Cricket in turmoil: Rebels plan to oust ECB chairman Giles Clarke in battle for control of the English game

By Peter Hayter, Mail on Sunday Cricket CorrespondentPeter Hayter, Mail on Sunday Cricket Correspondent Updated: 07:27 EST, 18 January 2009

Giles Clarke's controversial leadership of English cricket will finally come under threat tomorrow with the announcement of an official candidate to stand against him in the election for the chairmanship of the England and Wales Cricket Board.

Clarke's backers had been under the impression that, although his aggressive and confrontational style has polarised opinion, he would be re-elected unopposed for a second two-year term and any opposition to him was of the all-mouth-and-no-trousers variety.

Indeed, bolstered by messages of support from the smaller counties whose cause he purports to champion, even Clarke himself had expected tomorrow's deadline - by which rival candidates must be nominated - would pass without any being declared.

Scroll down for more

Threatened: Giles Clarke has upset many and could lose his ECB chairmanship

But I understand that Clarke, 55, faces an 11th-hour challenge by an independent candidate - the multi-millionaire Lord Marland, a cricket fan and former treasurer of the Conservative Party - who has been encouraged by offers of support from a significant number of counties to believe that not only is a leadership challenge desirable, it is also winnable.

Lord Marland's candidature will not be confirmed until his name is officially put forward shortly before nominations for the secret ballot close tomorrow, when county chairmen and chief executives will assemble at an ECB conference on the future of Test cricket at Stapleford Park, Leicestershire.

In recent times, names such as former chairman Lord MacLaurin, Vodafone's former chief executive Sir Chris Gent, Saracens RFC owner Nigel Wray and even the cricket-mad Sir John Major and Kenneth Clarke have been mentioned, but Lord Marland's decision to throw his hat in the ring has boosted Giles Clarke's opponents.

While a spokesman for the opposition declined to play the name game yesterday, he did confirm: 'Everything is in place for a proper challenge to Giles. He might have thought he would be unopposed but we're delighted an impressive candidate has come forward to offer a credible alternative.'

Those opposed to Giles Clarke's reelection are concerned that what they describe as a negotiating style akin to that of 'Attila the Hun' has resulted in England no longer being welcome at the top table of international cricket, and has permeated down through all levels to such an extent that there are deep divisions within those representing vested interests within the county game.

They see Clarke as more of the same, and believe an independent candidate - not aligned to any county but speaking for the majority rather than for one particular faction - is vital as a mediator to heal the rifts that threaten to pull apart the domestic game.

These splits have even caused internal divisions at a number of counties where chairmen and chief executives are known to be opposed over who to support. With 10 votes from the 19 full members - the 18 first-class counties plus MCC - needed to win an election outright, the spokesman confirmed Lord Marland has the backing of three county clubs to stand against Clarke, with Leicestershire likely to propose him officially.

According to sources who welcome a challenge to Clarke, the number of counties who have indicated they are prepared to vote against the current chairman stands at seven, and they hope to convert significant opposition into an overall majority when the leadership contest begins in earnest this week, and Lord Marland meets county chairmen to press the case for change.

Until now, public opposition to Clarke has largely come from critics such as Rod Bransgrove, the Hampshire chairman, and Leicestershire’s Neil Davidson.

Bransgrove has twice called for the ECB management board to resign, first over Clarke’s dealings with Texan billionaire Sir Allen Stanford and the public relations disaster of the Stanford Twenty20 for $20million fiasco in Antigua and, more recently, over the events that led to the resignation of England captain Kevin Pietersen and sacking of coach Peter Moores.

The Hampshire chairman had been identified as leader of a group of counties committed to removing Clarke known as ABC — ‘Anyone But Clarke’.

That group came into being after Clarke’s abrasive style first appeared adversely to affect relationships with the all-powerful Indian cricket authorities, and Lalit Modi, the Indian Premier League powerbroker in particular, which resulted in England being left at the station when the IPL Champions League gravy train left with India, Australia and South Africa all aboard.

Clarke appeared to gain ground with the Indians after ensuring England returned to the country for the recent Test series following the terrorist atrocities in Mumbai.

But the announcement that Modi is insisting England stars such as Pietersen and Andrew Flintoff sign up for a minimum four weeks of this season’s IPL or not at all suggests that relationship remains strained at best.

Indeed, England’s Test players are still refusing to sign central contracts until they are told whether they will be permitted to play in the lucrative IPL and for how long.

Scroll down for more

Delay: The England players are refusing to sign their central contracts until the ECB finally decide whether or not they will be permitted to play in the lucrative IPL

Feelings between the England team and their chairman over the IPL issue are decidedly icy, especially as West Indies stars such as Chris Gayle have already been told they will allowed to play in the IPL for as long as they want, even if it means missing the first of two Tests scheduled against England here this May.

Meanwhile, the attitude of Clarke’s supporters has been one of confidence bordering on complacency.

One said: ‘Recent events have proved that Giles can stand up to the Indians and stand up to the players.’

Others credit him with brilliant business instincts in signing a £300m television deal with Sky before the credit crunch took full effect, though those less convinced point out the timing was pure luck as the deal was up for renegotiation anyway.

Recently, Nigel Hillyard of Essex, one of Clarke’s chief backers, said: ‘I’d say the vote would be 14-4 in his favour now, with one abstention.’

Last week, Clarke’s successor as Somerset chairman, Andy Nash, said: ‘Anyone looking at the situation rationally would realise even a Don Bradman figure couldn’t win an election against Giles now.’

But if Clarke’s backers believe Bransgrove has been whistling in the wind, his detractors think a rival candidate would almost certainly galvanise opposition.

Another unnamed county chairman, welcoming the news of the emergence of an alternative to Clarke, insisted last night: ‘A contest is vital for English cricket because if Giles is returned unopposed it would not serve our democratic process well, particularly as the ECB have had such a bad year.

‘The image of the game has been damaged and the Stanford and Pietersen-Moores affairs have highlighted both errors of judgment and management failures. An uncontested election would imply endorsement of these errors and failures. It is not healthy for the ECB to be chaired by someone who is basically unacceptable to a significant number of county chairmen.’

Once nominations for the post have been accepted, the ECB have 48 hours to call an election, which must take place within two weeks. The successful candidate then has to be ratified by the 41 ECB members, including the non-first-class counties, though this is normally a formality.

Scroll down for more

Enlarge  

That means Clarke could be out and his replacement elected before mid-February, though the new man would not take up the reins until April 1.

As for the numbers, it is clear that Hampshire, Lancashire, Leicestershire

and Surrey are opposed to Clarke, while Somerset, Glamorgan and Essex are similarly steadfast in support for him.

Those committed to supporting Lord Marland are also encouraged by the memory that when Clarke stood for election in 2007, his first attempt to win the post ended in a 9-9 tie before he won a second vote 12-6.

They are sure that a combination of those who were unconvinced that Clarke was the right man for the job in the first place, and those convinced he is not now, will create a decisive majority in favour of change and allow for the process of unifying the domestic game to begin in earnest.