As New Zealand Cricket board member Martin Snedden says, it is normal for the dominant entities in any arrangement to flex their muscles. But to flex them in a way that is so obviously based on instant self-gratification and so detrimental to their own long-term interests? That smacks only of foolishness and greed. So it is with the proposed revamp of the International Cricket Council, which would give substantial powers to India, Australia and England.
India generates 80 per cent of the game's finances. That needs to be recognised in some shape or form. It already is to some degree, with India shaping its tours, recently to South Africa and now to New Zealand, to its own desires rather than the agreed Future Tours Programme. Now, however, it wants that programme abandoned altogether and to be able to play who, when and where it wants. It, and its allies, would not have to host uneconomic tours, such as that by New Zealand.
Almost every sports governing body is straining to spread its game, and give all sorts of assistance to fledgling nations. Not cricket's big three, however. They, apparently, would be happy largely playing one another home and away. The game's players, at least, have recognised the absurdity of this.
The Federation of International Cricketers Association says it is not in the interests of the global game because India, England and Australia would become stronger while other countries withered on the vine. Who said sportsmen and women were slow on the uptake?
