What’s common between cricket body ICC and the corruption-plagued Fifa in football?

Last week, David Richardson was asked for his thoughts on the fires engulfing Fifa. As chief executive of the International Cricket Council (ICC), there was an unmistakable sense of relief in Richardson’s comments.
“I am absolutely confident that, in my time with ICC, I haven’t seen any evidence whatsoever of any kind of backhanders or payment being made that shouldn’t have been paid, as seem to be alleged in the Fifa investigation,” he said.
“From time to time the decisions made by the ICC board might be questioned by some people as far as the wisdom of them, but there is certainly no evidence whatsoever or even any talk or consideration given to the type of thing that is emerging in the Fifa investigation.”
Richardson and all cricket’s fraternity should celebrate the many ways in which the ICC is not Fifa. Here are but six of those ways:
Sepp Blatter is head-deep in ­corruption allegations
The head of the ICC is not in any way besmirched by corruption allegations. N Srinivasan has never been removed from a post by the Supreme Court of India, or had a son-in-law found guilty of illegal betting on a franchise that Srinivasan owns in a conflict of interest of his then role as head of Indian cricket. Never.
Fifa has 209 members
The ICC has half of that: 105. In reality, only 10 matter. This is the smart way to development. Fifa wants to spread its game to all corners of the planet, not realising it is that which makes the sport unmanageable. If everyone has control, then nobody has control.
The ICC had this premonition long ago. They knew that increasing cricket’s reach would lead to headaches. Sports do not live and die off their popularity and reach. They exist off money.
Fifa gives each member, big or small, one vote
The ICC knows democracy is great in theory but pointless in practice. It is happy to reinforce itself as a members’ club where the rules of membership are vague and arbitrary. It is happy to be run by an oligarchy of its three richest members. That arrangement streamlines decision-making and eradicates dissent and differing opinions.
Fifa is still grappling with geopolitical fault lines
Blatter has thrived on his support from Asia and Africa, football’s lesser developed regions. That has helped him overcome disdain in the more established ones, such as Europe. Cricket has evolved far beyond power struggles between the Asian bloc and the older, established rulers of the game. Cricket functions on a purer, simpler line: those with the most money run the game. Everyone else does not matter.
Fifa’s process of choosing ­venues to stage its tournaments is irredeemably corrupt
So much so that it is no longer enough to justify it with the counter that the alleged corruption has at least taken the World Cup to countries where it has never been staged before but which are important to further spread the game.
Cricket no longer bothers with such aims. There is no bidding process. Instead, cricket has decided to rotate the staging of its major tournaments across three countries (the same three that happen to be running the sport). Between 2011 and 2023, only two of the 11 biggest cricket tournaments – the World Cup, the Champions Trophy and the World Twenty20 – will not be held in one of India, Australia and England (and none from 2016).
Fifa has overseen corruption within the game at all levels, across all regions
Cricket has that house in order. It had a corruption crisis in the early 19th century and the late 20th century, and the early part of the 21st century. In international games and domestic ones. Across nearly all its full member countries, involving its captains and youngsters alike. Other than that, clean as a whistle.
[email protected]
Follow us on Twitter at our new home at NatSportUAE