The battle for the ashes of American cricket

Gary Hopkins, chief executive of the now-defunct Project USA © Getty Images

A new battle has broken out inside cricket in the USA, and this time for a change it's one that does not involve the two opposing factions vying for control of the USA Cricket Association.

The dispute surrounds the plans for promoting international cricket in the USA, and especially the way that foreign sides will be attracted to play one-day internationals there. Aside from being a massive draw among the sizable expat community, the games would help to boost the profile of the sport in America.

Gary Hopkins, who headed Project USA until it was scrapped by the ICC in March, had spent recent months establishing a programme, via his company Cricket Partners USA, which would have put in place the infrastructure to enable this ambitious plan to be realised.

Talks had been held with the West Indies Cricket Board, and an agreement reached whereby Cricket Partners and the WICB would co-promote matches involving not only West Indies but also other national teams, primarily from Asia. Ambitious though the plans may seem, they were well advanced and have widespread support from senior officials in the game.

But it now appears that all Hopkins's work has been scuppered by the intervention of Kal Patel, the man behind the 20-overs-a-side ProCricket competition.

Both men were invited to St Lucia on May 20 by the West Indies Cricket Board - Hopkins to finalise agreements for the ODI series, and Patel to discuss Twenty20 rights and player-availability for his ProLeague. It was here that Patel dropped his bombshell, announcing that he had, over the previous few days, also acquired the rights to one-day internationals in the USA from Gladstone Dainty (the USACA president), surprising both Hopkins and the West Indian representatives.

It appears that Patel and Hopkins had been in discussions regarding Patel potentially investing in Cricket Partners, reaching the stage where, at the end of April, Hopkins submitted his business plan for review.

At that stage, it seems Patel decided to acquire the rights to stage ODIs himself and Dainty agreed to sign them over to him. It appears that Dainty did not know that Patel had already seen the Cricket Partners plan.

Patel's actions have raised eyebrows, and there also have to be questions over his ability to deliver. ProCricket last year was hardly a runaway success, and there is widespread confusion and uncertainty over this year's event. He has the added burden of owning the rights to the Twenty20 format. While Hopkins has an impressive string of contacts throughout the cricket community, especially internationally, and has done much of the groundwork to ensure that there will be matches as early as 2006, Patel can make no such claim.

Cricket Partners is unlikely to take this lying down, and more legal action is on the cards unless Patel and Hopkins can reach a compromise. The already tarnished reputation of US cricket cannot afford to have yet more dirty linen dragged through the courts.

While an agreement has been signed with ProCricket, it must be ratified by the full board of the USACA before it is valid. Hopkins has written to all USACA board members, and has requested the opportunity to present his case and proposal to the USACA executive when it meets in New York on June 4. The alternative executive, which assembles on the same day will also have to deal with this issue should they assume control of US cricket.

It was thought that out of the embers of Project USA something good could come. But yet again those running American cricket have shown a remarkable knack of pressing the self-interest self-destruct button whenever there is a chance of real progress being made.