The ICC's about turn

The ICC, the governing body for world cricket, or so it is said, held its fourth and final meeting of the year in Dubai on Monday and once again it exposed its main weaknesses, its lack of backbone and its inability to plan wisely.

In April, the ICC executive board emphasised that the Independent Governance Review, which included, among other things, clarifying the role and structure of the ICC and its committees to ensure that the strategic goals are met effectively and that decision-making is made in the interest of the game; the constitutional framework and documents to ensure they are " fit for purpose"; and making recommendations to ensure that the ICC enjoys a reputation as a well governed and leading global sporting organisation as one of its most important initiatives of its new strategic plan for the years 2011-2015.

Low and behold, however, after changing direction in almost everything it has contemplated and decided to do over the years with gay abandon, after discussing the possibility and the importance of a Test championship for a few years now, after deciding that the first one would be held in 2013, after fighting for the Decision Review System (DRS) and after stating, loud and clear for all to hear as late as June, that it would become mandatory for all Test-playing nations in October, the ICC has now said differently.

On Monday, the ICC said that the Test championship, which it championed for quite a while, will not be held in 2013 but it may be held in 2017, and that the use of the DRS, which it also championed, is no longer mandatory and that the participating countries may decide, bilaterally, whether they wish to use it.

The complete turnaround by the ICC in this instance follows its most recent poor and foolish decision to reduce the number of teams to 10 for the 2015 World Cup, a decision that meant leaving out teams like Ireland and the Netherlands without even giving them a chance to qualify.

The turnaround occurred in June when, after protests by the associate members and the rest of the world, the ICC agreed to up the number to 14 after a series of qualification tournaments not including the chosen 10.

Protecting test cricket

The Test-playing championship was intended to take the place of the Champions Trophy, last played in 2009, in a bid to lift the impact and the value of Test cricket and because there was a feeling that one-day cricket had lost some of its lustre, partly because of the regularity with which it is played, partly because of repetition.

What, for instance, was the difference between the Champions Trophy and the World Cup?

The reason why the ICC wanted a Test championship was to protect Test cricket and they were adamant about having it.

Suddenly now, out of nowhere, apparently, all that has changed.

Somebody, somewhere in the ICC, or outside of it, but with influence on it, suddenly realised that without the consent and the support of its broadcast partner, ESPN STAR Sports, the ICC would stand to lose millions of dollars if it changed, at this point, the Champions Trophy for a Test championship.

And as usual, it appears that money comes first to the ICC.

That may be the reason why the ICC, after fighting for so long for the DRS to be accepted by all, after finally deciding that it is so good that, according to its chief executive, Haroon Lorgat, it "improves correct umpire decisions by five per cent and correct any blatant errors", and after Aleem Dar, the three-time Umpire of the Year, had called for its use in every Test match, has decided to make it optional.

"It is not being used in all series and that affects the umpires' performance. I believe inconsistent usage is not good for the game either," said Dar.

India, which control some 70 per cent of cricket's money, has always been against the use of the DRS and they have never hidden their opinion, claiming, with good reason, that they do not trust the ball-tracking technology used by "Hot Spot".

DRS usage

In June, India agreed to the usage of the DRS with minimum use of "Hot Spot" for the series in England, but during the series there were a few discrepancies and at the end of the series India, who apparently suffered most, said they would not use it in future and that was that.

In saying that there are some who are not convinced by its reliability, Lorgat said, unapologetically, without batting an eyelid, without giving a thought to those batsmen who have been "saved" by the system, to those bowlers who have got their just return by it, "we will continue to work with interested parties to improve the system while permitting teams to decide whether they wish to use it or not".

The ICC has left batsmen and bowlers totally dependent on the umpires alone for their success, depending on where and in which country they are playing.

That cannot be right.

Since India's decision, Bangladesh have said that they will not be using DRS for the series with the West Indies.

"It would be difficult to use DRS given our agreement with Nimbus (the broadcaster for the series). The replays for DRS won't be clear. We have consulted with the ICC and they have agreed with the issue," said Jalal Yunus, BCB media chairman.

DRS costs a lot of money, it means the use of more cameras and that may be the reason why Bangladesh will not be using it, why the DRS in Bangladesh "won't be clear".

Regardless of the reason or reasons for it, for not making the DRS mandatory, the ICC must make up its mind one way or the other.

Cricket needs leadership and strong leadership at that. Cricket needs leadership and leadership with vision at that and every team, all the teams, must play under one rule.

A duck or century, no wickets or five wickets in an innings must mean the same in Bangladesh or in the West Indies, in India or in England.