Ken Borland

If ever there was any doubt that cricket is being captured by a greedy Big Three, the release of the Future Tours Programme by the International Cricket Council makes it abundantly clear.

Between 2023 and 2027, 777 international matches will be played by the various nations recognised as Full Members by the ICC. Of those, 173 will be Tests, but 121 of those will be played by just three countries – England (43), Australia (40) and India (38).

And that Big Three are not playing more Test cricket out of some altruistic concern for its future. It is simply because they are the only countries who can afford to play so much Test cricket, largely because they have screwed over the other nine Full Members of the ICC by hogging most of the financial returns of the game for themselves.

Because Tests are expensive to put on and don’t generate as much broadcasting revenue, the poorer nations are forced to play more white-ball cricket – ODIs and T20s.

And it is clear South Africa – whatever the wonderful impact they bring to international cricket – have now been relegated by the Big Three into the pauper category.

Over the next five years, the Proteas will play just 28 Tests and only two of those will be three-Test series. So that means 11 two-match series, which are thoroughly underwhelming and unsatisfactory.

In terms of white-ball cricket, they will play 39 ODIs, the least of all, and 46 T20s. Only Zimbabwe and Ireland will play less international bilateral cricket in the next FTP, and that sums up South Africa’s standing in the international game – with the dogs trying to get scraps from the big table.

And that big table has become even more of a banquet because the number of international matches has actually increased in total across all formats.

The fact that India can pretty much do as they please is borne out by the IPL window being increased to cover April, May and June – months in which other countries now dare not schedule any international cricket, and they will not play Pakistan in any bilateral series.

And England get another bonus because the next three World Test Championship finals will all be played at Lord’s.

Graeme Smith and Jacques Faul made it abundantly clear this week that after their recent dealings with the BCCI they believe Saurav Ganguly is the right man to become the next International Cricket Council chairman, but their error was in not following the correct channels for such shows of support, which is through the Cricket South Africa Board.

Shashank Manohar’s term as ICC chairman is set to expire in July and the Indian has suggested he will not stand for another stint, meaning world cricket’s top post could be up for grabs at the ICC annual general meeting in a couple of months. Ganguly, the current president of the BCCI and the man who as captain of India began their blossoming as international superpowers, has been identified as a frontrunner to replace his compatriot.

Smith, who captained the Proteas against Ganguly’s Indian team, has reason to back him because the BCCI have been supportive of accommodating South Africa in the post-Covid Future Tours Programme, most notably by agreeing in principle to playing three T20 internationals here at the end of August.

“Strong leadership is going to be the key for cricket going forward and we need people who understand the modern game. I’ve known Saurav for a long time, he is highly-resected and is in the best position to be the new president [chairman] of the ICC, a very important position. It would be great to see him get in and good for the game because he’s got the credentials and the skills to take it forward,” Smith, South Africa’s Director of Cricket, said this week.

But his statements in a remote media conference were followed hours later by this statement from CSA president Chris Nenzani:

“We must respect both the ICC protocol and our own protocol in deciding which candidate to back. There have been no candidates nominated as yet and once such nominations have been made the Board of CSA will take its decision in terms of its own protocol. At the moment we don’t want to anticipate any candidates who may be nominated for this important position to lead the game we all love.”

What that means is that the CSA Board will decide who to back for ICC chairman and Nenzani will be the person casting that vote, not chief executive Faul nor Smith. It was not quite a knee in the groin from Nenzani to Smith, but certainly a reminder that his powers are largely restricted to the field of play and not the politics of the boardroom.

But providing the BCCI continue to support South African cricket, thereby indirectly providing the board members with the gravy-rich meals they so love, there is no reason South Africa and Nenzani would not back Ganguly.

Given the current financial state of Cricket South Africa, they need as much charity as they can get and India have the deepest pockets.