John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sports tourism is a massively expanding area. Cricket tourism is no exception. Spearheaded by British fans, a Barbados test match featuring England is like a home game now with at least 70 per cent of the fans attending coming from England. Whilst a real boost to local economies, sports tourism can be the cause of resentment, especially if it is regarded as being driven by the relative economic wellbeing of one country over another.

Usually, a home cricket series for Australia sees nearly all local fans being accommodated, partly owing to the size of the grounds but also to the relative geographic isolation of Australia from the rest of the world. The large number of English fans who joined us in Australia for the 2001-02 Ashes series were accommodated with relative ease. The upcoming Ashes cricket series, however, has driven an unprecedented demand for tickets both locally and internationally.

Looking to the long term, Cricket Australia wanted to give preference to local fans, especially as many Australian fans were ‘dudded’ in the recent Ashes tour of England. The decision to set up the Australian Cricket Family recognised the need to look after Australian fans, not just for this series but for those future series where ticket demand would not be as high.

Cricket Australia should be commended on its intentions but criticised for the incompetent way they were executed. The first problem was that Cricket Australia seriously underestimated the demand for tickets. This was exacerbated by its failure to prevent potential infiltration of the Australian Cricket Family by overseas fans. The second problem was the daily limitation on ticket purchases of eight to 10 tickets at certain venues, which of course was a godsend to scalpers. At the very least, some arrangement should have been entered into with eBay, as occurred with Melbourne Commonwealth Games tickets.

The third problem was that selling all the tickets on the one day proved to be disastrous. Incredibly, the same booking phone number was used for venues in four states. The computer system crashed; it melted down in no time at all, and having fans ringing non-stop for 12 hours was hardly the PR coup of the year. Redialling 10 times a minute meant 600 times per hour and 7,200 times in one day. So, when the chief executive officer of Cricket Australia says, as he did today, ‘Perhaps some of the systems didn’t cope as well as we would have ideally liked,’ it is certainly the understatement of the year.

Cricket Australia has apologised for the problems, but it would be better placed instituting a policy of full transparency as to where tickets were allocated—members, sponsors, corporates and tour groups, as well as the allocation to the general public. I believe there is a place for tour groups in all of this, and many Australians are themselves beneficiaries of arrangements with tour organisers. Many national sporting organisations have been criticised for problems with the distribution of tickets. Often, secrecy is one of the great causes of aggravation, so let us have total transparency. This sort of transparency is something with which cricket could take the lead. I hope some football codes would follow such an example.

The cost of tickets to the cricket has raced ahead of inflation, although general admission tickets remain more family friendly. Cricket can only survive through revenue generated by tests and one-day internationals. Cricket outside the international arena depends on those revenues, so maximising the return is justified. Equipment, grounds, junior development, umpires, administration and so forth all need to be funded or supported.

I ask whether it is possible in Australia to enact antiscalping legislation or regulations that are workable. The English experience on this is hardly inspiring. Before the Lords test last year, the going rate for scalped tickets was at least 10 times the face value of the ticket, so the incentive for scalpers to weasel their way around any such rules cannot be underestimated.

In all the hullabaloo about the recent issue of Ashes cricket tickets, I am yet to see any firm evidence that the system was massively infiltrated by overseas fans. I remain unconvinced by the odd anecdote, a newspaper reference here and there or something mentioned on talkback radio. It may be true, but the hard evidence just is not in. Overseas fans got buried in the same morass as local fans. As such, though perhaps inadvertently, Cricket Australia probably did manage to maximise the participation of Australian fans.

It is unlikely that such a high demand for cricket tickets will reoccur in the near future but, when it does, Cricket Australia should take advice from the experts—that is, the rock concert promoters, the major football code administrators and major event organisers. Once the cricket ticket fiasco is solved, the challenge for Cricket Australia as well as for the state cricket associations and for the ground administrators will be to ensure that cricket fans inside the ground are looked after. This involves issues like providing comfortable seats, good and affordable catering, decent ground announcements and ground administrators treating cricket fans with respect rather than indifference. All these things can improve, and I sincerely hope that Cricket Australia will do all it can to make that happen for those Australians who love nothing more than a day at the cricket.