Hayden: ‘CA-ACA dispute can be settled in two minutes’

The board, Hayden felt, should have agreed to ACA’s terms. “Cricket Australia is a not-for-profit body. Its job is to run cricket efficiently and keep all stake-holders happy.”

Matthew Hayden: “All that the cricketers are asking for now is 23 per cent, a marginal hike.”   -  K. V. Srinivasan

Matthew Hayden believes the bitter payment dispute between Cricket Australia and the Australian Cricketers Association (ACA) can be settled in “two minutes” if the minds are applied properly.

Talking to Sportstar on Tuesday, Hayden said, “I do not know what all the fuss is about.”

According to Hayden, there were three major stake-holders in the game — “The fans, the players and the broadcasters / the media in that order.”

Hayden said a big chunk of revenues in the past came from sponsorship and gate money. He added, “Now, 85 per cent of the money comes from broadcasting and media rights, 10 per cent from sponsorship and only five per cent from gate collections.”

He elaborated, “The revenue for the board has grown by more than 20 times. And over the last three decades, Australian cricket has witnessed unparalleled success, winning several series, Ashes and World Cups.”

Hayden revealed the players received only five per cent of the board’s total revenue till the mid 90s. “Only in 1997-98, the board and the players reached an agreement that enabled the cricketers get 21 per cent.”

The 45-year-old added, “All that the cricketers are asking for now is 23 per cent, a marginal hike.”

The board, Hayden felt, should have agreed to ACA’s terms. “Cricket Australia is a not-for-profit body. Its job is to run cricket efficiently and keep all stake-holders happy.”

Asked why there was such a stand-off if a solution was within reach, Hayden answered, “I think there are people in the board who do not want the cricketers to have a say in the Players Payment Pool (PPI) and how the money should be shared.”

Hayden added, “How the players distribute the PPI, obviously the top guys will receive more, should be left to the cricketers. It’s their right.”

He wondered how Australia could send a second string team. “Almost all cricketers, including those at the Grade level, come under the MoU. So, I don’t know from where another team can be picked.”’

Clearly defined roles’

Turning his attention to the coach-captain saga in Indian cricket, Hayden said, “In an Australian context, the chief coach is the high performance manager while the captain is the head of the team. Their roles are clearly defined.”

On the Anil Kumble-Virat Kolhi conflict, Hayden said, “There can always be a difference of opinion between two people, things may not work out. We have to respect his [Kumble’s] decision to leave and move on.”

Ravi Shastri, Hayden opined, was an excellent choice.

“He is a very capable man, did fine in his earlier stint. The coaching staff comes under his domain, he has to deal with them everyday and should have the right to pick them.”

The Aussie also said “The captain leads the boys into the battlefield. He should be allowed to choose his men.”

Support Sportstar


Dear Reader,

Support our journalism — where text and pictures intermingle so seamlessly — and help us scale up your experience as the world changes around us. Your contribution is vital to our brand of uninfluenced, boots-on-the-ground reportage that’s worth your while. Clickbait sensationalism is not for us, but editorial independence is — we owe it to you.

  Dugout videos