NEWS
SCHEDULES
COLUMNS
PREVIOUS TOURS
OTHER SPORTS
STATISTICS
INTERVIEWS
SLIDE SHOW
ARCHIVES

Wanted: some fair-weather fans

I don't like cricket -- regardless of whether the Indian team is winning or not. I said once before that the Indian team is lousy (see my column 'Cricket considered harmful'), and I know this is not a popular position to take. I still think it's a lousy team, but there is hope -- it can be turned around with radical process changes. I say this based on what has succeeded in the US.

Even for someone who doesn't like cricket, it is necessary to deal with it because it has become India's secular religion. This reminds me of a comment someone made once: "Ancient Greeks were so primitive -- they worshipped the forces of nature! We modern Americans are so advanced -- we worship rock groups!". Have we really gained from disrespecting gods and worshipping cricketers?

I have a straightforward conjecture: the state of cricket is a reflection of the state of cricket fans. You cricket fans have got the team you deserve, in a demonstration that while God does not play dice with the Universe, It loves irony. You are unthinking fans, so you get an unthinking team. It also illustrates fundamental flaws of Socialism -- lack of competition and incentives means lack of performance.

For what is needed is for cricket fans to be fair-weather fans, and to now desert the game in droves after the drubbing in Australia. Thus driving down the market value of the players, due to the lowered advertising and brand value associated with their endorsements. Once their paychecks are in jeopardy, said players will suddenly discover that making excuses isn't enough, and that they actually have to produce.

People keep suggesting that it is not the fault of the players, but of the "establishment" that somehow is not answerable to anybody. That the "establishment", I guess the Board of Cricket Control, is incompetent. Maybe this is true; it would not surprise me at all. But then why aren't the fans and the players rising up in arms against these bureaucrats?

Consider what has happened to similar ante-diluvian institutions in India that once had a monopoly -- Indian Airlines, and Maruti Udyog, to pick on two. Once they found they had to compete against clever and determined foes, Jet Airways in the case of the former and the slew of Tata and the Korean imports in the case of the latter, lo and behold, their responsiveness to customers, their performance, everything has improved.

In the US, I am devastated that the San Francisco 49ers, my favorite football team, is a shadow of its former self. So much so that they, a regular fixture in the Super Bowl in years past, did not even make it to the playoffs this time. And wonder of wonders, the St Louis Rams who used to be pummelled with monotonous regularity by the 49ers in years past, have now become the champions.

How can this be? The 49ers of the 80's and 90's were gods, the most dreaded team in the league, because they always won against overwhelming odds. Some of their players were arguably the best ever in their positions: Joe Montana at quarterback, Ronnie Lott at free safety, Jerry Rice at wide receiver. Lott and Montana have just been inducted into the Hall of Fame, as undoubtedly Jerry Rice, still playing, will eventually be.

But the dynasty has passed on; the current 49ers are struggling; and their fans of yesteryear have now moved on to other teams. In America, they only appreciate winners -- and nobody makes excuses for losers. Losing coaches are fired with no ceremony. Losing teams find their stars lured away by winning teams, their gate collections fall, and the management is forced to get ingenious in their pursuit of winning strategies. It hits them where it hurts, in the pocketbook. They want the fans back.

This is the model that should apply to the Indian cricketers as well. If they don't perform, every fan should swear off of watching cricket, spend their discretionary sports spending money on things like soccer or hockey or tennis or chess -- yes, Virginia, there is life after cricket. They should also make their disgust known by boycotting the products peddled by failed cricketers -- and let the media and the advertisers know this by organizing themselves.

For instance, let us say player X is being paid Rs. 1 million for being a spokesperson for, say, Singapore Airlines. Surely, Singapore Airlines would sit up and notice if they got one thousand letters from consumers saying they would boycott Singapore Airlines until player X cleaned up his act.

The problem is that there are no disincentives for the Indian cricketers. There is no downside to losing, being hammered, being massacred. They will still have their fat paychecks and their lucrative endorsements to return to. What if, on the other hand, their incomes were dependent on winning?

Let's say their winnings are Rs. 100,000 per Test match. Suppose they had an incentive clause in their contracts -- your base pay is 20% of this, you get an incentive bonus of the remaining 80% if you win. This is pretty much the kind of incentive-based structures that many salespeople have: say 30% base, 70% incentive based on reaching targets. What exactly is wrong with such an incentive plan?

Remember, this cricket of today is no amateur game of gentlemen, it is one with a great deal of money being made by players and officials. I would put in place a similar scheme for the cricket board as well -- first make all their financial records public and audited. Second, give them time-limited contracts, and individual responsibility for events, tours etc. so they cannot hide behind collective incompetence. Only those whose events succeed will be paid. Others will be fired.

There are interesting non-financial incentives available as well. I remember a while ago some Latin American soccer team that was eliminated from the World Cup as a result of a self-goal by some hapless player. When the dejected team returned home, someone shot the player! Similarly, I believe the Pakistani cricket team are in some danger of being beaten up or taken potshots at by their fans (with AK-47s, not newspaper columns) if they don't perform. So, unsurprisingly, they perform.

The other thing to look at is what the National Football League has done successfully in the US. They realized that there was inequity in the market sizes of the various cities where the teams were: for instance, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco and Miami are huge media markets where the game telecasts themselves are worth large amounts. But Green Bay, for instance, is a tiny town; so how does Green Bay compete?

The League came up with a number of steps that have made football highly egalitarian. For one, there are salary caps -- the total team salary cannot be more than some specified number. So rich teams simply cannot go out and buy a star by paying him a huge amount. Second, the TV revenues for all clubs is collected by the league and distributed equally among all the teams, so Green Bay can indeed benefit from Los Angeles's largesse.

Third, the 'draft' for bringing in new players from the universities every year is so arranged that the worst-performing teams in any given year get to pick earlier in the draft. This seems to ensure that, talent percolates into the poor teams, so that in the long run the teams all become approximately level. Thus, small-town fans also have a shot at their team making it to the Super Bowl.

As a result of these steps, American football is doing extremely well. Why can't these things be implemented on the Indian cricket scene as well? My suggestions would be:
* Do boycott cricket and cricket sponsors unless the players perform
* Force the huge TV revenues from cricket to be shared with the Indian Hockey Federation, the Indian Tennis Association, the Indian Atheletics Federation, and so forth. Give the fan a choice
* Introduce 20 per cent - 80 per cent or even 10 per cent - 90 per cent incentive-based compensation for all cricket players and officials
* Fire non-performing captains and players based on some clear numerical criteria: number of runs per innings, number of runs given away per wicket, something like that. These criteria can be fine-tuned as necessary
* Instead of the same tired players who have proven their ineptitude, bring in fresh talent on a regular basis

In terms of attitudes, I have a few suggestions to the fans as well:
* Please lose the 'messiah' complex. No individual, however wonderful, is going to single-handedly win a series. So don't blame an Azharuddin or a Tendulkar for the problems of the team. If you do so, you go on pointless witchhunts. There are no messiahs -- the entire team and every individual in it has to work at full strength. We need a system tuned to win
* Please don't suggest that the Indian cricket team are good role models for children. Really? Would you cossett your children despite their having no drive, no ambition, no discipline, no persistence, no self-respect? No, you'd give them a kick in the pants
* Most of all, stop making excuses for the Indian team. It is not because of Australia's terrible umpires or doctored pitches that the Indians lost. They lost because they don't have the heart, the confidence, to fight against the odds. Life's tough all over, so I say to the whining players: "Deal with it. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."