The End Game?

Your Next President Of The ICC

This blog is absolutely no fan of Giles Clarke. His appearance in Death of a Gentleman was perfect pantomime villain, except he was deadly serious. He wasn’t playing for laughs or entertainment, he was self-justification personified. I’ve talked to a number of journalists, cricket writers and bloggers on line and it seems that he is the one subject that unifies all of them. I’ve hardly heard anything good about him.

The carving up of the ICC into the Big Three was something that got us all going. We aren’t alone, but one thing running through this blog and with our commenters is the love of much overseas cricket. Blackwash evokes the memories of the great West Indian teams. New Zealand are, in recent times, a thrill to watch. Pakistan evoke great passions in the commenters, Sri Lanka as well, especially with Sanga and Mahela. There is nothing but huge praise for Dale Steyn, and anger that we play a great team so infrequently. There’s unanimity on the need for a larger World Cup.

The justification Clarke raised was that when the ICC was being carved up, it was he who got India into the tent and not left outside to effectively go it alone. For this the ICC tournaments were handed exclusively to the Big Three for the next decade. Clarke got on the side of Srinivasan, despite his travails at home with the betting crisis involving his son-in-law at Chennai Super Kings. Srini became ICC Head Honcho, and Clarke got to be his replacement in 2016. It was neat, it was tidy.

Then Srini fell, and the game changed. I remember asking a source what the impact of the new broom in Indian cricket would have on the ICC. At the time he was non-commital but had some views…

He thought the grounds had shifted but had no idea if Manohar was going to be pro- or anti-Clarke.

We believe that the election was a fudge, to prevent a bloodbath at the ECB. That’s an accepted view.

He stated that if the BCCI professed to not knowing everything about international cricket, Clarke would be in the room as a loud voice telling them. But he was certainly of the view that Clarke’s position looked less solid.

I might bring some more, but need to speak to the individual first.

It appears as though Manohar has indicated he’s not sold on Clarke’s charms (backing the wrong horse I would imagine, Giles) and now we see the intimations that the vote will be open, there will be freedom to choose (I wonder if there will be an Indian candidate) and that some of the Big Three grab will be returned. These sound like good stories.

The Telegraph is all over it. Nick Hoult is doing great work. The Independent is silent. Andrew Miller has run this prominently on Cricinfo, the Mail is silent. And The Guardian. The Guardian is silent too. The Guardian is not interested. The Guardian does not mention it. The Guardian doesn’t really do ICC business unless it’s internet rights for the Beeb and something that tried to paint Giles in a good light. I think their coverage is shameful on the future of the sport.

Now the ECB has a dilemma. They created a post which would allow Clarke to go to the ICC and do his thing. Now, on initial assessments, he looks as popular with India, Australia and South Africa as a rat sandwich, and now we are faced with a man in a position where he’s a liability and not an asset, and there is no clear path on what to do with him. The ECB’s next move is going to be extremely interesting….he doesn’t look the sort to go quietly.

It was said by Clarke that no-one should be interested in sports administration. Look over there, that implied. People aren’t “looking over there” but the Guardian, for one, is. I don’t have time to dedicate to this post now, but hope it gives the flavour and welcome insights and views (and please add related links when you come across them – who knows, there might be a Guardian one there one day).

Come hither, Al, and look at my soul….er, I mean this is all David Collier’s idea!

43 thoughts on “The End Game?

    • LordCanisLupus Feb 1, 2016 / 8:54 pm

      Oh no, Dennis. Oh no. Don’t count your chooks before they are hatched.

      And we may not be shot of him, either….


  1. Arron Wright Feb 1, 2016 / 9:14 pm

    Kick the Guardian’s sorry appeasing ass all the way from here to Dubai.


  2. Julie Feb 1, 2016 / 9:25 pm

    That terrible man will have a “plan B”. You can be sure of that.Why does he have this power over the “little men” in the ECB? We can only hope he is gone soon and maybe a new broom through ECB.I wish.!!!


  3. jomesy Feb 1, 2016 / 9:42 pm

    I’m naturally an optimist (and I know how niave this sounds) but, one day (and I expect in my lifetime) this website will be one of the sources referred to in a review of all that has gone wrong with cricket.

    So thank you


    • northernlight71 Feb 1, 2016 / 9:54 pm

      One could read your comment in quite an unflattering way, if one chose to 🙂
      But I know what you mean.


  4. pktroll (@pktroll) Feb 2, 2016 / 7:27 am

    I will only start celebrating when not only is he not in place as ICC Chairman but that the terms of redistribution of funds are put into place.


    • LordCanisLupus Feb 2, 2016 / 8:42 am

      And still the Guardian remains silent. Not a big enough story eh?


      • Sherwick Feb 2, 2016 / 9:19 am

        Well, if they make it a story then their sources of ECB leaks and party invitations with Cookie and Straussie may dry up.


      • Arron Wright Feb 2, 2016 / 9:22 am

        Weekly Whimsy will deal with it later today.

        Unless it covers the U19 World Cup, of course. Or maybe the BBC web thing, which obviously trumps both.

        Spoilt for choice, eh?

        Probably means a piece on a paternalistic local entrepreneur in Bedfordshire who generously allows kids to use a former school playing field he bought from the local authority.


      • Rooto Feb 2, 2016 / 12:01 pm

        Andy Bull probably rehashing a Mankad article as we speak.
        Look! Shiny, shiny!


      • Arron Wright Feb 2, 2016 / 12:06 pm

        The Mankad should be renamed the squirrel. As in “oh look, a…”.


  5. Mark Feb 2, 2016 / 10:37 am

    ” the is dependent is silent” ” the Guardian is silent too.”

    Says it all. My god how those two anti establishmemt newspapers have fallen. The Guardian has allowed its chief cricket writer to dominate and mould it’s coverage despite having a plethora of conflicts of interest. As for the Indie, well it’s completely lost its way. It stands for absolutely nothing these days. A hollow shell of pro establishment horse manure.



  6. Arron Wright Feb 2, 2016 / 10:50 am

    Is it Dave Tickner’s birthday?


    • Arron Wright Feb 2, 2016 / 10:58 am

      Shameful: Legitimate run out when your alternative is to defend two runs in six balls.
      Not shameful: That guy whose picture is at the top of this article.


      • Mark Feb 2, 2016 / 11:05 am

        Once again Selvey shows he doesn’t know the rules.

        It’s legal. There is no such thing as the spirit of cricket. It’s all bullshit living in people like Selveys head. If he doesn’t like the rule he should get on to his chums at the ICC to get the rule changed.

        But he does not understand the workings of the ICC, or at least that what he once boasted in his arrogant fake humour.

        The spirit of cricket is something English morons like Selvy think other should adhere too. Read up on WG Grace Mr Selvey. There was no spirit of cricket there.


      • LordCanisLupus Feb 2, 2016 / 11:27 am

        Another Mankad? Spare me those arguments again. From both sides.


      • Arron Wright Feb 2, 2016 / 12:15 pm


        How can you say that? Look at this gem:


      • Arron Wright Feb 2, 2016 / 1:30 pm

        For people who looked at Twitter the weekend before last, Tickers’s tweet here is a work of art, perfectly balanced between two equally apposite meanings:


      • RufusSG Feb 2, 2016 / 2:51 pm

        Heh, clever. Also, christ, people are entitled to their views on Mankading (I’m fine with it personally) but if my dad was the sort of guy who would ban me for a year for doing something that was within the rules, I’d question what the point of playing was in the first place. His proposal to throw the West Indies out of the competition is equally utterly delusional.


    • LordCanisLupus Feb 2, 2016 / 12:04 pm

      You know, it’s not the conclusion that bothers me. It’s the paucity of logic involved.


      • Arron Wright Feb 2, 2016 / 12:07 pm

        Loved the Gower bit. Loved it. I too learnt all I know about his career from “They Think It’s All Over”.


        • LordCanisLupus Feb 2, 2016 / 12:21 pm

          KP did not have the temperament. I mean. FFS. What does that even mean?


      • Alec Feb 2, 2016 / 4:35 pm

        Did you see KP’s temperament in team meetings? Constant looking out the windows, whistling, holding of opinions. You’re never going to score 8000 odd test runs and 23 centuries like that.


    • ianrsa Feb 2, 2016 / 12:38 pm

      Hi Arron I replied to you on the Danger signs thread.



    • Mark Feb 2, 2016 / 1:42 pm

      Joe Root is Englands greatest batsman in living memory?

      Er, yes……. if you’re 5 years old.


      • Sherwick Feb 2, 2016 / 1:18 pm

        Or Strauss, the new Comma, Aplomb.


      • Zephirine Feb 2, 2016 / 2:46 pm

        If I was a nasty mean-spirited person and not a real cricket fan, I might suspect that Alastair might not be awfully pleased.


      • RufusSG Feb 2, 2016 / 3:00 pm

        Leaving aside the whole “real fan” debate, do you honestly think Cook really gives a toss whether he’s on the cover or not? It feels like we’re just attacking strawmen at this point instead of the things (of which there are plenty to choose from, I’m not denying) Cook has actually done wrong – that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t speculate about people’s actions at all, but it just seems implausible to me that he would care about this.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. Mark Feb 2, 2016 / 1:38 pm

    So we will now be given a lecture on the ‘spirit of cricket ‘ by the same people who thought it was tickety boo for Selvey to have as his cricket highlight of one whole year Mr Strauss calling KP a C***.

    There’s your spirit of cricket right there!

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Sean B Feb 2, 2016 / 1:41 pm

    Anyone else completely bored of this “spirit of cricket” debate? Interesting to Selfey’s “shabby” tweet. Guardian more than happy to talk about Mankad’s yet still not a peep on Giles Clarke!

    Perhaps we could set up a countdown clock on the blog???


    • LordCanisLupus Feb 2, 2016 / 1:42 pm

      I respect all views on the Mankad. Noone is right. It’s that sort of debate.

      Ah Selvey. Bless.


      • Alec Feb 2, 2016 / 5:02 pm

        Surely the only person that can fully claim to be in the right is Keemo Paul, who saw his team through to the World Cup quarter finals. Regardless of where one may stand on the issue, he did what people of accused the West Indies of not doing for a long time- doing everything in his power to win his team the match.

        All this “spirit of cricket” stuff is a lot of pontificating on the ephemeral, while a mankad is an acceptance that the situation may occasionally call for the strictly necessary.


      • pktroll (@pktroll) Feb 3, 2016 / 7:28 am

        I’m pro mankading Alec in the sense that I reckon that much of the so called ‘spirit of cricket’ is created by batsmen. For years, the non strikers have taken liberties and it was good to see some get their commupence, even Jos Buttler and England’s puffery at that time from Cook and Moores only made me more intransigent. It is hard on the young Zimbabwean boy, but I guess that means he won’t be backing up quite so far in future.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s