A cricketer during a game on a pitch in front of Moscow's State University © Getty Images

It may be a triumph of publicity over substance, but stories have been doing the rounds over the last week about the setting up of a major cricket league in Russia, with some perhaps over-enthusiastic media outlets suggesting the country was poised to become a cricketing superpower.

While the Russia's United Cricket League (RUCL) should be encouraged, scratch below the surface and it’s soon clear the vision belongs pretty much to one passionate man - Ashvani Chopra.

“I love cricket and I want to make it popular and widely available here,” Chopra told AFP. “We started playing here in 1995 just for fun. In 2001 we conducted a small tournament, in which three teams - Australia, India and the selection of the rest of the world - were playing. The tournament was a success and it became the reference point of our league.”

The league has seven clubs, made up from largely from expats, but Chopra recognises the need for that to change. “We decided that every club should have at least one local player in their line-up,” he said. “From now on it's an indispensable condition for every one of the league's clubs.”

Chopra, however, faces the same problems anyone trying to play the game away from its traditional homes faces. “It's impossible to find cricket bats or the correct balls here in Moscow,” he admitted. “We have to bring all this stuff from home to play here. But we're ready to overcome any difficulties in the name of the game. Nothing can stop us.”

William Elliott, the Consul General at the British Embassy in St Petersburg, has written to let us know about a match taking place in the city.

“We are holding the 'White Nights Ashes', a match between the Crusaders, an intrepid touring team from Melbourne, and 'England', a team made up from various local ex-pats and Consulate staff,” he says. “The second major match in St Petersburg for about 90 years; last year we revived cricket here by playing against Sir Tim Rice's Heartaches (including one A.J. Lamb).

“The main interest is the venue: a spectacular garden in front of the State Russian Museum, which makes for good photos.” William assures us it will be a “proper” match, in spite of the rough pitch.

If you have any cricket news from obscure parts of the world, do drop us an email

Tony Munro

The development of cricket in eastern Europe takes another step forward this weekend when unofficial national teams from six countries compete for the Prague International Twenty20 Cricket Cup 2008.

ICC Affiliates Bulgaria (in their first tournament since gaining ICC membership last month) and the hosts, the Czech Republic, will be joined by teams from Belarus, Russia, Hungary and Romania in the two-day event, starting tomorrow.

Enthusiasts in Belarus and Russia have been thwarted in their desire for form national bodies and join the ICC by the bureaucracy and cost involved in forming official sporting bodies in countries of the former Soviet Union.

Similarly, the tournament organiser and Czech Cricket Union official, Timothy Hort, told CricInfo that it was imperative that the tournaments like these in future saw some benefit from the ICC's new financial position.

"Some countries, many due to their prospective status, have showed apprehension with committing to the tournament as they would not have financial assistance for travel and accommodation," he said. "This is set to change in 2009 with the new format of ICC funding.

"Also, the need to find sponsors for this tournament is greatly required to allow these kind of tournaments to flourish and improve facilities and cricket in the Czech Republic, and Eastern Europe."

Teams from Estonia, Poland, Slovakia and Croatia also played the the recent Euro Twenty20 in Carmel, North Wales, meaning the Slovenia, Ukraine and Latvia, are the only eastern European countries where cricket has a permanent presence not to field 'representative' teams this summer.

A club team from Slovenia, Ljubljana CC, though, does play regular matches in the Austrian Open League.

The draw:
Group A: Belarus, Romania, Russia
Group B: Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Hungary

Saturday
9am-12pm - Czech Republic v Bulgaria, Romania v Russia; 12.15pm-3.15pm - Bulgaria v Hungary, Belarus v Russia; 3.30pm - 6.30pm - Hungary v Czech Republic, Belarus v Romania.

Sunday
Semi-Finals - 9am - 12pm - 3rd v 4th; 5th v 6th - 12.15pm - 3.15pm
Final - 3.30pm - 6.30pm

Next week's ICC annual get-together promises to have more than its fair share of politicking, posturing and controversy. But, unless there is a major about-turn, it should also be a watershed for the Associates and Affiliates.

In 2009, income from the ICC's six-year media deal with ESPN-Star, worth over US$1 billion, kicks in, and while the game's big boys will still keep the lion's share, the rest will see substantial increases in their incomes.

Although the ICC draws considerable flak on many fronts, it is quietly committed to promoting the game in as many countries as possible, and it does that by means of a myriad of competitions and initiatives. Most do not warrant much media attention, but they are there and they work.

Until now, the gripe of the smaller countries, and especially those bubbling just underneath the top flight, has been about the inequality of the way in which the game is financed. That was never more apparent than when it came to earnings from last year's World Cup.

Ireland got a flat fee of US$125,000 a year for four years for taking part, and on top of that they received another $50,000 for reaching the Super Eights. However, because of the extra costs involved in their progression, not least because their players are not professional cricketers and their absences from their full-time jobs had to be underwritten, Ireland's success actually left the board out of pocket.

Zimbabwe, on the other hand, turned up, tied with Ireland and never threatened to progress after being thumped by Pakistan and West Indies. For those three matches, Zimbabwe Cricket received US$11 million, their share of the pot as a Full Member.

The top six Associates receive no more than US$500,000 a year - some substantially less - to fund their entire operations. Out of that they have to pay all their cricketing and administration costs. Only those with a low cost of living, such as Kenya, can hope to maintain a professional squad on that kind of money.

The gulf between the haves and have-nots is further widened by the limited sums Associates can earn from sponsorship and media contracts. Zimbabwe can exploit home series against, say, India to carve out lucrative TV deals worth millions, and on the back of that, attract shirt- and other corporate sponsorship. As highlighted by Scotland's failure to secure any TV deal for their forthcoming ODI against England, the Associates struggle to get such income streams.

The new deals will provide a substantial increase for Associates, especially for the countries who are pressing for space at the top table. Until now the share has been roughly equal, rewarding Netherlands and Kenya on par with Thailand and Fiji. The new system will see more demarcation between the top Associates and the rest.

The leading ten could earn as much as US$1.5 million a year from 2009. There will then be an onus on them to professionalise their administrations, but several of them are already well down that route. They will also be more accountable - the ICC does not want a repeat of the mess that came following a spike in Kenya's funding earlier in the decade.

The second-string Associates will also get more - around US$160,000 as a base figure - but then again the demands on them are less. Even Affiliates will receive US$15,000, with the opportunity for more should they make a good enough case. There will also be more cash in the pot for participating and hosting competitions.

There have never been more opportunities for development outside the Full Member countries, but there remain some nagging worries.

The main one is how to bridge the gap between semi and full-blown professionalism. Almost all the Associates rely on dedicated amateurs, both on and off the field. As the number of ICC competitions has increased - and they have to be welcomed - the pressure has begun to tell. Scotland and Ireland particularly have already found players cannot meet all their commitments, and even the increased income will not allow them to employ a full-time squad.

"So much of putting players on full-time retainers depends on how many fixtures we can command," Warren Deutrom, Cricket Ireland's chief executive, said. "At the moment, all we can promise the squad in 2009 is a World Cup qualifying campaign, eight FP Trophy matches, an England game, and probably some Intercontinental Cup matches. Of course, we hope to have more, but can't be sure at the moment.

"Our top players are already plying their trade in county cricket, while others have full-time jobs which they may not wish to give up. The actual number of players that the coach will want to put on a full-time contract, or else the number that even want to have one, may not be that many."

The other quandary is how to get them fixtures. Kenya, widely regarded as the leading Associate, have found it almost impossible to get Full Member countries to visit or host them. As a result they invariably play other Associates. Good for the win-loss ratio, not so clever in providing the kind of experience that no amount of money can buy.

These issues will need to be addressed, but for now the future has never looked so promising beyond the Test world.

The number of people actively participating in cricket outside the Test-playing countries increased 17% in 2007, according to the ICC.

The research, carried out by the ICC's development program, was collated from 33 Associate and 58 Affiliate members. It showed that there were 338,051 male and female players in those countries in 2007, an increase of 49,158 on the previous year. Since 2002, when there were 144,047 participants, there has been a 135% rise.

Click here for the full story.

It won't get many column inches in the mainstream cricket press, but the World Cricket League, which started in Nairobi yesterday and continues into next week, features the best of the rest, the six sides just under the ten Test-playing countries. For the two finalists, the rewards are bountiful - a place among the big boys in the inaugural Twenty20 World Championship in South Africa this September, along with $250,000. For countries used to surviving on annual handouts from the ICC of less than $200,000, that's big money.

With the exception of Bermuda, cricket is not a mainstream sport in any of the participants. And yet it survives, and in some instances thrives, despite the lack of attention and a relatively small number of enthusiasts.

The ICC, who do sterling work in supporting the game's second and third tiers, will rightly use the event to highlight that cricket is not just about the Indians and Australias of the world.

But there remains a nagging worry. The ICC boasts that the game is spreading across the world. But is that right? Is it taking root or is it surviving because more people from its hotbed - south-east Asia - are emigrating and keeping it alive for the duration of their careers?

In last year's Wisden Almanack, Matthew Engel raised this very issue. "Overwhelmingly, the game in non-traditional countries is played by expatriates, mostly South Asian. Journalists were kidded into believing that cricket was about to burst on China, on the basis of some warm comments by civil servants and a couple of coaching courses. I have seen not one shred of evidence to back this up. Are the kids playing with tapeballs on the streets of Shanghai? Are they heck!"

Take Canada. Of the squad in Nairobi at the moment, only three were born in the country, and two of those are over 35. Of the rest, five come from the Caribbean, four from India and each from Pakistan and Uganda. Whereas other Associates have a smattering of expats, Canada are utterly reliant on them.

Engel's comment attracted fierce criticism from those who either argued that England had more than their share of "imports" or that the game only spread in Asia, Africa, Australasia and the Caribbean through expats playing it in the first place.

The worry in some countries is that rather the game is not being continued by the second and third generations but is only being maintained by a steady flow of new immigrants

With regards to England, yes there have been quite a few non English-born players who have been picked for the side, but the game still has a massive stronghold in the country. The selection has been more about improving a solid side. And as for the ex-pats argument? Well, yes, but that's the crucial point. In the regions flagged the game was brought in but it was then embraced by the indigenous population and taken on as their own. This is exemplified no better than in CLR James's seminal work, Beyond A Boundary.

The worry in some countries - and again I come back to Canada - is that rather the game is not being continued by the second and third generations but is only being maintained by a steady flow of new immigrants. Canada's cricket heritage is rich but there is little sign that it has been built on. This is best underlined by the selection of former West Indies international Anderson Cummins. Forty years old and without a major match to his name since 1995-96, he made his debut in Mombasa last week. What message does that send out about the strength in depth of cricket in Canada?

It's not just Canada. Look at the USA, whose 2004 Champions Trophy side was a collection of ageing expats whose performances verged on the disgraceful. And the UAE, which is almost entirely dependant on its ex-pat workforce to keep the game alive.

Cricket's expansion should not be about filling teams with expats and expecting the locals to get excited about it. The only way cricket can gain a foothold in emerging countries is by actually getting the indigenous population to embrace the game, and two excellent examples where this is happening are Nepal and Uganda.

Anderson Cummins of Barbados, West Inbies ... and now Canada © Eddie Norfolk

Does it matter? Yes, because as the ICC looks to develop the game in as many places as possible, that means the financial cake has to be cut in ever thinner slices. The ICC needs to concentrate on a smaller number of countries where the chances of the game taking off. It is invidious that Uganda gets the same basic allowance as Belgium.

Cricket is in trouble in its traditional homes in Africa - Zimbabwe are hell-bent on destruction and South Africa seems to be falling out of love with the game. So efforts should be made in Uganda . And in Asia, which everyone accepts is the game's stronghold, a side like Nepal should really be given the leg up. It's about targeting rather than a scattergun approach.

In fairness to the ICC, they have a tough time and a lot of countries scrambling for a share of the spoils. It's about weeding out the weak and really looking to grow the game in areas where it has the best chance of taking root. It's an almost impossible ask. Look at the repeated failure of American Football to crack Europe ... and if football itself still battles for acceptance outside expats and schools in the USA, then the size of the ICC's task becomes clear.

Of course expats have a key role to play in expansion. But if the game is basically played by them, is it the game spreading or is it more about diehards clinging to the traditions of their homelands? In the UK there are baseball and American football sides, but they are almost all expat Americans and so few would seriously claim the games have taken hold. However, basketball and ice hockey are widely played by locals, boosted by some imported players and expats, and, crucially, the national side can stand on its own two feet. That's the difference.

The St Petersburg Times reports on a tournament for international students in the city at the Polytechnic Institute Stadium near Ploshchad Muzhestva.

"The pitch was not exactly as clipped as Lord’s, the ball was borrowed from another sport and the British team crashed out early, but participants in the The St. Petersburg Cricket Cup 2006 brought to the city the passion of one of the world’s most popular and perplexing sports."

The ball they used was a tennis ball, partly because cricket balls are hard to come by, partly because without protective equipment, it was felt that a cricket ball could cause some serious damage!

Elsewhere, it is reported that cricket in St Petersburg has all but died with the disappearance of the main organiser ... along with almost all the club kit!