Rohit Sharma and Mitchell Starc have been heroes to many cricket followers for a long time but they are my heroes for the moment because I enjoy the ambition to live in a parallel universe. Doing things differently and bucking trends has always deeply appealed to me.
India’s captain, Rohit, said after the World Test Championship final that it should be a three-match series and bemoaned the fact that such an important match came just 10 days after the IPL finished. It was akin to a pastry-chef complaining about being fat after eating his own cakes. He offered no suggestion about how, or where to fit another two Tests into the international schedule but it was a wonderful and welcome nod to the importance he places on Test cricket.
Australian captain, Pat Cummins, likened the showdown to the Olympic Games in which there is only one race for the gold medal after the heats have been completed. He was also perfectly clear what the victory and title as World Test Champions meant to him and his team: “Ask anyone in our change-room what their favourite format is and they’ll all have the same answer,” Cummins said.
It’s like having favourite uncles, or even children. You may not be able to disguise your preference, but you daren’t say a word against the others. Especially when the onerous uncle gives you the best birthday presents.
Although the proprietors of the new world order of T20 Leagues around the world would have us believe that they are merely following global trends rather than setting them, the truth is that millions of cricket lovers around the world – inside and outside of India – are feeling bewildered and lost by the changes in the game’s structure and apparent values.
It’s time to front-up to those doubts and do something positive amidst the confusion because confronting fears is usually a good thing and, also, there isn’t much choice. It is pointless wishing for a return to the way things ‘were’. Cricket is now on an irreversible trajectory towards a new age.
This may be hard to digest but many aspects of the old age were antiquated and have been for many decades. Much as I adore first-class cricket and would write and broadcast anything to advocate its preservation and campaign for its continuation, the whisper was never far from my ear. It is a luxury for both the players and spectators – in its current format.
Much as players enjoy the highs, lows, competitive thrust and long hours of the four and five-day game, the days of meaningful audiences sharing that joy, in-person, passed somewhere between the 1960s and 1980s (except in England).
Without a significant and meaningful first-class structure to support it, Test cricket can’t really survive - but not enough clinical and dispassionate thought has been dedicated to defining how that cricket should be played and staged. Is it entertainment, or preparation for something higher? Is it in the market for an audience, and if so, what sort?
Which brings me, quixotically, to Starc. Like Rohit, he was speaking out of ‘rhythm’ in an interview with the brilliant Guardian correspondent, Andy Bull. The article highlighted the fact that Starc has not played Franchise T20 cricket for a decade, costing him an estimated $10million.
“Being able to spend time with my family is part of it,” Starc said. It is difficult enough finding time to spend with his wife, Australian captain, Alyssa Healy, without spending two months at the IPL. “But it is also about getting myself in a position where I can play my best cricket for Australia. I’d certainly love to play in the IPL again, but my goal for a long time has been to be at my best for Australia, no matter the format,” Starc said.
Starc played two seasons with the Royal Challengers Bangalore: “I enjoyed it…but Australia will always sit at the top. I don’t regret any of it, money will come and go but I’m very grateful for the opportunities I’ve had. Over a hundred years of Test cricket and there’s been less than 500 men who have played it for Australia, that in itself makes it very special to be a part of it.”
What madness is this? Kevin Pietersen’s Twitter rants would have us all believe that MAXIMISING revenue during short playing careers was a non-negotiable for cricketers. No question about the quality of life for cricketers with a more rounded and less ‘driven’ outlook. Starc, however, may look back on his life – from his multi-million dollar waterside Sydney home – and reflect that his enjoyment of it had included his life’s prime years.
“There’s nothing I love more in cricket than to sit back with my teammates at the end of a Test win and reflect on the success we’ve had that week. To be able to pull on the baggy green with a lot of my close mates, guys I’ve grown up in the game with. I mean, franchise cricket is great, but you can be bought or sold or traded in 12 months, whereas this is an opportunity that I’ve been fortunate enough to have over 10 years now.”
There will be many cricketers in the years to come who cannot, or will not, refuse the millions of dollars. And good for them. But in a parallel universe, they might consider the ‘cost’ of their lucrative lifestyle.
This is the inevitable, hence utterly predictable and yawnsome natural progression of any Capitalist based program. Which is most of the planet unfortunately.
And here, while the ECB attempt to catch up (again) with India & Australia from their deckchairs, the amateur game is decaying rapidly. Perhaps its not where big bucks or stars are. But then pro sport is very good at knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing
Let's have more Mitchell Starcs in governance perhaps?
And some women.
Please
It’s so hard to comprehend, but my beloved sport has fell to the evil of money and it’s never com8mg back. I can see me not subscribing to,sports channels anymore as I don’t want to see millionaires playing Mickey Mouse cricket. I will instead go to Chelmsford and watch county cricket.