THE LATEST news is that Texan billionaire Allen Stanford might be turning his back on cricket.

That is certainly big news, news that must put a number of organisations, now banking on his support, on edge.

According to reports, cricket's 'big man' is considering his options after losing an estimated US$40 million from his 20/20 for 20 winners-take-all match and the associated series preceding it.

If Stanford decides enough is enough, I hope two things.

Firstly, I am hoping that the global economic climate won't have affected cricket too badly (already Vodafone is scheduled to end its sponsorship of English cricket in 2010).

Affiliated associations

And secondly, I am hoping that the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) and affiliated associations around the region have taken a page out of Stanford's book.

Let's look at the impact of Stanford's possible departure from cricket.

He sponsors different territories in the region to the tune of US$200,000 a year. This would be a significant loss to the Caribbean, which is in the process of developing its cricket to the point where it is just as professional a set-up as obtains in other Test-playing countries. Replacing that sponsorship in times like these may prove impossible.

Then of course, there is the loss of the legends of cricket.

The ambassadorial board was not just highly-paid veterans of the game, but offered much in the way of teaching the sport and increasing the likelihood of talent rising to the top of West Indies cricket.

Without them in the mix, West Indies cricket would have lost the best opportunity to have those that were great, teach upcoming players to be great.

No great players, no great West Indies and the decline in the Caribbean's number one sport could continue unabated.

There are those who will be saying good riddance as Stanford threatened to change the face of the game they had grown to know and love.

Those persons, whoever they are, can count themselves as part of the reason cricket isn't growing as fast as it should ... an unwillingness to change.

If the legends of the sport, those who played solely for the love of the game can see the virtue in having a backer like Stanford, then so should we.

Probably the most glaring impact to hit cricket if Stanford decides to call it quits is what the move would say to other potential sponsors or financiers.

Not marketable

Cricket is not marketable and there is no way to earn a return on your investment, especially in the Caribbean where the crowds are smaller.

Whatever the scenario, I don't foresee any real good coming from Stanford's move.

If it happens, I am of the opinion that the WICB at least has the opportunity to employ the service of the board of legends for the same purpose.

The development of the game in the Caribbean is woeful and that shows clearly when players go on to the big stage.

In contrast was the performance of the Stanford Superstars against England's cricketers.

It might be fair to say the match was not a true reflection of England's potential in 20/20 cricket.

However, it cannot go unsaid that the talent found during the series showed itself, with very little time, to be able to compete internationally.

This means the development programme was working in 20/20 cricket and can be applied to other areas of the game.