News
Measuring Sri Lanka cricket’s success- Big bank balance or performance on the field
View(s):What is the yardstick to judge the success of cricket administration in the country? Is it a fat bank balance in the accounts of Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) or performance on the field by the cricketers.
Judging by the remarks of the contenders for positions at the forthcoming SLC elections to the financial standing of SLC, it seems to be what counts. In fact, several months back, SLC ran big media advertisements proudly proclaiming the amount of funds accumulated in the Bank accounts of SLC.
No reference was made to the success or otherwise, of the national cricket team which has been going through a bad spell for some time. Going by the statements made at the pre-election Press Conferences, the emphasis on the finances of SLC is unlikely to change, whoever is elected to office.
At a Press Conference on Friday, Jayantha Dharmadasa and K. Mathivanan, two Vice President’s under Thilanga Sumathipala, highlighted the waste and lack of transparency in the administration which, according to Dharmadasa, prompted him to tender his resignation from SLC in September 2016.
The two claimed that, in a joint letter to Sumathipala in June 2016, they had pointed out the need for transparency. The matters highlighted in their letter included the non adherence to procurement guidelines for award of tenders, HR related matters and expenses related to CSR projects such as Cricket Aid.
Why the contents of these letters were not made public earlier is baffling, because remedial action could have been taken, if these matters had been brought to the notice of the authorities at that time.
Sumathipala himself, at another Press Conference, continued the discussion on the SLC’s finances, claiming that, if elections were not held by February 14, 2019, SLC would run the risk of losing Rs 3,600 million.
Neither of the two groups contesting the elections have elaborated on their plans to develop cricket or, help the National Cricket team to perform better.
It is also unfortunate that Sri Lanka has come into the spotlight due to the corruption allegations surrounding Cricket in the country. The ICC has temporarily stationed one of its senior Anti Corruption officers in Colombo to help fight the crisis.
Making a bad situation worse, Minister of Sports Harin Fernando claimed that, recently, an attempt had been made to bribe him, in order to get some players into the national squad. Fernando also stated that Sri Lanka has been labeled the most corrupt by the ICC.
But of what cricket itself? There does not seem to be much hope for the game, if we are to go by the who’s who of the candidates offering themselves for the elections. All of them have, at one time or another, held positions in SLC without much to boast about as achievements in promoting success in the game.
It is therefore self evident that, a complete overhaul of the administration of cricket, through a reorganization of the structures, is necessary. It has to be based on the premise that the cricketers are the most important segment of the game and that, the administration exists to support and finance the development of the game, as well as to facilitate the cricketers to perform at their optimum.
Although the National team is going through a bad patch at the moment, the individual performances of the cricketers at different times shows that the country is not lacking in talent. Being a young and less experienced team, it is only time that can result in maturity. Even the World Cup winning team in 1996 had in its ranks several outstanding players in their prime, who collectively peaked at the correct time, resulting in Sri Lanka’s proud moment of victory on the world stage.
It would be unfair to expect the current team to achieve the same degree of success as their famous predecessors, but given time and the proper support, they have the potential to do much better than how they are performing now. The cricket administrators will have to help create the conditions to help the players play to their full potential.
A few comparisons with the past may help put things in perspective. In 1996, Arjuna Ranatunge’s leadership role played a critical part in the team’s success. Yet, Arjuna himself may not have been able to make such an impact, if his team did not have so many outstanding and experienced campaigners such as Aravinda de Silva, Sanath Jayasuriya and Muttiah Muralitharan among several others.
In recent times, Angelo Mathews, who had to shoulder the responsibilities of captaincy, did not have the benefit of similarly experienced players.
Yet, he was not given sufficient time to build his self confidence, with various disparaging remarks about him being made in public, resulting in his morale being affected and having, at times, to struggle to even keep his place.
The ability to spot talent and keep faith with players who take time to reach their full potential, which practice was prevalent earlier, is absent today, and players are expected to perform quickly or perish. Marvan Attapattu and Jehan Mubarak were two players with whom the Selectors kept faith for a long time despite their repeated failures. Even the cricketing public may have wondered why the Selectors were persisting with the two, despite their not contributing to the scorecard, but the more discerning Selectors gave the two ample opportunity.
The result was that Attapattu proved a tower of strength to the team with his outstanding performances. Unfortunately, Mubarak, despite his capabilities, could not prove himself and had to bow out. In the case of Mathews, careful nurturing and support may have brought out the best in him, which would have added to the benefit of the team.
The question that the authorities have to answer is whether Cricket is a business or a sport. After Sri Lanka’s World Cup success, funds began to flow into the coffers of SLC and thereafter, SLC has begun to have a corporate emphasis, almost at the expense of cricket.
Whatever successes the National team has enjoyed in the past, has primarily been due to the inherent talent of the players. The neglect of management of ‘cricket affairs’ has had an adverse impact on the country’s fortunes on the cricket fields.
A complete overhaul in SLC is necessary, if past glory is to be restored. A suggestion made earlier in this column is worth repeating. It is probably a good idea to delink Cricket from the day-to-day administration of SLC, and have a two-tiered structure of cricket governance.
The Cricket segment of the structure must comprise a Board of Trustees made up of former National cricketers who will have the final say on cricket related matters, and also initiate development plans for the game. The management of SLC should comprise a mix of management experts, professionals and any other categories which may be beneficial to the game.
These broad suggestions should be fine tuned and improved, looking at best practices elsewhere, in order to put cricket back on track and on the world map.
(javidyusuf@gmail.com)