A complex story at that with many subplots.
1. Axiom: No One Country Should Dominate
Finally Howard has found the right answer. It is probably lost on him though that his own nomination comes courtesy of domination of NZC by CA.
Howard follows it up with, "They've got to pay regard to what's happened, given that we had apparently put in place a procedure for choosing by rotation the president and vice-president of the ICC, and that appears to have been pushed to one side in the last week," Howard told Channel Nine. "But equally they've got to look at the future of the game."
He conveniently does not include the ratification as the part of the procedure which, perhaps in some perverse sense, does try to exclude the domination of one country: Just because it is your turn and you nominate does not mean you get to force through a nomination which others have an issue with (even if the issues are not flawlessly presented).
Now the rules are rules community (a burgeoning breed among cricket enthusiasts and administrators) should be perfectly fine with this. They've told us before that if someone is given the procedural power to do something and does it then it must be upheld no matter what the reality of the situation. This was the procedure and the opponents do not have to explain their objections.
However, fairness (something even above procedure and rule and the ultimate law unto itself), demands that Howard be given a straight answer. To begin with the letter that the six boards wrote should be made public to see what the boards actually said. Certainly if it is idiotic then CA would at least in time leak it if it does not come from the ICC. The ICC should make the letter public.
The problem with Howard finding the truth about the unfairness of domination is his history. If one always find the answer that always favors one, others have to scratch their heads. Now we have been told that his support of apartheid sports is old history. We are told he reformed a long time ago and then in fact acted against Zimbabwe in that spirit. Perhaps. But let us follow the steps taken by him over the last thirty years on this issue.
Howard first supports apartheid cricket with South Africa.
With no pronouncements in the intervening years we find that when it comes to Zimbabwe Howard is for sanctions because he believes that the sanctions work as he learned from the South African experience. This also meant end of non-interference in sports for him because Mugabe's board should not get 2 million dollars.
Finally when nominated for the presidency of the ICC Howard flies in clandestinely to meet the head of Mugabe's board. Now in the name of bringing Zimbabwean cricket back into the fold. This apparently because now things have changed and Mugabe's own sports minister criticizes Mugabe (Not an apology for Mugabe but what kind of lame dictator allows his own minister to speak against himself:) Usually they avoid doing that in public even in democracies especially when the issue involves another country. Mugabe should resign straight away and put himself in line for ICC presidency. After all its better to be not a dictator especially if you are a lame one and ICC seems to be the collection of lame dictators according to Haigh). Yet all the gregariousness had to wait until Howard needed a vote.
Finally once rejected he proclaimed that his support of the Zimbabwe ban was a badge of honor (but not before the vote).
It would be a lot easier to take Howard's new found faith in equality at face value if his positions when shifting by a hundred and eighty degrees did not always favor him. As Bertrand Russell noted about one of the prime ministers of England: He always finds God on his side of the argument (paraphrasing).
Howard continues, "I think it is very important we understand there's got to be a fair sharing of responsibilities and no one part of the world, no one country, should dominate. "
"People in the past criticised the fact it was dominated by England and Australia and now we don't want to replace one perceived domination with another. "
Perhaps he would unfold his manifesto for election to the presidency. Perhaps it will have something about abolishing the domination of CA, CSA, in running the Champion's League. CSA and CA were too ready to let the BCCI have its cake just as long as they got a tiny share of it. The rest be damned. They are too inconsequential to ask for anything. Perhaps he will tell us that in the interest of fairness he will do his utmost for an ICL revival pushing for its acceptance as a member of the ICC.
2. The Cricket of Politics
Cricket administrators since the stance in support of apartheid in the sixties have been telling us on and off that politics and sports should be kept separate. Yet again politicians failed to keep their mouths shut. John Key came up with this gem:
Key said in a radio interview Friday that Howard would be a "fantastic" leader of world cricket and urged him to stand again.
In essence encouraging a deadlock. Perhaps next he would like to comment on Murali's action.
On Anderson, Justin Vaughn held the opposite view:"He is a busy man," Vaughan said. "The ICC president's role takes a lot of time if you want to do it well. The other point is the events of the last week have probably made the ICC not quite as attractive a proposition to people as it was. "
"I imagine there would be a bit of hesitancy from anyone to put their name forward because you never know if it is going to be torpedoed. "
So the ICC presidency is not good enough for Anderson but Howard should keep fighting for it.
Then Gillard piped in: "John Howard, passionate, passionate cricket fan. I share some of the concerns he's voiced publicly about the kind of factors that are influencing this decision,"
Since she shares only some of the concerns she should have elaborated on which ones. Perhaps the journalists should have asked her.
3. The Journalistic Wars
Now the journalists are at each others throats. Haigh, in his rabid support for Howard, went after some guy named Alvi writing for Dawn.
He continued with further Haighlelujas in Howard's defence.
Which prompted Bhogle to launch into a BCCI defence the basic premise of which was everyone who had power misused it and so it shall be so don't complain about BCCI misusing it.
And now Bal and Kasavan (the hindsight expert) have jumped in with harsher treatments.
The Australian and Indian journalists are at each other and no one seems to be exercising the journalistic detachment. Perhaps they all consider themselves more of opinion piece writers.
4. I'll Race You
It was not going to be long before race relations were going to enter the debate. The Afro-asian block vs the colonial masters; Who votes with whom on how regular a basis based on race. whether the 7-3 split confirms that the seven are racists or the three. Whether Howard is a closet racist or just an opportunist. To their credit no one has talked about the sports minister of Zimbabwe supporting CA's cause rather than ZCs.
5. Not the Real Story
The latest news suggest that Howard might withdraw or that the CA will withdraw and nominate someone else. Whether he does or not...whether he gets the presidency or not. This is a tiny issue only useful in highlighting the nature of relationships within the ICC and in the larger cricket world. But no one is yet talking about the most important issue that the ICC has either let go or has been powerless to do anything about but which is likely to make it even less relevant and more ineffective. An issue that will render the lesser boards even lesser. On that next time.
