AFTER a dismal one-day series against Australia, England have shocked the ICC Champions Trophy with a comprehensive defeat of Sri Lanka, one of the favourites. The pitch at the Wanderers offered movement and bounce – exactly the conditions England's seamers thrive on – and James Anderson and Graham Onions responded with early wickets.
If these conditions are replicated in the next two games England have a good chance of progressing past the group stage, but if the wickets flatten then normal service can be expected, that of little guile and thought followed by crushing losses. Sou
th Africa today will be a stern test.
More would also be needed from the maligned batsmen. Ravi Bopara's dreadful summer continued as he was dropped, but Owais Shah, Eoin Morgan and an excellent Paul Collingwood provided the necessary impetus and composure to chase down 213 needed.
So, for England, this tournament has become hugely important and not 'just another' set of one-day matches in the calendar. There really is a feeling around this Champions Trophy that it could be under threat and that it no longer has a role in the calendar.
It is not helped with West Indies sending a second-string team, but the changes made by the ICC – two weeks' intense cricket between the top eight sides only – should provide a thrilling event. The problem is, though, it does nothing. Winners receive a trophy, not accolades as the world's best, and that is because the tournament started in 1998 as a money-making exercise, and they, as the IPL is likely to discover in time, lack the credence that so engages the widest possible audience.
Not that its conception was a bad thing. Until 1999 the World Cup was run by the host country and therefore most of the shekels went to those boards. Therefore in 1998 when ICC president Jagmohan Dalmiya's new tournament, the ICC Knock-Out – it changed to Champions Trophy in 2002 – started it did so as an official ICC tournament and one meant to fill the coffers of cricket's global governing body. They have never hidden that fact – indeed, publicly acknowledge it.
"When it was conceived the ICC Champions Trophy was specifically a vehicle for generating finance for development," explained James Fitzgerald, an ICC spokesman. "Remember this was a time before a central broadcast deal was in place for ICC events so there was no real mechanism whereby ICC's Associate and Affiliate Members could be funded centrally," he continued.
And it is this funding that is so important if cricket is to broaden its playing base. $300 million is scheduled for development outside the ten top nations, money that is mostly raised from the ICC contract with the broadcaster ESPN/STAR Sports that expires in 2015.
Not all this money comes from the Champions Trophy. The contract includes all ICC events so the World Cup and the World Twenty20 must be considered the bigger contributors although it is unclear as the exact value of the contract is protected by confidentiality. $1 billion for ten years is generally accepted as about right though.
But the question is, with the rapid advent of Twenty20 and the public affinity with it, is there any need for the Champions Trophy to continue?
