Time to make a clean break from the superfluous Future Tour Programme

NICK HOWSON: Countries are either ignoring the schedule or unable to fulfil it. There is no need to flog the dead horse that is the FTP

• South Africa given green light to host England
• England in talks over Pakistan T20s
• Rawalpindi and Lahore to host Pakistan-Zimbabwe white-ball series

"They have agreed to all our conditions except for one, but that is the main one."

Bangladesh Cricket Board president Nazmul Hassan's dejection was palpable when he addressed why the Test tour of Sri Lanka was looking for a third different date.

Government rules stated the Tigers' squad must quarantine for 14 days upon their arrival for the three matches.

What followed was a messy set of back-and-forth negotiations, leaving both nations considering another berth for a series already postponed twice. For any avoidance of doubt, there are no winners.

Neither has played an international match since the pandemic took hold. Indeed, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan are the only full member nations either yet to feature in the Covid-19 era or without a match fixed in the calendar.

The Future Tour Programme states that Sri Lanka are scheduled to face Bangladesh in three ODIs, South Africa in two Tests, New Zealand in six white-ball matches and West Indies in an eight-game multi-format tour in the Caribbean before the middle of next year. But this calendar is a fallacy.

ICC confident inaugural World Test Championship will be completed

How certain can we be about these matches, or any game for that matter, in the current climate?

Virtually all major nations appear ready to host international cricket, perhaps except for India. Despite this, the entire calendar is currently out for tender. It is as fluid as at any stage during the FTP era, which began in 2002.

The FTP has plenty of merit. It holds the major nations to account, pushing them into touring the small teams on the roster giving balance and credibility to the sport. The original intention was that sides would play each other home and away at least once over a 10-year period. 

Additionally, it ensures the big three - whose monopoly has already been tempered in recent years – do not create their own mini-league.

In the closed shop that is top tier international competition, nations without the pulling power of India, England and Australia sit on as level a playing field as is permittable. It guarantees they are part of the conversation across all formats. This is particularly important for the likes of Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Ireland, who would struggle for regular exposure if the calendar were more flexible.

Cricket boards then have advanced notice to sell domestic and international TV rights to broadcasters, though again the big three remain the chief benefactors. Fans understand the calendar, anticipate upcoming clashes and decisions over which tickets to purchase and tours to save for.

^{England and Pakistan are on course to face-off in 2021}

But many of these factors are no longer as important or pertinent as they once were. The FTP has disintegrated in recent months and even with a clearer picture of how nations can manage the coronavirus and still stage matches, it is obvious scheduling will remain flexible.

The irony of the ICC's long-awaited World Test Championship being completely derailed at the first attempt should not be lost on anyone. The Test schedule has never been more structured, yet this format is a mess. Six series have been ‘postponed’ since the pandemic began. The governing body will likely bury its head in the sand and persevere in attempts to stage the inaugural final at Lord's next summer. Bangladesh have only played three times, Sri Lanka four.

Neither the FTP nor WTC are unequivocally bad for cricket. But neither work amid the current circumstances. And it appears clear that some cricket boards around the world agree.

The ECB are being perhaps the most disobedient. England are off to South Africa next month, Pakistan in the new year, Sri Lanka potentially simultaneously while Ireland and New Zealand are bound for the UK in 2021. None of these tours are in the FTP. A Sri Lanka series would be rescheduled from earlier this year, a South Africa from early next.

Aspects of the FTP are starting to be fulfilled and the schedule resumes in earnest this weekend when Pakistan host Zimbabwe in the first of six limited-overs matches. Though it cannot be argued it provides the same fixed framework as before, that is to be expected.

The ICC would do well to shelve both the programme and the championship, for now. Some nations might lose out, but it is not as if they are benefitting from the current situation as it is. Talks between Sri Lanka and Bangladesh ended in deadlock and unless cricket is being permanently moved to the United Arab Emirates then they will be repeated.

^{England are due back in Sri Lanka in the New Year}

The FTP is not serving a purpose, and the WTC - already unbalanced and complicated enough - does not need its first year determined on points-per-game just to deliver an outcome. It does not matter that much.

Additionally, the ICC needs to step in to help finance bio-secure environments. Bangladesh have spoken of the cost of setting up such conditions and even the ECB says its sophisticated summer testing programme, which cost £1million, not least the intensity of the bubble itself is unsustainable going forward. That support provides nations with a bargaining chip from which to base negotiations.

Countries do not need to be held ransom by the programme. They must be agile and allowed to pursue series which work for them. Granted, it might mean a degree of repetitiveness in the schedule but needs must.

There is a time and place for defined organisation. But cricket is already handcuffed enough as it is.