Players still wait for their voice to be heard

International cricketers are demanding more influence in running the game. They are deeply disappointed about their lack of formal involvement more than a year after the Condon Report on Corruption proposed that they should have a much greater role.

The players and their associations have not added the warning phrase "or else" to their call for proper recognition but their increasing grievance at the lack of progress was made plain to the International Cricket Council last week. It was an indication that the game at top level, while anxious to reform and evolve, is still beset by difficulties which threaten not only its ability to expand but its existence in its present form.

David Graveney, the co-chief executive of the Federation of International Cricket Associations, said: "Our organisation now represents 70 per cent of those playing international cricket in seven of the 10 countries. We think we deserve to be formally consulted on many issues. This is not about industrial action, it is about being responsible and trying to help to ensure the game is taken in the right direction."

Part of the difficulty for both players and the ICC is the lack of players' associations in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. "We respect and observe different cultures and attitudes," said Graveney. "But we still represent the majority of players." It is a further example of the customary but unfortunate wariness between the Asian countries, where the game is biggest, and the original Test nations.

The match-rigging officially exposed by Lord Condon's interim report in April 2001 appears to have ended, despite uncorroborated whispers of a continuing scandal. But the professional game is still far from at ease with itself, as last week's ICC sessions in London demonstrated. Factions are not limited to Asia and the rest. They also extend to rich and poor, which could have a devastating effect on Test and one-day programmes and championships.

The ICC are hard-pressed on several fronts as their president, Malcolm Gray, conceded. They have to deal with cancelled tours because of political disruption in some Test playing countries, try to find a way of helping the poorer nations who are pleading poverty, ensure the safety of players, plan a playing programme which embraces rolling Test and one-day championships but does not mean too much cricket, and prepare for the eighth and, naturally, biggest World Cup.

Only on the financial front can the game at large rest easy at present. For the moment it has been spared from the TV rights implosion. Several individual countries, including England, have long-term agreements. The ICC have a deal lasting until 2007 and have current assets of more than $125 million. "If agreements were being negotiated for the end of June this year it would be a disaster," said Gray.

The officers of the game's governing body were given more power by the board last week, particularly to intervene in tackling threatened tours.

But unless they also swiftly instigate a proper working relationship with the players they will struggle to be purposeful. Graveney's carefully planned question of Lord Condon at the ICC's business seminar on Thursday reminded the audience from around the world what Condon had written in his report. "The players are not sufficiently involved in the administration of the game and ownership of the problems," recommendation 17 had said. "There is considerable scope for drawing players into a more productive relationship with the ICC."

Graveney said that things were not moving quickly enough. He emphasised that he had a good working relationship with ICC's chief officers but he is frustrated by the refusal of some countries to budge. They see player power where they still want hired hands. "We don't want to tell the ICC how they should run the game," said Graveney. "But the players have every right to be consulted on the protection of players, which is paramount. Then there is the amount of cricket being played and player burn-out as well as player participation in off the field activities in next year's World Cup."

Gray, who has 15 months of his tenure to run, was as upbeat as a self-confessed pessimist could be. Like most others in the organisation he is relieved that match-riging provoked by illegal bookies on the sub-continent appears to have stopped. But Condon conceded somewhat controversially last week that there are handful of cricketers still playing who were involved in match-fixing. Maybe his statement went against the rules of natural justice but most of the men have been mentioned in previous reports and Condon's words at least reinforced the need for constant vigilance. The new rolling one-day championship in which every game will count should also persuade players not to take the bookies' shilling. Suggestions in some quarters that recent matches have been fixed lack both evidence and grounds of any kind and also tend to deflect attention from the game's myriad other problems.

The division between rich and poor might be the greatest of those. Pakistan have lost perhaps $20m because of cancelled tours. West Indies are also in trouble, largely because of falling interest, and their series against New Zealand failed to attract any TV bids.

But pleas for ICC cash were rejected. "There's a great deal of sympathy," said Gray. "We have been working on the possibility of a compensation fund, only the possibility, but the board have rejected that. In a two-horse race I suppose you always back self-interest, but not without a very good hearing."

Gray said television money had changed everything. In the old days the only income was from ticket sales and bilateral agreements. "If you come to me I keep all the money and vice versa. Now there are home TV rights and secondary overseas rights and if you come to me I still keep all the money. Is that necessarily fair?" So far, the ICC members have said that it is indeed fair and proper. Given the chance to express it the players might have a view on that as well.