This book is like 4 years old, and you're just reviewing it now? Lame.
1996: The last time any team other than Australia won the World Cup.

Well said.

might have to try and get a copy of his book! i remember reading in australian papers the supposed split in world cricket and how the asian bloc along with south africa would simply have control and a final say on anything as they had a majority vote. and that the acb were worried south africa wanted australia's prime summer time slot (xmas - new years period) for their home matches. the latter has sorted its self out with south africa or australia both agreeing to not tour the other during that time but i think the voting majority is still the same problem it was back then eg.test cricket championship, but things may be a little bit more diplomatic between india, england, australia and south africa now.

REDNECK's got it wrong when he says that "not much has changed since then" in terms of the power blocks. If you've been following what has been happening, it's now usually India, South Africa and Australia that are collectively setting the agenda. Other South Asian countires bar Sri Lanka no longer follow India, but then again, India no longer need them.

PRG, I never claimed to be reviewing this book. All I said that was that I stumbled upon it and then got slowly into it. Actually, it was the night of the washed out India vs Australia Champions Trophy game recently and I was trying to find something to read whilst staying awake to see if the game would resume. Hence, I found this old book that I had never really bothered reading. I'm not pretending it's topical, nor am I recommending it as a riveting read. As for your 1996 comment about the World Cup: you lost me I'm afraid. All I commented on was the inaccuracy of Halbish's comment (in 1997) that Australia were world champions.

>> Even the lure of the Ashes would soon lose its box office appeal if the two countries were forced to play each other every second year in Tests and ODIs.

Hey Michael,

They already do that - there's been an Ashes series every 2 years for several years now. Perhaps you meant every year?

The man is a mad man, and his book is a fair reflection of his character!

MJ_374 if i got it wrong then why did india shut down australias proposed test championship? or australia siding against the bcci's rejection of the wada doping tests? the all powerful majority vote! when india raise their hand to cast a vote so to do bangladesh, zimbabwe, south africa, sri lanka & pakistan (even with all the mud slinging between the 2 nations???)blindly following india's lead! hence when i say not much has changed, the icc is still stuggling to be the governing body with out prejudice, just as it was back in the 90's and just how it was in the imperial cricket council days! although i still havent heard of how any cricket nation was disadvantaged when england ran the show?

Hi Nish,

You're 100% correct my friend. What I meant was every second year at home which also means every year home and away. Thanks for clearing that up.

i was hoping for a insight and needed article on current tournment in india.which i think is one of the best concepts to come out of cricket in along time and possible should be expanded.not some claptrap about cricket politics.

Decision making power resides with those who are generating more revenue for the game. For globalization of the game ICC come up with different FTPs so that weaker opponents get an opportunity to play against the stronger ones. The gap between the two opponents will definitely bridge after a period of time. Having two tiers of cricket playing nations is a rubbish idea. I will emphasize on full members ranking from 7 to 10 play atleast once every year against the other official ODI playing nations, which rank from 11 to 16.
This will give a good exposure to the other Associate/ Affiliate nations.

I wonder how the governing body for a global sport like soccer, FIFA, maintains its neutrality, when clearly, they've also got some major nations playing there as well.

Interesting article. The only thing to question is this- if the members of the original Imperial Cricket Conference (Australia, South Africa & England with West Indies & New Zealand joining in 1926) had broken away from the current ICC and left the asian nations playing on their own would the following have occurred..

1. The proliferation of ODI & 20/20 cricket to the detriment of test cricket.
2. The allowance in the law of the bending of the arm prior to delivery set by the Murali controversy.
3. The emergence of "super bats" and dead pitches all over the world.
4. The use of technology in umpiring decisions.

I think that had the MCC still been in charge of the game that it codefied in 1787 then the game would not have been irrevovably damaged by influence from the sub-continent. There are many fans in this region that love test cricket and the traditions of the game, but on the balance of things the influence (in my opinion) has been a negative one over-all.