Home > Bermuda, Cricket Development, Netherlands > To invest or not to invest

To invest or not to invest

There is one question that has always played at the back of my mind, but I have been unable to figure out the right answer. How does the ICC choose which country to invest in over another?

Here is the dilema. The ICC does not have unlimited funding to sponsor development activities in emerging countries. In fact, the funds are quite limited. So how does it decide, whether to spend them on say Holland, or Bermuda?

One obvious answer is that the ICC selects the country that has a higher standard, which is why I have chosen Holland and Bermuda as an example, because they have a similar standard.

But note this. How much money the ICC has to spend on development depends upon how much money it earns through the television and sponsorship rights to the world cup, the u19 world cup, the champions trophies, and also other series between member countries. So in that completely commerical sense, the ICC should go and spend the money on Holland instead of Bermuda. Reason? Holland becoming cricket crazy is much more lucrative in all respects than Bermuda becoming Cricket crazy (Bermuda’s economy is about 1/250th of Holland’s, and its population is only 60K as opposed to Holland’s 5 mil). ICC will make more money that way, and hence will have more money to spend on development of the game. Holland may be able to contribute $50 mil to the ICC exchequer in 4 years, while Bermuda would not be able to top $2 mil. So while putting in the investment, the ICC has to take note of what they are likely to get out of the country for continuing the development process.

But this school of thought has an issue. In such situations, there will always be countries which are better investments than Bermuda. Hence the poor countries, or the small countries will always lose out, no matter how much passion they have for the game, or what level of development they are at. Some variables need to be taken into consideration irrespective of the potential for the investment.

If Bermuda were a better Cricket team than Holland, then Bermuda should be getting the development funds to make them competitive at ODI level. They would have a better chance of doing so, and they would have a better chance to improve the standard of cricket to match the Test Nations. Also, if Holland had an equally better team, but their team consisted of only first generation or second generation immigrants, even then Bermuda should be getting the funds if they had an indegenous team. Obviously if Holland were better then they should be getting the funds anyway. It is by this logic that I would expect the ICC to invest money in Bermuda, Denmark, Uganda or UAE instead of the USA at the momment.

  1. CLR
    January 18, 2006 at 12:32 am

    Another thing that the ICC might have to consider is which countries border the country in question, sometimes it might be worthwhile to invest in a particular country in order to spread the game to the entire region.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: