Cricket's call for change

Hardly had Nepali cricket fans recovered from jolt due to ICC confirmation that the next two World Cups will be 10-team events, they were given another shock. The news of a few former national cricketers moving the Supreme Court against the activities of Cricket Association of Nepal has surprised many, at the same time raised quite a few eyebrows too.

Much has already been said by the players and officials from Ireland, the most successful of the associate nations in past two World Cups, along with Scotland, Kenya, Canada and other nations about the associates being shown the exit doors. Whether it moves the money minded ICC or not; Whether it has excluded the 'world' from the World Cup or not; Whether that decision will mar the reputation of cricket across the globe or not, the single decision has killed the aspirations of cricketers from the emerging nations. And that includes Nepali players too.

However, the major disappointment, and one which could have long term bearing on the sport, comes from the players' moving court. The disappointment is not merely that the cricket governing organisation has been challenged. The disappointment is due to the fact that some people deemed it necessary that judiciary be involved in sport.

The petitioners have claimed that CAN has never conducted election of its executive committee and the association lacks financial transparency. They also claim that CAN has been exploiting players. We know that these are modern times and transparency is a must. And exploitation? That's a word we don't even want to hear in the sector.

However, one must admit that not everything is fine in our cricket. Less than five years of the present executive committee taking over, a sense of disenchantment has grown in. Talk to those who've been in the association for several years – the ones who have cricketing background - they'd tell you that the political appointees disturb the work. Talk to the so called political appointees… well, they're never available for cricket talk. They can give you enough on why the government formation is difficult and constitution may never be drafted. Cricket is definitely not on their agenda.

If you talk to the players in the national cricket team, and if they have confidence in you, you do hear some murmurs. Dissatisfaction is there. Complains are there, but they never go on record, to save their career. Maybe CAN authorities have not noticed but that affects their motivation during matches too.

And now CAN has a court case to settle.

Time to worry? Maybe not.

Maybe this is an opportunity for those who really want to clean up cricket to come clean themselves. If everything is fine, this could be an opportunity to say so.  If not, this could be an opportunity to correct it. Transparency has not, and never will hurt development.

On the other hand, a few questions perhaps need to be asked to the plaintiffs. Court should be consulted after every other system fails. Was there no alternative left? Or were they in a hurry to get popular? Or how does it help when some from the plaintiffs openly talk only against the CAN President? Is it only him who runs the show? How do you ensure that this is not being vindictive?

This also raises a question. Could those, who moved court, not have stayed within a system and tried to improve it, rather than challenging the system itself? It is a good idea to get into the system and try to cleanse it. Maybe that helps everyone.

Now these are former cricketers and we should give them due respect. But they also need to prove their motive here. If some of these are included in CAN in near future, will they abandon this 'crusade' as they might like to call it?

The questions are many but the answer is simple. Cricket needs to come clean after all the hullabaloo.

(The article originally appeared in The Kathmandu Post, 9th April, 2011, in a weekly column of Yours Truly)

Minnows' World Cup? Not quite yet

For once, the cricket fans in Nepal, and perhaps in some other associate members of International Cricket Council, are not very happy with Shahid Afridi, the Pakistani captain and all-rounder. For once, we do not want to cherish his five-for. For once, we do not want to be a part of his match turning performance. For, he blew up the possible juggernaut of associate members, a fairytale, we could have witnessed at this World Cup.

If it was not for his superb bowling efforts, Canada could have defeated Pakistan to create second miracle at this edition of the Cup. They could have pushed the cause started by Ireland, for ICC to reconsider its plans of hosting mere 10 nations at the WC 2015. Now we can't blame Afridi for that. He's paid in cash by his board and in respect by hundreds of thousands to do that job, thrashing the minnows and remain competitive with the top teams.

The Irish team defeating the Englishmen has been dubbed as one of the biggest upsets in the cricketing history, akin to Greece taking the Euro Cup football in 2004 or Boris Becker winning the Wimbledon in 1985, when he was just 17. True, it was one of the biggest shocks in World Cup history. This can also be assumed by the fact that, the bookmakers were ready to offer mere 400-1 odds for the relative minnows, trying their fate with the English team that had tied a match only a few days ago, against the mighty Indian team, at 338 runs.

The Ireland team chasing down the biggest target in Cricket World Cup history, at 328, is also a thumping challenge to the ICC executive board, which approved that 2015 CWC will consist of only 10 permanent members and associate members cannot participate in the tournament. Then, the decision had drawn flak from associate members and we'd started questioning if the acronym ICC actually stood for International Commerce Council and if the term 'development' did not actually feature in ICC dictionary.

But then, we associates hardly have a loud voice. At the time the world bodies of sport are lost in the cacophony of ringing at the cash counter collections, we, the associate members are regarded as the recipients, getting donations from them – the cost centers and not profit centers.

But now, the Irish cricket team, led by one of the best ODI innings ever from Kevin O'Brien, has given a thunder in our voice. The defeat of English team at the hands of Ireland is similar to Mike Tyson being defeated by little known James Buster Douglas in 1990. Never had a boxing ring heard such a loud thud, when Douglas knocked out the then undisputed world champion, Tyson in Tokyo. The thud, to many, is still deafening. It was a thud of minnows arriving. It was a thud of a new world order coming. The Irish team has created a similar thud. And the noise should be heard by those who sit in the executive board meeting of ICC. For, we, the associate members of ICC popularize the sport, make it reach millions more than it already has. We make it an international sport and not a game played just by former British Colonies.

We wish just that a few more minnows should replicate what Irish team has done. We need more O'Briens, more Douglas and there would be a day when we would see Paras Khadkas, Gyanendra Mallas and Binod Dases playing at the world stage.

The famous songster, Bob Dylan, in his song had asked once: How many ears must one man have, before he can hear people cry...

We hope ICC has ears and can hear.

Because, another song from the great man says: Please get out of the new one, if you can't lend your hand... For the times they are a-changin'.

Four years after

And the World Cup has begun. It is four years after the almighty Aussies conquered the Caribbean, making it three cups in a row – exerting the dominance never ever seen in cricket ever. It is four years after, we searched for a team Australia would meet in the final. And four years after, we see that the Cup is wide open, up for grabs for at least four top teams, if they can manage consistency throughout the month and half long celebrations.

But there are deeper questions that surround the ICC's 49-match, 43-day, 13-venue event, this time around. Yes, it is being organized in the biggest money collecting bowl for cricket in the world – the subcontinent we are a part of. Yes, it is perhaps the last time we'd see the two of the best batsmen of our times – Sachin Tendulkar and Ricky Ponting, playing in multi-nation tourney. But this is also a time where ODI format is being questioned, for its worth, especially in the wake of the T20 onslaught.

Unlike in the past, the Cup's 10th edition - even before it began - was labelled as the decider for what course the 50-over game will take in future. And in all the likelihood, everything that happens in this edition will have consequences impacting cricket's future, almost immediately. The ICC now calls this World Cup, "The Cup that Counts", which gives enough indication how important it could be. More so for non-Test playing countries like Nepal, since they've been preparing for past decade to be able to play in the World Cup under this format. Imperative that our administrators watch every action that takes place during the World Cup, both on and off the field.

Since the 1980s, ODI World Cup has kept cricket expanding and has been the best advertisement for cricket in non cricket playing nations. Netherlands, Canada and Kenya playing at the biggest stage in this format have kept our boys putting in that extra yard of pace, that extra bit of power in their shots, in their backyards. If that were to fall, we would have to rethink our strategies, and the same stands true for the countries like Afghanistan.

Test cricket still remains purists' choice and delight. It's not old, it's mellow, like wine – they say. It's there to stay – they say. But questions have been raised on the relevance of the shorter format – the one dayers. With more explosive and animated form of the game, added with oomph (read cheerleaders) and shorter duration – the T20s – there are questions over why is there a need for format that lasts entire day. It has become the new tequila shot for the non-purists. Why need anything when we already have wine and tequila – they say.

There were many who said bringing in Bryan Adams at the opening extravaganza of the World Cup fitted well. After all, Bryan Adams had his peak in 90s, the same time as the peak of ODIs. Both are losing their charm – is what they complain.

But then, how many of us do dislike '18 till I die' or 'Everything I do'? It's that spirit of openness and romance that remains in us, no matter how old. That's akin to ODI format, which gave wings to cricket, just when Test matches began to become dull affair. The spirit of romance that ODI brought in cannot be compared with the oomph and money we see in the T20s. That ways Bryan Adams fitted well with the World Cup.

It's also fitting Sachin Tendulkar now will make his presence in the World Cup as a brand ambassador. ICC chief executive Haroon Lorgat said once: "We are very lucky to have such an extraordinary player as Sachin supporting our flagship event."

So if not for anything else, for him, we should rejoice this event. The event that began in Bangabandhu stadium in Dhaka, a place where history and the memories live in, a place where the fans have special bonds, should be toasted.

After all, despite the presence of wine and tequila shots, rare scotch whiskey has its own value. Its value lies in being mellow and having the sting at the same time.

So let's celebrate the ICC World Cup 2011. For we can't be sure – what it will be, four years after.

(The article originally appeared in The Kathmandu Post, 19th February, 2011, in a weekly column of Yours Truly)