The old boys network just isn't working

Tatends Taibu: retired after death threats from a provincial chairman © Getty Images

Last weekend, Malcolm Speed and Ehsan Mani made some widely reported remarks expressing the ICC's concern about the increase in verbal sparring between international teams. "We don't want cricket being reduced to a level where it turns into a hooligans' sport," Mani said, "and the spirit of the game is eroded."

Commendable sentiments. Well, they would be were it not for the fact that while the ICC chief executive and chairman tackle that particular issue, they are powerless to act while the very fabric of the international game is torn apart and one of the ten Full Members - Zimbabwe - is allowed to self-destruct. The captain has quit after death threats, a team-and-a-half of decent cricketers have retired, and the senior board members are accused of gross mismanagement. And yet, the ICC is not empowered to lift a finger.

This situation raises a more general suspicion that the ICC - or, to be fair, its own constitution - is increasingly out of touch with the demands of the modern game. For much of its 96-year existence, it took a backseat while world cricket rumbled on, dominated by the old Anglo-Australian powerbase. It is only in the last decade, and thanks to the kick from Jagmohan Dalmiya, that the balance of power has shifted and it has become a driving force in the game. But while it does do much good across the world, one of its key roles in the 21st century has to be to act as the game's policeman. Never has the need been greater.

That it doesn't is down to its own remit and the cosy, self-interested approach of its directors, who appear to value making money for their national boards and looking after each other's backs above all else. The endless washing of hands over who is responsible for tackling - hell, let's start with even acknowledging - the Zimbabwe crisis means that nothing will be done until it is far too late. It might already be anyway.

But, as Tim May, the chief executive of FICA, the international players' association, so rightly observed: how can players take the ICC seriously when it pontificates about on-field standards, when it refuses to even take a passing look at numerous allegations of widespread abuses behind the scenes?

The documentation supplied to the ICC alleging financial and governance issues within Zimbabwe Cricket would make even the most ardent advocate of a laissez-faire approach baulk. And it is worth remembering that much of the money that is unaccounted for has come from the ICC in the first place. Surely, it is not unreasonable when handing over millions of dollars to someone to politely ask them to explain where it has gone when you are alerted that it might not have been spent as intended? It is to the ICC.

Before this is dismissed as a unique situation, it is not. It mirrors what happened in Kenya in the last couple of years when there were many similar allegations of mismanagement over several years which the ICC chose to ignore. It took the intervention of the Kenyan government to stir the ICC into action, and the former chairman is now awaiting trial on charges of stealing $3.3 million from the Kenyan Cricket Association. But the cash has gone and the damage could take years to overcome.

It is simply not good enough for a world governing body to do so little about Zimbabwe in the face of such overwhelming evidence. Speed and Mani lean back on the limitations of the ICC constitution; the directors claim it is not down to them individually to act - and so nothing is done.

So what is the ICC about? Well, in essence, the administration, development and promotion of cricket globally. In many regards, it does an excellent job and there are many extremely committed people working for the greater good of cricket. But where it can - and should - tackle some really thorny issues, it is found woefully wanting.

It is not even as if the ICC itself is a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs out of their collective depth. It is a multi-million dollar business - many would argue that it is the preoccupation with making even more cash that is causing it to overlook more pressing obligations.

In the most recent accounts, for the year ending in March 2005, Speed was paid $558,273. In the previous two years he had received sizable increases (in 2002-03 he was paid $416,615 and in 2003-04 $475,902) and on top of his salary, all travelling and associated expenses are covered. That kind of salary means that he has to get his hands dirty and start tackling major issues, and not just obsess about the spirit of cricket and worry about the width of Shoaib Akhtar's wristbands. The remuneration is in the big league, and the responsibility should also be.

What is clear is that the individual boards are so wrapped up in their own self-importance that they do not care what happens outside their narrow confines. Someone detached from it all has to start restoring order to an increasingly anarchical set-up. It should be the responsibility of the ICC to assume that role, and Speed and Mani should be working their socks off behind the scenes to try to get a major review of its rules and scope of operations underway as soon as feasibly possible to tackle the problems of a changing world.

Member countries have to be more accountable and their operations more transparent. They benefit from massive sums generated by international cricket and so, like most other recipients of large sums of cash, they should fully account for it. It should be the role of the ICC not only to generate and disperse the funds, but to make sure they are used correctly. It should also take more responsibility for the welfare of the players and not just worry about treating them like errant schoolboys. Both these changes will cost, but take a look at the latest ICC accounts - it can afford them. More to the point, cricket cannot afford for it not to.

The ICC is in the spotlight, and so it is what it doesn't do that will often be more newsworthy than the positives. But it should be given the powers to be accountable and to tackle major issues. At the moment, it seems too often that it acts to deal with relatively minor problems, and turns a blind eye to far more complex - but crucial - ones. We are all the game's stakeholders. Treat us with a little more respect.