World Cup faces threat of 'ambush'

Cricket's biggest international tournaments could be wrecked by the interminable dispute over sponsorship. Months of private manoeuvres reached an impasse last week.

At stake for some individual players are lucrative sponsorships and endorsements. The International Cricket Council, meanwhile, are trying to protect the $550 million (£360m) deal for commercial rights with Global Cricket Group, which runs until 2007.

Administrators and players are holding their positions, but with only three weeks left until the ICC Champions' Trophy, compromise will be essential. If that does not happen the consequences for the World Cup next spring could be disastrous.

The public statements have not been encouraging. Malcolm Speed, the chief executive of the ICC, has virtually told the players to choose between making money for themselves or playing for their countries. Tim May, co-chief executive of the Federation of International Cricket Associations (Fica), has made much of the infringement of personal rights, saying the ICC are acting not only unreasonably but unlawfully.

Some time this week, whatever principle is at stake, they may realise that high-profile competitions depend on the participation of high-profile players. The final stumbling block, one recognised by the ICC, may be the stars of India.

At the heart of the negotiations is ambush marketing, essentially in this case the difference between event and personal sponsorships. The ICC are adamant that tournament sponsors must be given a clear run. This effectively means that players must suspend any conflicting personal sponsorships.

The players' representatives claim this is tantamount to inducing players to breach contracts. The ICC saythe players know their reponsibilities towards tournament sponsors. They are also openly angry that some companies have targeted individuals knowing their product would be in direct competition with tournament sponsors.

Officials are adamant it is up to players and their agents to sort this out. They do not appear to be prepared to take no for an answer. Regular discussions have taken place between May and Dave Richardson, the ICC's general manager (cricket) but whatever fudge they can come up with may hardly matter. Fica claim to represent 70 per cent of the world's international players because they have seven of the 10 professional cricketers' associations under their umbrella. Those players in turn are under contract to their boards.

But India have no players' association, and their team members also have probably the loosest ties with their board. Their match fees are comparatively small but they can earn fortunes from personal endorsements. Sponsors will be anxious for their products to be promoted during the Champions' Trophy and the World Cup. The players may be torn but are reluctant to risk potential future income.

Richardson and Brendan McClements, the ICC's communications manager, visited Chelmsford, where the Indians were playing last week, to talk to several senior players. It was an mission to explain, not a negotiation.

Seven of the 10 major boards have signed the Participating Nations Agreement for the Champions' Trophy in Sri Lanka – accepting ICC terms – and all 10 have already done so for the World Cup. The three who have yet to agree terms for the Sri Lankan competition are Australia, England and New Zealand. England signed their PNA, but with so many provisos that the ICC could not accept it.

England may have been showing the players they had their best interests at heart. But it does not reflect well on them or David Graveney, chairman of selectors and co-chief executive of Fica.