Normally when the cold weather sets in, cricket is an afterthought in Australia. Australian Rules football, also called “footy”, dominates the headlines as the cricketers enjoy a breather during their designated annual leave or head to the lucrative Indian Premier League or England to make a buck.
However, cricket is back in the headlines and for all the wrong reasons this winter as Australian cricket’s festering pay dispute continues to escalate. The nasty fallout over negotiations threatens to derail all the goodwill percolating since Australian cricket’s “line in the sand” moment following their humiliating Test series loss to South Africa at home last November.
Right now, Australian cricket is unravelling as relations between Cricket Australia and its players hit a nadir, with the bickering playing out publically. It’s the type of ugly slanging match normally reserved for chaotic cricket nations like the West Indies and Pakistan.
Getting to the crux of the dispute
A fixed revenue percentage model has been at the heart of the Memorandum of Understanding since 1998, but CA is determined to dismantle it, which has become a major sticking point in negotiations.
The Australian Cricketers’ Association has proposed an updated fixed revenue model, which would give players a 22.5% share. In the Australian Football League, it is believed a new pay deal will provide players 28% of revenue, while in the NBA, players receive roughly 50%.
The fixed revenue model seems to be rational, but CA believes there needs to be more of a cut to other areas of the sport, most notably into the grassroots of the game. CA claims the average income for international male players, inclusive of match fees and performance bonuses, would rise to A$1.45 million by 2021-’22 under the deal.
“We’ve identified that we need $20 million - A$30 million a year to really make a difference,” James Sutherland CA chief executive, said. “On the facilities side, we’re talking about hundreds of millions of dollars. We believe the [revenue-sharing] model has served a purpose where previously the players were not well paid... but we have this responsibility to grow the game in the grassroots.”
However, significant looming television deals – most notably the likelihood the Big Bash League might treble – could create an injection of cash into CA, which is already awash with funds. It is the type of financial boon that players, obviously, would want to get a slice of.
Petty bickering
The disputing parties have merits in their arguments – there is always a pushback in these kinds of negotiations but the petty bickering is muddying the situation. Neither party has done a particularly solid job of explaining their hard-line stance, while each appears to be dogged by political machinations.
The heavy handed approach from Sutherland in threatening players to accept the pay proposal or risk not being paid after June 30 was excessive and does nothing else than embolden the defiance of the players. It also was a public relations disaster for CA. Almost instantly, Sutherland’s missive was leaked to the press and, predictably, the public sided with the players. Australian vice-captain David Warner, ever pugnacious, was quick to pounce and boldly threatened that Australia “may not have an Ashes team”, which quickly whipped the public into a frenzy.
In these situations, inevitably fans are going to side with their heroes who, ironically, have long been put on pedestals by the governing body. Players, however, can’t cry foul over remuneration – being unhappy about potentially earning around A$1.5 million shows the bubble elite sportspeople live in. Under CA’s offer, Sheffield Shield players would earn salaries of about A$300,000, which, once again, is very healthy in comparison to the real world.
Still, as the sports landscape changes, players increasingly exude power. Any strike action will be blamed squarely on CA – fans only really care about the games not the shenanigans in the backroom. CA will be keen to avoid a calamity of this kind although time is ticking on a resolution.
Elite cricketers are no longer shackled by their boards
Due to the abundance of franchise leagues dotting the cricket landscape, players can make a lucrative livelihood as gun for hires on the Twenty20 carnival. As has been notably evidenced in recent times, elite cricketers no longer can be shackled by their boards – there are other means to earn healthy remuneration.
It all means that threats of a strike is not mere posturing, the prospect of player boycotts is on the cards. Right now, what happens after June 30 – if a resolution can’t be reached before then – is murky. Australia A’s tour of South Africa in July and August, and Australia’s likely Test tour of Bangladesh in August are in jeopardy. Most worryingly, a cloud is hovering over next summer’s Ashes – undoubtedly the most revered contest in cricket.
Surely, sensible heads will belatedly prevail. However, the stonewalling has already done irrefutable damage in Australian cricket. One wonders how relations will be mended once a resolution is finally struck and if stability can ever be fully restored.
Whatever eventuates, it feels as if Australian cricket will never be the same again.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!