Give world cricket an Indian 'home'

As the 2022 T20 World Cup gathers steam, and as the unassuming but iron-hearted Roger Binny begins his spell as the new president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the time has come to ask if Lord’s should not be displaced as the “home” of cricket, which should be Mumbai. After all, it’s the BCCI that sustains the International Cricket Council (ICC).

The thing is this: Just as England did once upon a time, India now provides not just the money but the class as well. It’s far and away the dominant cricketing power. So whichever way you look at it, there’s simply no case any longer for India not claiming to be the new home of cricket.

Consider the Indian facts — and the British myths. The Indian economy is now bigger than the British economy. The BCCI earns multiple times more than the Marylebone Cricket Club. India has three times the number of quality cricketers than the UK. And Indian cricket history is no less than that of the UK.

So why should Lord’s not be displaced by, say, a stadium in India as the “home” of cricket? Render unto Caesar and all that?

The transfer will be easy because the only language the British understand without any difficulty at all is money. Believe me, if the price is right the English will sell even their Crown Jewels, the most important part of which is Indian anyway.

So one option is to buy the Lord’s brand from the MCC and bury it — if only because of that vulgar red- and yellow-striped club tie. The details can be worked out, which basically makes it a problem of valuation. To begin with, the BCCI should make an offer and tell the MCC, just as the colonising Englishmen did, take it or we stop funding the ICC.

Independently of that, the BCCI should have the headquarters of the ICC shifted to India. It’s moved once already to Dubai. So there’s a precedent.

But going back to the claim that Lord’s is the “home” of cricket, the British make many such claims. Hence, the home of democracy? Westminster. Home of physics? Cambridge University. Home of astronomy? Greenwich. Home of modern medicine? Edinburgh. And so on. They even call Wimbledon “The” Championships!

These were the legitimate conceits of the Empire. Politically, economically and militarily Britain was so dominant that it could get away with these claims.

But that time has now long gone. In all the three ways mentioned above, Britain is today a parasitical country which can barely govern itself. It is given importance only because of its steadfast defiance of morally acceptable financial practices.

As to cricket, there’s all this rubbish about tradition by a bunch of fellows who are the first to abandon tradition when it’s financially attractive to do so or otherwise expedient. The movement from Test matches to ODIs to T20 to T100 all fall in this category. In tennis they have been fiddling with the size of the ball and the height of the grass for several years now.

In other words, Lord’s being the home of cricket because of tradition is just so typically British that it’s a wonder no one has called the bluff so far. The BCCI should do it now by offering some money.

It will be asked if other cricketing countries will accept this shifting of the “home” of cricket. But why wouldn’t they?

There are only three major white cricketing countries now — England, Australia and New Zealand. Even South Africa is not. Ireland, Scotland and the Netherlands are there just to increase the white votes. But they don’t have Test status.

In contrast, South Asia has India, the powerhouse of modern cricket; Pakistan, the second-highest supplier of absolutely top-class players; Sri Lanka, which despite its current form, is in a class by itself; Bangladesh, which is getting there; and Afghanistan, which will beat the MCC team in the next ten years. Also there’s the West Indies and Zimbabwe. South Africa is an anomaly. The BCCI subsidises most, if not all, of them.

Given this, where should the home of cricket be? London or Mumbai? Indeed, if London has two grounds, Mumbai has three, all of them top-class as we have seen during the IPL games.

Finally, just in case you think this is a joke, it’s not. It’s a dead serious suggestion. Remember the 1983 World Cup? Most members of the Indian team thought it was a good joke to say that India would win the cup.

Only Kapil Dev didn’t. And we won the cup.