Cricket Analysis And Management Plan: Sport Promotions And Public Relations

Introduction

Cricket has had a long history of transformation, from being called a gentleman’s game in the 17th century to being a sport that is treated like religion in nations around the world. The main factors behind this transformation are the game’s commercialization and globalization with the interference of politics and emotions. Australia is home to thousands of cricket enthusiasts and since it’s the national sport of the country, it is one of the most popular and participated sports in Australia. However, there are certain activities that cricket players indulge in that bring a bad name to the sport such as sledging, spot-fixing, ball tampering and excessive appealing. This paper focuses on one such scandal, which is the 2018 Australia ball-tampering scandal. Before moving to what happened, we will discuss what exactly is ball tampering.

Ball Tampering

While commercialization and globalization have helped with the popularity of cricket; science and technology have played an integral part in training cricket players and bring out the best in them. Physics has helped determine the results by studying important aspects of the game like the bounce of the cricket ball, air resistance, sweet spot of the bat and most importantly, swing of the ball. Fast bowlers often use reverse swing with the old ball which makes it spin in the opposite direction of the conventional swing to bewilder the batsmen and capitalize on the ball’s aerodynamics (Mehta 2005). In order to do a reverse swing, there is a certain condition the ball should be in; one side of it should be shiny while the other side should be rough. Players often use their saliva or sweat to shine the ball, which is perfectly alright. The problem arises, when players use external substances to shine the ball and rub the ball against the ground, use fingernails or any other external object to make it rough (Mehta 2005). This is ball tampering and by definition, ball tampering is an illegal action pertaining to rubbing an artificial substance on the ball used to create a rough. There have been several cases related to ball tampering in the past; the one that this paper will talk about is the Sandpaper scandal by the Australian cricket team in 2018.

The Sandpaper Scandal

The scandal took place in March 2018 when the Australian cricket team went to South Africa to play four test matches. The matches had a rough start. The tension between the two teams was evident as David Warner was seen to have a heated spat with Quinton de Kock, which resulted in both of these players receiving a fine. In the match that followed, Kasigo Rabada received a match ban from purposely bumping into Steve Smith but the ban was later removed which angered Steve Smith. After two matches, the series was tied at 1-1. On March 24th, on the day of the third test match, South Africa had a lead of hundred runs, which meant it had a high probability of winning. Post lunch session of this match, Cameron Bancroft, from the Australian cricket team was found to be tampering with the ball with an external yellow object. This activity of his was caught on camera and displayed on television and screens in the ground. Bancroft became aware that his activity had been caught on camera so he hid the object in his trousers, which was also recorded on camera. After the activity was displayed on screens in the ground, the umpires approached Bancroft to inquire about the situation upon which he revealed a microfiber sunglass cover from his pocket. However, the umpire could not find any alterations done to the ball so they did not penalize the Australia team and continued with the game (Kuriype 2018). Later, at a press conference, Brancroft along with the Australian cricket team captain, Steve Smith, admitted that he had indeed attempted to tamper with the ball that had become abrasive enough to create a rough surface due to dirt and grit accumulated on it and that he used a yellow colored adhesive tape with dirt granules stuck on it to rough up the ball on one side to do reverse swing (Ferris 2018). In the press conference, Steve Smith, confessed that the plan to tamper with the ball was made during the lunch break, making him fully aware of what was going to happen after the lunch session. He was quick to admit his mistake but refused to leave his captaincy. As a penalty, Smith was fined hundred percent of his match fee along with a one match ban by the ICC. However, investigations carried out later revealed that the press conference was just used to conceal the actual truth and there was more to the story that was untold.

Further investigation of the scandal revealed that instead of using a yellow coloured adhesive tape, Bancroft actually used sandpaper. This act brought shame to the Australian cricket team. Steve Smith after admitting to his mistake expressed his disappointment in himself, the team and said that people are right to question the integrity of the game and the players but he promised that under his leadership, such a scandal will not be repeated (Financial Express, 2018). The Australian Prime Minister also expressed great disappointment when he heard the news after which he spoke to David Peever, Chairman of Cricket Australia, to ensure that decisive action is taken against the culprits. This action brought great disappointment to the entire nation and as a result, Sport Australia called the Australian cricket team captain, Steve Smith to step down from his captaincy immediately along with any other staff member or team player who was involved in the scandal (Cricket Network, 2018). While Brancroft and Smith came forward voluntarily, the main culprit behind the scandal, David Warner decided to stay silent. It was found on March 27th that David Warner, the vice-captain of the team, was the one who gave the idea of ball tampering and he showed Brancroft in the dressing room on how to use the sandpaper on the ball. Consequently, both, Steve Smith and David Warner resigned from their roles.

Consequences of the Scandal on Public and the Team

Cricket Australia was auctioning broadcasting rights for six years for its matches during the time when the sandpaper gate incident happened. According to analysts, the board was to receive around $150 million per year for the rights being sold but due to the scandal; the bids received were not as high as expected. Broadcasters were asked by the board to resubmit their bids because the amount being offered was too low (Craddock 2018). This ball tampering incident had not only brought shame to the three players involved but also to Cricket Australia itself. Sponsors have publicly rebuked the scandal and were thinking about pulling out from their association with Cricket Australia. One of the biggest setbacks for Cricket Australia was when Magellan Asset Management Limited, only after five days of the scandal, ended its three-year contract with Cricket Australia, with two more years to go, costing Cricket Australia AUD 20 million. For them, the scandal was an indication that the event was against the values they uphold (Miller 2018). The scandal also affected individual sponsorships for players. Weet-Bix ended its association with Steve Smith. Weet-Bix is a cereal brand for young kids and for them; their association with Steve Smith was sending a wrong message to the kids. Furthermore, Steve Smith was also no longer remained the brand ambassador of the Commonwealth bank. Whereas David Warner is concerned, LG and ASICS backed out of their sponsorship with him, while Bancroft also no longer had ASICS sponsoring him (Honeysett 2018).

The scandal also had a detrimental effect on the team as a whole because with two of its star players. David Warner and Steven Smith gone, the team would have to suffer in terms of performance. Steve is one of the greatest players Australia has ever had. He had scored over a thousand runs in the past four years prior to his ban, which made him only the second person to do it in the history of cricket (Ferris, Stats that underline Smith's greatness 2018). Whereas, David Warner is the player who has the second highest test average in the team of 48.2 (ESPN 2018). With the two players and their coach, Darren Lehmann, gone the team has lost out on it captain, vice-captain and world cup winning coach.

The scandal left Cricket Australia in a crisis situation, which it had to deal with effectively. The framework used by them with regards to communication and public relations to manage this situation to earn back their reputation in the eyes of the public is discussed in the section that follows.

Public Relations Theory in Practice

After the scandal, Cricket Australia had to once again build up its credibility in the eyes of its stakeholders and the public. By definition, public relations are effective communication between an organization and its public. It is a managing functioning to maintain a healthy relationship between the two parties for the benefit for both of them (Gordon 1997). A key aspect of public relations is that it is dependent more on media coverage rather than paid advertisements, which mean organizations have less control over them. However, in crisis situations like these, an organization should be quick to adopt a crisis management situation to salvage the situation and minimize its negative impact. In a crisis situation, it is imperative for an organization to maintain effective communication and relations with its stakeholders.

The crisis management framework that this paper will discuss is the one proposed by Wilcox and Cameron. This framework consists of four phases namely, proactive, strategic, reactive and recovery (Wilcox and Cameron 2006). The paper will discuss how Cricket Australia applied this framework to deal with the crisis situation.

Phase 1: The Proactive Phase

The main objective of this phase is to prepare an organization for any type of crisis that may arise at any time and to give an understanding of how it can impact the organization. The three main aspects of this phase are:

1. Environmental scanning – involves the identification of the issue and its potential consequences,
2. Issue tracking – this comes after identification of the issue which helps in the analysis and the impacts created by the issue,
3. Issue management – assists in coming up with strategic plans to get rid of the issue and prepares the organizations to tackle future crisis (Wilcox and Cameron 2006).

We will see how Cricket Australia applied the aforementioned in this crisis situation.

The Australian cricket team is known to be aggressive, do on-ground sledging and play with the attitude that they have to win no matter what. Cricket Australia’s primary focus is to produce the best results whereas, integrity and spirit of the game and fair play are its secondary focus. Quite often Cricket Australia has reached the news for its toxic culture (Barnsley 2018). According to the hierarchical structure at Cricket Australia, the team captain has more authority than the coach. During the test series, before the ball tampering, there was on-ground sledging seen between David Warner and the wicketkeeper from the South African team but nothing was done against it by Cricket Australia (Kuriype 2018). After this, the ball tampering incident happens; this was planned by the vice-captain, David Warner himself. Darren Lehmann, who was the coach, had no knowledge about the ball tampering incident. This shows that Cricket Australia failed to pick up cues it should have to stop the sandpaper scandal from happening but it was not proactive enough about it.

For better crisis management in the future, Cricket Australia needs to have a few changes in its current system. First, they need to prioritize the game’s spirit, integrity and fair play before winning (Cricket Network 2017). Furthermore, in order to have a healthier and more conducive environment, there needs to be a better relationship established between the coach and the captain. The coach should play an integral role in influencing the team’s culture. Ball tampering is not something new. There have been various cricket players from all around the world who have indulged in this illegal activity. Cricket Australia should have learnt from what these players did and taken preventive measures. What it needs to do now is embed values of integrity and fair play in all its grassroots programs so that budding cricketers know the dos and don’ts of the game.

Phase 2: The Strategic Phase

Once the crisis has been identified, the organization’s strategy makers need to devise a strategic plan to deal with the crisis. The three facets of strategic planning are:

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

1. Risk communication – communication is one of the most integral parts of crisis management. Effective communication can either work for or against the organization. Looking at its positive aspect, communicating the risk to its stakeholders will tell them the truth and gain their trust. Once the crisis is over, the organization stands a good chance of building back its reputation (Witte 2009).
2. Conflict positioning – it prepares the organization to deal with the outcome and make appropriate statements.
3. Crisis management – it is important to have a well thought out strategic plan that the organization can use in the reactive phase to eliminate the crisis and minimize its damage.

In the scenario under discussion, Cricket Australia identified the ball tampering incident as a crisis and immediately had a communication plan in place. First, an investigation team was sent to South Africa by Cricket Australia that was accompanied by James Sutherland. After the investigations of players, James Sutherland was the one who communicated the outcome to the stakeholders and media. He ensured that he heard both sides of the story, the media and the players before he made any comments. The entire responsibility of communicating this to the stakeholders was taken up by the CEO of Cricket Australia, James Sutherland and was not interfered by the State Cricket Association, that was extremely cooperative and helped Cricket Australia in smooth conduct of the issue.

What is missing here is a law or some kind of punishment related to ball tampering that should have been a part of Cricket Australia’s code of conduct. However, to deal with this, an independent panel was made, led by Rick McCosker to review the team culture and provide recommendations to improve it. Cricket Australia was able to use the strategic phase of the framework efficiently because the way it dealt with the situation was very well.

Phase 3: The Reactive Phase

The organization needs to have an effective plan at hand to deal with the crisis situation. When the crisis reaches its peak level, the organization needs to be reactive and take quick action to minimize its damages. There is a ten step process that organizations use in this part of the crisis management framework. One of the most important steps out of those ten steps is to make a holding statement to convey relevant information to the stakeholders until the crisis has not ended. In this stage, the organization should be prepared to deal with emotions and unexpected situations.

The holding statement that was produced during the sandpaper gate incident was issued by James Sutherland who officially said that, from Cricket Australia’s code of conduct, the three players involved in the scandal, have breached section 2.3.5 and that once investigations have been completed sanctions against these players will be announced in the next 24 hours. The following day, it was announced that all three players have to volunteer for 100 hours to serve community cricket along with that Steve Smith and David Warner were banned from participating in any international or domestic match for the next 12 months while Cameron Bancroft received a similar suspension for 9 months. It was also decided not to give any leadership role to Smith and Bancroft for 12 months after their suspension has ended but Warner will never be given a leadership role (Cricket Australia 2018).

According to ICC, the punishment regarding ball tampering is to ban the players from playing a maximum of two matches with a 75% fine on their match fee but the punishment given to these players by Cricket Australia was too harsh. When the players were planning out this in their heads, the knew that if they get caught the maximum punishment they can get is a penalty of two matches, they had no idea that the punishment they would get will be so severe. This shows that Cricket Australia gave no regards to the player’s career while taking this decision. Cricket Australia should conceptualize the penalties and sanctions that are to be implemented on unethical issues like these in its code of conduct so players, prior to the act, know what is at stake for them.

Phase 4: Recovery Phase

Once the crisis has been dealt with, the next part that the organization has to manage is to repair the damage caused by it and to improve its image in the eyes of its stakeholders. The two key aspects of this phase are:

1. Reputation management – according to Wilcox and Cameron (2006), reputation management is the process of analyzing the reputation of the organization after the crisis and what steps in needs to take in order to recover
2. Image restoration – this aspect can be further broken down into five strategies:

i. Denial – the accused denies his/her involvement or shifts the blame onto someone else.

ii. Evading responsibility – this is used when the accused fails to deny the accusations made against him/her. This strategy has four facets to it:

• Provocation
• Defeasibility
• Make an excuse based on accidents
• Suggest that intentions behind the action were good

iii. Reducing offensiveness – this include the following components:

• Bolstering
• Minimization
• Transcendence
• Attacking the accuser
• Compensation of the victim

iv. Corrective action – the accuser takes responsibility and is ready to make corrections and ensure nothing like this happens in the future.

v. Mortification – this is the last resort, when all fails the accuser simply asks for forgiveness. (Walsh and Spooner 2011).

From Cricket Australia’s perspective, the organization was transparent about the entire situation and did not hide anything from its stakeholders in order to regain its credibility. James Sutherland, himself said that this action has put the integrity of Cricket Australia at stake (Cricket Australia 2018). The cricket board also apologized for this scandal happening and expressed its deep regrets. In order to restore its reputation, Cricket Australia took the following steps:

• Tim Paine was appointed as the new captain of the team
• Darren Lehmann, who resigned as the team’s coach after the incident, was replaced by Justin Langer.
• The banned players were replaced with new and young crickets to bring in a new culture to the team.

As mentioned earlier, Cricket Australia launched an independent panel led by former cricketer Rick McCosker, to see the flaws in the culture and how they can be rectified. This is a promising step taken by the organization because it shows that it accepted its mistake and wants to improve. Moreover, it also realized that the punishments it placed on the players were too harsh so it allowed them to play in club cricket so that they can still enjoy the sport they love. Cricket Australia should learn a lesson from this scandal that it needs to be well-prepared for a crisis like these in the future.

Conclusion

The crisis that Cricket Australia faced was unexpected and was of the highest degree they ever had to deal in the past. As mentioned in the paper, Cricket Australia was not well equipped to deal with the situation but it still managed to do a good job in handling the crisis. Even though Cricket Australia was not proactive enough, it was still fairly successful in attaining back its credibility. The nature of the crisis was such that no one could have predicted it and it had a significant impact on stakeholders as sponsors started pulling out and there was public outrage. The framework used by Cricket Australia to manage the situation was the one proposed by Wilcox and Cameron and had effective strategies applied in its strategic, reactive and recovery phase. There were instances that escalated the crisis like the comments made by the Prime Minister before the investigation began by Cricket Australia. However, Cricket Australia dealt with the situation very well, given the situation it was in.

Bibliography

1. Barnsley, W. 2018. Australian selector Waugh defends Test team culture. April 3. Accessed May 17, 2019. https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/australian-selector-waugh-defends-test-team-culture-20180403-p4z7ja.html.
2. Craddock, Robert. 2018. Australia’s cheating shame could cost the game millions in television rights deal. March 26. Accessed May 17, 2019. https://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/cricket/australias-cheating-shame-could-cost-the-game-millions-in-television-rights-deal/news-story/9f1868e2a4b109cf02b6fbae27973b54?nk=11a3f23ace651a875528b634dc915f4b-1558124589.
3. Cricket Australia. 2018. Cricket Australia Statement on Investigation. March 28. Accessed May 17, 2019. https://www.cricketaustralia.com.au/media/media-releases/cricket-australia-statement-update/2018-03-28.
4. Cricket Network. 2017. Clubs Insurance and Policies. Accessed May 17, 2019. http://community.cricket.com.au/clubs/insurance-and-policies/spirit-of-cricket.
5. Cricket Network. 2018. PM: Ball tampering news 'beggars belief'. March 25. Accessed May 17, 2019. https://www.cricket.com.au/news/steve-smith-cameron-bancroft-ball-tampering-quotes-adam-gilchrist-allan-border-prime-minister/2018-03-25.
6. Express, Financial. 2018. Cameron Bancroft, Steve Smith admit ball tampering - What is sandpaper gate? March 25. Accessed May 17, 2019. https://www.financialexpress.com/sports/cameron-bancroft-steve-smith-admit-ball-tampering-what-is-sandpaper-gate/1110274/.
7. Ferris, S. 2018. Australia own up to ball tampering. March 25. Accessed May 17, 2019. https://www.cricket.com.au/news/cameron-bancroft-steve-smith-ball-tampering-umpires-tape-pockets-australia-cape-town-video/2018-03-25.
8. Gordon, J. 1997. 'Interpreting definitions of public relations: self assessment and a symbolic interactionism-based alternative.' Public Relations Review 57-66.
9. Honeysett, S. 2018. More sponsors dump Aussie cricket stars. Accessed May 17, 2019. https://wwos.nine.com.au/2018/03/29/11/12/ball-tampering-crisis-magellan-dumps-cricket-australia-sponsorship .
10. Kuriype, J. 2018. From sledging to ball-tampering: How Australia's series from hell unfolded. April 4. Accessed May 17, 2019. https://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/australia/from-sledging-to-balltampering-how-australias-series-from-hell-unfolded/news-story/601af2e801ab2e05efcc3ad9336d80f4.
11. Mehta, R.D. 2005. 'An overvire of cricket ball swing.' Sports Engineering 181-192.
12. Miller, J. 2018. Magellan terminates partnership with Cricket Australia. Accessed May 17, 2019. http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/companies/news/193988/magellan-terminates-partnership-with-cricket-australia-193988.html.
13. Walsh, J., and S. M. Spooner. 2011. 'Analysis of the image repair discourse in the Michael Phelps controversy.' Public Relations Preview 157-162.
14. Wilcox, D.L., and G.T. Cameron. 2006. Public Relations Strategies and Tactics. Pearson Education.
15. Witte, K. 2009. 'Putting the fear back into fear appeals: the extended parallel rocess.' Communication Monograhs 329-349.