Jay Shah has his hands full as he takes over as ICC chairman

File picture of Jay Shah, the new ICC chairman
| Photo Credit: –

Jay Shah takes office as chairman of the International Cricket Council (ICC), at a critical juncture. There is the re-entry of cricket in the 2028 Olympics, for one. The Champions Trophy imbroglio seems to have been sorted out, but there is a more important issue bubbling with ramifications for the sport itself.

With India’s decision not to travel to Pakistan next year for political reasons, the tournament is now scheduled to be played in Dubai too (for India matches). As a face-saving expedient, Pakistan have told the ICC that the hybrid format should be followed if Pakistan don’t come to India for the 2026 T20 World Cup, 2029 Champions Trophy or the 2031 ODI World Cup all scheduled in this country. That is unlikely to happen because the power dynamic is in India’s favour.

Shah, son of India’s Home Minister, who until last week had mainly India’s interests at heart, will have to recalibrate his outlook and work for the game at large. Of the four Indian chairmen before him, only Shashank Manohar — “an Indian administrator with a conscience,” Wisden called him — thought beyond India and addressed the interests of the game which was then being hijacked by the ‘Big Three’, India, Australia and England.

The separation between India and the world is notional because where cricket is concerned, India are the world.

They have the money, the power and the energy to bend the sport to their will. Like England did when they had those things. Some three decades ago, the official veto power England and Australia enjoyed in the ICC was removed. Now India have the veto, even if unofficially.

But does a country have the power of insistence or endorsement that insists an individual can play only in certain countries or formats? Can players sue their boards for ‘restraint of trade’? That argument allowed players in the 70s to win a court case after choosing Kerry Packer’s series in Australia over Test cricket. We will know soon enough.

Last year, 74 England players appeared in franchise tournaments around the world, more than from any other country. Now the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) has banned players from appearing in leagues that clash with their domestic season (the IPL excepted).

The Professional Cricketers Association might take the ECB to court over this, thus firing a salvo that will influence where the game is headed.

The ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) from their home boards is the players’ visa to leagues, from Pakistan and South Africa to Canada and the West Indies. England have no objection to their players taking part in the IPL, the richest and the most sought-after tournament ever since it was inaugurated in 2008. The IPL has made millionaires of more cricketers from more countries than any other.

Understanding that boards might need to be encouraged to provide the NOCs, the IPL began by paying ten percent of players’ salaries to their country’s national boards.

The ECB’s action might see a further diminishing of red-ball cricket if players choose a good deal in the present to the possibility of being remembered as a hero of the long game in the future. It might – an argument that has been made in these columns before – lead to a split in the administration of the game too, with T20 and Test cricket being run by separate bodies. It happened with rugby when it was split into union and league that became two distinct games.

As players turn their backs on the First Class game for the higher returns and apparently greater security that the franchises promise, it seems natural to have two different governing bodies too. If Test cricket becomes a sport played by those not good enough for the franchises, it might not matter so much; this is where legacy comes in.

T20, by its nature is a forgettable sport; to be remembered in a couple of decades, a player must make his mark in Test cricket. Or is that overly romantic?

There are some 20 domestic leagues around the world. Cricket is in the position of the frog in gently heating water that gets cooked because it didn’t react early enough. Something has to give. Jay Shah has his hands full.