Bangladesh news March 15, 2017

BCB raises objections to new ICC constitution

ESPNcricinfo staff

The Bangladesh board does not like the idea of the chance of losing its Full Membership © Getty Images

The BCB has revealed it has objected to two proposals in the new ICC constitution that was agreed on in principle by a 7-2 majority vote of Full Members during the ICC meetings in February.

The Bangladesh board was one of seven that had voted in favour of the new constitution, but its new stance has created uncertainty over whether the ICC will get the eight votes it needs to pass the changes at the board meeting in April.

Nazmul Hassan, the BCB president, said the Bangladesh board did not agree with the proposal that a country's Full Membership at the ICC could be up for review. He also objected to the proposed change in the voting system that would decentralise the power held by the Full Members boards.

Hassan, however, said the BCB had no objection to the new revenue distribution model proposed since the board felt it stood to benefit more than it did under the Big Three model.

"Three days before we came here, we have informed the ICC that we do not agree with two specific things," Hassan said in Colombo, where he along with BCCI chief executive Rahul Johri was present to watch the opening day of Bangladesh's 100th Test. "One of them is relegation: we said we don't agree with a Full Member going down. Zimbabwe might be getting demoted but it might be someone else another time. We said that the Full Membership status cannot be changed at all.

"The second is voting rights … they are taking new independent directors, increasing the number of Associate members, weightage distribution is being changed. We have to understand this better, so we cannot approve this so quickly. We want to know Bangladesh's position in this regard.

"We didn't oppose the financial reforms but there were parts of the constitutional changes that we had opposed. When these came up in the last meeting, there were things that didn't go with us. In the next meeting, these will come up item-wise, and we will vote on them item-wise too. A lot of those present had told me to refuse the whole thing but I said that if Bangladesh is getting more money, why should I refuse? I have to look at BCB's interest."

The BCB announced its position on the new constitution on the same day that ICC chairman Shashank Manohar, the driving force behind the rollback of the governance structures created by BCCI, ECB and CA in 2014, resigned from office citing personal reasons.

The BCCI was at the forefront of the resistance to the new ICC constitution that was passed in principle in February because its share of revenue was heavily reduced under the new model. Sri Lanka Cricket had also voted against the new constitution, while Zimbabwe Cricket abstained from voting. The BCB's objection to the two specific proposals could now pose another problem for the ICC in its bid to approve the new constitution in April.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Bala on March 17, 2017, 20:30 GMT

    The ICC, as usual, has put the cart before the horse, and that is leading to these kinds of ridiculous conundra.

    Performance on the field should have repercussions on the field (or in terms of future competition). However, that should not have a bearing on the membership status. The complication arises because historically only Full Members could play Tests. In fact, till not long ago, only Full Members played international cricket (outside of the World Cups). That was possible because of the wide gap between the highest Associate and the lowest Full Member. With the Intercontinental Cup and other international opportunites, the gap between the Associates and Full Members has reduced. This leads to the possibility of overlap in on-field performance between the two groups. This means that the membership status should be decoupled from on-field performance (which can vary depending on the format). The T20 Champion may struggle in Tests, and vice versa.

  • mahbub4075347 on March 17, 2017, 5:39 GMT

    Afghanistan supporter who are cursing us need to think about the past. They need to think which country give the player like Rashid Khan, Mohammad Nabi, Ahmed Shehjad the chance to play at franchise base t20 tournament. Although our BPL not upto upper standard yet but it is the tournament that gives your player more exposure at the first time. We have hosted them for 3 match one day series. Our board always beside the team who are improving and improving fast. We haven't forgot the support of Srilanka, Zimbabwe in our worse possible if time. We want to walk the path like they did to us. Like a elder brother rather to be a big brother. I hope Afghanistan people can understand that we are elder brother to them. Not like Indian cricket board who were like big brother to us

  • Syed on March 17, 2017, 4:40 GMT

    BD due to home advantage is maintaining the test status otherwise Afghanistan & BD r of similar standards.Doubt if BD can win a test match outside BD.

  • Mohammad Subail on March 17, 2017, 4:37 GMT

    Don't want to change entire proposal. BCB please be sure for your objection some will get the chance to return old system.

  • johnthekiwi on March 16, 2017, 18:51 GMT

    I believe there should be three six team tiers and balanced H/A schedules over the course of about 40 months before each rebalance. Any shorter than this and basically scheduling dictates who is crowned T1 champ and who was unfortunate enough to have back-to-back series in completely alien conditions at the wrong time. If Oz gets knocked out of Tier 1 then the Ashes get skipped until such time as they return or a (no points) series is scheduled between those two boards should a slot become available. If you want to grow the sport (internally, please stop with the US stuff!) then giving a team/nation something to play for is going to increase interest. That being said as long as India and Pakistan won't play each other and a bunch of countries want nothing to do with Zimbabwe this is just a pipe dream. "Full membership" is guff. Let all 18 teams be full members. It is the tier of membership (earned on the field) that will determine how much money boards and players make.

  • Adnan on March 16, 2017, 16:35 GMT

    There should be a two league system for tests. Primary league should consist of 10 teams with bottom two teams of primary league relegated and replaced with top two teams of the secondary league after every 2-3 years. So the relegated teams could still have a chance to regain their lost status. But it will give chance to teams like Afghanistan and Ireland to join the primary league. The primary league should have an equitable formula for competition (not likely given the ambitious big 3 presence). For one day and T20, the group could be expanded to include leading teams from secondary group. Not sure how much of it is practical, but this will be good to popularize cricket.

  • Amir on March 16, 2017, 15:46 GMT

    There is so much nonsense packed in one Oldtimer01 post. Their is no tolerance and helping the downtrodden. It is called bullying. BTW, BCB is very loyal to BCCI at the expense of BD development. BCCI opposes this ICC proposal, so here comes BCB to the rescue. I wish BCB had abstained the first time and reserved the right for review. I think both AFG and IRE can be given the Test status and ICC should ensure that all Test playing nation gets a minimum of 12 Tests in a year. Without playing regular Tests, no team is going to improve.

  • wafa.m7182451 on March 16, 2017, 12:23 GMT

    I am in support of the new proposals. To me it is kind of making the boards work harder than before, no boards should scare of losing their status. There are 10 full members by now, is the fear from the rising nations? if yes, then it is a shame to scare of losing your status because of them. Fight hard, try hard you will promote further, otherwise cricket should come out of the box, otherwise sticking only these 10 will increase the hatred to the game. Learn from football, no one should be conservative. I think the likes of Afghanistan really showing their dominance across all three formats of the game, so they have to be motivated further through providing them better opportunities in the bigger stage to showcase their talent, fan base they are unique by now, good infrastructure, rising new stars pool like Rashid, Tarakai, Usman Ghani and other new talents coming up next, in SHPAGEEZA t20 we had international players in kabul having no security tensions.,we can host games.

  • Mohsin Tariq Khan on March 16, 2017, 11:39 GMT

    @mustafasarwari I appreciate your recent affection with India and BCCI but correct your stats. Pakistan helped BD to achieve test status not BCCI. I hope your forward thinking fear prove incorrect. Afg players mostly are born and trained in Pakistan so how could you say that. I appreciate your team is doing well and we wish the same but kindly do not make things up in your mind. You need to be open and unbiased in your life to move forward. Regards from a host who kept and is still keeping afghans in Pakistan and in our hearts.

  • Saq on March 16, 2017, 10:01 GMT

    @mustafa sarwari: I think Funtopia and Asiacricket1234 hit the nail on the head. You must be 15 and not know who actually nurtured your senior players and got you started. As for BD, let's be honest, they're get quite close to the line and then fail recently. That means they have the talent, just lack application to go over the line in crunch situations. They need more test games, not lack there of. Goodluck, BD.

  • No featured comments at the moment.