The Corridor

Recent Posts

PLEASE NOTE The Corridor is moving grounds at the moment. This is the old site, and comments have been disabled. Check back tomorrow and we should be safely ensconced at our new home


Another day, another administrative bungle to fulminate about

By Scott 2 years ago, mid-August Leave a comment on this post

The latest tomfoolery concerns sponsorships. Indian readers will sigh, because they are awfully familiar with this scenario.

Anyway, World Cup organisers has instructed Australia and South Africa that they have to cut links with their long-standing sponsers for the duration of the 2007 World Cup.

Australia was the first nation to express its frustration at being told by tournament organisers it had to axe Travelex as its tour backer because its core business of currency exchange infringed on the interests of recently signed tournament sponsor Scotiabank from Canada.

Australia has been told Travelex, which backed Australia when it won the last World Cup in South Africa in 2003, can have no involvement with the team for a five-month period next year including the cup.

And yesterday, representatives from Standard Bank in South Africa expressed their dismay at having to put their long-time deal with the South African team on hold for the tournament in the West Indies next March and April.

There is of course no conflict because Canadian banks do not operate in the Australian marketplace, and I doubt whether or not they feature too highly on the South African financial radar either.

I must say that it is extremely disappointing that the Australian and South African boards have meekly submitted to this.  What is the value of sponsoring the national team if that sponsorship is not visible on the biggest global event in the world.

And who do the organisers think they are, undermining the Australian and South African boards? In whose interests is the 2007 World Cup being organised for? The cricketers, or the sponsors?

Tags: , , , , |

2 Responses to “Another day, another administrative bungle to fulminate about”

  • worma wrote:
    August 14th, 2006 at 10.35 am

    It’s a messy area..and yes, you’re right, we Indian fans are pretty well versed with the script.

    I don’t really know which side is right, because either way, its commerical interests in question. So, atleast your last point is not valid. Its not a choice between the cricketers and the sponsors…its between one set of sponsors and the others. Both with similar interests at stake.

    The ICC should have drafted their agreements with the WC sponsors more carefully….and they didn’t learn their lessons from the Indian fiasco of last year (the Indian team sponsor SAHARA operate a domestic airline in India that had absolutely no clash of interests with the SA airline..or whoever that official ICC sponsorer were)

    Then again, this happens in all sports…even in Olympics and Soccer WC. The tournament sponsors have the bigger rights, if I’m not mistaken.

  • Elliott wrote:
    August 14th, 2006 at 11.17 am

    So have we acttually given in yet!
    Todays paper said we were fighting it…


    • « Rahul Bhattacharya awarded Cricket Writer of the Year | Main | Sri Lankan tragedies keep on piling up »