John Howard - future ICC president?

smssia0112

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
John Howard ICC

And Peter Roebuck's opinion: Howard is the wrong choice for the ICC

Basically from 2012, an Australasian will be the ICC president, so Australia and New Zealand are preparing their candidate at the moment. Reports at the moment are that Australia want to nominate former Prime Minister John Howard, well known as a massive cricket fan.

Peter Roebuck reckons it's a bad decision, but I disagree. I think Howard would be fantastic for the job - he's a smart politician with a great track record managing the Australian economy, so the business side of things would be no issue. I think he'd have enough cricket knowledge to be a president, and it'd help to sway the power in cricket back to more of a middle ground between the subcontinent and the rest of the world - he wouldn't be afraid to stand up to the BCCI, and he's not afraid to speak his mind either (the Murali chucking call case in point, misguided though it may have been).

What are everyone's thoughts?
 
I couldn't believe it when I heard! No way! He's too manipulative, and he can't speak clearly. :)

I say, get a former player in there. Stephen Fleming would be great, or even Shane Warne, Adam Gilchrist, Richard Hadlee, Steve Waugh, etc.
 
Well we need somebody with sense. Maybe we could ask K Rudd to quit the PM and become it? Although John Howard can teach the youngsters how to bowl :p.
 
I couldn't believe it when I heard! No way! He's too manipulative, and he can't speak clearly. :)

I say, get a former player in there. Stephen Fleming would be great, or even Shane Warne, Adam Gilchrist, Richard Hadlee, Steve Waugh, etc.

Why a former player? Just because they used to play? They probably know sht all on what to do.
 
Depends on the role of the ICC president, if it requires substantial cricketing knowledge then you would need a former cricketer. But he wouldn't be the worst option and he knows how to handle deals and what not.

Maybe we could ask K Rudd to quit the PM and become it?

Haha hes the biggest noob of cricket on earth, he has next to no idea about cricket.
 
Why a former player? Just because they used to play? They probably know sht all on what to do.
Not just any old former player, the ones who I mentioned seem to have some pretty good ideas as well, and they've captained sides, etc.

It's all about management skills, and also knowledge of the game. Also, as a former player they have insight into what the players want.

Anyway, why do they have to be Australasian? Wasn't it just Malcolm Speed?

EDIT: Wait no, he was CEO. I understand now.
 
They should give the ICC to us, the members of Planetcricket.
 
Not just any old former player, the ones who I mentioned seem to have some pretty good ideas as well, and they've captained sides, etc.

It's all about management skills, and also knowledge of the game. Also, as a former player they have insight into what the players want.

Anyway, why do they have to be Australasian? Wasn't it just Malcolm Speed?

EDIT: Wait no, he was CEO. I understand now.

Warne would be rubbish.

Dean raised some good points, and it's far to say former crickets don't have those skills.
 
Howard seems to know his cricket and hes definitely got the management attributes. That is what most players would be missing.
 
Rudd pretends he is a typical Aussie bloke but it comes off as faker than Sam Newman's face.

I don't think indepth cricket knowledge is necessary to be a president. CEO maybe, but don't forget that a president's job is not analyse games of cricket, it's to protect the interests of the company he is representing, and the game that that company controls. I think Howard has the passion to do that, and I think as a devoted cricket fan his knowledge will be sufficient.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top