Future Tours ProgrammeEdit
The Future Tours Programme (FTP) is the International Cricket Council’s structured framework for organizing the men’s international cricket calendar among its full member nations. It lays out a rolling schedule of fixtures across the three principal formats—Test cricket, One-Day International (ODI), and Twenty20 International (T20I)—over multi-year cycles. By design, the FTP aims to provide predictability for players, coaches, fans, broadcasters, and sponsors, while balancing the commercial realities of the sport with the competitive demands of national teams. Although the FTP is primarily negotiated by the boards of International Cricket Council member nations, it interacts with big multi-nation events such as the Cricket World Cup and the World Test Championship to form the backbone of international cricket scheduling. The cycle also influences the timetable of domestic leagues, like the Indian Premier League, which in turn affects player availability and performance across formats.
History and purpose
The FTP emerged as part of a move away from ad hoc, individually arranged tours toward a more predictable, systematized calendar. Proponents argue that this arrangement stabilizes revenues, fosters long-term planning, and sustains national programs by ensuring that core rivals—especially in the traditional bastions of the sport—are played on a regular basis. The framework is intended to protect the integrity of the sport by providing a clear path for international competition, while accommodating the growing commercial ecosystem around broadcast rights, sponsorship, and media distribution.
Over time, the FTP has become the organizing logic behind how top boards distribute home and away series across the formats. It requires complex negotiation among boards representing countries with sharply different cricket landscapes, from the traditional powerhouses to emerging centers of the game. The arrangement also interacts with multi-team events such as the ICC Men's Cricket World Cup and the World Test Championship, which provide additional context and incentives for long-form competition and limited-overs tournaments alike.
Structure and scheduling
Formats covered: The FTP schedules engagements in Test cricket, One-Day International, and Twenty20 International formats, with an emphasis on ensuring that each full member nation faces others in a mix of home and away ties. The goal is to preserve the traditional hierarchy of the sport while adapting to the evolving popularity of different formats.
Cycle length and cadence: FTP cycles typically span multiple years and operate on a rolling basis. This allows fans and broadcasters to anticipate key rivalries and milestones while giving boards time to plan stadium availability, security, and local sponsorship opportunities. The schedule is recalibrated after each cycle to reflect changing competitive balance, player availability, and strategic priorities of the member boards.
Home-and-away balance: A central feature is the alternating pattern of home and away fixtures. Regular exposure to diverse conditions helps players adapt and strengthens national programs, while also spreading revenue opportunities across different markets.
Interaction with domestic leagues: The stability provided by the FTP interacts with the calendars of high-profile domestic competitions (for example, leagues like the Indian Premier League and other leagues around the world). The scheduling must take into account player welfare, rest periods, and travel demands, balancing international duty with commitments at the club level.
Development considerations: While the FTP prioritizes the schedules of the wealthier cricketing nations, it also touches on opportunities for development in associate nations and emerging markets. The degree of access for developing teams can vary by cycle and ongoing reform efforts within the ICC.
Economic and governance implications
Revenue and sponsorship: A predictable international calendar makes broadcasting rights, ticket sales, and sponsorship more predictable and valuable. National boards rely on these revenues to fund facilities, coaching, and development programs, as well as to compensate players for international duty.
Governance and bargaining power: The FTP is negotiated under the governance framework of the International Cricket Council and the leadership of national boards. In practice, the agreements reflect a balance of power among wealthier, cricket-rich boards and those from developing nations. Critics argue that this balance can tilt toward boards with larger media footprints and deeper television markets, shaping the rhythm of fixtures in ways that favor profit and prestige over broad-based development.
Player workload and welfare: Scheduling within the FTP has direct implications for player workload, injury risk, and rest periods. A compact calendar can strain players who participate in domestic leagues and international series in different formats. Proponents contend that the FTP provides stability and reduces sudden, disruptive tours, while critics warn that the most demanding schedules still fall on a small pool of star players.
Global competitiveness: The economics of the FTP influence how competitive balance is maintained over time. Regular fixtures among the strongest teams help preserve global standards, but the economic clout of a handful of boards can limit opportunities for rising teams to accelerate their ascent without significant investment and policy changes.
Controversies and debates
Development versus consolidation: A central debate concerns whether the FTP sufficiently promotes cricket growth beyond the traditional powerhouses. Advocates for a more aggressive development role argue that the calendar should reserve more space for touring opportunities by emerging nations, enabling them to build infrastructure, improve performance, and attract investment. Critics contend that expanding development sometimes comes at the expense of the most commercially attractive fixtures, potentially reducing immediate revenue and fan interest.
The influence of wealthier boards: Critics allege that a small group of boards with deep broadcasting reach and large market footprints can steer the FTP to secure lucrative home fixtures and favorable windows. The counterargument is that predictable calendars create value for everyone by reducing scheduling chaos and enabling long-term planning, while the ICC argues that cycles are designed to balance interests and incorporate development opportunities where feasible.
Associate nations and long-term growth: The role of associate nations in the FTP is often a point of contention. Some see the program as primarily benefiting full members, with limited exposure for associates. Others argue that a well-structured FTP should include pathways for development, tiered competition, and transitional programs that lead to meaningful international exposure for smaller cricketing nations.
Scheduling and player welfare versus market demands: The push for maximal commercial value—through extended bilateral series and major tournaments—can clash with concerns about player rest, injury prevention, and the need for domestic leagues to thrive. Proponents of market-driven scheduling say that a robust commercial platform funds grassroots programs, while opponents warn that overemphasis on income can erode the long-term health of the sport by exhausting players.
Impact on development and global competitiveness
The FTP exerts a measurable influence on the growth trajectory of international cricket. By setting a predictable sequence of fixtures, it creates stability for national boards, stadium owners, and broadcasters, which in turn supports investment in coaching, facilities, and youth programs. At the same time, the structure tends to reward nations with established commercial bases, while the pace of expansion in opportunities for developing cricketing markets depends on ICC policy and the willingness of member boards to allocate bandwidth and resources.
In practice, the FTP interacts with global competitions like the World Test Championship and the Cricket World Cup to determine how the sport balances the prestige of long-form and one-day formats with the rising popularity of short-form contests such as the T20 format. The interplay between format-specific calendars and multi-team events can influence where attention and investment go, shaping the pathways available to players from different backgrounds and regions.
Innovation in scheduling—such as dedicated windows for T20I-focused tours or deliberate pauses to accommodate major domestic leagues—reflects ongoing attempts to reconcile competitive integrity with financial imperatives. Supporters argue that disciplined scheduling is essential to maintaining a high standard of international cricket, protecting the value of national programs, and ensuring that fans can reliably witness marquee matchups. Critics, however, call for more flexible arrangements that can accelerate the exposure of emerging teams and diversify the calendar to reduce overreliance on a few flagship fixtures.