Cricket’s players put international schedule under the microscope

When Ben Stokes asked not to be considered for selection for this year’s T20 World Cup, it set off alarm bells in cricket circles about the sport’s scheduling. 

Stokes, who made a match-winning 51 not out in the 2022 T20 World Cup final, cited the need to stay fresh for a busy English season that included Tests and ODI against West Indies, Sri Lanka and Australia. Something had to give and defending England’s world title was the sacrifice Stokes, one of the sport’s biggest stars, chose to make. 

A schedule packed with World Cups, Champions Trophy and most commonly T20 Leagues, has proved too much for the players, and besides the physical and mental toll, also raised issues about the relevancy of bilateral series’ particularly in the limited overs formats. 

With the International Cricket Council seemingly more interested in just running its annual events rather than the sport as a whole, the World Cricketers Association (WCA), formerly FICA, has taken it upon itself to conduct a deep dive into how to resolve the sport’s calendar, at what is a critical point for cricket.

In announcing a six-person “working committee” on Monday that will interrogate cricket’s schedule, the WCA described the current model as “broken and unsustainable”. 

Whether it be Stokes or Cricket SA preventing contracted Proteas players from touring New Zealand for Test matches because of the SA20, or players turning down full-time contracts with their national associations to allow them the freedom to play in T20 Leagues, it is clear the current system is not working.

“We are fortunate that cricket is spoilt for choice and has three core formats across both the international game and domestic leagues,” said WCA chairperson Heath Mills. “However, to date, the game’s leadership has collectively failed to come together to establish a clear and coherent global structure in which they can coexist. We have virtually given up hope of it doing so.”

The committee includes the former CEO of the England Cricket Board, Tom Harrison, the former CEO of the SA Cricketers Association, Tony Irish, Sana Mir, former captain of the Pakistan women’s team, James Kitching, who previously worked for Fifa and Sanjog Gupta, the head of sports for Disney Star. The group will be chaired by Paul Marsh, the former CEO of the Australian Cricketers Association. 

There can’t be a more suitable time for key stakeholders in the game to contribute towards work that could help shape thinking about the game’s future

—  Sanjog Gupta, Disney Sports

“Having watched the progress of the game over the past 10 years from outside the sport, it is clear to me that there is so much opportunity for cricket if it can get this part of the puzzle right,” said Marsh. “But it is also clear to me that the long-term health of cricket is at risk if this work is not done and changes are not made.”

Players have had to endure unfair criticism when choosing between their international careers and financial security, which is offered by playing in the T20 Leagues. 

Cricket SA was slammed earlier this year by various ex-players over its decision to withdraw the country’s top players from the New Zealand tour, and later by Kagiso Rabada, who gave a voice to his teammates’ frustration about the SA20 being prioritised over a Test series. 

Rabada described the entire situation as “unacceptable”, in an interview during this year’s IPL. 

“That is a planning issue and it has got to do with what is happening at the higher level — what happened with Cricket SA. It was basically a double book, that was what it was.”

“[At the] end of the day, we didn't really get a choice to even go there [New Zealand] because of the importance of the SA20. It is like shooting yourself in the foot,” said Rabada.

He further explained that Test cricket in particular couldn’t only be a priority for England, Australia and India — the sport’s wealthiest nations. “If you are looking at prolonging Test cricket, if you want kids to keep playing Test cricket globally, then a plan has to be made,” said Rabada.

Scheduling essentially is a financial issue, whether for the ICC, which has a men’s white-ball tournament as part of its calendar for every year until 2031, for the BCCI, cricket’s most dominant body, which makes billions of dollars from the IPL and wants to expand it, and national boards like CSA, which needs the SA20 to keep itself financially sustainable. 

“Cricket, driven by changing consumer habits, emerging media trends and evolving realities of the game, has witnessed accelerated foundational changes over the last decade. There can’t be a more suitable time for key stakeholders in the game to contribute towards work that could help shape thinking about the game’s future,” said Gupta, whose company has driven much of the increased finances in the sport, through broadcasting deals. 

The ICC is under no obligation to accept the WCA’s recommendations, but once they are publicised, it will be very difficult to continue to ignore the players’ voices.