Moments that changed cricket forever: Kerry Packer's World Series Cricket

Packer may have lost many of the battles but he had won the war – not only did Channel Nine get the broadcast rights, but Packer also bagged a contract to promote and market the game in Australia for the next ten years.

Packer may have lost many of the battles but he had won the war

In effect, it meant that the Australian cricket schedule now mimicked that of the erstwhile WSC, with six Tests against two opposition sides each summer, and an ODI tri-series (not coincidentally called the World Series Cup) with the same opponents thrown in.

The format came under heavy criticism but made a lot of money, most of which went to Packer’s company. The WSC players came back to the fold a year later as the Australian selectors failed to find replacements for the struggling members of the team which went to the 1979 World Cup and the subsequent series in India.

Greg Chappell was reinstated as captain and everyone was happy again, except for the ICC and the TCCB, who had provided most of the support to the ACB through the tumultuous years of WSC, and now found themselves short sold for money.

WSC may have lasted for only two years but it left some very deep impressions on the game of cricket, and not all of them were controversial.

Many argue that the greatest effect WSC had on the game of cricket was coloured clothing, although they were used only in the latter part of the second season, and more as a gimmick than as a serious element of the setup. I find a few other things that make more sense in the modern day scenario.

a) Thanks to the gruelling schedules and frequent travelling, cricketers had to be fitter than ever before. This showed up on the field in the form of their fielding and catching, which was generally nothing short of brilliant.

b) Limited overs cricket saw an upsurge in popularity – so much so that about twenty years later, it spawned another variant in the form of Twenty20. The day-night format turned out to be a craze, especially for working professionals who now had a reason to head back home directly after work.

c) Playing cricket is now a full-time profession even in some of the Associate countries – some of their players like Ryan ten Doeschate are regular county cricketers and have found more employment in the various Twenty20 leagues around the world. The money involved in the game now is of significant proportions too.

d) Broadcasters now have a greater say in the running of the game. This is sometimes unfortunate as in the case of the West Indies-Sri Lanka Test series which had to give way to an ODI tri-series involving the more “profitable” India.

e) Test cricket saw itself being threatened by its younger brothers and hence nowadays we see a lot more innovation in the game. The DRS and Hotspot may be controversial, but they certainly provide a zing to the otherwise staid nature of the game. Players themselves have become more adaptive, and today we see more results in the longest format than ever before.

f) The marketing of the game itself changed – for the first time we got to know about something called cricketing merchandise. It is one of the biggest sources of revenue for the game today.

Zee TV’s Subhash Chandra tried a ‘Packer’ of his own with the Indian Cricket League after Zee Sports lost the rights to India’s cricketing season to Neo Sports. While he wasn’t half as successful as Packer, he did initiate a chain reaction which started with the Indian Premier League and has now spawned many variants over the world.

Clearly, this suggests that the game of cricket lends itself to change. You only need the will of a Packer to implement it.

Read more about such events which altered the way cricket was played over the years – The moments that changed cricket forever.