Players demand clearer scheduling and fairer financing for cricket

A detailed report from the World Cricketers Association (WCA) has emphasised the need to create a clearer and more concise schedule as part of a broader restructuring of the sport.

The report — titled “Protecting History, Embracing Change: A Unified Coherent Global Future” — recommends the creation of divisions across all three formats, a schedule that could be implemented in 2028 that leaves room for four 21-day windows for international cricket, a fairer distribution of the sport’s revenues and the modernisation of the International Cricket Council (ICC), to make it an actual governing body rather than the current members' group structure.

“While there are a number of positive trends in cricket, there is no doubt that global cricket is at an inflection point,” said Paul Marsh, who headed up the WCA subcommittee that oversaw a six-month review of the sport. 

“Many of the issues highlighted in the report are challenging, but they need to be discussed if we are to create a more sustainable future in more than just a few countries. Creating a clearer global calendar and incorporating more consistency across formats along with greater competition integrity and context for international cricket, will benefit cricket and all of its stakeholders hugely.”

The WCA represents over 600 international players. Among the 64 stakeholders whose opinions were sought for the report were Proteas women’s skipper Laura Wolvaardt and men’s team T20 captain Aiden Markram, who is among a handful of local players to have featured in all three formats and thus feels the pinch of the current schedule acutely.

Cricket SA CEO Pholetsi Moseki and SA20 commissioner Graeme Smith were among the administrators who contributed.

The current global calendar was described in the report as “chaotic, inconsistent and confusing”, putting the future of the international game at risk. It recommends a global calendar and using 2028 as an example creates 21-day international windows in February/March, May/June, September and December. 

Space is also provided for the Los Angeles Olympics which is set to host a men’s and women’s T20 competition and the T20 World Cup, scheduled for October of that year. The report says that for such a calendar to be implemented “designated global game windows set aside for ‘Core International Cricket’ need to be agreed on by leading stakeholders in the game from the next Future Tours Programme in both the men’s and women’s games”.

While there is no silver bullet, the report defines the trends and major issues facing the sport at global level, along with some recommended solutions, intended to be both aspirational and realistic.

—  Heath Mills, WCA chair

A revised scheduling model could add almost $246m (about R4.5bn) per year to cricket’s finances, it states.

Besides scheduling the report highlights economics, regulation and leadership as key areas that need urgent transformation to safeguard international cricket.

The economic recommendations are radical and include an overhaul of the current distribution structure in which India collects the overwhelming share of funds from the ICC. 

The review found that 70% of the sport’s revenues are generated during just three months of the year — which includes the period when the IPL is played — while revenues generated by countries other than India, England and Australia, “equate to less than 4% of global cricket revenue collectively”.

“Global cricket’s finances and distribution models are heavily unbalanced, self perpetuating and do not effectively support global growth or competitive balance,” the report states.

To emphasise the competitive balance point, it points out that 11 of the last 13 ICC events have been won by the same three countries.

“While current models may suit the bigger countries in the short term, they ultimately limit the sport’s growth potential. The logical outcome of a small number of countries retaining most of the money in the game is that all others do not have very much money, severely limiting their ability to invest in the game at grassroots and professional levels, reducing the sport’s overall competitiveness and ultimately devaluing the overall sporting and commercial product,” it said. 

The WCA recommends the establishment of minimum and maximum distribution parameters of ICC revenues, stating “a minimum 2% and maximum 10% for the top 24 countries, and a minimum 10% distribution collectively for countries 25+.”

Such a model, while demonstrably fairer, may not sit well with India’s cricket authority the BCCI, which currently rakes in 38% of the distribution from the ICC. 

It is worth noting that the report, which included opinions from other sports including football and basketball, had little input from the BCCI, cricket’s most powerful entity. 

In addressing the need for stronger governance of the sport, the WCA report recommends the establishment of a ‘Global Game Leadership Committee’ to make recommendations to the game and ICC Board. This would comprise 25% national boards, 25% T20 leagues franchises, 25% players and 25% independents.

That committee would be tasked with ensuring that “the ICC is modernised and fit for purpose to lead the global game in line with global objectives and best practice”.

“While there is no silver bullet, the report defines the trends and major issues facing the sport at global level, along with some recommended solutions, intended to be both aspirational and realistic,” said Heath Mills, the WCA’s chair.