The Impotent Cricket Council

There is a view in cricketing circles that India and the rest of the Asian bloc (Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh) holds the rest of the cricketing world to ransom. Aided by their financial clout (estimated at 70% of the cricket economy) and the other non-white nations (West Indies, South Africa and Zimbabwe) it pits them against the so-called “white” nations (England, Australia and New Zealand). In a way, it’s a kind of reverse colonialism. Allegedly exercised by the former colonies on their erstwhile masters. Never mind the fact that Australia and New Zealand had a not entirely dissimilar relationship with England. But I digress.

This is about the ICC. Originally standing for Imperial Cricket Conference (note the connotation in the first word) and subsequently amended to International Cricket Council. But more aptly the Inept, Incompetent, Ill-advised, Injudicious (take your pick) Cricket Council.

This morning, Malcolm Speed, ICC Chief Executive announced at the MCG: “What we've seen over the last week is a lot of criticism of umpiring decisions, a lot of ill feeling. It's not unlike the situation the cricket world faced at The Oval in 2006. What we need to do is to alleviate some of the tension that is focused on this match and one way of doing that is to bring in a new umpiring team."

Speed clarified, though, that this will not be the end of the road for Bucknor as an international umpire. "I expect that Steve will continue as an ICC Elite Panel umpire. He is coming to the end of his career. What we are seeking to do is take some tension out of the situation. Steve accepts that in the interests of the game and this Test match it is better that another umpire substitute for him ... where the presence of one umpire becomes an issue that causes further aggravation we need to be sufficiently flexible."

Huh? Just yesterday, an ICC "spokesman" invoked the playing conditions both teams signed up to before the series, saying: "Neither team has a right to object to an umpire's appointment." To remove Bucknor, the issue would have to be discussed and voted on by the ICC's executive board, with a majority of members voting in favour of removing him.

Steve Bucknor’s performance as an umpire has been rapidly declining for a few years now. If the ICC had any wits about them, he would long ago have been removed from its “Elite Panel”. But by removing him from the Perth Test for the reasons Speed has given just fans the flames of those that feel that India holds the rest of the cricketing world to ransom.

The crux of the problem of course, is the awkward position the ICC is in. It is not so much a governing body (like FIFA or The IOC) as it is a loose collection of member states (think the UN). So while it can have all its laws, rules, regulations and even playing conditions, apparently they are not actually binding on those who have signed up to it.

Let’s take the above argument to ridiculous levels. Wed 16th Jan, 2008, Perth.

Scenario 1: The umpires examine the ball. They believe it has been tampered with. They fine the fielding team five runs. The match continues. In the next break, the fielding captain watches the TV replays and commentary and realises there is no visual evidence to back up the umpires. He refuses to lead his team back out. The umpire awards the game to the opposition. It’s a situation filled with tension.

Scenario 2: A batsman is ruled out. He believes he’s not. The umpire says go. He says no. He walks off the pitch. He leads his batting partner off with him. It’s a situation filled with tension.

Will the ICC seek to alleviate some of the tension?