Cricket: Few game changes in ICC pipeline

Dave Richardson . Photo / AP

Prior to each World Cup, cricket enters a state of introspection. Andrew Alderson spoke to International Cricket Council chief executive Dave Richardson for his perspective... and about being at the other end when South African teammate Brian McMillan was asked to hit 21 off one ball in the rain-affected 1992 semi-final against England in Sydney.

What was it like contesting the 1992 World Cup as South Africa returned from isolation?

"It was our first major event and I remember [Australian rugby coach and broadcaster] Alan Jones gave us a motivational team talk. The first game we did well against Australia [winning by nine wickets] and we came to New Zealand full of confidence but Mark Greatbatch destroyed that with his knock [of 68 off 60 balls]. I'll never forget that rain coming down in Sydney. I think if the Duckworth-Lewis method had been applied we would have needed three or four off the final ball but, as everyone remembers, it became 21. However, we had bowled slowly. When it rained we realised our chances were gone if we left the field. [England captain] Graham Gooch was doing his best to keep things moving but Allan Lamb, who I recall ran in from deep mid-wicket, was shouting 'Goochie, we've got to go off'. He knew the significance of the situation.

How do you sustain three formats of cricket?

"The challenge is to give each an audience. I think it goes without saying there is a future for tests and T20 is important because it attracts a new audience including younger people and women. However, unless you're batting in the top four in T20, there can be a sense of being all dressed up with nowhere to go. ODIs bridge that gap. You can see a century constructed patiently or bowlers given the chance to bowl several spells to a plan - 50-over cricket can still be the perfect day out. We're seeing that on the sub-continent and also recently with South Africa hosting the West Indies. Gone are the days of relying on containment. Playing conditions with more fielding restrictions have helped, as have better bats. You need to take wickets with attacking bowling and captaincy; otherwise 70 for five can still balloon into 250.

Are too many runs being scored?

I like the way it's going with more scores in excess of 300. Yorkers used to guarantee dot balls but now batsmen are adapting by going down on one knee and bowlers have counter-attacked with slower ball bouncers.

[Former pace bowling teammate] Fanie de Villiers used to say you weren't worth your salt unless you could go at about three runs an over, now three for 60 represents a good day.

We see wonderful batting practitioners like AB de Villiers, Brendon McCullum, Virat Kohli and Chris Gayle. At our [ICC] cricket committee meeting in May we will reassess the playing conditions for fairness. Look at a bowler like Daniel Vettori; he can still outsmart batsmen without needing too much assistance from the wicket.

How can India be convinced to join the technological revolution?

Our objective remains to make the technology more consistent. We've recently been doing further tests at an American university and we've improved the ball-tracking year by year. You can't compare the standards we've established with what was trialled between India and Sri Lanka in 2008. India were upset with the predictive path and harboured doubt about the system's accuracy. It's taken time to rebuild the trust but Anil Kumble [the captain in that infamous 2008 test] chairs our cricket committee and he's committed to reaching a solution. We want to keep the discussion on the table so India come on board willingly without forcing it down their throats.

What's the next step in staying regimented against chucking?

There was probably justified criticism as to why it took the ICC so long to crack down. The initiative started with the [ICC] cricket committee. We realised virtually every team had one bowler with a suspicious action. Once the umpires realised they had our support they were more prepared to enforce the law. We also wanted to ensure there were a suitable number of accredited labs to test remedied actions. At this tournament there's no directive to be stricter but the Brisbane lab is on standby for a quick turnaround if someone requires testing.

Are moves in place to offer amnesty to those coming forward in cricket corruption cases?

I'm not sure we've given enough thought to amnesty. On the evidence of the players who have been banned, like Mohammad Amir and Lou Vincent, it seems if they work with authorities they can expect to be dealt with more favourably. But bear in mind, players don't necessarily want soft punishments because the vast majority feel so let down when teammates cheat.

From an ICC anti-corruption point-of-view, they're trying to increase their information on those who might be engaging in this sort of activity. That doesn't come easily but they're developing relationships with law enforcement agencies [like the memorandum of understanding with New Zealand and Australian Police at the World Cup] to target those involved in illegal sports betting markets such as India.

Will night tests become the norm with the proposal for a New Zealand/Australia fixture this year?

"They're not necessarily the way of the future but in some markets it makes sense commercially. More people might come and watch after work and from a time zone perspective there's potentially a greater TV audience. Factors like dew and lighting need to be considered but I'm confident the [pink] ball is ready.

For more coverage of the Cricket World Cup from nzherald.co.nz and NZME check out #CricketFever.