Anatomy of a cricket election
View(s):Periodically we do take up this subject from various angles; yet unlike any other tug-of-war, this battle for the local cricket election has its own intrigue. Over and over again we have discussed how the game of cricket’s governance declined since 1996, and thus the game slithered into a political soup.
As a game, yes, the game of cricket did have its own flourish, where Sri Lanka transformed itself from an inconspicuous minnow to a well-recognised mid-level cricketing power. Yet, it happened mostly because of the inherent cricket structure that needed no railroads to run on.
From the moment we discovered the magic formula that helped us win the cricket world cup in 1996, the transformation occurred more by cause than design. From the world cup winning combination of Arjuna, Aravinda and Mahanama ilk, there were players who took the baton and ran the next lap. Among them were Muttiah Muralitharan, Chaminda Vaas, Sanath Jayasuriya and Hashan Tillekeratne. Though they were part and parcel of the 1996 combination, they were the next generation of players who gelled to form the subsequent lap of the Lankan cricket marathon. While the second half of the 1996 combination was in place, the next lot of players – Marvan Atapattu, Mahela Jayawardena, Tillekeratne, Dilshan, Kumar Sangakkara and to a some extent Thilan Samaraweera were shaping up to fill in the blanks and keep the Lankan machine work with equal timing.
This transformation did not occur because the Lankan cricket administration nurtured and nourished the system. It happened because the inborn nursery of Lankan cricket had developed its own strong root network that performed like clockwork, with or without the support of the administration.
Starting from the century old school cricket system, the game of cricket had its own branching system, be it club cricket or any other form. The school nucleus was small, lean and mean and more often than not, the budding nationals were recognised while still at school.
From the names which were mentioned before, it was only Kumar Sangakkara who did not have direct impact in school cricket in his passage to national honours. However being an old boy of Trinity College, he too had sound basics which he learnt during junior grades and thus his transformation was rather smooth.
When you analyse a cross-section of players mentioned above, school cricket has been the cornerstone of our success in cricket. From the initial breakthrough in 1996, they were all part and parcel of the age old system that played the game in the very formative form.
In the two decades since Sri Lanka won the cricket World Cup, no one could deny that there has been a decline in ethics and standards, contributing to the erosion of the very system that they are supposed to help and nourish. Through the post-1996 governing system, how many more cricketers have come through the system with equal ability and class?
Yes, you could paste names like, Angelo Mathews and Lasith Malinga on the board, but, the list is short — far too short for comfort.
So, for twenty years of warring at cricket elections, what has the game of cricket achieve administratively? May be very little. However, during this period, we made some other achievements in our cricket administration. Yes, we have carved out three clans — strong as mafia dons in cricket. Yes, the system has nurtured three clans – the Sumathipala clan, the Dharmadasa clan and the Ranatunga clan. They have been in the prowl in the thick and thin. The administration has been mostly in their custody in the past twenty years. At the same time the administrations also have been interspersed by some Interim Committees. That is mainly because of the ills of the governing system.
It is against this very background the next Cricket AGM or the Cricket Board elections are to be held, come December.
With this status quo at hand, it is interesting to learn what this process is and what its anatomy is made of.
Obviously the core is manned by the players who have either been in the helm and have held the reins of power or strong enough to make the change and take over power. They are in a camp led by Thilanga Sumathipala and Jayantha Dharmadasa. Then there is the group that consists of Arjuna Ranatunga, Nishantha Ranatunga, Upali Dharmadasa and Mohan de Silva.
The third force is K. Mathivanan, a strong player with a clout at one time, but looks non-committal right now.
Since Thilanga Sumathipala and Arjuna Ranatunga are parliamentarians and holding posts – the former as deputy speaker and the latter as Ports Minister — have to obtain the political nod to contest. It is reported that they were awaiting the return of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe for a final decision.
The next category is past senior national cricketers who have the game at heart. They have served the game in many capacities and some even have led the administration as chairmen of Interim Committees, though they do not take part in the election process. They are players like Sidath Wettimuny (who is the incumbent chairman of the government appointed cricket Interim Committee), Ranjith Fernando, Michael Tissera, Anura Tennakoon, Aravinda de Silva, Bandula Warnapura and Duleep Mendis.
The third category comprises mostly non cricketers. They are powerful enough to get into the influential administrative positions, but, are not block vote holders. They are mostly affiliated to the corporate sector. The list reads as – Prakash Schaffter, Ashok Pathirage, Kushil Gunasekera, Asanga Seneviratne, Charith Senanayake (played international cricket) and Ana Punchihewa.
Then there is an influential set of players and cricketers who are very vibrant, but, stop short of getting mingled in the electoral process. Their names are synonymous with the administrative process. They include Sanath Jayasuriya, Hashan Tillekeratne, Pramodya Wickremasinghe, Brendon Kuruppu – (All past Test cricketers), Hirantha Perera and Jayantha Seneviratne.
Last, but not the least is the block vote holders. They get involved in the process on various counts. Most of these bloc vote holders have more than one reason to get involved in the process.
Heading the list is former national cricketers Jayananda Warnaweera who was recently interviewed by ICC anti-corruption officials on match fixing charges and also was barred from getting involved as curator of the Galle International Cricket Stadium.
Now with an election in the frame and Jayantha Dharmadasa being the president of Galle CC and one of the close confidants of Warnaweera, there may be different curves taking shape.
Also in their list are names like A.R.M. Aroos, Dilshan de Silva, Priyantha Algama, Shibly Azeez, Shammi Silva, Sunil Mohotti, Jayantha Paranathala, Sumith Perera, Dunstan Goluhewa, the ever green Nuski Mohammed, Janaka Pathirana and Sujeewa Godaliyedda.
Then at the same time there are players like Kumar Sangakkara, Mahela Jayawardena, Chaminda Vaas, Muttiah Muralitharan and Chandika Hathurusingha who would be happy to serve the cause of cricket if the proper seats are filled by fitting candidates. As a matter of fact, the administrative system has only bred a list of political animals who have not served the purpose of cricket in the past twenty years.
During the next elections, surely there would be some people who would be elected and some who would creep in with the political charge. Yet, if the system with such a lot of power and money has managed only two cricketers of international class in the past two decades, is there any purpose in our holding elections anymore?