Photo Credit: Instagram Photo of @gavaskarsunilofficial
The International Cricket Council (ICC) is considering the creation of a dedicated fund to support Test cricket, particularly for boards outside the ‘Big Three’ (India, Australia, and England). Proposed by Cricket Australia and backed by the BCCI and ECB, this fund aims to provide a minimum match fee of approximately USD 10,000 for players and could be introduced by 2025.
The initiative seeks to address the financial difficulties faced by boards not in the ‘Big Three,’ who often struggle with the costs of hosting Test matches and find T20 leagues more financially attractive.
Sunil Gavaskar has supported this proposal, suggesting it would be beneficial if the host board covered the hotel and travel expenses for the visiting team. He stated, “It is a good idea for the ICC to suggest that the home team should bear the hotel and internal travel costs of the visiting team. This could significantly ease financial burdens and help balance budgets.”
Gavaskar has also stressed the importance of establishing minimum standards for accommodations and travel. “Clearly, there should be a minimum standard for hotels and travel; otherwise, some boards might end up accommodating visiting teams in subpar conditions,” he remarked.
However, Gavaskar believes that player fees should be set by individual boards due to varying living standards across countries. “Determining uniform playing fees might not be ideal,” he noted.
Earlier this year, the ICC finalized its financial distribution model for 2024-27, with the BCCI receiving 38.5% of the revenue share, which is significantly higher than the ECB’s 6.89% and Cricket Australia’s 6.25%. This distribution has caused dissatisfaction among some boards, who view India’s share as disproportionately large.
Gavaskar has called for a forensic audit of how ICC revenue is allocated and utilized by various boards. “It would be worthwhile to conduct a forensic audit to track the ICC’s revenue distribution. This could reveal whether the funds are being used effectively and address complaints from boards about revenue distribution,” Gavaskar wrote.
He further added, “The share each board receives is more than sufficient to run cricket in their countries and still leave some surplus. Relying on increasing ICC revenue shares fosters complacency and prevents boards from focusing on strengthening their cricketing infrastructure.”
Name of Author: Cricexec Staff
