By Anil - 10 Sep, '02
September 10 2002

The ICC has a contract with a conglomerate of companies, who in return for advertising during cricket events, will pay the ICC about $550 million over 5 years. Of this, ICC will pay out $100 million to cricket boards. What, exactly, does the ICC have in mind for the remaining $450 million? The controversial contract which the Indian players have refused to sign over the last month, has turned up several questions about the financial wheeling and dealing within the International Cricket Council (ICC). In this day and age, when the accounting practices of large companies throughout the world are being closely examined, it is necessary that some questions be answered. Why will the ICC return only 20% of the massive revenue of a half billion US dollars to its member countries, and keep 80% for itself? And, why is India treated on an equal footing with all the other countries, given that 80% of that revenue comes from Indian companies, which are obviously targetting the Indian market?

From the capitulation of the ICC to the terms laid out by the Indian players, it is clear that India is at the heart of big money in cricket. The majority of the global cricket audience being mainly resident in India, aside from a wealthy diaspora throughout the world, what does India get back? Only a tiny percentage of a profit that it is largely responsible for creating. (All boards share equally in the 20% returned.) It is well known that if India withdraws from any cricket event, it can be expected to collapse financially. This is evident from the ICC's hasty retreat from its earlier aggressive position against the Indian players reasonable refusal to sign its illegal contract - the sponsors apparently insisted that the ICC accomodate Ganguly, Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag, and company at any cost.

The ICC has not been clear on why it wants to keep the bulk of the revenue for itself. Indeed, it has not explained its program for investment of the $550 million dollars coming to it for the next 5 years (other than that 20% will be returned to member countries boards). As is well known, ICC does not pay for expenses incurred when a member country travels to another for a cricket tour. Nor does it pay for stadium equipment such as TV cameras, speed guns, or any other gear needed to run a Test or ODI other than the ICC world cups and mini world cups, or the construction of stadiums or cricketing infrastructures anywhere including the poorest of the cricket playing countries.

To examine the spending patterns of the ICC, we examine its last freely available annual report, for the year ended March 2001. During this year, their total income was $21 million, of which $5.3 million went towards administrative expenses, $8 million towards cricket event costs, $2.7 million to development costs, and other expenses. Total profit which was bankrolled is$ 6.5 million. A total cash balance of $50 million is reported.

There are many questions that come up. Why does 25% of its total revenue go to their administrative and salary expenses, whereas only 13% goes towards development of the game? A large profit is bankrolled - adding to an already ballooning surplus, whereas poor countries such as West Indies, Bangladesh, and Kenya continue to suffer from severe shortage of finances which threatens the game's continued viability there.

If ICC spends such a small portion of its available cash on developing the game, what is it planning to do with $450 million for five years? Will it help bear some of the expenses of cricket tours? Why can't a large portion of that revenue be returned to the country from which it originates, so that first-class cricketers there can make enough for 3 square meals a day and a roof above their heads? It is outrageous that the top cricketers in India, other than the 5 or 6 best and most popular ones, must struggle to make ends meet. And that retired international cricketers there live in abject poverty, while the administrative cost of the ICC includes a comfortable pension plan.

ICC, please explain what you plan to do with our money. Your plan to pull a fast one on the Indian players and deprive them of sponsorship earnings has been throughly exposed and defeated - now YOU need to explain why cash comes before the game for you. No administrative body of any business retains 80% of the earnings of the business - the profits MUST be returned to the game instead of bankrolled, and a large part of it must also go back to the development of the game in the country from which the bulk of that revenue comes: a country which happens to also be one in which a large portion of the population, and hence its potential cricketing talent, lives in abject poverty. Instead, amazingly, Indians have to put up with sickening injustices by the ICC, including the still-unresolved matter of disgraced referee Mike Deness.

ICC: it's about time you do something to earn some of those "administrative expenses". The state of the game is poor. Return the cash to cricket, help the game along, correct the injustices, and don't be afraid to acknowledge the source of the revenue.

Indian Cricket Message Board