Never before in the history of the International Cricket Conference have such dramatic announcements been made at the time a new chief was taking over as this year. The difference probably was that for the first time, an Asian was taking over as president. Jagmohan Dalmiya has ensured that all and sundry will remember the day he took over by announcing that both Kenya and Bangladesh would henceforth be upgraded to full one-day status; their applications for Test status would, however, be kept pending and would depend on future performance.
The programme for the 1999 World Cup was announced and a number of well-worn cliches about popularising the game and helping it to globalise it by beginning a one-day jamboree at Disneyland were also part of Dalmiya's first Press conference. However, these announcements pale into insignificance when considers the dramatic upgrading which was done in the case of both Bangladesh and Kenya. And the question must needs be asked: are we, perhaps, jumping the gun a bit? Or are there pressing reasons, other than pure cricketing ones, why such decisions had to be taken?
After Dalmiya was blocked from becoming the ICC chief in June 1996, he did his homework well to ensure that he would not fail this year. There were plenty of stories which hinted that the Indian team were sent hither and thither to play in one-day tournaments in return for these countries voting for Dalmiya when the time came for the election in 1997. None of these stories were verified but then there is generally no smoke without at least a small fire.
Dalmiya finally had use the threat of a court case to get his way and make the others see that there was no other route out of the situation but a compromise. He had got what he wanted and a businessman who had made the one-day game into a golden goose was set to step into the shoes of the one of the best-known cricketers of all-time -- Sir Clyde Walcott, one of the famous three Ws.
It is only logical that the countries which agreed to support him would expect something in return. Some got a tournament apiece; others, like Bermuda, got a couple of one-dayers. But in the case of Bangladesh and Kenya, the stakes are much higher as the teams from these two countries have made strides in the game, enough to guarantee that they will play in the World Cup in 1999. But are they really good enough to play against the nine others who are Test-playing nations?
Kenya probably have a good claim. They have figured in one World Cup and pulled off the upset of the year when they beat the West Indies by a handsome margin. There were reasons for this, though, reasons that led to the resignation of the West Indies skipper and the dismissal of the coach and manager. Kenya have since been claiming that they should be given Test status. Their entry into a second World Cup came when they finished runners-up in this year's ICC tournament.
Bangladesh's claim springs from their having qualified for the 1999 Cup by virtue of being winners of that tournament. But are they really good enough to be promoted so soon? The ICC trophy was played on matting. Matches which should have been finished in a day dragged into two more often than not. Was just one tournament of this nature enough to prove a team's calibre? The UAE won the ICC tournament in 1994 and figured in the last World Cup; what would have happened if they had been upgraded to one-day status? The team today is a shambles, due to reasons both on and off the field. Why then this rush to upgrade teams? It all smacks of a debt being repaid.
In the case of Kenya, there may be less cause for complaint as they have shown some consistency over a long period. They have been doing well in the ICC tournaments for some time and thus one can stretch a point in their favour. But in the case of Bangladesh, it seems premature. They may have won the ICC tournament but one feels that they must be evaluated over a period of time and then awarded one-day status. This is not to, in any way, take away something from their victory; it would be better for the team itself if they were to be upgraded a couple of years hence when they have shown the consistency which they need to fare well in the big league.
Dalmiya's gesture will gain him plaudits at home; India is making a conscious effort to strengthen ties with its neighbours and its relations with Bangladesh have been done no harm by this cricketing boost. Only the very naive would still persist in believing that there is no link between politics and sport and Dalmiya has shown that he is adept at the former. He may have his admirers, but there are many who feel that this move has more to do with repaying a debt than anything else. It is a discordant note on which to begin a three-year tenure.