Far from dead: The return of the Big Three Cabal

By Anand Vasu

The Big Three Cabal that once threatened to take over cricket and ride roughshod over any country that did not have a big enough market or financial clout, is dead. Long live the Big Three. If the latest Future Tours Programme (FTP) — yet to be finalised or officially announced by the International Cricket Council (ICC) —is put in place the already significant gap between the haves and the have-nots in cricket will grow ever wider.

When Shashank Manohar rode on his spotless white winged stallion of reform from the offices of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to the ivory tower of the ICC in Dubai, he made a grand show of turning back what the BCCI had pushed through with the enthusiastic approval and support of Cricket Australia (CA) and the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB). Many decisions were looked at afresh, the system of sharing global revenues was revisited and the BCCI lost a significant amount of the case it believed it had a right to. So far so good when it comes to cleaning up house.

But, the manner in which India has been allowed to control both the volume and identity of its opponents in the cycle from 2019 to 2023, is the clearest indication that the more things change the more they stay the same. As per the current proposal, India will only play long Test series against England, Australia and South Africa. Countries such as Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Bangladesh and the West Indies will get only the minimum-stipulated two Tests in each series against India. While it can be argued that this will reduce the number of one-sided encounters, it will also cripple the smaller countries who depend on series against the bigger nations to generate funds that are already fast dwindling in their geographies.

Also, while five Tests can seem like forever when one team is dominating the other completely, two-Test encounters reveal little about the respective strengths of the two teams. There is little room for ebb and flow, almost no chance for a team to comeback once it has lost the first game and the examination of a player’s mettle, temperament and character goes out the window in such a short clash. It feels wrong to even call two Test matches a series, although technically that might be so.

Additionally, when the Big 3 proposal was tabled and initially agreed on, it included a slush fund of sorts that would help defray the costs of series involving two teams that might not otherwise be able to attract the kind of sponsor interest that would beep broadcasters happy. Naturally, that has gone out of the window with the dismantling of the Big 3 proposal.

Just how teams such as West Indies will keep their players from jumping ship to Twenty20 leagues when they cannot match the money on offer in these tournaments remains to be seen. How New Zealand or South Africa can stop their players from picking up lucrative Kolpak contracts to play in the relatively stress-free environment of England’s County cricket when the national boards’ coffers are depleted, is a question that cricket needs to address.

Of India’s 37 Tests in the period specified, 24 are against England, Australia or South Africa. Given how stark the difference has been when these teams have played each other home or away — domination guaranteed and big wins at home but little to show for overseas, whether it is India or any of the other big guns visiting the subcontinent, there is the real risk of viewer fatigue if the teams play each other so much over a short period, without their being a serious improvement in how they travel.

What is also significant is the worldwide acceptance of the Indian Premier League (IPL) as an event that requires a window. Lalit Modi, the creator of the league, was careful to never officially request the ICC for a window for this tournament as that would open a door to accusations of club taking precedence over country. But, not that no teams will play each other in the window left open for the IPL, and elbow room been quietly added to allow the league to contemplate expansion, all talk of the primacy of Test cricket appears to be little more than just talk.

If these same decisions had been reached when the BCCI had a strong president, it would have immediately been accused of arm-twisting and using its financial muscle to get its way. Now that there isn’t one target to blame, however, enlightened self-interest has come to the fore and even the most inequitable decisions are being passed off as completely democratic and voluntary.

The Big Three Cabal is far from dead. It just went from being out in the open to back in the shadows.