ICC news June 25, 2013

ICC to ask members to adopt stronger anti-corruption laws

  shares 25

The ICC's anti-corruption and security unit (ACSU) is likely to recommend that its members adopt stronger anti-corruption laws to prosecute players, match-officials and franchise owners found guilty of corrupt practices in domestic Twenty20 leagues. Sir Ronnie Flannagan, the chairman of the ACSU, is expected to address these concerns during ICC's annual conference, which begins at the Lord's cricket ground today.

Flannagan is expected to highlight the threats and challenges, and give recommendations to ICC members on how to curb the dangers of corruption. These concerns come in the wake of various corruption crises that have taken place in the last year, exposing the loosely-fit anti-corruption mechanisms that are used in lucrative domestic T20 leagues like the Indian Premier League (IPL), Bangladesh Premier League (BPL) and the Sri Lanka Premier League (SLPL).

In May, three IPL players, including the Indian fast bowler Sreesanth, were arrested for their alleged involvement in spot-fixing. A franchise owner, Gurunath Meiyappan, was also arrested for alleged involvement in betting a few days later. In Bangladesh, Mohammad Ashraful confessed to indulging in corrupt practices during the BPL. Last year, the news channel, India TV, carried out a sting operation in which match officials were caught on video agreeing to divulge information.

However, the Indian judicial system has no specific law yet to deal with corruption in sport and the ACSU fears this might allow perpetrators to get way easily. Bangladesh and Sri Lanka also face the same issue and culprits cannot be held under criminal offence in the absence of relevant laws. Hence, Flannagan is likely to recommend that members, and the three countries in particular, ask their federal governments to institute a law to discourage people from getting involved in corrupt practices and corrupt elements.

One of the other important issues likely to come up for discussion is the decision on the venue for next year's World Twenty20, scheduled between March 16 and April 6 in Bangladesh. Recently the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) raised a red flag on the delay in setting up proper infrastructure to meet the original deadline set by the ICC. BCB president Nazmul Hasan, who went public with his displeasure over the slow work at two of the four venues, is likely to address the ICC board on this matter. The members are likely to discuss options - from setting new timelines or conducting further inspections to moving the tournament to another country as a viable alternative.

The five-day annual conference begins with the Associate and Affiliate Members' meeting (June 25), chief executives' committee meeting (25-26), governance review committee, finance and commercial affairs committee, and the HR and remuneration committee meetings (June 27-28). These will be followed by the annual conference on June 28 before the two-day ICC Development International board meetings on June 28 and 29.

One of the main items on the agenda at the chief executives' committee (CEC) meeting is an assessment of the decisions recently taken by the Anil Kumble-led Cricket Committee. The new ODI rules - which were rolled out last October and include fielding restrictions and the use of two new balls - have been accepted with skepticism by some countries. India captain MS Dhoni had stated, before the Champions Trophy, that the rules were a big challenge. The cricket committee had decided to observe how teams fared during the Champions Trophy before debating on whether the new rules needed to be modified or carried forward till the 2015 World Cup.

Kumble's committee was also concerned about the members ignoring the ICC's Future Tours Programme and sacrificing Tests to accommodate more ODIs or T20s. The CEC is expected to discuss how best to maintain a balance between all three formats. The Cricket Committee had earlier suggested that members play a minimum number of Tests across a four-year period to protect the format.

Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY Donsshaddow on | June 26, 2013, 5:08 GMT

    It's time ICC police cricket and keep it clean from corruption. It's a difficult task but one that is needed to keep the sport's image clean. No matter how much money ICC spends on keeping cricket corruption-free, it is money well spent. The council should also iron-out certain rules that tilt the advantage too much in favour of batsmen or bowlers. Case in point is the two-new-ball law that has made life so much more difficult for spinners or the size of cricket bats, which seem to be getting bigger by the day. Surely these bats give batsmen an unfair advantage.

  • POSTED BY Edassery on | June 27, 2013, 10:37 GMT

    No need to ask all members, asking India, Pakistan and Bangladesh will do :-)

  • POSTED BY FAB_ALI on | June 27, 2013, 6:41 GMT

    Why cant ODIs be cut down to a 40-over per side match?... And a mandatory powerplay of 1-15 overs will be enough. 4 fielders outside in non-powerplay overs and 2 new balls will also be OK in this case. I would also like to see 2 reviews per innings for batting and bowling side.

  • POSTED BY AltafPatel on | June 27, 2013, 6:20 GMT

    rule for free hit still seem to be joke. When no-ball itself is like freehit and not taken in account, what is need for free hit ? 2 bouncers in a over in ODI also seem to be exaggeration. They also need not to allow batsman or umpire for review of no ball after wicker falls as it is used on almost all wickets in crucial situations. ICC also need to allow teams like Ireland, Keyna to play more international cricket and also should allow Bangladesh in Champions trophy. They need to indulge in fixing scandal in IPL and its their duty to ask Srinivasan strictly.

  • POSTED BY SRAM20 on | June 26, 2013, 21:40 GMT

    I like the idea floated around here about the third umpire overturning virtually any decision of the on-field umpire. And to make sure time is not wasted, the batsman can be brought back immediately after the third umpire rules in favor of the batsman. This would mean that the new batsman who came in and faced a few balls will have to go back to the pavilion. In case the third umpire rules in favor of the fielding team, the subsequent runs scored by that "dismissed" batsman will stay but will count towards the next batsman who will come in.

    Technology meanwhile should be improved so that the third umpire can use it quickly and efficiently to give out a decision to the on-field umpire in time before the next delivery is bowled.

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 17:03 GMT

    way to go!!hope it is the beginning of a new era!!

    11

  • POSTED BY fr600 on | June 26, 2013, 10:10 GMT

    If everyone stops playing certain countries, the corruption will stop automatically. We demand brutal punishment for corruption, whether it's a cricketer or a rich guy or both.

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 7:53 GMT

    Please allow the third umpire to call back an on-field umpire to change his decision ,that way so many howlers can be removed. If time is such a huge constraint then allow the wrongly given out batsman to come back at the fall of the next wicket...that wont create any problems at all.(Since he wasnt out at first place).If wrongly given not out,then the third umpire can call back the on-field umpire to wait for 30 secs(not a huge time in a n 8-hour match) for his call.The skill of a captain to review a decision or not isnt a cricketing skill.its a vague assumption as the captain is in an even worse position than the on-field umpire to make a call.Also the bowlers/batsmen lose out on opportunity to prevent howlers due to captain's mistake.....again an unfair situation.

  • POSTED BY CricketMaan on | June 26, 2013, 7:23 GMT

    @Anil Kumble - As much as i respect you, its nothing but hypocrisy on your side to complain about boards swapping T20s and ODIs for Tests. Do you even know about the ongoing debate between BCCI and NZC? They are planning for a 1 test 2 ODI series or even 2 ODI and 2 T20 no tests campaign. Whom are you guys kidding?

  • POSTED BY Haleos on | June 26, 2013, 6:46 GMT

    We dont need DRS if the thrid umpire is given power to overturn bad decisions. Why should a team be penalised for using up its reviews if it takes a few wrong calls. If the purpose of the system is to eliminate umpiring errors I do not see the reason fo r implimenting what I suggested. It can be easily done when the batsman is walking back to pavilion. If not call him back. What is wrong in that? Not like he has flown home. BCCI can not object to this.

  • POSTED BY Donsshaddow on | June 26, 2013, 5:08 GMT

    It's time ICC police cricket and keep it clean from corruption. It's a difficult task but one that is needed to keep the sport's image clean. No matter how much money ICC spends on keeping cricket corruption-free, it is money well spent. The council should also iron-out certain rules that tilt the advantage too much in favour of batsmen or bowlers. Case in point is the two-new-ball law that has made life so much more difficult for spinners or the size of cricket bats, which seem to be getting bigger by the day. Surely these bats give batsmen an unfair advantage.

  • POSTED BY Edassery on | June 27, 2013, 10:37 GMT

    No need to ask all members, asking India, Pakistan and Bangladesh will do :-)

  • POSTED BY FAB_ALI on | June 27, 2013, 6:41 GMT

    Why cant ODIs be cut down to a 40-over per side match?... And a mandatory powerplay of 1-15 overs will be enough. 4 fielders outside in non-powerplay overs and 2 new balls will also be OK in this case. I would also like to see 2 reviews per innings for batting and bowling side.

  • POSTED BY AltafPatel on | June 27, 2013, 6:20 GMT

    rule for free hit still seem to be joke. When no-ball itself is like freehit and not taken in account, what is need for free hit ? 2 bouncers in a over in ODI also seem to be exaggeration. They also need not to allow batsman or umpire for review of no ball after wicker falls as it is used on almost all wickets in crucial situations. ICC also need to allow teams like Ireland, Keyna to play more international cricket and also should allow Bangladesh in Champions trophy. They need to indulge in fixing scandal in IPL and its their duty to ask Srinivasan strictly.

  • POSTED BY SRAM20 on | June 26, 2013, 21:40 GMT

    I like the idea floated around here about the third umpire overturning virtually any decision of the on-field umpire. And to make sure time is not wasted, the batsman can be brought back immediately after the third umpire rules in favor of the batsman. This would mean that the new batsman who came in and faced a few balls will have to go back to the pavilion. In case the third umpire rules in favor of the fielding team, the subsequent runs scored by that "dismissed" batsman will stay but will count towards the next batsman who will come in.

    Technology meanwhile should be improved so that the third umpire can use it quickly and efficiently to give out a decision to the on-field umpire in time before the next delivery is bowled.

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 17:03 GMT

    way to go!!hope it is the beginning of a new era!!

    11

  • POSTED BY fr600 on | June 26, 2013, 10:10 GMT

    If everyone stops playing certain countries, the corruption will stop automatically. We demand brutal punishment for corruption, whether it's a cricketer or a rich guy or both.

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 7:53 GMT

    Please allow the third umpire to call back an on-field umpire to change his decision ,that way so many howlers can be removed. If time is such a huge constraint then allow the wrongly given out batsman to come back at the fall of the next wicket...that wont create any problems at all.(Since he wasnt out at first place).If wrongly given not out,then the third umpire can call back the on-field umpire to wait for 30 secs(not a huge time in a n 8-hour match) for his call.The skill of a captain to review a decision or not isnt a cricketing skill.its a vague assumption as the captain is in an even worse position than the on-field umpire to make a call.Also the bowlers/batsmen lose out on opportunity to prevent howlers due to captain's mistake.....again an unfair situation.

  • POSTED BY CricketMaan on | June 26, 2013, 7:23 GMT

    @Anil Kumble - As much as i respect you, its nothing but hypocrisy on your side to complain about boards swapping T20s and ODIs for Tests. Do you even know about the ongoing debate between BCCI and NZC? They are planning for a 1 test 2 ODI series or even 2 ODI and 2 T20 no tests campaign. Whom are you guys kidding?

  • POSTED BY Haleos on | June 26, 2013, 6:46 GMT

    We dont need DRS if the thrid umpire is given power to overturn bad decisions. Why should a team be penalised for using up its reviews if it takes a few wrong calls. If the purpose of the system is to eliminate umpiring errors I do not see the reason fo r implimenting what I suggested. It can be easily done when the batsman is walking back to pavilion. If not call him back. What is wrong in that? Not like he has flown home. BCCI can not object to this.

  • POSTED BY satishchandar on | June 26, 2013, 6:16 GMT

    DRS.. Let ICC come up with a model where the sponsors will e identified for DRS. It is not ideal for ICC to look upon one single board to bear all the cost which is not going to reward the board in most case.. Or look at cost effective modes of implementing uniform DRS.. Till ICC comes to a conclusion on what to do, there is no use in discussing about DRS.

    No regular changes to ODI format. What it is now is good for the game.

    Uniform number of games for top 8 teams per year. And of course, all teams play all teams in 4 years span and each test series consists of atleast 3 games. Bilateral ODI series to be converted to 3-4 team tournaments.

    As for corruption, What ICC should do is, let the players to complain to the ACSU and make the deals offered public.. To reduce corruption, it is the only way.. Making the news public so that a clear message is sent to the bookies that if they approach players, they might end up in front page soon..

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 6:11 GMT

    I think bring 5 fielders rule back in ODI rather than 4 fielders because of this spinners facing lots of problem and there should be 1 powerplay from 1-10 over no other powerplay required when 4 fielders is outside the circle also only 1 new ball shud be used till 1-50 over there shud be runner for injured player and last please make DRS for all country compulsory

  • POSTED BY satishchandar on | June 26, 2013, 6:02 GMT

    As much the 5 fielders inside circle has been criticised as a defensive option for spinners, i have seen the spinners use it to their advantage in the Champions trophy.. It allows the extra fielder who can be at slip or leg slip position to prevent the paddle or the late cuts played.. It depends on the usage of the fielder.. May be, they can keep 5 inside circle till 45th over and last 5 overs will have 4 fielders inside.. But it would be a too much regulations on a single innings. Better stick with the current rules as it provides additional attacking option..

  • POSTED BY ajithabey on | June 26, 2013, 5:12 GMT

    ICC must ensure that all Test playing nations must play at least 6 test matches per year and at least 10 ODI's per team per year instead of the current lopsided arrangements. ICC should regulate these tours so that all teams have an equal share of matches each year and scheduling of same in the best possible weather conditions of each country. It is high time that the ICC does not recognize locally organized T20 tournaments which has brought corruption through gambling and bookies and disrepute to this noble game.

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 5:11 GMT

    Plz make DRS Compulsory.Plz allow 3 wrong reviews......Y spend so much money for just 1 review(illogical) else it is unfair on the middle and lower order batsmen ,who often come to bat with reviews already used.In England, allow 2 days time to complete a 1-Day match(weather is like that there).IF weather forecast is very bad... for a balanced match reduce it straightaway to a 40 -over match.(Aus-NZ match in champions trophy wudve had a result if it had been a 40 over match.

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 4:33 GMT

    They have to do away either of the two Anti-bowlers rules i.e. either stop using two new balls or allow 5 fielders outside the circle.

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 4:27 GMT

    despite efforts from icc cricket isnt growing anywhere in the world, scrape 100's of meaning less odi's, give windows for major t20 leagues, lets go the football way, and treat test cricket like a separate game,

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 4:25 GMT

    @SLGIRL agree with you if runner won't allow do not allow subs also. and other thing ICC committee should consider is if hw bowler replace a sub after Finished his quoter of overs????

  • POSTED BY naudurivsm on | June 26, 2013, 2:27 GMT

    Hmmm... Scheduling? Yes, that should be the Agenda #1. A. - ICC should cut-off meaning less t20s like NZ/Vs. ENG from the FTP B - Properly plan a reserve day for Semi finals and finals for all major championships.

    Agenda #2. Grounds maintenance: C- Plan towards use of technology and resources for ground maintenance, drainage systems and easy covering and drying methods.]

    Agenda #3. Playing conditions / rules etc.

    Agenda #4. Corruption

    Agenda #5. Other burning topics on revenues etc.

  • POSTED BY cric_follower on | June 25, 2013, 22:09 GMT

    Please do not change the ODI rules!! The introduction of 4 players outside the circle is a greattttt idea. The number 7 position has to be a specialist bowling all rounder position. Going to back 7 specialist batsmen is not the way to do it.

  • POSTED BY kalyanbk on | June 25, 2013, 19:01 GMT

    When the Hansie Cronje Scandal broke out one of the recommendations was to do away with "meaningless" ODIs that had no significance apart from making money. Yet we are having a meaningless tri-series with India, SL and WI immediately after a Champions Trophy. This does not even let us relish the results of a world event. We also saw people and team owners with cellphones during IPL matches. How then do we as fans get confidence that the ICC follows the recommendations?

  • POSTED BY SLMaster on | June 25, 2013, 17:27 GMT

    What about runner for Injured batsman. If that is the case then there shouldn't be replacement fielder who ever walking off the field. Most of the time bowler walk of the field take refreshment while replacing them with a talented fielder. It is not fair to the batting side and there must a balance.

  • POSTED BY palla.avinash on | June 25, 2013, 17:26 GMT

    Please bring 5 fielders rule back in odis 4 fielders is disgusting especially for spinners,they were forced to be too defensive. please change the rule ICC.

  • POSTED BY on | June 25, 2013, 17:13 GMT

    Bangladesh played just two tests on 2012. Every text playing should play at least 5 test matches a year. Otherwise, it will be unfair to countries which pay less number of matches. Not playing enough text matches a year can be very bad for text cricket too.

    We must not forget, Test cricket is the format where true cricket skills can be shown.......... I hope ICC will take necessary steps to save test cricket..........

  • POSTED BY on | June 25, 2013, 17:07 GMT

    To be honest,i feel that ODI rules which were during 2011 World Cup were much better..This rules are not that bad at all especially 2 new balls from every end..What I think is that ICC should rethink about the rule about keeping only 4 fielders in circle during non-powerplay overs.This rule is more like an injustice to bowlers.They should stick to the old rule of allowing 5 fielders to be kept outside the circle during non-powerplay overs.Also I think that the old rule had 3 powerplays & during 2011 World Cup,batting team used to take batting powerplay after 40 overs.Sticking to this rule can give boost to ODI cricket.One important thing I would suggest is that DRS,Hawkeye & Hotspot should be mandatory & minimum 3 reviews should be there for every team..rest of the rules are fine to deal with..Regarding fixing issues,ICC should make a strong law to curb fixing.Care should be taken as much as possible that players should not be allowed to meet bookies..

  • POSTED BY on | June 25, 2013, 17:07 GMT

    To be honest,i feel that ODI rules which were during 2011 World Cup were much better..This rules are not that bad at all especially 2 new balls from every end..What I think is that ICC should rethink about the rule about keeping only 4 fielders in circle during non-powerplay overs.This rule is more like an injustice to bowlers.They should stick to the old rule of allowing 5 fielders to be kept outside the circle during non-powerplay overs.Also I think that the old rule had 3 powerplays & during 2011 World Cup,batting team used to take batting powerplay after 40 overs.Sticking to this rule can give boost to ODI cricket.One important thing I would suggest is that DRS,Hawkeye & Hotspot should be mandatory & minimum 3 reviews should be there for every team..rest of the rules are fine to deal with..Regarding fixing issues,ICC should make a strong law to curb fixing.Care should be taken as much as possible that players should not be allowed to meet bookies..

  • POSTED BY on | June 25, 2013, 17:13 GMT

    Bangladesh played just two tests on 2012. Every text playing should play at least 5 test matches a year. Otherwise, it will be unfair to countries which pay less number of matches. Not playing enough text matches a year can be very bad for text cricket too.

    We must not forget, Test cricket is the format where true cricket skills can be shown.......... I hope ICC will take necessary steps to save test cricket..........

  • POSTED BY palla.avinash on | June 25, 2013, 17:26 GMT

    Please bring 5 fielders rule back in odis 4 fielders is disgusting especially for spinners,they were forced to be too defensive. please change the rule ICC.

  • POSTED BY SLMaster on | June 25, 2013, 17:27 GMT

    What about runner for Injured batsman. If that is the case then there shouldn't be replacement fielder who ever walking off the field. Most of the time bowler walk of the field take refreshment while replacing them with a talented fielder. It is not fair to the batting side and there must a balance.

  • POSTED BY kalyanbk on | June 25, 2013, 19:01 GMT

    When the Hansie Cronje Scandal broke out one of the recommendations was to do away with "meaningless" ODIs that had no significance apart from making money. Yet we are having a meaningless tri-series with India, SL and WI immediately after a Champions Trophy. This does not even let us relish the results of a world event. We also saw people and team owners with cellphones during IPL matches. How then do we as fans get confidence that the ICC follows the recommendations?

  • POSTED BY cric_follower on | June 25, 2013, 22:09 GMT

    Please do not change the ODI rules!! The introduction of 4 players outside the circle is a greattttt idea. The number 7 position has to be a specialist bowling all rounder position. Going to back 7 specialist batsmen is not the way to do it.

  • POSTED BY naudurivsm on | June 26, 2013, 2:27 GMT

    Hmmm... Scheduling? Yes, that should be the Agenda #1. A. - ICC should cut-off meaning less t20s like NZ/Vs. ENG from the FTP B - Properly plan a reserve day for Semi finals and finals for all major championships.

    Agenda #2. Grounds maintenance: C- Plan towards use of technology and resources for ground maintenance, drainage systems and easy covering and drying methods.]

    Agenda #3. Playing conditions / rules etc.

    Agenda #4. Corruption

    Agenda #5. Other burning topics on revenues etc.

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 4:25 GMT

    @SLGIRL agree with you if runner won't allow do not allow subs also. and other thing ICC committee should consider is if hw bowler replace a sub after Finished his quoter of overs????

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 4:27 GMT

    despite efforts from icc cricket isnt growing anywhere in the world, scrape 100's of meaning less odi's, give windows for major t20 leagues, lets go the football way, and treat test cricket like a separate game,

  • POSTED BY on | June 26, 2013, 4:33 GMT

    They have to do away either of the two Anti-bowlers rules i.e. either stop using two new balls or allow 5 fielders outside the circle.