ICC News: Restructuring the ICC, BCCI Influence & more

Also to add, I was trying to find what I could on the MoU, and the MoU itself is not in public domain, but some people have read it, and are quoting bits and pieces from it. Now BCCI has got a lot of flack for wanting to move the series from UAE. However this article states that the MoU says that the series will be held in "the UAE or any other mutually accepted venue".

This clearly shows that the MoU leaves the option open for BCCI to explore venues besides UAE. So if BCCI wanted to explore other venues for which it got a lot of flack, it was only exercising an option within the MoU itself.
 
Anyway I can't find any article on it, but Harsha Bhogle it seems has some updates -

 
Good decision. The December series sounded really dumb (even after ignoring the current political realities between the two nations).

And the whole idea of "gullible PCB has been hoodwinked" is laughable. India-Pak series has always had to go through government clearances from both sides, so even if this clause was not in the MoU it would be really stupid on part of BCCI or PCB to ignore this fact. (From what I recall though, initial reports had said that that the "with govt permission" thing was actually in the MoU)
 
This is from back when the deal was signed. Its not official, but an excerpt from Cricinfo's Umar Farooq's article stating the obvious. Both PCB and BCCI got into this deal knowing this reality that government NOC's will be required from both sides

However, despite the latest developments, given the sensitive relationship between the governments of the two countries, a fresh government NOC will be required before each series. India has just completed voting in its general elections with the results out on May 16; the BCCI is unlikely to proceed without the new government's green signal.

PCB says six-series deal signed with India | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo
 
I was having a discussion, and I felt that there is one big gigantic hole in the ICC programme, about what qualifies an associate nation to get test status.

Right now, the best we can say is that for a side to get test status depends essentially on the whims and fancies of the ICC. Playing in one world cup and beating Pakistan in it, was enough of a reason to get Bangladesh test status, but there are other associate sides who have done a lot more than that, and they still don't have test status. Kenya not only qualified for multiple consecutive WCs, they even got to the Semi-Finals of the 2003 WC. Its hard to put in words what a great achievement that was, In addition to that Kenya had always impressed everytime they turned out, including beating WI in the 1996 edition, when they were nowhere near as bad a side as they are now.

Ireland have been regularly qualifying for the WCs (three straight now) have been beating the big teams, (Pak, Eng and WI), and yet where is their Test Status. This subjectivity is just very very unfair.

ICC must make this process more open. One way to do that is to set targets, clear tangible well defined targets, on what sides need to do to win test status. Test status shouldn't be something that should be left to the whim of the ICC. ICC should clear targets, for instance, win X no. of games over a fixed period, produce X no. of young players who score X no. of runs or take X no. of wickets, build infrastructure, X no. of Int'l class satadiums, etc.

Set multiple targets, they could be performance related, infrastructure related, player production related, etc. but the conditions that will lead to a side getting test status must be well defined and clear, so sides can work towards them. The fact that right now nobody quite knows what they have to do, to get test status, is really hurting the associate side development.

This is one area that ICC must address ASAP.
 
Lodha panel recommends severe BCCI shake-up | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

Key Points -

  1. One State, One Vote - Have only one full member of the BCCI per state (Currently Maharashtra, Gujarat have multiple). Members without geographical boundaries - Railways, Services and universities to become associate members
  2. Board headed by a General body of the BCCI with separate governing bodies for BCCI administration and the IPL to report to it
  3. BCCI administration should be done like any a professional organization - Headed by a Chief Executive Officer (CEO), who will be assisted by six professional managers to take care of the day-to-day management
  4. Limited autonomy for the IPL Governing Council - Representation of players (A players' association) and franchises in the IPL GC which will report to the General Body
  5. A steering committee to include Mohinder Amarnath, Diana Eduljee, and Anil Kumble to help setup players' council - to include international and fc cricketers - idea to represent players' interests
  6. Three special officers - An ombudsman, an electoral and an ethics officer
  7. Terms for Office Bearers - Cannot be over 70 years old; cannot hold office for more than 3 terms. No consecutive terms
  8. Uniformity in state associations - No office for life; No Proxy voting; Accounts to be audited by the auditor of BCCI
  9. No Politicians or government servants as office bearers. No additional votes for Presidents. Vice Presidents pruned from five to one
  10. Selection, Coaching and Performance management to be managed by former international cricketers with knowledge on the topic
  11. CLEAN CHIT FOR SUNDAR RAMAN
  12. BRING BCCI UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION (RTI)
 
I like this idea of a 2 division test championship. Don't think West Indies or anyone that gets relegated will thought. So lets see if the ICC has the will to follow through.

ICC ponders two divisions for Test cricket in radical shake-up | Sport | The Guardian

ICC ponders two divisions for Test cricket in radical shake-up
• Governing body proposes promotion and relegation in Test cricket
• ICC wants to counter Tests’ loss of relevance and end fixture uncertainty
Australia v West Indies
Australia’s Nathan Lyon celebrates a West Indies wicket in the recent one-sided series between the sides. West Indies could slip into a Test Division Two under new ICC proposals. Photograph: William West/AFP/Getty Images
Exclusive by Tim Wigmore
Thursday 25 February 2016 21.30 GMT Last modified on Friday 26 February 2016 01.05 GMT
Share on Pinterest Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+
Shares
131
Comments
129
Save for later
The International Cricket Council is considering a radical proposal that would see Test cricket split into two divisions with promotion and relegation between them, and places granted to two new nations.

In a bid to bolster the appeal of international cricket the ICC, led by its chief executive, David Richardson, is exploring a number of options that would provide greater context to all three formats of the game from 2019.

It is understood that the preferred idea within the governing body at present, in terms of Test cricket, is a plan to place seven nations into division one and five in division two, with promotion and relegation decided every two years.


Sensible Shashank Manohar may finally signal end of ICC soap opera
Read more
Based on the current rankings, eighth-placed West Indies would slip into division two, which would still have full Test status, along with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. This second tier would then see the two best teams from the 2015-17 Intercontinental Cup, the first-class competition for associate nations, added to it, leaving Ireland, currently top of the table, poised to gain Test status.

In division one it is envisaged that all seven nations would play a series against each other, either home or away, over a two-year cycle. The leading team would win the Test championship, while the bottom side would face relegation.

There would be no exemptions to this, something originally proposed by Australia, England and India during the restructuring of the ICC in 2014. Relegation and promotion between division two and the Intercontinental Cup would also be in place, although whether this would be automatic or determined by play-offs is still being discussed.

Matches within this divisional structure would occupy no more than five months a year, leaving time for countries to schedule additional tours. A marquee series such as the Ashes, for example, could continue on its current cycle even if Australia or England were in different divisions.

This proposal is likely to be put to the ICC board at the annual conference in Edinburgh in June, and could come into effect after the 2019 World Cup.

Plans for one-day international and Twenty20 cricket are less advanced in terms of detail, although the ICC is keen to restructure both formats. One option being discussed for ODI cricket is to have two leagues of six, forming the basis of qualification for the World Cup; three leagues of four is also being considered.

In T20 cricket, the ICC hopes to introduce a system of regional qualifiers, from which all 105 members would have the opportunity to qualify for the World T20. The automatic qualification of each full member nation to world events would also end.

The proposals are designed to combat the loss of relevance of bilateral cricket, especially Tests, and concerns that matches lack clear consequences for victory and defeat, as well as the fixture uncertainty many countries face. The ICC has attempted to introduce a structure to the Test game since 2004, but there is now a feeling of renewed urgency.

Numerous Test series have been cancelled or shortened in recent years, with more lucrative ODI or T20 series in their place, and there are fears that the number of competitive Test teams is falling. The rise of domestic T20 cricket is another concern, and the ICC hopes that a new structure will help to manage the relationship between domestic and international cricket.

But convincing full members to vote for such reforms will be “a massive job”, said one senior source. The three Test nations who face relegation to division two might not be easily persuaded, while Australia, England and India, who have scheduled huge amounts of cricket against each other recently, might also be unwilling to relinquish such control over their fixture lists.

Funding is a further complication: the ICC envisages paying for all matches under the structure, preventing less glamorous fixtures being cancelled if boards are impoverished.

Whether the ICC is able to do so appears dependent on whether the Board of Control of Cricket for India agrees to return some of its ICC funding to the central pot, something advocated by Shashank Manohar, the BCCI president and ICC chairman.

That such an idea is being discussed at ICC level has been welcomed by the Federation of International Cricketers’ Associations, the umbrella organisation for seven players’ unions. Its executive chairman, Tony Irish, believes the current schedule to be “random and confusing”. Irish said: “This proposal of divisions, leagues and qualification requirements across the various formats may well be part of the answer to introducing structure and context into bilateral international cricket.


ICC chairman hits out at ‘bullying’ nature of the big three
Read more
“However the full solution lies in a fully researched new global structure for the entire game and can’t simply be an overlay on the existing disjointed bilateral playing schedule.”

As part of the continuing reviews, the ICC is also discussing whether to launch a bid to join the Olympics. Any bid for inclusion in the 2024 Games must be submitted to the International Olympic Committee by next year.

While England have recently reversed their opposition to cricket’s inclusion, India are yet to be convinced of the merits, with opposition to being affiliated with the Indian Olympic Committee understood to be one concern.

One alternative to the Olympics being discussed by the ICC is whether to revert back to the World T20 taking place every two years, rather than every four. The next World T20 after this year’s, in India, is due to take place in Australia in 2020.

A concern among senior figures in the ICC regarding Olympic inclusion is that a cricket event might feature as few as eight teams, making it unlikely that associate nations would qualify. It is also thought that the additional broadcasting rights from the World T20 being held every two years would be worth more than $300m to the ICC over an eight-year cycle, which could help to fund the new structure and the development of the game.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: War
I like this idea of a 2 division test championship. Don't think West Indies or anyone that gets relegated will thought. So lets see if the ICC has the will to follow through.

ICC ponders two divisions for Test cricket in radical shake-up | Sport | The Guardian

Not a big fan of two divisions, but one thing is for sure there needs to be a very big global debate on fixing cricket's very incoherent scheduling that has been very messed up compared to other sports in the world.

So from that standpoint all options need to be discussed once the Big 3 nonsense is scrapped
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top