A spot of Aussie gloating and ranting

And so Australia are the No. 1 Test team in the world, again, and you're no doubt expecting some sort of gloating piece about the superiority of Australia at the game of cricket.

Well… let's not disappoint! Woo-hoo! Isn't that good? Been a while. We were No. 1 for 28 years or something and became rather used to it. So allow me another woo. And a hoo.

And it's all made particularly sweet because of how bad this Australian Test team was, and not all that long ago. Bit over a year ago they lost 4-0 to India. Bit under a year ago they lost 3-0 to England. And lo, were the depths plumbed, and the teeth gnashed, and the imaginary bugs scratched off arms, like meth users do, the silly moos.

But knock over England 5-0 (woo!) and South Africa 2-1 (hoo!) and all is right with the world again, amen Mr Lillee. Amen.

What I don't get, though is: why now? How come they have only just worked out the numbers now? Australia last played a Test on March 5, against the team they overtook in the rankings, South Africa. Third-placed England last played in the three-day belting in Sydney on January 5. While fourth-placed Pakistan (Pakistan!) last played on January 20 in a drawn series against Sri Lanka, who are ranked seventh behind New Zealand.

And yet they come out with these rankings in May? They have only crunched the numbers now? Are they using mainframes from 1978? Do they even have computers? Are they adding up on an abacus? Who are these people?

And this on the day Sri Lanka, World T20 champions, are displaced in the T20 rankings by India, whom they beat in the World T20 final. Never one for mathematics, me. But Duckworth and Lewis would struggle explaining this malarkey.

Meanwhile, Cricket Australia, august body of boardroom business types, good men and true, decides that on the day Australia reclaim the world No. 1 Test ranking to replace the selectors who selected the players who reclaimed the world No. 1 Test ranking.

Goodbye, John Inverarity. Goodbye, Andy Bichel. Hello TV man Mark Waugh. Hello (again) Trevor Hohns. Rod Marsh becomes chairman of selectors. Michael Clarke still doesn't pick anyone. And onwards we roll, upwards, one hopes, or all this might seem a very silly state of organisational affairs.

On top of that, said august board of business types appointed David Peever, a one-time clubby and managing director of mining mob Rio Tinto, as deputy chairman and the man to take over from Wally Edwards in 2015. It's part of the board's reinvention of itself in which independent types, i.e. those without affiliation to various states of Australia and their self-interest, take over the board.

Now, ICC? Listen up: this is the model. For you! Yes, you! People without self-interest should govern for the greater good. If you have independent directors with a mandate - do good for cricket - rather than being governed by rich kids who want to be richer kids, world cricket, the game will get better.

This is not the science that launched Sputnik.

The ICC, and by extension the BCCI, are bodies governed by self-interest. Driven by rank capitalism. There's no over-spreading of wealth in this organisational system with India, England and Australia telling everybody what to do. Without pressure or oversight on their governance, why would they care for the greater good, the global expansion of cricket, the nurturing of "small" nations? It won't go on. The fat fish don't want to share their pond with the guppies. Why would they?

(Wow. Isn't this yarn getting political after starting out as a bit of gloating about Australia being good at Test cricket?)

One problem is that it seems the ICC doesn't particularly want the stars of the show - the players - getting above their station. Example? I played golf with Paul Marsh the other day (coincidentally on the day his old man, Rod, became chairman of selectors). Paul is the CEO of the Australian Cricketers Association and chairman of FICA. These organisations exist to give players a fair suck of the proverbial sauce bottle. They advise players of security threats. They do Good Things. They are the union for players, the organised labour that stops Big Bosses from being too greedy and hence sharing the revenue and the love.

And India's cricket heavies don't recognise FICA at all. Like, at all. Marsh and the FICA types are persona non grata. The BCCI types don't pick up the phone, much less return calls. And if Indian players join FICA, they'll no longer be Indian players.

And that, Indian people, should not be.

Your thoughts?

(PS: Woo!)