A recent cricexec poll revealed that 78% of global cricket industry executives support the International Cricket Council (ICC) assuming greater central control over the sport’s calendar, while 22% prefer maintaining the current decentralized approach. This consensus underscores mounting concerns about the sustainability and coherence of cricket’s scheduling.
Challenges in the Current Scheduling System
The World Cricketers’ Association (WCA), has described the existing scheduling model as “broken and unsustainable.” In August 2024, the WCA initiated an independent review focusing on global scheduling, the sport’s economics, and player employment. The review panel included former Pakistan women’s captain Sana Mir and ex-England and Wales Cricket Board CEO Tom Harrison.
Tom Moffat, CEO of the WCA, in conversation with cricexec, highlighted the rapid growth of the T20 landscape, noting that leagues are emerging “in pretty much all parts of the world.” He acknowledged the benefits of this expansion, stating, “That’s a great thing for the game because it’s new opportunities, it’s new eyeballs for players. It’s a new earning opportunity as well.” However, Moffat emphasized the lack of structure integrating domestic leagues with international cricket, leading to “a full calendar of domestic leagues set up alongside a full calendar of international cricket.” This overlap forces players to choose between national representation and lucrative domestic opportunities. He stressed the need for a system where both landscapes can “coexist,” suggesting that “the best way to do that, we think, is through global scheduling windows.”
Advocacy for Centralized Scheduling
Andrew Breetzke, CEO of the South African Cricketers’ Association, emphasized the significance of calendar control in a guest post for cricexec: “If you control the calendar, you control the sport.”
He further elaborated on the ICC’s current limitations: “The ICC do not control the calendar, so they are not in control of cricket. The evidence of this is the proliferation of franchise T20 leagues and the pressure being placed on the bilateral international cricket schedule.”
Breetzke advocates for the ICC to establish clear windows for franchise leagues and international cricket to prevent scheduling conflicts: “The ICC could, for example, create windows where franchise leagues are played… Then there’s space for bilateral international cricket to be played.”
He also emphasized the need for strong leadership: “We need strong leadership at the ICC that starts by looking at the calendar. Because that’s what other sports do.”
Australian Test captain Pat Cummins has also called for designated periods for Test cricket, similar to the Indian Premier League’s scheduling. He believes that specific windows would simplify decision-making for players balancing international and franchise commitments: “If we can have specific windows for IPL but then also Test windows, that makes the decision-making for the players a lot easier.”
Global Scheduling Windows
As Moffat told cricexec, the best solution is through global scheduling windows:
“We want to see a system in which (international and franchise cricket) can coexist. The best way to do that, we think, is through global scheduling windows. And we know the players are really supportive of that. And most recent survey data and all the anecdotal feedback we’re getting from them is that that’s what they want to see as well. It’s not necessarily a healthy situation to have two competing side-by-side calendars. We want to see them come together in a really coherent structure set up with some global scheduling windows.”
With respect to implementing global scheduling windows, Moffat provided a broad outline of how they would work, including more direct scheduling competition among franchise leagues:
“there’s going to have to be some cricket competing with some cricket. And, we think that if you’re going to keep international cricket strong and best versus best, ultimately that needs some clear air and some clear windows in the calendar to ensure that happens. Which naturally will mean that in the other windows where there’s domestic leagues being played, those domestic leagues or some of those domestic leagues are probably going to have to compete with each other – that’s just going be a reality. Something’s going to have to give and everyone can’t have everything in a cricketing landscape. That’s a global landscape. Everyone obviously wants access to the best players in the world, which is a really good thing if you’re one of the best players in the world. But we also want to make sure that we’re setting up the game sustainably in a way that can coexist into the future.”
Industry Leaders Advocate for Collaboration
Caribbean Premier League (CPL) CEO Pete Russell has previously urged T20 leagues to collaborate on scheduling of franchise leagues to prevent overlaps and ensure player availability. He emphasized the importance of working together to maintain the sport’s integrity and provide players with clear career pathways, providing examples of when these tournaments were able to streamline clashes during the summer season:
“[The ECB] have a defined window that they have to play in, and it happened that we could move everything out to ensure that we didn’t clash [with the Hundred]. It makes absolutely zero sense if you’ve got [Sunil] Narine and [Andre] Russell having to fly back the day before the final of the Hundred. That’s in no one’s interests, and certainly not the Hundred’s… It’s not rocket science. We should be able to find a solution where leagues don’t overlap, and players are available for all.”
Conclusion
The cricexec poll results reflect a strong consensus among cricket industry executives for the ICC to assume greater control over the global cricket calendar. Centralized scheduling is seen as a potential solution to current challenges, aiming to create a more sustainable and balanced framework that accommodates the interests of players, national boards, and domestic leagues alike.
Name of Author: Zee Zaidi
