Speed MALCOLM SPEED's ascent up the sport management ladder has been as strange as it has been rapid. Even now, the 55-year-old Chief Executive Officer of the International Cricket Council (ICC) from Australia seems a little stunned by his rise in a mere 25 years from the president of his home state's basketball association to probably the most important position in world cricket.
At the helm of the ICC, the grey-haired former barrister admits he has been in his fair share of rough water since taking on the job in 2001 but remains undaunted and wants to see his current contract through to 2005 and maybe beyond.
One on One caught up with the London-based father of three at Strawberry Hill during his visit to the island last week to, among other things, sign the 2007 World Cup host agreement.
Q: What are your plans after leaving here (last Wednesday)?
Malcolm Speed: Well, it's back to London. Then Bangladesh on Sunday, Dubai for a few days for meetings; then Australia and New Zealand before going back to London.
Q: Do you enjoy all that travelling?
MS: I don't mind the flying, it's the standing around and waiting at airports that I don't like.
Q: What sports did you play growing up in Melbourne?
MS: Cricket, football (Australian Rules), basketball, tennis, golf ... a typical Australian kid growing up in the '50s we did everything. My two main sports were basketball and cricket. I played basketball for Victoria and 20 years of club cricket. I was a left-arm opening bowler usually bowling uphill into the wind character building.
Q: How did a barrister become involved in sports management?
MS: I started off at 30 when I was president of the Victoria Basketball Association. That was a young age to be coming into an area which had been traditionally run by older men in Australia. That was the start. I ended up then as chairman of the National Basketball League and Basketball Australia at the age of about 40. I was then, in 1997, headhunted for the post of Chief Executive of the Australian Cricket Board ... two months later I was appointed and I was greatly surprised that cricket would go outside of cricket because it was such an insular game in Australia. I had four years there and then there was a similar situation with the ICC. I went through the process again and I was surprised again to be appointed because I didn't think they would go with another Australian (after David Richards). I've been there nearly 2-1/2 years now.
Q: Do you want to stay on after your contract expires in 2005?
MS: I'd be very tempted to stay on until the West Indies World Cup but I'm keen to get back to Australia and at 55 there are always health concerns so I'd have to take that into consideration. It's a high stress job and there's always a limited time-frame for a job like this.
Q: What have been the most stressful parts of the job since you have taken it up?
MS: I think there have been three seriously stressful issues. The first one was when referee Mike Denness suspended Indian players in South Africa and India insisted he not referee the next Test match. I then cancelled that match. They went ahead and played it ... in the end they didn't contest the ruling. That then blew up into an issue that put the England tour of India at risk as one of the Indians had been suspended for the next match and India were saying they were going to play him. I said if you do, that won't be a Test match either. England then said if that was the case they would cancel the series and come home. It spiralled out control, with massive publicity in India and it was the first time I was burnt in effigy there.
Q: The only time?
MS: (laughing) No, I'm averaging one a year now. The third issue has been over player terms for ICC events. Again, involving the Indian players for last year's Champions Trophy and the World Cup this year. That was a massive event and a massive issue. It's quite a complicated issue. One of the most interesting parts of the job is dealing with India which has a population of a billion people. We think the West Indies population is passionate about cricket and it is. There are two million people in Jamaica, multiply that by 500 and you have a massive population which is just as passionate about a game which in the sub-continent is 50 times more popular than the next sport.
Q: What is your primary goal for the rest of your tenure?
MS: The game generally is very healthy, particularly in the full member countries where it is played seriously. If you come to places like the West Indies you see how strong cricket is. It is being challenged by other sports in many countries but it is holding its ground and growing in some. So, what we are trying to do is grow it and lift the standard at the next level countries like Canada, the United States, Malaysia, Ireland, Scotland, Denmark, throughout Asia, throughout Africa. It's a 10-year project to grow that and I think we are at about year three. We also need to get the West Indies World Cup on sound footing and that's a major undertaking. We could have taken some easy options and run another World Cup in England, Australia or even India instead of here where we are faced with serious logistical difficulties in having the event spread over eight countries. I want to make sure that the role I take makes it a success.
Q: In Test cricket, is it good that Australia is so dominant at the moment?
MS: The time will come in one year, two years, three years and someone else will come along. The difference at the moment between Australia and, say, the next best team, South Africa, is perhaps one good batsman and two good bowlers. You put two outstanding bowlers into South Africa and one more good batsman and they will be competitive. I think you will see Australia's supremacy challenged over the next couple of years. I'm not saying they will not be the top team but I think you will see the gap being bridged again. I don't expect Australia to drop its standard, other teams will have to rise up but I don't think there's as much between Australia and the other top teams as people think. It's their bowling strength that sets them apart.
Q: At the other end of the table now, do the plights of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe concern you?
MS: Yes. The decision was made in 2000 to give Bangladesh full member status and I think in hindsight we should have eased them into the game a bit more than we did. Have them play at home more and play in the sub-continent on pitches they were more familiar with. Over the past year or so we have realised we need to go back in there and do more work - particularly on the structural side. I think over the next year you'll find they'll start to win games. I don't care if it takes two years, they have a huge, passionate population and they will be a great bonus for the game sooner rather than later.
Zimbabwe is a different story. They have always had the odds stacked against them with a small population. They have done great work getting into the black communities and we now see their team is much more representative on a racial basis and that's great. Given what they have been up against (political situation), it's amazing they have been so competitive. It's fair to say a lot of people are worried about the future of Zimbabwe but we (ICC) will continue to do all we can to support them. I think it will be an ongoing struggle to sustain cricket there but they are very good at fighting against the odds.
- Tym Glaser
