Clare Connor: why equal prize money is an absurd proposition

The Guardian is doing its bit for women in sport by provoking lively debate around the issue of equal prize money, with outraged columnists calling for its introduction in the name of “equality”.

Cricket was described by one Guardian columnist on Friday as one of three sports which “refuse to move forward”. Yet what has been starkly absent from the blogs and columns I have read on this subject has been information and facts.

I write this blog from Dubai, the home of the International Cricket Council, where I will spend the next few days chairing the ICC women’s committee meetings and attending the ICC chief executives’ meetings. Within the agenda, we will be discussing prize money for women’s global events and the rate at which it should increase. I know there will not be a single member of the women’s committee, male or female, calling for equal prize money. And if as chair I stated a claim for equal prize money, I’d be laughed out of the building and into the desert; not because I’m female, but because it is an absurd proposition.

The ICC became “responsible” for women’s cricket in 2005, my last year as an international cricketer. From a standing start, the ICC invested $750,000 in the women’s game in 2006; between 2009-2012 the average spend was $5m a year and in 2013, the ICC invested $7m. And in January 2014, the ICC board approved an additional $1.5m to kickstart the ICC Women’s Championship, a new World Cup qualifying competition. To me, this feels like pretty rapid progress. And this is only the cash spent on regional development activities and global events.

Add to this investment the amount spent by each home board and you’re talking about a sport transformed on a global scale in eight and a half years. A sport that has professional players in some countries, clear pathways for global event qualification, a joint global event with the men (ICC World Twenty20), one million participants globally and fully integrated in terms of governance and strategy at ICC level.

Let’s imagine I’m told on Wednesday by the ICC board that it has approved $2m (or similar) to equalise prize money for women’s cricket. I can tell you that I’d be doing everything in my power to redirect that money. I’d refer the board to our “females in world cricket” strategy and suggest that its investment would be better spent continuing to accelerate change, growth, sustainability and driving the profile of women’s cricket so that the opportunities in cricket are well and truly equal.

I’d suggest that some of it could pay the amazingly committed female players who aren’t paid to play for their countries. Some could go on further expansion of the international schedule so that teams play more, performance standards rise and the best players become more visible. Some would undoubtedly go on devising innovative marketing projects to sell an irresistible product to potential sponsors, broadcasters and audiences.

Give me five years to go down those paths, I’d say, then let’s talk again about equal prize money.

Clare Connor is the ECB’s head of England Women’s Cricket