The ECB never should have flirted with the IPL
The Daily Telegraph, 28th March 2009
Having the future on your side is the dream business model. That success seems inevitable, that the tide of history is with you, that to resist you would be pointless and counter-productive – these are the goals of every spin-doctor, politician, businessman and entrepreneur. ‘Oppose me and you will be frozen out’ has been the cornerstone of corporate bullying since business began.
Lalit Modi has proved the master of this myth of inevitability. This week both English and South African cricket genuflected before an IPL that was homeless and potentially helpless. Why? What lasting good would an English IPL – even the phrase is internally contradictory – bring to English cricket? Would it enhance our chances of winning the Ashes? Would it improve cricket in our state schools? Would it bring into our game lasting money and broader support?
In truth, an English IPL may not have done any of these things. More likely, it would have been like throwing a large piece of tracing paper onto a fading log fire. Certainly, there would have been an initial burst of flames and illumination, the crackle and spit of superficial combustion. But soon afterwards the fading embers underneath would have been revealed, not even slightly reignited – but charred, burnt-out and more resistant than ever to being brought back into lasting flames.
By the time the closing Bollywood tune had been played out, the last bedraggled piece of IPL tinsel had been disentangled from our Test grounds, and the final cheerleader removed her heavy make-up, English cricket would not have moved an inch closer to its long-term ambitions.
Perhaps some counties, as Surrey have argued, would have been able to fill their grounds and their coffers. But has it comes to this? That we are willing to shuffle around an entire Ashes summer in order to appease an Indian entrepreneur who has shown little or no interest in the health of English cricket?
It is worth adding that I am not an opponent of the Indian Premier League. I wish it every success. But I am more concerned with the state of English cricket and the state of world cricket. To my mind, though apparently not in the minds of those who count, the success of the IPL’s second season is a peripheral matter, to say the least.
There are two questions prompted by the rush to help the IPL. First, was saying ‘Yes, we’d love to help,’ a good negotiating position? Secondly, why did we want to ‘help’ in the first place?
Because both England and South Africa publically threw their hats in the ring, the IPL was able to present itself as cherry picking between the two. I cannot be the only English sports fan who was insulted by Modi first saying the weather in England is fine in April, and then arguing that he’d chosen South Africa because of the climate. Did the long-range forecast change overnight?
No, Modi wanted to achieve the privileged negotiating position of being able to play off rival bids by England and South Africa. When you only have one potential buyer, the salesman is helpless and the buyer can name his price and his terms. But with two rivals bidding, the salesman can play one off against the other. So it was essential from Modi’s point of view that he got England into the race.
There was talk from the ECB about needing to help the IPL in its hour of need. Surely the more pressing concern is helping English cricket and redressing the international balance of power towards a healthier equipoise?
World cricket first. If the ECB really wanted to help the international game, their first phone call should have been to South Africa. (Who knows, perhaps Giles Clarke made the call behind closed doors anyway?) ‘Let’s cut Modi out of this,’ he might have begun. ‘We’ll let you host the IPL in South Africa while we focus on the Ashes – but on certain conditions. We all need the IPL contractually to agree to consider what we (the other cricket boards) want the world game to look like – in terms of scheduling, grass-roots investment and future IPL time-windows. If they don’t agree to our demands, they can hold the IPL in Reykjavik – but do check the forecast.’
The non-Indian cricketing community has been moaning for years about the balance of money and power swinging too far towards India and the IPL. Here was the perfect opportunity to bring them back into line. By negotiating in tandem, South Africa and England could have represented the real interests of world cricket – not just propped up a travelling circus of cricketing glamour and quick cash.
How about English cricket? What is it that our game needs? My three goals would be stability, sound judgement and playing success. After the embarrassment of the Stanford saga the last thing English cricket needs is another mix up with transitory cash. The first rule of economics is that money which appears from nowhere can disappear just as fast. We should be shoring up the fabric of our game – from grass roots to Test team – not chasing the next new thing.
At the top, England has suffered serious instability with coaches and management. We have had four captains – Vaughan, Collingwood, Pietersen and Strauss – inside one year. Meanwhile, the team has won one game all winter.
The ability to prioritize is central to good leadership in any sphere. English cricket should take a collective intake of breath, steady its nerve, and focus its concentration and energy towards beating Australia. The IPL, and all its baubles, can find its own way.