Should cricket's administrators be ex-cricketers or dentists?

Doesn't ex-cricketer sounds too much like ex-con...if you say it really fast, and with an accent?

Anyway, I feel we all must recognize that cricketers themselves know more about the game and its demands than do working professionals. In my previous post about Kallis, I vented about how board leadership must have had experience in cricket. Atheist over at LeftArmChinaMan feels otherwise.

Now I realize that ex-cons, I mean ex-cricketers, are sullen bunch. They're know-it-all bastards, with something to say about everything. They're always ready to say a choice thing or two about Murali's arm, or Vaughan's knee. Point is, they make themselves heard even though we don't really like that much.

Naturally I would want leadership that communicates well with players. While I feel that not every ex-cricketer has a role to play in administration, surely there must be a few here and there, that know how to build bridges (metaphorically), and understand where players are coming from. It just seems that there is no much bad blood between the boards and their players, that something needs to change. I'm sick of boards telling the players what do, disciplining them for fickle reasons, fining them for supporting their teammates in public. They should serve the game and serve the players and quit ruling with an iron fist.