16 September 1996
Blueprint for a brighter future
By Christopher Martin-Jenkins
THE game`s broader future has at last been tackled, at least to
the satisfaction of those who control the strings of the public
purse. We finally have a National Development Plan for
cricket, introduced with such a clash of cymbals by the Test and
County Cricket Board and the National Cricket Association that
unless you read about it here this morning, you - like
all bar a tiny majority in the administration of the game
- would be blissfully ignorant of its existence.
Never mind its apologetic appearance; it is a well-meaning
document, rational, and significant because it will enable
cricket to attract even more from the Sports Council than has
already gone to the game. In the midst of their gloom on the
field, Durham CCC have just been awarded 2.32 million by the
Lottery Sports Fund for the next building at Chester-le-Street,
which will make it a certain venue for a World Cup match in 1999.
Seven other cricket clubs have this month alone attracted
lottery funds ranging from 6,000 to Brailsford and Ednaston CC
in Derbyshire for a non-turf pitch - I hope they will maintain
it better than too many clubs who let these assets deteriorate
quickly - to 27,000 for Blythe CC in Staffordshire to enable
them to buy the freehold on the old Cookson Matthey ground.
The National Plan gives greater definition to the purposes of
the England and Wales Cricket Board, confidently expected to be
ratified on Sept 24 and to come into being next January under the
joint command of the quietly efficient Tim Lamb and the battlehardened Ian, now Lord, MacLaurin.
The degree to which they will be able to manage the game in
its best interests was as clear as mud on a first reading of the
report produced by David Morgan`s working party last Friday,
but painstaking work has gone into its preparation and detailed
analysis is more rewarding. In its simplest terms cricket, both
amateur and professional, will in future be run like a public
company, though its business will continue to be cricket the
game, not cricket the money-making exercise.
There will be 39 shareholders: the 38 counties plus the MCC.
The direction of the company will be in the hands of a management
board and the execution of policies will be the responsibility
of officials at Lord`s, employed by the England and Wales
Cricket Board Ltd, for which the report suggests the working
acronym ECB.
The working party have left room for the new system to evolve,
putting much faith in Lord MacLaurin`s proven toughness and
sound judgment. The really important document is the `Proposed
Memorandum of Association` which accompanies the report and in
particular the section detailing the powers of the management
board. Here it becomes plain that the counties will continue to
exercise effective control over professional cricket in the UK
through the medium of the new `first-class forum` which, along
with the `recreational forum`, representing amateur
cricketers, is theoretically to subordinate to the
management board. This is Section Five (B) in detail:
If The Management board proposes to exercise any power in
relation to (a) the competition programme or playing
regulations and regulations of either international or domestic
first-class cricket or domestic or international limited-overs
cricket; or (b) the designation of Test match stadia and
allocation of international cricket; or (c) the annual budgets
including the allocation of resources to first-class county
clubs, MCC and Minor Counties, then NO SUCH PROPOSAL SHALL BE
IMPLEMENTED WITHOUT THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF A MAJORITY OF THE
MEMBERS OF THE FIRST-CLASS FORUM.
The recreational game has a similar control over its own
affairs. To this degree at any rate, nothing much will change,
but it would have been foolish to deny the right of the counties
to look after their own reasonable interests. The first-class
forum will only meet twice a year and it is significant that
only a simple majority of the 18 counties plus the MCC will in
future be required to sanction changes.
The Management board, who will meet about 10 times a year,
will consist of 15 people: the ECB`s chairman (MacLaurin) and
chief executive (Lamb, who has no vote but is the only
salaried member of the Board); four elected non-executive
chairmen, representing cricket, finance, marketing and the
England committee; an MCC representative; and four from
each first-class forum and the recreational forum. The
process of electing the 13 extra members will begin this
month.
The first proof of the pudding will come, perhaps, when the
structure of the professional game is analysed this winter and
changes are proposed for 1999 onwards. Last week`s tour
selections underlined the essential problem: an intrinsically
worthy county circuit with any number of good young players who
look as good as their foreign rivals as 20-year-olds but who
somehow seem to become much of a muchness with one another
as the years pass.
The cricket they play does not so much wear them out as iron
them out, like so many shirts neatly folded, each as tidy
and unexceptional as the rest.
Take Chris Silverwood, undoubtedly a young fast-medium bowler of
great promise. To call him fast would be stretching a point, but
he may yet add a yard and he has performed usefully and
consistently for Yorkshire this season. On most Test pitches
against most opponents, however, I am not convinced that he
will solve England`s underlying problem of a lack of
penetrative bowling. Andrew Harris, of Derbyshire, might, and he
should have been the young quick bowler chosen to tour if one
had to go.
As usual, mind you, one could make a good case for swapping
some of the A team fast attack - Harris, Dean Headley, Glen
Chapple, Mark Ealham and Craig White - for their counterparts in
the senior side - Cork, Mullally, Caddick, Gough and Silverwood.
More than that: one could name another five who missed selection
for both teams yet might have done as well: Martin, Bicknell,
McCague, Brown and Lewry for example.
It is just the same with the batsmen. James Whitaker, Mark
Ramprakash, Alan Wells, Matthew Maynard or Hugh Morris might just
as well have been made captain of the A tour, and Ben Smith,
Darren Maddy and Chris Adams, to name only three players I have
seen in the last fortnight, are batsmen of clear England
potential.
Look, too, at the A team players who have been chosen in the
past, but now, more or less, languish in county cricket`s
mainstream: Dale, Hemp, Lathwell, the Bicknell brothers, Pooley,
Ostler, Piper, Loye, Lloyd, Paul and Richard Johnson etc. Some,
as Robert Croft and Warren Hegg have done this season, will come
again, perhaps according to who sits on the next selection
committee.
Source :: The Electronic Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/)