07 August,2017 02:47 PM IST | | Ian Chappell
Now that the acrimonious dispute between the Australian Cricketers Association [ACA] and Cricket Australia [CA] is finally over, the feeling is one of relief and the nagging question, writes Ian Chappell
David Warner
David Warner
As much as you felt deep down that CA would never let the situation deteriorate to the point where an Ashes series was cancelled, there was palpable relief to hear that it actually will go ahead. And as much as you knew in your heart that CA would never - knowing the financial punishment inflicted by the BCCI on the West Indies Board when they abandoned a tour - not fulfil there ODI commitment in India, it was uplifting to know that the matches would be played.
However, knowing that CA was so anti-revenue sharing in the lead up to and during the on-going negotiations, and to then find out that the new MoU will contain a "modernised" form of revenue sharing, it was only natural to wonder why this agreement wasn't reached long before it alienated the fans? Revenue-sharing is important to the players because it signifies a partnership rather than a boss and employee arrangement.
Curse for CA
To CA it was a curse because they felt including it would leave them with too little ammunition to fight the on-going battle for the hearts and minds of young 'first choice athletes'. Those talented kids who go on to become the elite players critical to keeping Australian cricket teams successful, which in turn helps to build the sport's popularity. The end game is to ensure that the Australian cricket teams - men and women - are strong. If those teams keep winning, then administering the sport becomes a lot simpler.
If Australia was to lose the Ashes series, then an already angry public will take out their frustration and cricket will experience a recession. As it is, cricket will take time to recover its elevated place in the hearts and minds of the Australian public but suffer a loss to England and it will take a damn sight longer to recapture the faith.
David Warner has been the face and mouthpiece for the players' grievances during the protracted dispute. Warner is a strong-minded individual - you have to be to successfully play the role of belligerent opening bat - but he's going to need all the will-power he can muster if he starts the summer slowly. The kids love Warner but if he fails against England they'll hear - loud and clear - from their fathers about this "greedy, loud-mouthed so and so" and they'll begin to wonder if they were right to idolise the ebullient opener. While questions abound for CA - why did an agreement take so long; why try and fracture the ACA; why did the CEO only become involved late in the piece? The question for the players is a simple one; "Will you leave the game stronger than it was when you began your career?"
Think of the kids
Most young cricketers take up the game because they adopt a hero. They watch cricket firstly because it's a popular sport and then one player in particular catches their eye. They begin to wonder if they could emulate his or her feats and they head out to the park to begin a journey of discovery.
