In 1735, an advert proclaimed that a London XI, selected by the Prince of Wales, would meet one from Kent, chosen by the Earl of Middlesex, for a prize of £1000. In 1751, Eton Past & Present challenged the Gentlemen of England for the even princelier sum of £1500. We have almost come full circle.
The Stanford Series has attracted scorn ever since Sir Allen helicoptered to Lord’s carrying a briefcase stuffed with more dollars than Elvis Presley’s estate earns in, ooh, a month. With the credit crunch biting and recession dawning, that scorn has been augmented by distaste, hence Kevin Pietersen’s insistence that he will not tolerate any excessively jubilant celebrations should England beat the Stanford Superstars in next Saturday’s $20m winner-takes-all finale. Oh, that John Terry were so sensitive towards his fellow man every time he haggles over whether he should be paid £135,000 a week or £140,000.
Then there is the sheer fear Twenty20 tournaments of this ilk incite: for the future of Test cricket, yes, but also for the unity of the game. The ECB and the BCCI may at least be on speaking terms but to describe their relationship as warm would be akin to characterising Paris Hilton as a demure young lady. Sure, the Antigua showpiece is the ECB’s way of compensating KP and company for their misfortune in playing for a country whose season clashes with the IPL, but it is also a broadside aimed at what it perceives as the BCCI’s temerity in using its vast revenues to take over the game. Accepting that the boot has swapped feet never comes easy.
The decision to empower the umpires to refer any decision they wish to the greater wisdom of technology has drawn plenty of opprobrium too, not least from Duncan Fletcher, whose advocacy of a referral system has finally found wide support. “[This] essentially means they become the guys who hold the bowler’s hat,” he lamented in today’s Guardian. “It will be very hard to judge whether or not they are actually good umpires.” But is that the point, Duncan? Surely what matters is that we get the best, most accurate decisions, not that we fret about egos?
These are all familiar arguments, and will undoubtedly continue to rage long and loud. And yes, as Fletcher asserts, there are “a few too many questions for comfort”. But being at the crossroads, as the game unquestionably is, is never a comfortable place to be. And if the answers to those questions culminate in a window for a merged IPL/ICL, a revamped Future Tours Programme and a reconstituted ruling body uninfluenced by national interests, all the better. In the meantime, let’s pause and reflect on the one indubitably good thing that could come out of this. Sir Allen Stanford wants to regenerate Caribbean cricket, and ventures such as this cannot hurt.
In the short term, there is every possibility that victory for his Superstars over England, and the unimaginable sums it will bring to Chris Gayle and Co, will accentuate the divide between the leading players and their principal employers, emphasising that talent can flourish and prosper without having to deal with a clutch of inadequate administrators. Which would be no tragedy whatsoever.
In the long term, this could be the latest step on the road to winning back the love of these disunited islands for a game that once defined them and, much more important, united them.
For the first time that I can remember, I agree with everything you've written without reservation! Stanford's funding will be used to expand the first-class domestic season in the West Indies and re-form the West Indies A-team (at least according to the latest from the WICB) so that can only be a positive for cricket in the region.
Posted by: krishna on 10/25/2008
Do you really believe that the "honourable" businessman (oxymorons actually) is doing all this for the benefit of Caribbean cricket? Surely, you have been in his business and that of life in general, to be not so gullible.
Posted by: Lloyd on 10/25/2008
"unimaginable sums ?"Have you seen what American Football,basketball and baseball stars make?Green envy of what our cricket professionals make is nauseating. We do our jobs to make money and its time the great athletes of cricket make some.What is wrong with Pietersen? It's that kind of thinking that chopped off heads during the French Revolution.It would be better if he directed his attention to the IOC President Rogge, who recently,without reason,rejected cricket once more for the Olympics. Only Cricket2012Games.com seems to be paying attention to this travesty.
Posted by: Jackie Litherland on 10/26/2008
History demonstrates that the money match ethos in cricket did not prevail. Now we have Stanford trying to match the nobs of England who hadn't a clue what the spirit of cricket meant and neither has he. The loss is greater than any financial gain to the players. Cricket is hurt by this. It is demeaning to West Indian cricket to claim that prize money for the few is the spur that can save the game there. Sport is under attack by those who fancy making quick bucks out of the game without any concern for the long term. That's how business tycoons think, but sports administrators and commentators?
The Stanford matches are the wrong call at the wrong time and send out the wrong message to our youth. Ironically the world has moved on to show that greed is not the best incentive for success, whether it is in business or sport.
Maybe the IPL is a bubble waiting to burst?
What then? It is interesting that the Press are beginning to question the ethics of the Stanford matches.
Posted by: Asif Sarfraz on 10/27/2008
Is it just me or is this Stanford thing a total flop! I am a cricket fan and watch all forms of the game! But what is a team winning 20 million dollars going to do for cricket! You can't even call it the same as winning a final! Geezers just wasting his 20 mills!
Lalit Modi must be laughing his socks off at this contest!
Posted by: Mark on 11/03/2008
I watched stanford 20/20 last night. It was the most enjoyable 20/20 match I have ever seen. Far more enjoyable than anything Lalit Modi's IPL offered this year. Criticism for this seems to be coming mainly fromm indian and english people. Well they must very worried of a resurgence in caribbean cricket! If Stanford's millions help put Caribbean Cricket at the VERY TOP of cricket again in the future, then I for one will be watching every tournament coming out of the caribbean rather than the overhyped Indian IPL! It seems England fans and Indian fans find it very hard to forget the constant thrashings they got at the hands of the mighty west indians in the 1970s and 1980s but also before those decades, they know Stanford's millions could reignite a resurgence in the caribbean and they are well understandably very afraid. Oh those Malcolm Marshall, Joel Garner and Colin Croft bouncers must be terrifyingly still fresh in their minds!
Posted by: Pratyush on 11/03/2008
God, cant beleive someone liked this 20M match ! It was possibly one of the worst T20 matches ever ! First the pitch seemed not for stroke making, then the players were abysmal ! People would not believe this but it was 3am IST when the match started and i really hoped for a great match but was utterly disaapointed. This was even worse than some ICL matches (which are really bad)!!
Posted by: Mark on 11/03/2008
Pratyush it was England that was bad! They came to the caribbean with a superior complex attitude thinking that the this west indies team would be easy beats, it was worst in your biased mind because England's overpaid cricketers were soundly thrashed. Also give me a west indian cricket crowd over a boring english one or even an overhyped IPL indian frenzied crowd anyday. By the way I like indian cricket especially against australia its some of their immature supporters I can't stand. Who talk a lot of crap on the blogs. I wish some indian supporters can be like some of their india team members like Kumble or Tendulkar who always talk a lot of sense about cricket when they open their mouths.
Posted by: Praveen on 11/06/2008
I think the Stanford 20-20 is a novel tournament.
The final was a disappointment, but it was refreshing to see the West Indies players' hunger and determination to win. Their win is based on hard work and discipline.
6 weeks of physical training and staying away from partying really helped them a lot.
And, I don't think there is anything wrong in pocketing a million dollars for winning a cricket match. From a player's perspective isn't this better than toiling away for months on lifeless wickets in Modi's IPL?
Congrats to the West Indies players for their win.
I hope they can show similar dedication and hunger while playing test matches and ODIs also.
Sure, test matches and ODIs don't pay a million dollars but still the pay is not bad you know?
Posted by: sumit das on 11/07/2008
I have always been a crazy cricket fan, but ever since Sourav's emergence, I have gone absolutely bonkers living and dying a thousand deaths every time he comes to the crease. Cricket will never hold the same charm for me with his imminent departure. Living abroad for the past several years has furthered strengthened my love for the game and especially, Ganguly. Waking up nights to watch him play is common nature for me. I salute him in the twilight of his career and wish him a long and fulfilling life beyond cricket
Rob Steen is a sportswriter and senior lecturer in sports journalism at
the University of Brighton whose books include biographies of Desmond
Haynes and David Gower (1995 Cricket Society Literary Award winner) and
500-1 - The Miracle of Headingley '81. His 2004 investigation for The
Wisden Cricketer, Whatever Happened to the Black Cricketer?, won the
EU Journalism Award For diversity, against discrimination. Sports
Journalism - A Multimedia Primer, his latest offering, will be
published by Routledge in August.