Let’s Be Honest: Cricket is Dying a Slow, Yet Avoidable Death
By: Nikhil Mehta
Tags: Sports, India, Cricket, Cricket World Cup, Corruption

Following the tournament, the ICC met with the richest national boards and a decision was made to not ever allow a repeat of 2007. The 2011 & 2015 editions of the tournament were reduced to fourteen teams, while the World Cup in 2019 featured just ten teams. Tournament format was altered as well, with the major teams receiving automatic advancement to latter rounds and a higher threshold of matches. The ten team World Cup has now been approved through 2031.

“In a 48-day tournament, if teams like India and Pakistan are out for playing bad cricket in two matches, there is something really wrong. We were against this format and even told the International Cricket Council to reconsider it” — SONY TV president

The sad contrast is, no other major sporting body is exhibiting similar behavior. In basketball — considered the fastest growing sport — FIBA has expanded its World Cup from 16 to 32 teams since the turn of the century. FIFA has followed suit, expanding the World Cup field from 32 in 2022 to 48 in 2026. Proponents for the 10 team World Cup have argued that football is more competitive across the board, but that is not necessarily the case.

In real numbers, Africa has had 44 teams participate in FIFA World Cups throughout history with just just three advancing to a quarterfinal and zero reaching a semifinal. Asia has had 37 teams compete in the FIFA World Cup, with two teams advancing to a quarterfinal, and just one advancing to a semifinal — South Korea may have paid off some refs there. Comparing these two confederations to cricket’s associates, the success rate is not far off. For FIFA’s Asian and African confederations, the best years appear are ahead, as the sport has seen tremendous improvement, from teams like Ghana, Nigeria and Japan.

“We will not let this matter lie. It is wrong, everyone knows it’s wrong. The decision must be overturned.”-Cricket Ireland’s statement on a 10 team WC

On the theme of lost opportunity is cricket’s participation, or lack thereof in the Olympics. The Summer Games have given sports like rugby, basketball, and even curling a spotlight for international viewers. The addition of rugby sevens to the 2016 Olympics created a wave of interest, especially as Japan entertained its way to a 4th place finish. There have been initiatives in place for years to add cricket to the summer games, with the proposal consistently vetoed by the BCCI. What is hindering BCCI approval for Olympic participation? The latest statement cited a conflict over what doping agency would carry out drug testing.

These excuses make little sense, but one can infer the actual reasoning is the board’s reluctance to relinquish control of their players for a period of time to the IOA — Indian Olympic Association. The Olympics would mean potentially losing revenue and shortening the summer season, which for the richest cricket board in the world is a sacrifice too large to bear.

At the current rate, the next captains photo could take place on a single couch

3. Grassroots Efforts are not Effective Enough

In 2015 a tournament was organized called the “Cricket All-Stars”, in which a three game exhibition series was played in the United States featuring thirty recently retired cricketers. The games were played at iconic baseball stadiums, with strong attendance, but what exactly was the point? For the ICC, the prize has been set on a cricket revolution in massive markets like the United States and China, but while attention is drawn to these countries that have minimal cultural interest in cricket, relevant nations have suffered. The data suggests that even in full member nations, there may be a growing youth participation crisis.

New Zealand- Has seen youth participation rates fall 16% since 2011, now ranking as the 10th most popular sport among youth participants

England- Has seen youth participation drop nearly 50% since 2012

South Africa- Has pushed for more aggressive racial quotas due to lack of black youth participation

So what does the future hold?

With alums like Virat Kohli and Joe Root the U-19 World Cup is an opportunity to gauge future potential and scout elite talent. This year the tournament featured 16 teams, with two countries making their inaugural appearances — Japan, Nigeria.

The qualifications of Japan and Nigeria were touted as massive achievements for world cricket, showcasing developmental inroads in two big markets, that have little cricketing history. Also promising was the fact that both teams qualified over higher ranked squads in Papua New Guinea and Namibia.

It would be unwise to discount Japan. They boast plenty of talent. It might be (a long way to go). But Japan has already gained considerable ground.-ICC Statement on Japan cricket

Although simply being a part of the U19 World Cup meant joyous celebration, the results were a little more harsh. Both teams were convincingly defeated in every match — Nigeria did beat Japan in the 15th place playoff — finishing with two of the worst net run rates in U19 World Cup history. The qualification of more teams is of course a positive, but in this instance a broken grassroots system lay exposed as well.

Japan for instance, had no seasoned cricket players, with a bulk of their athletes being baseball crossovers or players who had gained access to the sport through international schools. These were amateur level players, competing with teams like India where a number of players had already signed their first six figure contracts in the IPL. This is not to blame Japan of course, the athletes want to compete but they have to be given a chance.

Japan were bowled out for 41 against India, the second lowest total in World Cup History

The remaining associates (UAE, Canada, Scotland) did not fare much better, as all three were eliminated in the group stage, joining Japan and Nigeria in the bottom five. For all the bluster coming from the ICC regarding grassroots initiatives, the shortcomings are continually stark. The rhetoric may be hopeful, but the results have not shown such optimism. In fact the disparity between the top sides and the rest of the world appears to be growing.

4. Consolidation is Impacting the Associate Nations

The associate framework is meant to grow and develop teams, and ICC PR would have you believe that this framework is working effectively. Associate players and teams would vehemently disagree. Scotland captain Peter Mommsen said recently, “There are far fewer opportunities for associates. It is going to continue to dwindle.” — referring to the lack of funding for the Scottish team. Other associates echo similar sentiments.

Let’s take a look at some of the more noteworthy associates — Zimbabwe included — and give a slight prediction on what the future might hold.

Ireland- Ireland was the darling child for the ICC for a period after 2007. Ireland was proof that the game was reaching new parts of the globe. The golden years lasted from 2007–2011, with a few solid World Cup appearances and notable victories over Pakistan and England. Since that point Ireland has made little progress, fielding one of the oldest teams in cricket with no true breakout stars. Over 50% of the players from the 2011 World Cup team were still on the squad for an ODI series against Pakistan in 2018. Ireland is in need of new facilities and better infrastructure. A silver lining is an uptick in youth participation with a growth of 35,000 new players since 2007.

Chance of being a viable cricketing nation in 2030: 5/10

Kevin O’Brien celebrates after Ireland defeat England

UAE/Oman- Both UAE and Oman have risen in the ICC rankings quite significantly over the course of the last 5 years. A major factor for this is the South Asian diaspora in the the two countries. The team in UAE features a side that is over 80% Indian/Pakistani born while Oman is currently fielding just one player from Oman. With constraints on citizenship, it seems unlikely the game will actually take foothold with locals and immerse in the culture. The existent facilities and stadiums in the UAE are world class, however.

Chances of being viable cricketing nations in 2030 4/10

USA/Canada- The ICC has had its eyes on a breakthrough in North America for decades. The market is saturated, with numerous sports and leagues, but the potential revenue is substantial. Both countries have seen a rise in their national teams, but like UAE/Oman the majority of players come from the South Asian or in this case the West Indian diaspora. With more of those immigrants actually attaining citizenship, it is possible for the game to develop pockets of popularity. Thus far we have not seen any such inroads however, and cricket would probably not fall on a top ten list of the most popular sports in either Canada or USA. The infrastructure has some promise with improving local leagues. Ultimately, popularity is the main hinderance and cricket appears to be years away from any noteworthy traction.

Chances of being a viable cricketing nations in 2030 3/10

Scotland- Scotland has been lurking in shadows for a while, but the sport has always lagged far behind in popularity nationwide. A recent win over England, along with World Cup qualification in 2015 did provide some momentum. Scotland also saw an increase of 17,000 in youth participation between 2014–2016. Scotland needs better facilities and grounds that meet international standard — The Grange seats just 6,000. As of right now there is not enough popularity nor opportunity for the players to assuredly compete in the coming years.

Chance of being a viable cricketing nation in 2030: 4/10

Zimbabwe- Dealing with its own internal conflicts, Zimbabwe cricket has suffered under the country’s instability. The team has regressed tremendously in the last two decades, but the nail in the coffin may have come in June, 2019. That year, Zimbabwe cricket was banned indefinitely due to governmental interference. Unbeknownst are the actual details, but this decision will surely pit the sport into further deterioration.

Chance of being a viable cricketing nation in 2030 3/10

Netherlands- Netherlands has been on the scene in world cricket for a long time but the timetable for a renaissance in Dutch cricket may have passed. The team has some domestic talent, but they also rely heavily on immigrant players from South Africa. Despite very little investment there still remain about 6,500 registered players in the country.

Chance of being a viable cricketing nation in 2030 2/10

Afghanistan- Afghanistan is undoubtedly a success story, but it is hard to attribute the Afghan’s rise to ICC development and investment. The sport was first picked up by Afghan refugees living in Pakistan. As the country stabilized, those same refugees brought the game back and created the first cricket board in the country. Today, Afghanistan has many talented players, and success seems promising as long as stability holds in the country.

An Afghan woman plays cricket near Kabul

Chance of being a viable cricketing nation in 2030 8/10

Nepal- Nepal has been sitting in the shadows of a cricket awakening for some time. With geographical proximity to India, the sport has developed a heightened following. Having established interest in the game, up and coming youth talent, and several domestic tournaments, Nepal is in a promising spot. Nepal is coming off a three year suspension from the ICC, so the next few years will be telling.

Chances of being a viable cricketing nations in 2030 8/10

Papua New Guinea- Papua New Guinea is a small nation in Oceania, with close proximity to Australia. The game has a long way to go, but there is legitimate interest in certain pockets of the country, with around 60,000 youth picking up the sport. However, infrastructure and domestic competition remain virtually non-existent.

Chances of being a viable cricketing nations in 2030 4/10

What Next?

You see it with the Indian Premier League, Big Bash League, and the Bangladeshi Premier League, cricket is now more lucrative than ever. These leagues are often cited as impactful additions to the game, but is the top-down approach working? Are these leagues benefitting the cricketing community as a whole or rather consolidating resources and money? While the sport appears to be having a tremendous amount of success in certain countries (India, Australia, Bangladesh) the rest of the world is losing interest. The growth of the game is what gives the sport its identify, from Afghan refugees taking part in their first World Cup, to the scrappy Irish team defeating mighty England for the first time, it is the associates who provide the game thrill and flavor. For cricket to continue to be competitive, the world needs associates to sustain their infrastructure and make strides forward.

It is apparent that the those in charge of running global cricket are not concerned with the future of cricket, so what are we as fans to do? What about the players? I think at this point it is time for fans to start boycotting major tournaments, and hopefully we will see more marquee players stand in solidarity with their associate peers as well. If greed is the only factor influencing decision making from the top, then it’s the fans who have to mobilize for change.