scotland in 2001 in Canada during the ICC Trophy where we qualified for the 2003 World Cup. To come back from the brink of defeat in that match to actually win it and qualify was probably the single best moment of my whole career.
Who is the most talented player you have played with?
I have been fortunate enough to have a very long career and have played with some very special players. Gavin Murgatroyd was very very good in his prime and could have played for any side he wanted to. Gerrie Snyman is also incredibly talented and is one of those rare breeds who can bowl really fast and can take any attack apart with the bat as well.
How crucial has involvement in the South African domestic tournaments been for Namibia's development?
Playing in the South African Domestic competitions is absolutely vital for Namibia. If we didn't play in these competitions we would only play a handfull of games a year and there would be no opportunity to groom younger players in the longer and tougher versions of the game. It gives us an opportunity to play against high quality opposition on a regular basis in a variety of formats of the game.
What are your future aspirations in the game?
At the moment I don't really have future aspirations in cricket. I retired at the beginning of 2011. But I would like to take up umpiring at a later stage.
Monday, 20 February 2012
Reaction to the Woolf Review
In pugilistic vein Lord Woolf certainly didn’t pull any punches in his recent review of the ICC. It is more quotable than a volume of Oscar Wilde quips in exposing the organisation as a private members club for its ten full members rather than a governing body of an expanding global sport. The powers that be must have anticipated some cosmetic proposals that they could adopt under the banner of modernisation. Instead what Woolf delivered was a withering expose of a closed shop of ten nations serving its own needs at the expense of the 95 associate and affiliate members.
His recommendations will have been music to the ears to supporters of global development who have been pushing for such reforms for so long their voices have grown husky with fatigue. Not only does Woolf call for an expansion of full members, removing the restrictive link to test status, but he goes further and suggests the elevation of two associates by 2014. This was, and I'm paraphrasing ICC bigwigs here, way beyond his remit. He also echoes calls for the Future Tours Programme to incorporate leading associates, advocates qualification to global tournaments for all members (removing the guarantee that test countries currently enjoy) and suggests a needs based distribution of funds, with a far greater slice of the cake for development and a challenge to the existing full member dividend.
Non test development boards would have smiled broadly over their croissants and coffee as they read of the removal of artificial barriers to progression, transparent criteria for development and a more equitable funding regime. In contrast full members must have almost choked on their morning bowl of cornflakes when they read that they might lose their veto, the cliquey cronyism of the existing governance structure and the fact that their test status itself would come under review. ‘Was this not a god given right?’ they may rhetorically ask, apparently not.
It is not that Lord Woolf is a visionary or has a particular soft spot for the underdog. Afterall, he could have gone further. All of his recommendations flow logically from the premise that a global body should oversee the global game. It is the lack of such clarity of vision that has seen the ICC repeatedly give opportunities with one hand (the HPP, Intercontinental Cup, WCL) but take back with the other (reducing world cup places, refusing to consider cases for further elevation to full membership). As he candidly admits it would take a very public spirited action for existing full members to support an expansion to their ranks when they face the financial consequences of doing so. Unless such self-interest is removed decisions will never be made for the good of the sport as a whole.
The idea of removing membership categories has been bouncing around the ICC’s regional development managers for several years and Woolf adds his voice to this suggestion. It would see the removal of the affiliate category with all non full members being classed as associates, with funding dependent on meeting transparent criteria based on meeting performance and development goals set out in development plans. Such a system would provide an incentive for aspiring countries and come as a rude shock to those nations that rest on their laurels and persist in selecting teams from ageing ex-pats and passport holders to the detriment of developing local players and promoting the game to local populations.
When the WCL was introduced everyone welcomed a meritocratic structure for world cup qualification, only to see this slowly eroded by the self interest of full members and the pernicious influence of their media partners. Woolf puts these principles back at the forefront of the ICC’s prime strategic vision and reason for existence.
While delighted with the report some will feel that Woolf did not go far enough. Many would have liked to have seen all members eligible to play ODIs and T20s (some even want test cricket expanded to all members), for the review to cover the ICCs recruitment of new members and the process for electing more and specific reference to the number of participating teams in a world cup (with Woolf advocating qualification for all but not necessarily an increase in numbers). Perhaps a follow up review focusing specifically on development would be useful, though again the ICC may find the conclusions unpalatable.
Currently international cricket is divided into different categories of matches depending on the supposed quality of the teams involved. For example the top six associates play ODIs while division 2 of the WCL is awarded List A status. Below that they are just ‘internationals’. It is a similar story for the longer format of the game. Full members play tests, HPP countries play at first class level and the rest just play fixtures. But these classifications are somewhat arbitrary. Hong Kong for instance have played ODIs by virtue of the Asia Cup but have not come anywhere near getting ODI status in the conventional way. Similarly Afghanistan played in the WCL5 and then virtually the same squad played ODIs several years later. Quality is a very subjective term. The Cayman Islands played in an early season of the InterContinental Cup but are now being hopelessly outclassed in WCL5. The argument that classifications are needed to protect the brand doesn’t reflect on these anomalies.
The problem with any analysis of such issues is that commentators are not party to the discussions that the ICC have with media partners. It may be, for instance, that media partners have threatened to withdraw or drastically cut their funding if more teams play test cricket or more teams are admitted to the world cup. If this is the case then the ICC are placed in a difficult position. But they need to weigh up short term injections of capital with long term repercussions of depriving aspiring nations development opportunities. The health of the game in the longer term will depend on the number of countries playing cricket.
Sadly it is likely that Woolf’s review will be rejected by those full members who have the most to lose. India have already belittled his recommendations. But, ironically, the greater their opposition the greater credence they give to his conclusions. The ICC have a choice, they either take the brave decision to become an efficient, modern, forward thinking global body or they retain the status quo. But whatever path they choose Woolf has provided a yardstick against which they will be judged.
His recommendations will have been music to the ears to supporters of global development who have been pushing for such reforms for so long their voices have grown husky with fatigue. Not only does Woolf call for an expansion of full members, removing the restrictive link to test status, but he goes further and suggests the elevation of two associates by 2014. This was, and I'm paraphrasing ICC bigwigs here, way beyond his remit. He also echoes calls for the Future Tours Programme to incorporate leading associates, advocates qualification to global tournaments for all members (removing the guarantee that test countries currently enjoy) and suggests a needs based distribution of funds, with a far greater slice of the cake for development and a challenge to the existing full member dividend.
Non test development boards would have smiled broadly over their croissants and coffee as they read of the removal of artificial barriers to progression, transparent criteria for development and a more equitable funding regime. In contrast full members must have almost choked on their morning bowl of cornflakes when they read that they might lose their veto, the cliquey cronyism of the existing governance structure and the fact that their test status itself would come under review. ‘Was this not a god given right?’ they may rhetorically ask, apparently not.
It is not that Lord Woolf is a visionary or has a particular soft spot for the underdog. Afterall, he could have gone further. All of his recommendations flow logically from the premise that a global body should oversee the global game. It is the lack of such clarity of vision that has seen the ICC repeatedly give opportunities with one hand (the HPP, Intercontinental Cup, WCL) but take back with the other (reducing world cup places, refusing to consider cases for further elevation to full membership). As he candidly admits it would take a very public spirited action for existing full members to support an expansion to their ranks when they face the financial consequences of doing so. Unless such self-interest is removed decisions will never be made for the good of the sport as a whole.
The idea of removing membership categories has been bouncing around the ICC’s regional development managers for several years and Woolf adds his voice to this suggestion. It would see the removal of the affiliate category with all non full members being classed as associates, with funding dependent on meeting transparent criteria based on meeting performance and development goals set out in development plans. Such a system would provide an incentive for aspiring countries and come as a rude shock to those nations that rest on their laurels and persist in selecting teams from ageing ex-pats and passport holders to the detriment of developing local players and promoting the game to local populations.
When the WCL was introduced everyone welcomed a meritocratic structure for world cup qualification, only to see this slowly eroded by the self interest of full members and the pernicious influence of their media partners. Woolf puts these principles back at the forefront of the ICC’s prime strategic vision and reason for existence.
While delighted with the report some will feel that Woolf did not go far enough. Many would have liked to have seen all members eligible to play ODIs and T20s (some even want test cricket expanded to all members), for the review to cover the ICCs recruitment of new members and the process for electing more and specific reference to the number of participating teams in a world cup (with Woolf advocating qualification for all but not necessarily an increase in numbers). Perhaps a follow up review focusing specifically on development would be useful, though again the ICC may find the conclusions unpalatable.
Currently international cricket is divided into different categories of matches depending on the supposed quality of the teams involved. For example the top six associates play ODIs while division 2 of the WCL is awarded List A status. Below that they are just ‘internationals’. It is a similar story for the longer format of the game. Full members play tests, HPP countries play at first class level and the rest just play fixtures. But these classifications are somewhat arbitrary. Hong Kong for instance have played ODIs by virtue of the Asia Cup but have not come anywhere near getting ODI status in the conventional way. Similarly Afghanistan played in the WCL5 and then virtually the same squad played ODIs several years later. Quality is a very subjective term. The Cayman Islands played in an early season of the InterContinental Cup but are now being hopelessly outclassed in WCL5. The argument that classifications are needed to protect the brand doesn’t reflect on these anomalies.
The problem with any analysis of such issues is that commentators are not party to the discussions that the ICC have with media partners. It may be, for instance, that media partners have threatened to withdraw or drastically cut their funding if more teams play test cricket or more teams are admitted to the world cup. If this is the case then the ICC are placed in a difficult position. But they need to weigh up short term injections of capital with long term repercussions of depriving aspiring nations development opportunities. The health of the game in the longer term will depend on the number of countries playing cricket.
Sadly it is likely that Woolf’s review will be rejected by those full members who have the most to lose. India have already belittled his recommendations. But, ironically, the greater their opposition the greater credence they give to his conclusions. The ICC have a choice, they either take the brave decision to become an efficient, modern, forward thinking global body or they retain the status quo. But whatever path they choose Woolf has provided a yardstick against which they will be judged.
Thursday, 9 February 2012
The Big Questions Interview - Thomas Odoyo (KEN)
In the first of a series of interviews with leading Associate players in the period 2000 - 2010, Thomas Odoyo, of Kenya, shares his views on development issues, bridging the gap to the test nations, Kenya's stagnation after the 2003 World Cup and the impact of T20.
Thomas is a former Associate player of the year, represented the Africa XI and is the leading associate wicket taker in ODIs.
What have been the biggest changes in the game for associate players since you started your career?
The biggest change is that more associate players are playing the game professionally, unlike in the past where most of the players used to play part time.
How significant has the introduction of professional / semi-professional contracts been in bridging the gap between the leading associates and test nations?
I dont think the significance of being professionals and semi pro will be fully felt too as long as the associate nations are restricted to only playing test teams in the big tournaments. A formula has got to be found whereby the top associates get to play test teams more often. That is the only way the associate nations will be able to narrow the gap.
The ICC have increased funding for leading associates to help them become more competitive at world cups. How effective has the High Performance Programme been and what else could be done to bridge the gap?
The funding obviously does a lot in terms of preparations for the world cup. The High Performance Program is a good thing. However, growth in cricket needs to be a continous programme. It shouldn’t just start again after each World Cup.
Is the Intercontinental cup a popular competition with the players and to what extent is it crucial as a testing ground for potential promotion to test status?
It is popular with the players but I think the home boards should be encouraged to start the longer format in their leagues so that they adapt easily to the longer version. It does not make sense playing two intercon. matches in a year and then be expected to produce cricketers who will compete with test nations who play it throughout the year in their domestic leagues.
Do you think the winners of the Intercontinental Cup should get an opportunity to play a test match against the lowest ranked test nation? Is a two division test championship a good idea?
I support the idea of a two division test championship as it will give the top ranked associates the opportunity to regularly play the test teams. The idea of the winners of the intercon playing the lowest ranked test team is a good incentive to make the players aim higher than just having the bragging rights and the money that comes with winning it.
Should leading associates, and leading associate players, focus on T20 for the greatest opportunity to be competitive or should the ultimate aim remain promotion to test cricket?
The ultimate aim should always be test cricket. I don’t think we will produce good cricketers by focusing only on T20. A cricketer still needs skills to prosper in T20 and i dont think they will have those skills by just swinging their bats. they need all the necessary attributes of cricket.
Is Test Cricket a realistic ambition for associate nations?
Test cricket is a realistic ambition as long as the home boards also make an effort to achieve that and not just wait for the ICC to fund them. Governments should be involved at some level to help spread it easily.
ICC figures show a huge increase in player participation over the last decade. In your experience what are the most effective ways of spreading cricket to new people/communities?
The associate nations should be encouraged to try and keep their retired players in the game to help them spread the game to new communities. The government can also help in this respect by encouraging schools to take up the sport.
What prevented Kenya from progressing after reaching the semi-finals of the World Cup in 2003?
What prevented Kenya from progressing was greed by officials who thought that cricket in Kenya would receive more funding and so started fighting for positions, forgetting that the game had to progress. After the world cup in 2003 players stayed in the cold for 2 years. In the process some players who could have hanged in there for a while left the game and took up more secure jobs.
A problem with Kenyan cricket is that it being played by the majority black community professionally but is run by the minority asian population who play at an amateur level. Another very crucial aspect is the lack of proper development structures.
What is your most cherished memory on a cricket field?
My cherised moment is playing in a semi-final of a world cup and winning the associate player of the year award.
Who is the most talented player you have played with?
There are many talented players but I’d say Steve Tikolo because I have seen most of his innings live and i have seen him take on some of the best bowling attacks in the world.
What are your future aspirations in the game?
My future aspiration is one day to be able to give back to my country in any capacity.
Thomas is a former Associate player of the year, represented the Africa XI and is the leading associate wicket taker in ODIs.
What have been the biggest changes in the game for associate players since you started your career?
The biggest change is that more associate players are playing the game professionally, unlike in the past where most of the players used to play part time.
How significant has the introduction of professional / semi-professional contracts been in bridging the gap between the leading associates and test nations?
I dont think the significance of being professionals and semi pro will be fully felt too as long as the associate nations are restricted to only playing test teams in the big tournaments. A formula has got to be found whereby the top associates get to play test teams more often. That is the only way the associate nations will be able to narrow the gap.
The ICC have increased funding for leading associates to help them become more competitive at world cups. How effective has the High Performance Programme been and what else could be done to bridge the gap?
The funding obviously does a lot in terms of preparations for the world cup. The High Performance Program is a good thing. However, growth in cricket needs to be a continous programme. It shouldn’t just start again after each World Cup.
Is the Intercontinental cup a popular competition with the players and to what extent is it crucial as a testing ground for potential promotion to test status?
It is popular with the players but I think the home boards should be encouraged to start the longer format in their leagues so that they adapt easily to the longer version. It does not make sense playing two intercon. matches in a year and then be expected to produce cricketers who will compete with test nations who play it throughout the year in their domestic leagues.
Do you think the winners of the Intercontinental Cup should get an opportunity to play a test match against the lowest ranked test nation? Is a two division test championship a good idea?
I support the idea of a two division test championship as it will give the top ranked associates the opportunity to regularly play the test teams. The idea of the winners of the intercon playing the lowest ranked test team is a good incentive to make the players aim higher than just having the bragging rights and the money that comes with winning it.
Should leading associates, and leading associate players, focus on T20 for the greatest opportunity to be competitive or should the ultimate aim remain promotion to test cricket?
The ultimate aim should always be test cricket. I don’t think we will produce good cricketers by focusing only on T20. A cricketer still needs skills to prosper in T20 and i dont think they will have those skills by just swinging their bats. they need all the necessary attributes of cricket.
Is Test Cricket a realistic ambition for associate nations?
Test cricket is a realistic ambition as long as the home boards also make an effort to achieve that and not just wait for the ICC to fund them. Governments should be involved at some level to help spread it easily.
ICC figures show a huge increase in player participation over the last decade. In your experience what are the most effective ways of spreading cricket to new people/communities?
The associate nations should be encouraged to try and keep their retired players in the game to help them spread the game to new communities. The government can also help in this respect by encouraging schools to take up the sport.
What prevented Kenya from progressing after reaching the semi-finals of the World Cup in 2003?
What prevented Kenya from progressing was greed by officials who thought that cricket in Kenya would receive more funding and so started fighting for positions, forgetting that the game had to progress. After the world cup in 2003 players stayed in the cold for 2 years. In the process some players who could have hanged in there for a while left the game and took up more secure jobs.
A problem with Kenyan cricket is that it being played by the majority black community professionally but is run by the minority asian population who play at an amateur level. Another very crucial aspect is the lack of proper development structures.
What is your most cherished memory on a cricket field?
My cherised moment is playing in a semi-final of a world cup and winning the associate player of the year award.
Who is the most talented player you have played with?
There are many talented players but I’d say Steve Tikolo because I have seen most of his innings live and i have seen him take on some of the best bowling attacks in the world.
What are your future aspirations in the game?
My future aspiration is one day to be able to give back to my country in any capacity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)