ICC News: Restructuring the ICC, BCCI Influence & more

[Karachi]

BCCI has offered Pakistan a series on a neutral venue (UAE). So its a one off series for putting the fate of the game in the hands of BCCI & allies forever. If PCB is to be charmed at least do it with a long term/forever sweetener deal i.e. a series every year (home & away). May be same with Aus & Eng. However, I don't think PCB is going to fall for any of it.

 

[War]

I don't support the actions of the BCCI, but its foolish to say that the BCCI cant stand their ground in the event they breakaway from the ICC. BCCI think that they are the ones responsible for all the money that flows into the game whenever India is playing or whenever tournaments happen in India.

If the BCCI breakaway and form their own ICC, they have the power to attract other boards who would not want to stay with an organization minus India (the cash cow). Other boards will toe the line and will side with the BCCI, thereby leading to the collapse of the current ICC. The very fact that this stupid proposal has been drafted and put forward for approval, shows how much power the BCCI wield. For example, NZC have already shown that they care about their financial status by supporting this draft proposal. And there are other boards who are either afraid of voicing out their opinion, or voice their opinion in private/anonymous channels.

Also don't rule out cricketers becoming freelancers by turning down their contracts with their respective boards to play in the IPL. I mean, the money you earn in the IPL is huge and you don't care if your country's cricket board bans you from international cricket. They cant ban you from playing the IPL because if the BCCI breaks out from the ICC, no cricket board will have control over the BCCI to not pick a certain player.

This is where we would hope sense prevails by the various members boards & the world's leading players if the BCCI does break away, if this proposal is blocked by other boards.

During the Packer years or during the years when some countries went to South Africa to play those rebel leagues during the apartheid years - some players were called traitors and mercenaries by their fans.

I would think any sane cricketer wouldn't wan that backlash, given they would essentially be complicit in the destroying the fabric of the sport in their respective territories.

----------

We used to pay top teams to come to India: BCCI - The Times of India

Old bad blood being dug up here. Would be interested to hear a past Windies or Australian official comment on the legitimacy of this.

 

[SaiSrini]

This is where we would hope sense prevails by the various members boards & the world's leading players if the BCCI does break away, if this proposal is blocked by other boards.

During the Packer years or during the years when some countries went to South Africa to play those rebel leagues during the apartheid years - some players were called traitors and mercenaries by their fans.

I would think any sane cricketer wouldn't wan that backlash, given they would essentially be complicit in the destroying the fabric of the sport in their respective territories.

----------

We used to pay top teams to come to India: BCCI - The Times of India

Old bad blood being dug up here. Would be interested to hear a past Windies or Australian official comment on the legitimacy of this.

But that was those days. These days, the idea of playing for your national team isn't seen to be as prized anymore. Even among the fans, they do get patriotic when teams win world tournaments, but other than that, the patriotism has been on the decline.

I would dearly love to see someone from back home in India stand up against the BCCI. I know it wouldn't happen (as I said in this thread before), but if Tendulkar raises a voice against the BCCI, it would be the equivalent of a major storm. He is arguably the most respected sportsperson across all sports in the country, and definitely so in cricket. He is still very fresh in the Indian people's emotional mind (having bid goodbye in a very emotional manner). If he raises a voice, the BCCI would be running for shelter.

 

[War]

Sharda Ugra on the big three cricket boards | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

God i love Sharda Ugra...

 

[cricket_icon]

Sharda Ugra on the big three cricket boards | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

God i love Sharda Ugra...

That is a good piece, in all the BCCI bashing, we seem to have forgotten that the ECB and CA had the power to say no...in fact, they have the RESPONSIBILITY to say no. But when has greed and lust ever fallen to morality?

It's good to hear Mushfiqur of Bangladesh speak out too, I hope a few other test players, from more notable nations such as SA and PAK speak out too.

 

[War]

But that was those days. These days, the idea of playing for your national team isn't seen to be as prized anymore. Even among the fans, they do get patriotic when teams win world tournaments, but other than that, the patriotism has been on the decline.

I would dearly love to see someone from back home in India stand up against the BCCI. I know it wouldn't happen (as I said in this thread before), but if Tendulkar raises a voice against the BCCI, it would be the equivalent of a major storm. He is arguably the most respected sportsperson across all sports in the country, and definitely so in cricket. He is still very fresh in the Indian people's emotional mind (having bid goodbye in a very emotional manner). If he raises a voice, the BCCI would be running for shelter.

I haven't seen any concrete evidence to suggest that any of the players & fans or various nations feel that way now.

Agreed on Tendulkar however.

----------

In the end, there needs to be some change regarding how ICC will function in the future (or whether it should exist or not). Although the proposed idea will stop cricket from gaining any more popularity worldwide, the current ICC structure is not helping the game either. It is simply too weak to do anything to help the game. Asking for a fifa type strong governing body will not help either as that is simply impossible at current stage. No way would BCCI go with that. Neither will Australia or England. Handing in that much power to a relatively unbiased governing body would be a bad "business decision" for them.

As i mentioned b4 in the thread, unless the other 7 boards stand up along with ENG/AUS getting a change of heart soon - cricket has potentially fallen into a black hole so deep - that their is no way out anymore.

From a historical context, the modern ECB/AUS & the old ECB/AUS are at more blame for the current messy ICC structure & the rise of BCCI in the last 15 years.

When the Packer ordeal occurred & exposed ICC in the 1970s, since then the AUS/ENG should have brought all the members boards should have tried to formulate an ICC independently, just as how FIFA became independent away from central control of England.

ICC was never a financially viable institution before Jagmohan Dalmiya became president in the mid 90s (when ENG/AUS veto power was eased), i read once that the champions trophy was formed in 1998 to save the ICC from being bankrupt. So India has played a MASSIVE role in helping the ICC have money.

If this was done, ICC would have been a proper independent body all these years with sound finances & India rise as financial power would be as irrelevant as England financial might in world football to FIFA, despite the influence of the premier league.

Now India financial influence has grown, its using it to get back @ ENG/AUS for unsubstantiated bad treatment, they claim was death against them, as tony greig mentioned in his MCC speech b4 he died:

MCC Spirit of Cricket Lecture : Tony Greig Cowdrey Lecture: The full transcript | Cricket News | Marylebone Cricket Club | ESPN Cricinfo

"We can huff and puff as much as we like and have all sorts of external reports," Greig continued, "but this situation can only be resolved by India accepting that the spirit of cricket is more important than generating billions of dollars; it's more important than turning out multi-millionaire players; and it's more important than getting square with Australia and England for their bully-boy tactics towards India over the years. It's ironic that the world, including India, rightly worships at the Nelson Mandela altar because of his conciliatory attitude but then India eschews his approach by indulging in a little pay back."

India's disgusting power in game is epitomized in one man - Narayanaswami Srinivasan. Owner of India cement, Owner of Chennai super kings, BCCI President and a ICC director. This takes the idea of conflict of interest to another level...

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

they should just expel india from the ICC and any ICC matches and negotiate terms with Zee star, that TV company that formed the ICL.

obviously this wouldn't actually work and be ultra complicated but a boy can dream.

 

[War]

WICB set to support radical makeover | Trinidad Express Newspaper | Sports

Oh jesus, WICB aint make it official, but if veteran writer Cozier is already saying this - it likely true. Cricket is about to die, the owners of this site, should probably shut it down when all the boards (except S Africa it seems) cave into the "Big 3".

 

[ferg512]

As much as we don't like it, its probably going to go ahead. WICB and NZC already making noises they will go through with it. PCB, SA etc. have no choice but to go through with it.

 

[War]

Bangladesh cricket fans protesting...

 

[asprin]

Wow. Never expected support from the female fans. That's nice.

 

[War]

This statement slipped me by. But now this is very good couteraction by former ICC president Eshan Mani, to the wildly held view that of India 80% contribution to ICC finances:

ICC news : Ehsan Mani slams 'Big Three' proposal | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo

"Similarly, sponsors use cricket to promote their goods and services. While the values are generally greater when the broadcaster's country is playing, not all of this can be attributed to the individual country's Board. The quality of the opposition has a great bearing on the value Boards receive for their media rights. A strong case could be made that the broadcast revenues for bilateral home and away series between two members should be pooled and shared equally.

"While there would be a significant reduction in the value of the ICC Commercial Rights if India did not participate in an event; it would not be a reduction of 80% of ICC revenues. The Indian broadcasters would still wish to broadcast ICC Events. There would be a relatively greater impact, than the values attributed to Pakistan, South Africa and West Indies in the Paper if these three countries did not participate in an ICC event. From discussions with broadcasters, if a World Cup was held without Pakistan, South Africa and West Indies ICC revenues for the event could be reduced by 30%-40%."

Mani's background in chartered accounting and corporate governance, via numerous board directorships, served him well at the ICC, when he took a major role in growing television revenue through his post as the head of the ICC's Finance and Marketing Committee from 1996 to 2002.

----------

ICC's revamp : Malcolm Speed, Malcolm Gray join Ehsan Mani's protest | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo

"A point that also needs to be addressed is; why does BCCI need more money at the expense of other countries? The domestic and international media fees that BCCI receives from playing with other members are massive and underpin BCCI's financial position. It is the richest cricket board in the world.

"If cricket is to grow and develop around the world more investment is required in the Associate & Affiliate countries, not less. The Associate & Affiliate countries represent some of the biggest economies in the world. If cricket could be established properly in the United States of America and China and become an Olympic sport, the ICC could double its revenues in real terms over the next 10-15 years. This requires vision and a less parochial approach."

 

[IceAgeComing]

Here is Eshan Mani's view on the proposals.

It includes this wonderful graph which shows one of the smaller problems of this proposal...

So this proposal also pretty much guts the future growth of cricket by slicing the associate contribution by more than 50%; just so the BCCI can increase their revenue by 5x...

 

[SaiSrini]

As much as we don't like it, its probably going to go ahead. WICB and NZC already making noises they will go through with it. PCB, SA etc. have no choice but to go through with it.

Read somewhere that this is an extraordinary proposal that requires an extraordinary majority to go through. If CSA and PCB don't agree to this, then the proposal won't go through. And if BCB join in, all the more good.

Hope all this BCCI attacking doesn't translate into attacks on the Indian team. Its sad that we Indians and the team are seen on the bad side due to the BCCI's actions. Saw the revenue split after this proposal. Heights of greediness by the BCCI (in complicit with ECB and CA). This is explicitly an attempt to stifle the growth of cricket. If such a proposal goes through, I will stop watching cricket.

 

[IceAgeComing]

I heard that the rumours coming out of the BCB were that they were concerned about being "alone" if they didn't vote for it...

THe way I see it is that if it is going to pass; then the majority of the boards who are on-the-fence will vote for it and you'll have CSA and the PCB as the only ones against it.

The way I see the votes going as of now are:

YES: BCCI, ECB, CA (of course), WICB (they've pretty much said that they support it; plus India have been... quite kind towards the West Indies recently and perhaps they don't want to lose that?) and the NZCB (similar reasons?)

NO: CSA (the board that loses the most from this; definately hasn't been treated very well by the BCCI and sees itself as oneof the big nations in cricket while the proposal ignores them); PCB (I'm sure they've came out against, haven't got a source though)

At this point, its 5-2 towards yes. If its a simple majority, then they need one of the remaining votes to guarantee a win (unless the tiebreak would go for the proposal, I'm not sure how its decided). If its a super majority; you'd be talking about 2/3s normally, so that's 7 boards.

Those undecided currently are SLC, the BCB and the ZCB - the three nations most likely to lose out from this proposal. The grapevine seems to be saying that Bangladesh my vote for the proposal while not really liking it because they need the 1 ODI every 5 years from India to survive, which would make it 6-2 (a simple majority). God knows that the ZCB will do, but I'm guessing that they'll go with South Africa on this, especially since the "Big" nations probably won't be touring Zimbabwe any time soon and there won't be any ICC competitions for a while, so the cuts in revenue sharing would actually hurt them.

Thus, if my assumptions on the voting system and the attitude of the boards are correct; its all down to how Sri Lanka vote. I dunno, but I'm not feeling very optimistic...

e: Personally, I think that they should give the associates representation in ICC decisions. Perhaps not too the level of the main nations (it'd be dumb to give Jersey and France the same voting powers as India), but at least some protections to ensure that they were being listened too. Perhaps all decisions would need 50% of all members and 50% of full members; with big ones needing 2/3s of both? Perhaps state that associate/affiliate members have to approve ICC funding proposals, with any cuts not going through unless approved? I dunno, but a more independent, inclusive ICC would be much better for the development of the sport as a whole rather than simply including India in the old Australia/English duopoly...