Cricket is administered very differently to other sports with an international footprint, such as football, rugby league and rugby union.
All those other sports operate with players from all the different countries earning similar salaries (from clubs or central employers), with the sports being run on a multi-lateral, not bilateral basis.
Cricket is different. The majority of the TV money comes from private networks in India, and that country's cricket board has chosen to use that to exert a stranglehold over world cricket, with each other board grovelling to receive bilateral deals from the BCCI.
In football, the TV rights which fuel international competition are sold for the highest prices in Japan and the USA, even ahead of England and Germany, but there is no redistribution of FIFA funds to the Japanese and American federations. But in cricket, the high-spending BCCI relies on ICC handouts to balance its books, as its own self-published finances from multiple years demonstrate.
But India's behaviour causes endless problems. For years they refused to accept DRS. They insist on bilateral scheduling to prevent the other nations from obtaining power by collective bargaining. They schedule the IPL right across the entire West Indian home international cricket season.
In 2007-8, when they lost the Sydney Test after the Monkeygate scandal, India somehow threatened to go home early citing "unsportsmanlike" behaviour by Australia. They never forgave umpire Steve Bucknor, and in 2011 their revolting behaviour against umpire Daryl Harper led to him pulling out of his own farewell Test in Dominica.
When India objected to Cricket South Africa appointing Haroon Lorgat at its CEO in 2012-13 they actually literally bankrupted Cricket South Africa (and multiple small vendors) by shortening the tour to cancel the Third Test at Cape Town. (This also caused huge embarrassment for New Zealand Cricket, which had scheduled matches with India in good faith without the BCCI telling them that they were supposed to be playing at Cape Town at the time.)
And finally, of course, in 2021 the Indian team refused to play the Fifth Test at The Oval and went home, because they wanted a break before the next part of the IPL.
Cricket finds itself in a bind. The English and Australian boards pay their players around 4 times as much as their peers who play international rugby union and rugby league earn. Which is 10 times as much as the other countries apart from India pay their players.
Cricket Boards around the world are now addicted to Indian money, and also allow players to take up lucrative T20 contracts to increase their earnings.
But still the BCCI and Indian fans are not satisfied. We hear endless talk of a year-round IPL. The BCCI refuses to play Pakistan, yet unlike in other sports the ICC does not make them forfeit the series they refuse to play.
In essence India wields its power in an aggressive and unpopular way, and it is my belief that even its closest cricketing allies loathe them. Most of us in the SENA countries know exactly what the SENA players who play IPL think of India and the IPL: they view themselves as selling themselves for a fantastic payday, in a place they are prepared to tolerate for a couple of months each year because of the money on offer.
So what would happen if India left?
Well, the current Australia team has 10 players over 30 and a teenager. I believe that almost all the older players would go to play year-round IPL. But the result would be that, like England and South Africa, an exciting team of youngsters would emerge and replace them.
Currently good rugby league or Australian Rules footballers earn around A$400,000 per year, while their former team-mates who became international cricketers earn $2 million plus IPL money. The gap would obviously narrow if veterans headed off to year-round IPL and the Indian money evaporated.
I think that the ICC would very quickly turn cricket into an EPL style-model. It would put all international cricketers from the remaining nations onto ICC contracts banded from US$100,000 per year to $200,000 per year to $400,000 per year to $600,000 per year, plus T20 money.
Suddenly we would have a 4 year home and away World Test Championship featuring all teams, with no bilaterally-arranged series at all. The ODI World Cup would also be 4 yearly, with the T20 one every two years. All bilateral series would be played under the ICC banner.
The best players from ANY nation could now be on a $600,000 contract plus T20 money. A big drop for English and Australian players - but still more than their oval-ball friends earn.
When you look at cricket's convicted fixers, it is obvious that players from poorer-paying nations top up their meagre earnings by fixing. A football-style model of centralised TV sales and ICC contracting of players would hopefully end that scourge.
India has given cricket marvellous players down the years, and continues to. Unfortunately, I look at the centralised, multi-lateral model that I am proposing and I think that it would be much better than what we currently have. Not slightly better - much, much better.
All those other sports operate with players from all the different countries earning similar salaries (from clubs or central employers), with the sports being run on a multi-lateral, not bilateral basis.
Cricket is different. The majority of the TV money comes from private networks in India, and that country's cricket board has chosen to use that to exert a stranglehold over world cricket, with each other board grovelling to receive bilateral deals from the BCCI.
In football, the TV rights which fuel international competition are sold for the highest prices in Japan and the USA, even ahead of England and Germany, but there is no redistribution of FIFA funds to the Japanese and American federations. But in cricket, the high-spending BCCI relies on ICC handouts to balance its books, as its own self-published finances from multiple years demonstrate.
But India's behaviour causes endless problems. For years they refused to accept DRS. They insist on bilateral scheduling to prevent the other nations from obtaining power by collective bargaining. They schedule the IPL right across the entire West Indian home international cricket season.
In 2007-8, when they lost the Sydney Test after the Monkeygate scandal, India somehow threatened to go home early citing "unsportsmanlike" behaviour by Australia. They never forgave umpire Steve Bucknor, and in 2011 their revolting behaviour against umpire Daryl Harper led to him pulling out of his own farewell Test in Dominica.
When India objected to Cricket South Africa appointing Haroon Lorgat at its CEO in 2012-13 they actually literally bankrupted Cricket South Africa (and multiple small vendors) by shortening the tour to cancel the Third Test at Cape Town. (This also caused huge embarrassment for New Zealand Cricket, which had scheduled matches with India in good faith without the BCCI telling them that they were supposed to be playing at Cape Town at the time.)
And finally, of course, in 2021 the Indian team refused to play the Fifth Test at The Oval and went home, because they wanted a break before the next part of the IPL.
Cricket finds itself in a bind. The English and Australian boards pay their players around 4 times as much as their peers who play international rugby union and rugby league earn. Which is 10 times as much as the other countries apart from India pay their players.
Cricket Boards around the world are now addicted to Indian money, and also allow players to take up lucrative T20 contracts to increase their earnings.
But still the BCCI and Indian fans are not satisfied. We hear endless talk of a year-round IPL. The BCCI refuses to play Pakistan, yet unlike in other sports the ICC does not make them forfeit the series they refuse to play.
In essence India wields its power in an aggressive and unpopular way, and it is my belief that even its closest cricketing allies loathe them. Most of us in the SENA countries know exactly what the SENA players who play IPL think of India and the IPL: they view themselves as selling themselves for a fantastic payday, in a place they are prepared to tolerate for a couple of months each year because of the money on offer.
So what would happen if India left?
Well, the current Australia team has 10 players over 30 and a teenager. I believe that almost all the older players would go to play year-round IPL. But the result would be that, like England and South Africa, an exciting team of youngsters would emerge and replace them.
Currently good rugby league or Australian Rules footballers earn around A$400,000 per year, while their former team-mates who became international cricketers earn $2 million plus IPL money. The gap would obviously narrow if veterans headed off to year-round IPL and the Indian money evaporated.
I think that the ICC would very quickly turn cricket into an EPL style-model. It would put all international cricketers from the remaining nations onto ICC contracts banded from US$100,000 per year to $200,000 per year to $400,000 per year to $600,000 per year, plus T20 money.
Suddenly we would have a 4 year home and away World Test Championship featuring all teams, with no bilaterally-arranged series at all. The ODI World Cup would also be 4 yearly, with the T20 one every two years. All bilateral series would be played under the ICC banner.
The best players from ANY nation could now be on a $600,000 contract plus T20 money. A big drop for English and Australian players - but still more than their oval-ball friends earn.
When you look at cricket's convicted fixers, it is obvious that players from poorer-paying nations top up their meagre earnings by fixing. A football-style model of centralised TV sales and ICC contracting of players would hopefully end that scourge.
India has given cricket marvellous players down the years, and continues to. Unfortunately, I look at the centralised, multi-lateral model that I am proposing and I think that it would be much better than what we currently have. Not slightly better - much, much better.
Let's see how Pakistanis then react to news that the matches they watch at home are being used to finance the Afghanistan cricket team and their board. You know, the team you very interestingly excluded from your packages. Has the Taliban banned cricket on TV. Do they not watch cricket in Afg?
