The Times - Abandoned Pakistan cricket tour shows dangers of player power and a weak board
There was puzzlement in the voice of Ramiz Raja, the chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board, as though he couldn’t quite work out what was going on. The issue was the cancellation of England’s tour to Pakistan and a conversation with his opposite number, Ian Watmore. “He appeared as if the decision was out of his hands, that there were other influencers who really made the call in the end on his behalf,” Ramiz said. The only thing he did not add, for good measure, was: “***?”
I am reasonably well versed in the subcontinent by now and understand fairly well, I hope, the differences of cricketing culture and approach between East and West, but it was fascinating to listen to Ramiz on Tuesday to get a sense, again, of how others see us (it’s not pretty by the way). Time and again he used phrases like “western bloc” and “western mentality” in discussing the cricketing divide and how we do not understand the realities on the ground in the subcontinent.
He was right, of course, on this particular issue. If the game’s governing body in England does not understand much beyond its narrow walls, then there are also two strands at play here that outsiders would find incomprehensible: the notion of player power and the weakness of the ECB, both of which are central to an understanding of how decisions such as these can come about.
According to the ECB, individual players were not consulted, but the Professional Cricketers’ Association (PCA), Team England Player Partnership and England Women Player Partnership were, and these were key. How far they had consulted members is moot, but it is hard to think that they did not consult senior playing voices.
Two factors have made the players far more powerful than previously. The first is money, and the way it is distributed, and the second is opportunity. More money has allowed for the players’ advisers, such as the PCA, to be better organised and emboldened in negotiations. The way money is distributed, by a huge retainer contract rather than loaded towards match time, means that the incentives are skewed away from having to play.
Greater opportunity outside of international cricket, through franchised T20 leagues, means the players hold the whip hand. Bizarrely, the ECB has allowed a situation where it, as the employer, has washed its hands of its contracted players for two months of the year during the Indian Premier League (which became longer than two months this year, with players unavailable for the New Zealand series because of it). It has conceded this because it fears the consequences if it takes on the players. Players have new options beyond international cricket.
The results of player power can be seen around the dressing room too. Ed Smith, a bold national selector, upset one or two senior players with his views, decisions and manner. There is no national selector now.
Though an international player once himself, Ramiz would know that player power is not so firmly entrenched in Pakistan. Along with India, Pakistan is one of two full-member nations of the ICC that does not have a player association. Of course, India’s big-name players are powerful but they do not speak as a bloc generally, nor do the less significant names have an association working on their behalf. Pakistan’s players have no representation.
In general, the growing importance of the players’ voice is a good thing. Players deserve to be well remunerated and well looked after, and often their instincts for the game are sound. The days of players being treated like cattle are gone, which is entirely right. In this instance, though, the decision made on their behalf is narrow-minded and selfish.
At the same time that the players have become more powerful, so some governing bodies have become weaker. The ICC, the game’s supposedly ultimate powerbroker, has been reduced to an events-organising company. It runs its properties well — World Cups, World Test Championships and the like — but has little standing where the game’s moral issues are concerned and little influence over the game’s direction. The ICC has had an acting chief executive since July.
In its decision-making this week, the ECB has been weak beyond measure. When the journalist Peter Oborne went on television on Tuesday to eviscerate its decision on Pakistan, he mocked the chairman, Watmore, with the moniker “Invisible Ian”. Watmore has been missing in action, nowhere to be seen, when the decision to abandon Pakistan needed to be explained. Hiding behind a poorly drafted press release is not good enough.
There is precious little feel for the world game on the ECB. Among the non-executives, the only person with any cricketing experience is Lucy Pearson, who played for England between 1996 and 2005 and has since had a distinguished career in education. Andrew Strauss sits on the board but in a non-voting capacity.
A board needs broad-based expertise, and there are those with experiences in law enforcement, banking, private equity, corporate law and accountancy but the lack of feel for or knowledge of the game is apparent.
Its performance shows English cricket in a poor light. It has done significant damage to an already low reputation and ruined a relationship with a full-member nation, Pakistan, who have been gracious visitors to this country in five out of the past six summers. While England and Pakistan relations have not always been good on the cricket field, they have been lately and, as Ramiz has pointed out, the links for Pakistan with England are of a different emotional level from, say, New Zealand or Australia. They feel totally let down.
Player power and ECB board weakness were the driving forces behind England’s aborted tour to South Africa last winter, as they have been here. It was reported in The Guardian recently, that during the discussions around the South Africa issue, the chief-executive, Tom Harrison, who has more feel for the game than most in his organisation, sent Ashley Giles, the director of cricket, an email asking him who exactly was running the show. It is a pertinent question to be asking again this week.
Nagin Dance
