Cricket Australia's decision to nominate John Howard as its candidate for the top job at the International Cricket Council is as pitiful as it is disrespectful. Howard's knowledge of cricket is more characterised by enthusiasm than depth or imagination. Plain and simple, he is not qualified for the job. Moreover, the way in which he has been plucked from the sidelines shows CA in the worst possible light. Rather than recommending a retired politician, no matter how eminent, CA ought to be getting behind the splendid candidate suggested by its counterpart across the Tasman. Instead it stands accused on intransigence.
For several months Australia and New Zealand have been at loggerheads over the appointment of the next deputy chairman of the ICC. Under the protocol adopted by all nations a few years ago, it is this region's turn to choose the next senior man and the two nations were expected to produce a single candidate by the end of last year. Instead they kept arguing and were obliged to ask the ICC to extend the deadline by two months. Inevitably the other nations chuckled. Administrative bickering was supposed to be a subcontinental custom.
It is an important appointment because the occupant will take the top chair when Sharad Pawar's term finishes in 2012. Pawar takes over the reins from David Morgan in July. Although the ICC lacks the power assigned to other governing bodies, it presides over the game's operations in countries ranging from England to India, Papua New Guinea to Chile, and many stops between. It is responsible for the development of the game and striking the right balance between traditional and contemporary formats. Likewise it is charged with keeping an eye on drugs, gambling, easy money and the other modern blights. For all its faults, the ICC remains the powerhouse of an ever-expanding game.
Unable to resolve the impasse, the Australian and New Zealand boards contemplated putting up separate candidates and allowing ICC countries to choose between them. To that end rogue states such as Zimbabwe were buttered up in the most lamentable manner. Alarmed by the return of the very barracking the new system was designed to avoid, the ICC told the respective boards that it was incumbent on them to come up with a single name that others were duty bound to accept.
Accordingly the parties went back to the drawing board. Of course the talks were described as friendly but weeks passed and no resolution was announced.
Australia's position has been well nigh indefensible. Unable to produce a serious candidate of its own, CA ought to have gracefully withdrawn. Its reluctance to back Jack Clarke, its own chairman, told the tale. Clarke is bright, likeable and committed but lacks the gravitas and discretion required by the position. In other words, he likes a drink and a yarn. Rather than withdrawing, though, CA considered presentable internal candidates and thoughts turned to Mark Taylor and Dr Harry Harinath. Taylor counts among the most highly regarded of the game's thinkers. Furthermore he can flog environmentally friendly air-conditioners without breaking sweat. But he has a young family and a large television contract and it was too early for him. Harinath's ambitions know no bounds but he lacks stature and exposure.
All the more reason to accept New Zealand's long-standing and impressive candidate, Sir John Anderson. ICC sources confirm that he is respected as a straight talker blessed with leadership. Besides, an Australian had already taken the top position with Malcolm Gray counting among the previous bigwigs at the ICC. All the more reason to put other considerations aside and back the Kiwi.
Instead CA began to search for plausible external candidates. Although it was customary, CA was under no obligation to restrict itself to board members. Convinced that a heavyweight was needed to counter the all-consuming and much resented power of the Indians, thoughts turned to Howard. After all, he was a cricketing man and at a loose end. Pawar himself is a senior member of the Indian cabinet, so it is not unknown for even current ministers to involve themselves in running the game at the highest levels. Suspicions that Pawar might use his position as ICC president to advance a narrow agenda have been a motivation The notion that an aged and conservative white politician with scant knowledge of the intricacies of the game can act as a counterbalance is far-fetched. Howard does not know enough about cricket or cricket business and, besides, is a divisive figure.
New Zealand is entitled to be upset about Australia's churlish attempt to block its candidate. A mixture of pride and fear of Indian power has unhinged CA. And so Howard's name emerged as the pall of black smoke cleared over Melbourne's Jolimont Street.
Email a friend