Editorial: Howard wrong pick

OPINION: John Howard, it has been said, can't bat and can't bowl. But the former Australian prime minister, the man once described as a "cricket tragic", can and will become the next president of the International Cricket Council (ICC).

Howard's enthusiasm for the game is huge and his selection as the Australian and New Zealand choice as president should not be criticised simply because of his inability, as shown on television, to bowl an off break. But it should be derided, because of the two contenders for the post, New Zealander Sir John Anderson was far and away the better pick.

This was, in short, a wrong 'un of a decision. Howard is Australia's second-longest serving leader but he has no experience in administering cricket.

New Zealand has had its share of poor sporting administrators in the past, with codes such as football and rugby league suffering as a result, but Anderson is not in this category.

He has combined a successful career in business and Crown organisations with his roles in sporting administration. He chaired New Zealand Cricket between 1995 and 2008 and has first-hand experience of the sticky wicket that is the ICC, as he was this nation's representative on the world body.

Anderson also brought his trouble-shooting skills to New Zealand Rugby League, producing a critical but acclaimed report into its troubles, which is credited with giving that code a fresh start.

It is this sort of experience which world cricket needed but was overlooked by the seven-person selection panel which included four Australians, including an independent member.

When Howard formally takes up the job in 2012, the divisions and problems afflicting the sport will not have disappeared.

Howard must play a role in balancing the interests of all three forms of the game. In doing so he must put aside his own love affair with test cricket and acknowledge the commercial success of the shorter versions of the game, notably the recent phenomenon which is T20.

But the key task will be dealing with the Subcontinent, notably India. This nation has emerged as the powerhouse of world cricket, with its huge population's appetite for the sport generating vast revenue, as shown by the staggering player payments in the Indian Premier League.

Undoubtedly Howard will be expected by Cricket Australia, which is suspicious of the political power of India, to attempt to control that nation's influence. India's dominance has threatened to divide the cricketing world and, in the process, the relevance of the ICC has been threatened.

The new president in 2012 must also confront the security risks in the Subcontinent. This is likely to preclude cricket world cups being held in India in the foreseeable future and, after the debacle of the 2007 event in the West Indies, leave England, South Africa and Australia as the only viable hosts.

This could be another source of tension between the ICC and India, given the latter's hyper-sensitivity about its security threat.

Anderson would have had the vision and the ability to address such issues as a priority. As for Howard, his priority might well be shifting the ICC headquarters from Dubai back to Lord's, where an old traditionalist like him would feel at home.

- © Fairfax NZ News