With almost 90 per cent of ICC revenues coming from Indian companies, BCCI can truly be called boss, and despite regular cribbing about stadia, facilities, weather, travel etc. at world events, the revenue is shared in a manner that is best for all member countries
India players celebrate their win over Namibia at the Arun Jaitley Stadium in New Delhi on Thursday. Pic/PTI
Is there a world event in any sport without some controversy? It’s impossible to have one in the modern age, where eyeballs and increasing followers matter more than the authenticity of a story. Anytime a world event is in a country which is not on the best of terms with the so-called developed world, they will find questions asked by the media of the developed world about everything. How they got the right to host the event, how the stadia are not ready nor are the facilities good for the media there, how the weather would not be conducive to the athletes from the developed country, food, travel, athletes’ village, everything will be criticised. It’s as if only they can host and deliver world events.
Has anybody ever questioned why there are only 4 majors in Tennis and Golf? In Golf out of the four majors there are three in the USA itself. The first major happens in early April and the last major takes place in August. So only during the summer of the developed countries do the Golfing majors take place. Why should there not be at least two if not three majors in the 7 months between the end of the fourth major and the beginning of the Augusta Masters? There could be one in Southern America or in the Gulf or Far East or even in the Indian subcontinent.
Tennis can have extra major
Similarly, there could be a tennis major played in the gap between the end of the US Open in early September to the start of the Australian Open in the third week of January. It hasn’t happened because there aren’t enough administrators with the courage and conviction to take on the establishment. There’s no NKP Salve, Jagmohan Dalmiya and IS Bindra to question with reasoned arguments why the Cricket World Cup was held only in England. If it is called the World Cup, then it should be played in the other countries where cricket is played and that’s how the iron grip of England and Australia was broken. Their veto power was taken away, and the ICC became a truly democratic body.
India’s massive following
Today it is India, which is ruling the roost, thanks to the incredible following the game has in the country which in turn fuels the broadcasters to bid humongous sums of money to bag the telecast rights. With almost 90% of ICC revenues coming from sponsorships by Indian companies or by corporates run by Indians overseas, the BCCI can truly be called the boss. It’s a benevolent boss though as despite regular cribbing, the revenue is shared in a manner that is best required by all other member countries.
When England and Australia ruled the roost, they were mainly concerned with their cricket and did precious little to promote the game elsewhere. They invited and toured other member countries pretty much at their whims and fancies and their top players often took a break from touring these countries. Yet the feeling of entitlement because of the past power still pervades in their dealings with countries who they feel are commercially not good for them. Why else has there not been even one Test match in their countries against Afghanistan? The Afghan players are recruited for their franchise-based cricket, but when it comes to hosting the Afghan cricket team the response has been sluggish and lukewarm, to say the least. They will have them for the World Cups but not for a bilateral series. That’s why when their guys talk about responsibility by those in power now, it sounds hollow and is laughed at.
Yes, there’s always room for improvement in any organisation but don’t point only at that room and ignore the magnificent structure that has been built.
Professional Management Group
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
