From Left Field

[corporal]

We the supporter by attending matches & watching cricket on the TV which in turn creates the demand for advertising, are directly and indirectly providing the majority of revenue for cricket Australia.

Yet we have no say in any board appointments, bias's selection committee's and other change's and tinkering to the game we all so love and consequently no cricket administration is ever held accountable for anything. This is not to say that cricket Australia hasn't been doing a good job as we have the best team in the world and are financially strong, however we still have no control.

Of course it would be completely unworkable, however what are the thoughts on some system by which cricket supporters could by buy a membership which would have physical benefits such as admission to the test/one dayers in your capital etc... It would also include the benefit of being able to have voting rights for board/selectorial positions and the ability to add our voice.

I know its never going to happen, and possibly unnecessary, however its just something that has been floating around my head (a large empty chasm some may argue).

 

[wang]

I believe the way Cricket Australia operate is the way to go as the ignorant have no input with the issues you raised. No outside influences means the right decision is made most of the time.

A membership system probaly wouldnt work as well with cricket as it does with football as there arent as many games in the one city as there is with football. With football being a weekend sport it is possible to go to every game, but cricket is played mid week, which clashes with work. People are more passionate about their football clubs than they are with cricket, therefore are less likely to fork out money for something they cant go to, or as often as they would like too.

 

[manmountain]

I see your point corporal but I'm not sure that a suitable model could be created to make the situation workable.

I suppose people still do have an influence in that they can always just turn off their TV or not go to games, but that's not the same as a vote at an AGM by any stretch of the imagination.

Personally I think cricket doesn't stir the same passion as football, and support tends to be a bit passive. Would Cricket Australia change their stance on a given issue if 1,000 people wrote to them giving them a piece of their mind?

My pet hate is the non-explanation of selections. The quotes we hear from the selectors always amount to "that's who we wanted to pick so we did" without any real insight as to why. They come across as almost cocky/smug in that it appears they don't feel they owe the cricketing public an explanation.