Howards end

It was a sign that his bid to be part of crickets global administration was floundering when John Howard visited Zimbabwe last month. The former Australian prime minister was there to solicit support to become ICC vice president,a post that virtually guarantees eventual promotion to the top job. Latitude to nominate candidates is given to regional blocs,on a rotational basis,and Howards candidature was endorsed by Cricket Australia and New Zealand Cricket. But on Wednesday,a vote on his bid did not take place,with six African and Asian countries,including India,Pakistan and South Africa,reported to be disinclined. In a statement brimming with the obfuscation that routinely defines cricket management,the ICC executive board said the Australian and New Zealand boards had been requested to nominate somebody else.

Howard,a keen follower of the game,may or may not have the credentials to open his career in cricket administration at such a senior level. But in the absence of detailed discussions of his candidature,the veto appears to be more a case of announcing clout. Its been years since the Asian and African blocs democratised the ICC to correctly reflect its geographical spread. But the manner in which these countries have banded together to keep Howard out sends out disturbing impressions of a cabal that will use its numbers to keep out anybody who may be in disagreement with them.

The campaign against Howard,more through rumours than official statements,centred on his decision when he was PM to put sanctions on cricket officials of Robert Mugabes Zimbabwe. His comments on Muttiah Muralitharans technique are also cited as proof of his insularity. In effect,the dissenting cricket boards are sending out the message that given their numbers they can keep out anybody who may have ever disagreed with one of them,that too in a personal or political capacity,with no reasons given. Thats dangerous for the sport.