ICC news January 17, 2014

Big Three could control revamped ICC


Ugra: Changes will create an oligarchy that will run cricket

The ICC is to consider a comprehensive structural overhaul of world cricket administration that will effectively cede most executive decision-making to the BCCI, Cricket Australia and the ECB. A draft proposal on these lines will be presented to the ICC Executive Board during its quarterly meeting in Dubai on January 28 and 29.

The proposal, drafted by a "working group" of the ICC's Finance & Commercial Affairs (F&CA) committee - in which the BCCI, CA and ECB are key members - recommends wide-ranging changes in the ICC's revenue distribution model, administrative structures and the Future Tours Programme (FTP), questions the relevance of Test rankings and suggests the reinstatement of the Champions Trophy over the World Test Championship.

And almost every recommendation of the "position paper" gives a larger share of control over world cricket to the Australian, English and Indian cricket boards - both in the boardroom and on the field. It also gives them a larger share of revenues, in a ratio that is linked to the ICC's revenue growth.

The ICC says these radical proposals await response from and the approval of member boards. The document does, however, contain an April deadline for the formation of the ICC Business Co (IBC) - a newly formed business arm which will be set up to replace the existing IDI (ICC Development International) - in order to take over the task of issuing tenders for the ICC's next media rights and sponsorship cycle.

The proposal recommends creating a four-member group called the Executive Committee (ExCo) between ICC committees and the Executive Board, which consists of the heads of national boards. The ExCo, the proposal recommends, will include three permanent representatives from CA, ECB and BCCI, who will share an annual rotating chairmanship. A fourth member of the ExCo will be nominated by the ICC's Executive Board and come from the seven other Full Member nations. The ExCo, if created according to the draft, will become "the sole recommendation committee … on all constitutional, personnel, integrity, ethics, development and nominations matters."

When detailing Test match promotion and relegation, the document states that "relegation exceptions" will apply to India, England and Australia. This is "solely in order to protect ICC income due to the importance of those markets and teams to prospective ICC media rights buyers."

This document was made available to the ICC member nations in Dubai on January 9, as part of a special meeting called in addition to the normal ICC Board meetings held every three months. There is a possibility that the proposal could be even be brought to vote as early as the January meeting even though the ICC, which offered no formal statement, indicated that the document was a only working paper that awaited both response and approval from the Board.

There had been a buzz among member nations that these proposals were being worked on between BCCI, CA and the ECB over the past six months but the first that other member nations saw of it was the document on January 9. A representative of a Full Member board outside the BCCI-CA-ECB triad said the proposals were a radical return to the old "veto system" in which England and Australia controlled all decision-making. The newest, richest and, therefore, most influential entrant into this club of power is the BCCI.

"They are attaching the right of a country to rule the cricket world to its economic strength", this official said. The proposal by the BCCI, CA and the ECB to exempt themselves from relegation was, he said, contradictory: "On one side, they say they are following meritocracy. But then they base promotion and relegation on financial strength."

At an administrative level, the recently-created post of ICC chairman, (meant to reduce the powers of the president and be given to the "the best man for the job") will, according to the new proposal, become an annual rotation between "one of the nominees of the ECB, CA or the BCCI." Similarly, the BCCI-CA-ECB will nominate the annual chairman of the Finance & Commercial committee, thus nominating their own candidates in three key ICC positions: the head of the ExCo, the F&CA committee and the chairmanship of the ICC. The ICC chairman will not head other major committees of the ICC, its F&CA committee or the IBC, the commercial arm of the ICC.

The proposal states that the IBC is to be "established immediately" in order to take charge of the next cycle of ICC media and sponsorship rights from 2015-2023. The immediacy being referred to is the ICC Board meeting of April 2014.

The bulk of the "position paper" comprises a section focusing on a 'distribution model' of ICC revenues. The ICC's current funding model distributes surplus revenues equally among Full Members and, in smaller proportions, to its Associate and Affiliate members. This, the proposal says, "does not recognise the contribution of individual members" and provides for a "distorted distribution model that undermines self-sufficiency." The "value contribution" of India is listed as "over 80%" with the other Full Members' contribution ranging between "0.1% to 5%." The proposal says: "If ICC funds were entirely allocated on the basis of where they came from, all Members bar two would suffer a seriously damaging reduction in their funding," a position "not favoured by BCCI, the ECB or CA."

To redress the "distorted distribution model", the new model recommends the creation of a "contribution cost" as recognition for every member's role in "contributing to generating ICC's revenues required to sustain the game." An estimate of the percentage break-up of "contribution costs" to the entire ICC revenue has been "worked on and negotiated by" the BCCI, the ECB and CA; this accords the three boards greater shares of the ICC's revenues as they increase. At the current rights-cycle revenue levels of $1.5 billion, for example, the BCCI's share would be 4.2%; should the new rights cycle gross revenue cross $3.5 billion, the BCCI's share will be 21% - a total of $766 million.

The BCCI-CA-ECB have also recommended the formation of a "standing team" of representatives from each of the Boards who have a mandate to look at "every element of each ICC event and event costs" and will regularly report to the F&CA committee.

The ICC's finance and commercial affairs committee, whose working group has put together these proposals, comprises the following: Giles Clarke (chairman, ECB), Alan Isaac (ICC president), Dave Richardson (chief executive), N Srinivasan (BCCI), Neil Speight (Associate and Affiliate member/ Bermuda Cricket Board), Wally Edwards (CA), Dave Cameron (WICB), with Campbell Jamieson (GM, commercial) and Faisal Hasnain (CFO).

Sharda Ugra is senior editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on January 30, 2014, 8:32 GMT

    world cup would be a triangular series between Australia , England and India? ??

  • fr600 on January 24, 2014, 13:58 GMT

    This truly is a disgrace in the name of cricket. No more cricket for me if these are adapted.

  • on January 24, 2014, 13:41 GMT

    I have watched cricket for over 40 years in the Caribbean and for the most part Canada and I am appalled at the proposals made. This is not good for the game and maybe the remaining members should decide to play within themselves, essentially forming their own league and do with less. We will see how long the monotony of the big three playing each other will keep fans interested. The ICC, BCCI, and CA should look at the sustainability of sports franchises in North America where it is to their own interest to keep smaller markets viable and supplement them financially. Greed and blackmail can only go so far. Wanton display of shameful behavior BCCI.

  • SquareLegs on January 24, 2014, 11:37 GMT

    I agree with many of the other posters here: this is disgraceful. Having watched international cricket for over 35 years, if my board (ECB) goes ahead with this, then I have no further interest in paying to watch the national team.

  • on January 24, 2014, 11:36 GMT

    This all about the love and greed for money. Folks that's all it is. Just take a good look.

  • Twinkie on January 23, 2014, 23:43 GMT

    After 40 years of watching cricket, if this goes through , I 'm done! I'll start with the England Australia match tonight. Sponsors take note! I will NOT be watching!

  • Fahii on January 23, 2014, 20:46 GMT

    This is not going to be good for cricket integrity.

  • on January 23, 2014, 16:05 GMT

    If this kind of formation is going to be approved than there is no use of having "ICC" in the world cricket.It is better to drop these three countries from world cricket and let them play with each other.Without these countries, other countries can play with each other. Now, it is very important to think about world cricket and spread cricket all over the world.12 test playing countries need to play each other in every 2 years time to make cricket popular in the world."World Test Championship" or "Asia Test Championship" may be introduced.New Zealand,West Indies,Bangladesh and Zimbabwe cricket standard is almost same.These four countries can not support it as it is harmful for their growth in world cricket. SriLanka, South Africa,Pakistan have the same class of Australia,India and England.

    If ICC want to kill Cricket,than they can go for it,it will be like "Duck and Golden Eggs" story.I strongly believe that most of the supporters of Australia,England and India do not support it .

  • Garang321 on January 23, 2014, 14:06 GMT

    Neither India nor Aus and Eng are perfect, every side is tiger in home and they are fox in abroad. Let the cricket be the sport of fans and not be the business of useless.

  • on January 30, 2014, 8:32 GMT

    world cup would be a triangular series between Australia , England and India? ??

  • fr600 on January 24, 2014, 13:58 GMT

    This truly is a disgrace in the name of cricket. No more cricket for me if these are adapted.

  • on January 24, 2014, 13:41 GMT

    I have watched cricket for over 40 years in the Caribbean and for the most part Canada and I am appalled at the proposals made. This is not good for the game and maybe the remaining members should decide to play within themselves, essentially forming their own league and do with less. We will see how long the monotony of the big three playing each other will keep fans interested. The ICC, BCCI, and CA should look at the sustainability of sports franchises in North America where it is to their own interest to keep smaller markets viable and supplement them financially. Greed and blackmail can only go so far. Wanton display of shameful behavior BCCI.

  • SquareLegs on January 24, 2014, 11:37 GMT

    I agree with many of the other posters here: this is disgraceful. Having watched international cricket for over 35 years, if my board (ECB) goes ahead with this, then I have no further interest in paying to watch the national team.

  • on January 24, 2014, 11:36 GMT

    This all about the love and greed for money. Folks that's all it is. Just take a good look.

  • Twinkie on January 23, 2014, 23:43 GMT

    After 40 years of watching cricket, if this goes through , I 'm done! I'll start with the England Australia match tonight. Sponsors take note! I will NOT be watching!

  • Fahii on January 23, 2014, 20:46 GMT

    This is not going to be good for cricket integrity.

  • on January 23, 2014, 16:05 GMT

    If this kind of formation is going to be approved than there is no use of having "ICC" in the world cricket.It is better to drop these three countries from world cricket and let them play with each other.Without these countries, other countries can play with each other. Now, it is very important to think about world cricket and spread cricket all over the world.12 test playing countries need to play each other in every 2 years time to make cricket popular in the world."World Test Championship" or "Asia Test Championship" may be introduced.New Zealand,West Indies,Bangladesh and Zimbabwe cricket standard is almost same.These four countries can not support it as it is harmful for their growth in world cricket. SriLanka, South Africa,Pakistan have the same class of Australia,India and England.

    If ICC want to kill Cricket,than they can go for it,it will be like "Duck and Golden Eggs" story.I strongly believe that most of the supporters of Australia,England and India do not support it .

  • Garang321 on January 23, 2014, 14:06 GMT

    Neither India nor Aus and Eng are perfect, every side is tiger in home and they are fox in abroad. Let the cricket be the sport of fans and not be the business of useless.

  • Lakpj on January 23, 2014, 10:53 GMT

    This is crazy just imagine what happens if USA and China the two most powerful sporting nations in the world starts controlling International Olympic Committee or England, Spain, Germany and Italy, the countries with the strongest Football league structure starts dominating FIFA. This decision might lead to similar consequences.

  • maeen on January 23, 2014, 5:24 GMT

    will the attempt made by other than the three big nations result in something or we are gonna be captive very soon on the hands of these so called cricket boards, if so happens, the game of cricket will absolutely lose its brand no doubt at all.

  • Falcon1010 on January 23, 2014, 2:11 GMT

    For the sport to succeed , a happy marriage needs to exist between all playing nations. In answer to the bullying of the big three, the rest of the playing nations need to take a stand NOW and boycott ICC, otherwise they shall be for ever relegated to second class status. The big three claim to have a large fan base. It does not matter. Just remember, at a wedding ceremony, the groom can invite the whole world as guests, if the bridal party does not show up, there is no wedding We should not buckle to the dollar. Remember, the sport thrived just fine in the 60's when there was very little money to go around. They need to start again from there, and surely, money will come with a much larger playing audience by including other nations . Fans support their own team, and as long as they win, it does not matter if they are not as good as the top three bullys. Pretty soon, the fans of the top three will get bored seeing matches only among themselves and their hyped fan base shall disappear

  • on January 22, 2014, 19:20 GMT

    The non-relegation clause has to be done away at all costs. It is about the financial security of the "Big 3" (and not of the game) at the cost of the other teams.

    There are writers mentioning that the smaller boards will have to become more efficient. But with the non-relegation clause this will not be possible. What will be the reward for promoting the game when you can not pass the Big 3 in rankings.

    The incentive of better performance in cricket on the field is to have a higher ranking which will create more interest for the team translating to more sponsorships and higher revenues. But the non-relegation clause ensures the opposite. It ensures that even if G7 reach the top of the rankings, the Big 3 will not relinquish a place for them ensuring that the G7 can not increase their share. Revenue will be guaranteed for the Big 3 and a lack of it for the G7.

  • on January 22, 2014, 12:40 GMT

    As a cricket fan, I am ashamed of being Indian. ICC distributes the money from its events equally so that the sport can remain competitive. The proposed system will kill this competition and people may move on to watch other sports.

  • on January 22, 2014, 6:38 GMT

    Very Mean Minded Austraila, England & India.. and who brings the their thought to their head. We should Boycott these 3 team.

    South Africa, Pakistan, Bangladesh, SriLanka, WestIndies, Zimbabue and lot of promising countries are enough to globalize their Cricket. For sure they think for Cricket.

    India only think to heavy their own money business and destroy the cricket. Cricket is not their father's property.

  • on January 21, 2014, 15:53 GMT

    This not even money over cricket....this is greed over cricket...I believe this will lead to the end of Test Cricket

  • on January 21, 2014, 14:06 GMT

    Current system by ICC is not to globalize the Cricket. Only 4-5 countries is playing good number of game. It should be equal for all and more countries also should be given chance to play regular cricket. It should follow FIFA system for world event. No country should be given ultimate choice. Everyone should play qualifier to play in main event. There should be particular standard to get Test status or ODI, like in a particular time limit have win selected no of game or selected win percentage.

  • on January 21, 2014, 13:44 GMT

    What will happen if other 7 nations along with Ireland , Afghanistan, Scotland, Nepal ,UAE, Hong Kong start another cricket association and boycott ICC?

  • pitch_curator on January 21, 2014, 13:42 GMT

    @ PACERONE - Dont know what you are talking about. What did the world or ICC do about the Tony Greigs and Kerry Packers who did not care for touring India? NOTHING. You get that? Nothing. The only reason India is bossing the cricket world is because it has the financial muscle due to its fan base and not because someone else has gone out of their way to grant us any favors. FYI we were hardly ever allowed to play in the major grounds in test playing countries for a long time till 90s and our tours were few and far in between. The fact that you know nothing about India is highlighted when you talk about home games from India being held in Dubai. That will not happen. And just in case - even if the home games of India happen on moon, we will still have supporters cheering the team there. Dont worry about us. Worry about the empty grounds in SAF and NZ.

  • Starboomber on January 21, 2014, 11:09 GMT

    Simply put, it's Money Over Cricket....

  • on January 21, 2014, 10:40 GMT

    The big three will vote for what suits them the most --- rest of the cricket boards need to follow CSA . Come on BCCI, ECB & CA , you cannot dictate your terms forever

  • TEROSHAN on January 21, 2014, 3:08 GMT

    OK All three guns set up to lead the cricket for next decade and Pls do it in proper way in-terms of healthy cricketing spirit.. Control those IPL BBL and let us play more 20/20 and 40/40 (rather than 50/50) and more competitive Test matches like Aus and SA ENG At the moment..

  • on January 21, 2014, 2:37 GMT

    Please grow up, we are in 2014. This format does not make sense. Only few countries play Test cricket. I am just surprised, how can people even think this way!!!

  • wijeya on January 21, 2014, 1:17 GMT

    Isnt cricket meant to be a sport? So what happens when SA, PAK, Aus, Sl are the top nations by merit yet because of this structure 2 of SA, PAK and SL cannot get promoted. What does that make the Tier 1 structure competition?

  • GrindAR on January 21, 2014, 0:58 GMT

    A different thinking... as the officials and their retros filled media pages more than the game and players itself... they had enough trash built up.. why dont they take vacation for a decade and go to places where they don't play any sport ( if any they are in danger of same fate as Cricket is going through)... probably A & N Islands... have peaceful life watching waves and other nature's beauties... Leave Cricket along you ICC morons who dont even know what Cricket mean and where abouts... septic brains.. with so called useless management degrees...

  • PACERONE on January 21, 2014, 0:00 GMT

    India has short memory.there was a time that leading cricketers from the other two nations in the big 3 did not care to tour India.Where is KERRY PACKER /TONY GREIG when we need balance in the game.India might one day play their home games in DUBAI.We know how unstable the country can be.

  • shahnbej on January 20, 2014, 22:48 GMT

    I don't think it is end of cricket. Cricket will move on with or without those three or with or without ICC........

  • sitaram58 on January 20, 2014, 21:34 GMT

    fight fire with fire. let the other 7 nations appoint Modi as their representative with full power of attorney to deal with all matters on their behalf

  • on January 20, 2014, 21:30 GMT

    Global Cricket fans should resist monopoly of the big three. They will limit Cricket to themselves and between themselves. Already, IPL, Champions League is big three show (actually BCCI).

  • hasib9 on January 20, 2014, 21:05 GMT

    Instead of trying to expend globally, cricket is shrinking. I saw future for cricket 20 years ago. It grew and became relatively popular. I just don't see a future for this sport any more due to poor management in this generation. I wish BCB withdrew themselves from playing cricket and invest in football instead.

  • on January 20, 2014, 20:40 GMT

    1 nation should mean 1 vote. Think of a family,while it is true that there may be one member of the family who is dominant it does not mean others should have say little say - votes should favor all members not just 3 members and this is the way it's going to be - perhaps not in one or two years but ten years down the line there will be a drastic change.

  • GrindAR on January 20, 2014, 20:34 GMT

    ok.. in other ways... atleast it will release other nations to be free and play their own and find like minded pool of countries to form the legitimate World Cricket Authority (WCA) or International Cricket Body ( ICB). So, let them form the rules of game that truely value skills and capabilities and play cricket. Probably that would attract lot more crowd than current ICC managed to do. And especially without the Big3, it will be lot cleaner with minimal politics and maximal sports and entertainment.

  • GrindAR on January 20, 2014, 20:26 GMT

    In the direction of how field hockey demised from wider fan base :-(

    No details on how this is going to work, roadmap, assurances to protect fairness and expansion.

    Probably rename ICC to BEA Cricket Authority. These 3 boards fight always with their own short sighted agendas. So, they spend most of the common pool fund in meetings to resolve their useless fighting than letting a new nation bloom by the game of Cricket. And they also laying path to destory a well capable contender, SA. Other nations... will eventually close their books on Cricket and spend their energy elsewhere. So, the game of Cricket will be played only by these three elite nations.

    Sorry to say... Mr Alan representing KPMG doing disservice to the reputation on KPMG ? Or does KPMG work for anything other than fairness?

  • InnocentGuy on January 20, 2014, 19:46 GMT

    What a travesty. Cricket will kill itself.

  • ICKY on January 20, 2014, 19:27 GMT

    We all agree on 1 nation = 1 vote. If it was the otheway around, rich people, and those paying more taxes would be entitled to vote more than 5 times and poor people would have no vote or one tenth of the rich. Common, don't be Morons big three. You three are looking to hijack cricket for ransome but it will be a demise of the game of cricket. Save the game and those with such ideas should resign for such evil intentions. Let people with good intentions and clear concience head the boards of respective countries. Please resign and don't put fans in a difficult crossroads.

  • Arshad_786 on January 20, 2014, 18:59 GMT

    The big-3 will kill the goose that laid the golden egg. I hope none of the other boards even listen to this non-sense. If they persist, let them have their own 3 country league. The rest should form their own league. Their arrogance will kill them.

  • P4K1ST4N_7 on January 20, 2014, 18:25 GMT

    Seriously fans, if say only 3 countries play world cup and matches, what would it look like to fans. Will fans watch it? watching them again and again in repeat shows. Cricket is the loser in the end. No doubt these business bullies are destroying the beauty of world.

  • on January 20, 2014, 18:25 GMT

    If this format is approved, cricket will be a dead game in near future. Only three countries will play this game. No one from the other nations will even care to watch their show. If you like to see death of this game go ahead with your plan.

  • ICKY on January 20, 2014, 17:37 GMT

    Picture inthe caption is of thousand words itself. You can feel the guilty gestures and body language of these two exeecutives. It looks like two kids are looking around with guilty feeling and bad intentions after stealing a candy from a candy store. All nations are equal in the game of cricket. Trust me the game of cricket will become like a field hockey in Asian countries with no fans after such drastic measures are taken. Save the game of cricket you bounty hunters.

  • Northandsouth on January 20, 2014, 15:18 GMT

    Whilst uncomfortable with these developments, I do feel that jumping on these 3 as selfish is quite easy and a bit simplistic. If I was Indian cricket and generated 80% of the income and had 10% of the say, I would be questioning the sense of the system and calling for a re-balancing as well. Why should NZ and Zimbabwe's interests be given equal sway with India's? Serving the Indian interests would have a bigger impact on World Cricket than serving the WIs. I kind of like the approach my country, New Zealand is taking - see that the power is where the power is and positioning itself as a constructive junior partner to the big boys.

  • on January 20, 2014, 14:42 GMT

    Would they have questioned the point of Test Rankings if any of them were #1?

  • on January 20, 2014, 14:26 GMT

    This is the end of cricket. How about the ICC just scrap all the other sides and Eng, Aus and Ind just play the game...!

  • Northandsouth on January 20, 2014, 12:33 GMT

    Why is article after article being written about this without anyone drawing attention to the fact that the strongest cricketing nation is being excluded from this 'Big 3'. South Africa are consistently the world's strongest side, and yet they are never mentioned as relevant. They also have a far larger population and commercial base than Australia. What is it with the rest of the world ignoring SA - it genuinely confuses me (and I'm not South African btw)? Same with India only going on a short tour there, despite the strength of the Proteas, as well as the achievements of SA players such as the Great J Kallis being given less attention, despite being objectively more impressive than other modern greats like Tendulkar and Ponting. Its like the rest of the world has been hypnotised to be unable to remember there is a country called South Africa...

  • scarab666 on January 20, 2014, 12:12 GMT

    It looks like a unanimous decision by all who have posted here that this is a selfish idea by the big 3 and a greedy one.....it's all about the money. Cricket is the big loser here and the purist fans. Test cricket is also a big loser having to make way for more boring ODI's cricket whilst the BCCI will push for more of that ridiculous hit and giggle crap known as T20. We need a board comprising of the tier one countries making decisions as one country = one vote policy.......true democracy.

  • on January 20, 2014, 11:48 GMT

    When the commercial takes precedence over Passion for the game, the result would be disastrous. The new proposal of TWO-TIER system in Tests and revenue sharing model are going to help only the CA, ECB and BCCI and it is not going to help spread the game in othe non-test playing countries. It is suffice to say that the so-called 3 nations want to see the game as Financially powerful rich nations' game instead of popular game. This does not augur well as so many people watch this game which has got a large following after Soccer for passion of the game and not who control the game. It is the fans of the game who should decide the fate of the game and not the administrators sitting in AC Board rooms enjoying cocktails. Hope better sense prevails upon the ICC and shelve this idea of Two-tier and new revenue sharing idea and go for spreading the game all over the world and keep the game ALIVE.

  • on January 20, 2014, 11:10 GMT

    I thought that the role of the ICC was to ensure that the best interests of the game would take priority of over what 3 Bullies would want? Perhaps the reason they make the most money financially is because they currently over ride the FTP and do whatever they want. So in fact all the ICC is doing is making LAW what they have basically been allowing for the last 3 - 5 years anyway. So the rich will become richer and the poor will become poorer. Great work guys and awesome progress.

    The ICC is again showing what a pointless toothless governing body they are.

  • smudgeon on January 20, 2014, 10:26 GMT

    I just don't know what to say. Two tiers, now a greedy power-sharing proposal. Last one out turn out the lights...

  • Nutcutlet on January 20, 2014, 10:22 GMT

    There are concepts that make my hackles rise. Exclusivity, discrimination & injustice based on power, &/or position &/or wealth are at the head of that list. Division, unless it is an equable & just division of profit, is also deplorable to my mind. I also believe that as you sow, so shall you reap. What has been sown here? A self-serving tri-opoly, with no benevolence or generosity towards poorer member of the ICC. When I see Giles Clarke, our own ECB Rep, I am reminded of the time that he was seduced by the 'Stanford millions' and that revealed the man to me. (Alan Stanford, one of the biggest crooks of all time, is currently serving a 110 yr prison sentence, btw.) Clarke's morality is money and its acquistion. Such people deserve all they get - for no good towards the game we all love will come of this unholy carve up. The MCC, for all its limitations, always put the game first. But those days are long gone. There will be a bitter harvest from this proposal, if it is implemented.

  • Rj_Kiwi on January 20, 2014, 10:07 GMT

    True colours have been revealed. While I respect all three of these cricketing nations and their talented players - I have zero respect for the administrators. The financial model needs tweaking to better reflect economic contributions, but the FTP was not itself broken. Now - our game will cease to grow. The rich will get richer and the poor will get nothing. RIP International cricket, you have been a lifelong friend.

  • on January 20, 2014, 9:17 GMT

    RIP Cricket, greed and short term thinking at it's absolute worst :-(

  • on January 20, 2014, 7:46 GMT

    RIP cricket if this proposal is approved then shortly gambling, betting, will be regular feature of the show(its not game then) and IPL and CL will be official fixture for the year may be twice in a year. And India bannad thier all away series may be Australia and england too.....................RIP passion for cricket.

  • Thegimp on January 20, 2014, 6:21 GMT

    Hmmmmm when Eng and Aust ran cricket it was a wonderful international sport. Ind, WI, NZ, SA, Eng, Aust, SL, Pak were all strong, Zimb & Bangladesh were emerging much along the lines of Sri Lanka years before.

    Maybe this is an attempt by Eng and Aust to water down the current ruling body and get cricket back to the good old days.

  • Thegimp on January 20, 2014, 5:32 GMT

    I get all the comments here but their already is a two teired system in place. SA, Ind. Eng or Australia don't play Zim, WI, Bangladesh, NZ or Pakistan as much as they play each other.

  • on January 20, 2014, 5:23 GMT

    In short, if the proposal gets approved, we basically get a very 'precise' answer of a very 'insignificant'(!) question:

    " which is more important...the money FROM the game or the passion FOR the game ? "

  • Marktc on January 20, 2014, 5:18 GMT

    The idea about moving cricket forward and making it a global game will fall apart under this 3 power rule idea. We have already seen the effects of one country controlling cricket already, legally excluding the others will be a disaster. Self interest will be their first aim and not the good of cricket as a whole. Decisions shoul d be spread around from all who play the game, and not 3 selfish boards. Already the three of them play a disproportionate amount of cricket against each other, to the detriment of the rest.

  • on January 20, 2014, 5:11 GMT

    This is disgraceful. Look at football;the role of FIFA to spread the game & keep the opportunities open for everyone. Why should cricket be any different!! No one can say the fans of cricket are less passionate about the game. So why creating the division and let the game die?

  • on January 20, 2014, 4:49 GMT

    RIP Cricket. Glory days of a fascinating game goes to the end. Lets put some other name to cricket in other nations and make a different governing body.

  • globalcricketfan on January 20, 2014, 3:15 GMT

    Yes I googled Golf today morning.

  • whensdrinks on January 20, 2014, 2:43 GMT

    Disgraceful proposal, should be binned in its entirety. As an Aussie I look forward to playing competative tests against other nations and the stream of cash should be used to help make the other nations stronger, not prop up an old boys club. The BCCI already hads too much control and it disgusts me that CA and the ECB prefer to sell out and join them rather then attempt to grow the game.

  • on January 20, 2014, 2:02 GMT

    Its kinda pleasant to foresee cricket without these three big boards. Cricket will become sane without multimillion dollar contracts and corporate culture...

  • Babu22 on January 20, 2014, 1:50 GMT

    Please read the whole of my comment guys. Contrary to what almost everyone is feeling, I think this is a good idea. Because I see opportunity in this. And that is the other seven (and countries like Ireland, Afghanistan, etc) can unite and form another cricket control board that would actually look at improving and developing the game in other countries. To say that the ICC has failed in this important aspect is a huge understatement. Let the big 3 play among themselves and that will kill cricket in their own countries, including the IPL. It's so good. And cricket will prosper through the second board. Cricket survived for centuries without the BCCI money, and I am very sure it will prosper without it now. It's too great a game that can be ruined like what the proposal says. I think it is impossible to kill the love of millions of people. I really want this proposal to be pushed forward and succeed for the overall greater good.

  • on January 20, 2014, 1:50 GMT

    What a absolute joke this is the most bias idea to ever be mentioned, cricket omce before split in half remember world series cricket well if this decision come about it will happen again.

    The big 3 it would be a disgrace its bad enough now none of the test teams need to qualify for T20 or One day world Cups, again fear that revenue would drop if they didnt qualify but for this idea to get off the ground would be farce the big 3.

    As an Australian its a disgrace and i have to say this is not the aussie way in sport

  • on January 20, 2014, 1:34 GMT

    If India, Australia and England want to play only among themselves then let it be. Rest of the world should be making a separate governing body which is based on equal rights and improvement of cricket. I think there is enough following of cricket around the world to take the game forward.

  • on January 20, 2014, 0:44 GMT

    Speaking as an Australian I am ashamed to have our association linked to this gross injustice. I thought the days of this sort of colonialist claptrap were long gone. The way forward is for the ICC to represent the interests of all cricket and all cricket playing nations without preferential treatment for a few fat-cats. I encourage the other seven nations to draw a line in the sand, and if Australia, England and India end up playing each other in endlessly repetitive isolation it will serve us right.

  • Dashgar on January 20, 2014, 0:31 GMT

    As an Aussie fan I really hope this doesn't happen. Australia, England and India have no right to greater control over decisions and funds. Just because they bring in more money is irrelevant. This is cricket, it is greater than money. If there are guys on the boards just looking to make money they should be thrown out and go be stock brokers. Leave cricket to those who love the game.

  • Rabies on January 20, 2014, 0:07 GMT

    How about starting with a re- drawing of the constitution- with the overriding principle being that NO cricket administrator may, directly or otherwise, personally profit from cricket in any form- then let's see what sort of proposals come out of this incredibly self- serving body- I would have thought that the greater good is served by MORE money being pumped into the smaller sides suits the long term strategy more. Seems they are rightfully intent in eradicating all forms of corruption at player and punter level- as long as that does not disturb their cosy self interests- yet the #1 test side and the arguably the most popular (WI) are conveniently left on the sidelines- shame- @Swinger- expected more from you now you are at the top of the pile...

  • Ace89 on January 19, 2014, 22:08 GMT

    In reality, this is the beginning of the end of cricket being dominated by bilateral tours between international countries.

    India, Australia, and England will play international cricket regularly, and hold incestuous domestic seasons (with the same players playing in each tournament). In addition, they will play against a few strong sides (such as South Africa) from time to time. That model WILL collapse over time because of the sheer monotony.

    That's where other nations would benefit. I think it's time for other nations to focus on developing their own domestic cricket structures, and play amongst each other internationally. That's how they can break even. New Zealand has a good structure. Pakistan, West Indies, and Sri Lanka, Bangladesh's can grow over time and become sustainable. We're headed towards the football-ization of cricket.

  • on January 19, 2014, 20:29 GMT

    456 comments so far and I cannot see one that is in favour of this bizarre proposal. If this small sample is representative of cricket followers worldwide, one can clearly foresee that cricket will suffer and die a quick death. The biggest losers will be England, Australia and India, as the cricket fan is not going to be bothered following these three murderers of cricket. Let me tell you that as from now, I am not going to follow any game in which these three nations are involved. I am sure many others will follow my way of thinking.

  • on January 19, 2014, 20:20 GMT

    An English team that has just suffered a 5-0 whitewash to go with a 3-0 whitewash against Pakistan, an Australian side that lost all its 4 tests on its last visit to India and an Indian team that suffered big whitewashes on its last tours of England and Australia shall be exempt from relegation, but South Africa, without doubt the best team in the world that beat England and Australia on their own turf very recently will not enjoy such immunity. Bravo, ICC, bravo! What an idea and what rewards for all those whitewashes for Eng, Aus and Ind! Why not go one step further and provide match loss exemption to these 3 too? Just imagine, India needing 100 runs to win and SA needing 1 wicket with Steyn coming in to bowl to India's number 11, and then the umpire halts play and calls the match a draw under new ICC Law 123. Wouldn't that be an ever better way to ensure non-relegation and non-promotion? If you are going to insult other teams, then you might as well do it in this humiliating way!

  • on January 19, 2014, 20:03 GMT

    If the Big 3 want to be distinguished from the other 7 nations, then let them go their own way. Lets have two cricket bodies, the ICC with Eng, Aus and Ind as its only members; and the other new body with all the other test, associate and affiliate nations BUT ONLY ON THE CONDITION that none of the other test, associate and affiliate nations have anything to do with the Big 3. I mean complete isolation between the Bog 3 and others. The Big 3 can have their own games whilst the rest can concentrate on cricket and trying to make the game grow. With 3 teams, the Big 3 will not be able to contest a world cup, whereas the remaining 7 test nations with 2 newer test nations plus 3 Associate teams can participate in a proper 12 team global contest. That way the big three would be punished for such a selfish move; and they will suffer in the long term through lack of spectator interest, TV rights, etc.

  • heathrf1974 on January 19, 2014, 19:40 GMT

    As an Aussie I think this is a disgrace. The ICC is like the UN where the United States, Russia and China call the shots.

  • on January 19, 2014, 19:13 GMT

    It seems to escaped attention that South Africa is No.1 in Test cricket by quite some margin and at one recent time was No.1 at all 3 formats at the same time, very briefly I will admit.

    Cricket should not be a political pawn.

  • syed.r.karim on January 19, 2014, 17:46 GMT

    I am sure the plane of big 3 came out from BCCI, they killed cricket by investing money in IPL policy now they are imposing their greedy to ICC. I am an Indian and understand the situation of Zimbabwe players, they even play cricket without pay. What development did by ICC and BCCI in world cricket? Sorry cricket sorry others 7.

  • on January 19, 2014, 17:35 GMT

    ''Two-tier test system-my foot'' How about three tier. Let Eng Aus and India play against each other only, make own rules. not worry about about be relegated, keep all the money. The rest can have further 2 tiers where they will be promoted or relegated based on performance, may be give Ireland and Afghanistan etc to qualify aswell. Howc ome the richest footclubs don't use this idea?

  • on January 19, 2014, 17:35 GMT

    ''Two-tier test system-my foot'' How about three tier. Let Eng Aus and India play against each other only, make own rules. not worry about about be relegated, keep all the money. The rest can have further 2 tiers where they will be promoted or relegated based on performance, may be give Ireland and Afghanistan etc to qualify aswell. Howc ome the richest footclubs don't use this idea?

  • on January 19, 2014, 17:22 GMT

    @Jonah58 CA is much wealthier than the ECB.

  • on January 19, 2014, 17:21 GMT

    @ SLgirl Sri Lanka is terrible overseas, what are you talking about? If you were correct, they'd have a higher ranking but you are not

  • muzika_tchaikovskogo on January 19, 2014, 17:17 GMT

    @Venkat Sharma: This is a sport we're talking about, not some business. Our sport belongs to us, not those guys growing fat on our money. Its about time the powers that be set aside personal interest and thought about the interests of the game, out of which they're out to squeeze the last penny (and I'm an Indian)

  • Jonah58 on January 19, 2014, 16:59 GMT

    @India_ANY_track_bully Are you telling me that India, as in the BCCI hands out money from lets say the IPL to Nepal. Or are you saying that India through its proxy the ICC hands out money to Nepal. None of the IPL money goes to the ICC and there is no reason why it should that is BCCI money made and deservedly retained by them. The ICC however gets its monies from the World Cups and other global ICC events India, England Australia along with the other 7 full members already get in my opinion more of these funds than they should. The ICC is the global guardian of the game, or at least it should be. The role of the ICC is to develop the game globally not impoverish 103 members because of the greed of 3! Id this foes ahead then India and its fans who complained of the ECB / CA veto in the old days are hypocritical and taking cricket back to the dark ages.

  • joelucky on January 19, 2014, 16:54 GMT

    This is to all the other boards (other than BCCI, ECB and CA) - for the sake of cricket, please grow a pair and boycott this evil arrangement. I am an Indian cricket fan, but hate the BCCI for what it has done, is doing and could do by way of damage to cricket. Boycott matches with these three countries, it will hurt them bad and force them to climb dowm from their arrogance. Cricket should not be monopolized by a few cricket boards, regardless of nation. Fight it out and ye shall prevail.

  • keptalittlelow on January 19, 2014, 16:40 GMT

    Cricket is played only in a small number of countries in the world, so it is essential to keep all the Cricket playing countries at an equal level, if three countries want to be Big brothers and want more money than the rest, then it may discourage and harm the sport in the rest of the seven countries. In the extreme the rest of the seven countries may form their own Cricket Council.

  • punterdgr8 on January 19, 2014, 16:38 GMT

    @venkat sharma,how naive of you to put those lines.the icc is supposed to govern the sport of cricket not a business entity.it's perfectly understandable that "the big 3"(esp.ind)would demand more of the revenue since they generate more but what's required is to put in a separate mechanism for revenue distribution if at all they are not happy with it;imagine how boring it would be to see the game deplete and restrict itself to these 3 nations itself when it has managed to pierce only 15 nations out of a possible 215 albeit in a messy way.they are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs with their over greedy motives and finally a point to clear,I am an INDIAN.

  • on January 19, 2014, 16:33 GMT

    Goodbye cricket......... You competed well with other sports till now ..... R.I.P

  • SL_BiggestJoke on January 19, 2014, 16:32 GMT

    @Jonah58 : so you want free money without putting in any effort? Why should BCCI handout "benefits" ? The individual boards should take the pain to develop the sport in their countries. BCCI does and will continue to support poorer boards like Nepal, Afghanistan etc, but supporting boards in developed economies like NZ is nonsensical.

  • on January 19, 2014, 16:23 GMT

    Arrogant attitude from the three. Ayaan Khan I agree with you.

  • on January 19, 2014, 16:22 GMT

    Ridiculous situation to even consider. Vote no guys seriously. Sportsmanship should be reflected on and off the field.

  • akshay_heble on January 19, 2014, 16:21 GMT

    Wow!!And just when I thought cricket is moving forward by planning to implement the two tier structure in test cricket, the big 3 are planning to take the game 100 years back!!!.Just because you are financially strong doesn't give you the right to call the shots. Instead of showing their financial muscle they should use this money and invest it for the development of the sport , both at the national and international level. This is a disgrace and I hope that this proposal doesn't go forward. The other 7 nations and the ICC should stand up against this. If this proposal does go forward, then the death of cricket is inevitable.

  • on January 19, 2014, 16:17 GMT

    ridiculous proposal, these 3 want to kill the spirit of the game. Other members should make the rival cricket association.

  • Jonah58 on January 19, 2014, 15:42 GMT

    "Who makes the money, takes the money. This is a corporate business, not charity."

    No its not it is supposed to be a global sport! Do the All Blacks take all of the funds for the RFU? With the rest of the lions share going to SA and Aus, under this model it would given that these are the 3 powerhouses in that sport. this is nothing but a cabal of businessmen in suits doing their utmost to destroy cricket as a global game. And if it succeeds then I see no point in continuing the 10 or more hours a week I have have put into coaching kids to play the game as I have done for the last 20 years. i would just tell them all to play rugby or football at least that way they get to play a global sport that works to develop the game worldwide.

  • on January 19, 2014, 15:42 GMT

    Disgraceful. Cricket, which has always struggled to grow due its "old boys club" mentality has ensured that growth and development of the game will never happen outside of these 3 established nations. What might seem like a lucrative financial decision now is sure to see interest in the game outside of the IPL wane drastically. The ICC is rotten to the core and something needs to be done lest cricket find itself become a poorly supported, backwards 3 nation sport.

  • on January 19, 2014, 15:11 GMT

    Who makes the money, takes the money. This is a corporate business, not charity.

  • on January 19, 2014, 15:00 GMT

    Disgraceful. Time to make a rival international association!

  • SLMaster on January 19, 2014, 14:50 GMT

    ICC ranking is useless. BIG THREE cannot win outside of there own backyard. SL play well in all countries.

  • Jonah58 on January 19, 2014, 14:48 GMT

    Part2 Despite being probably the second wealthiest board in world cricket the ECB are unable to field a team made up of UK developed players. (For instance SA's Jade Dernbach travelled to the last T20 WC on his ITALIAN passport as an England player!) This has been the case as long as I have been following cricket back to the days of D'oliver, Lamb 'judge' Smith etc. it is not just in recent years that England have been represented by a UN XI. I digress, the point is that if these big 3 are allowed to grab an even bigger share of the ICC pot how are England going to be able to field a team in the future if there is no player development  taking place anywhere outside the big 3? What future for passionate teams already showing signs of remarkable development like HK, PNG, Nepal etc never mind the outstanding progress made by Ireland and Afghanistan of late? The steady progression of Scotland and Nederlands and even UAE. Are Namibia and Kenya to get the chance to rediscover their form?

  • Jonah58 on January 19, 2014, 14:47 GMT

    I believe we are all aware of the realities of 'Professional Cricket' How ever the ICC is the games GLOBAL governing body and as such should be removed from the necessity of increasing the already burgeoning coffers of the ECB, CA and BCCI. These countries do not directly contribute to the ICC coffers. They do of course take part in ICC events and the rights to broadcast these events are sold by the ICC to companies all over the world to cricket viewers who chose to pay for the privilege of watching them. These 3 'enlightened' boards already receive the full funding that they make from any matches they play under their own auspices. 10 Ashes, Endless India SL series etc.. The reason the ICC takes the fund from the competitions it organises is to spread the game of cricket globally, or it least it should be. These funds are already unfairly distributed with the lions share already going to the 10 self elected full members., and the scraps going to the rest of the world.

  • on January 19, 2014, 14:25 GMT

    If no danger of relegation then Australia, England and India might loose in long run....why should they try their best in ground if result won't effect any ratings.

  • on January 19, 2014, 14:22 GMT

    Totally ridiculous if this happens other members should consider not playing any cricket as protest.Icc was always with the ''BIG 3'' but it wasn't really sure but now it is 100% sure why Icc never took any action against the ''Big 3''players.Really bad decision,I'll stop watching if this happens and many others might do the same.

  • reality_check on January 19, 2014, 14:22 GMT

    Revenge is a dish best served cold. I hope South Africa will completely humiliate Australia.

  • on January 19, 2014, 14:12 GMT

    England will never win the World Cup! Javed

  • on January 19, 2014, 14:06 GMT

    We are doubt whether draft structural change will divide the ICC members drastically. It is question of what is the roll and position of other member countries. We are surprised with proposal as to how these gentlemen came out with such monopolistic, bureaucratic decision in this modern work. They should apologize from full members for their though.

  • on January 19, 2014, 14:03 GMT

    What ever this was, it sent out negative vibes while i was reading it. If this becomes reality Cricket will be doomed. It is already restricted to very few countries so why not try to expand it rather than constricting it further.

  • on January 19, 2014, 13:59 GMT

    Well I assume England will finally win a World Cup in future. Thanks to the BIG 3

  • on January 19, 2014, 13:55 GMT

    Disgusting. These men should all be forced to resign and go off and make their money elsewhere. A world without Steyn, Amla, de Villiers, Ajmal, Jayawardene, Sangakarra, Taylor, Chanderpaul? No thanks. And Test rankings are "irrelevant" are they? How convenient for them, when South Africa just happen to be streets ahead. I hope they humiliate Australia.

  • aminur3095 on January 19, 2014, 13:16 GMT

    This is absolutely absurd. I'm afraid that after some days the so called Big 3 will not allow other countries to play cricket without their permission. This is only because of controlling the board by their will for their own interest, not for the bigger interest of the game of Cricket. I really wonder how they have come to the worst decision of proposing that kind of lame proposals. I'm totally honest to mention here that if the ICC accepts those totally illogical, unbelievable proposals then I'll definitely loose most of my interest to follow the great game of Cricket. I'd rather play video games on my PC. That will give me more pleasure.

  • on January 19, 2014, 13:11 GMT

    It will destroy the game cricket. Other countries should make another council like ICC. ICC becomes now good for nothing.

  • on January 19, 2014, 13:02 GMT

    So, what is next? Are we making a rule to say that none other than India, Australia, and England can win the World Cup, because it is bad for ICC 's revenue?

  • on January 19, 2014, 13:00 GMT

    it seems like cricket is the most discriminatory game in the world.

  • Mirbazkhan on January 19, 2014, 12:17 GMT


  • Mirbazkhan on January 19, 2014, 12:07 GMT

    If any other countries still supports this idea........ They deserve this treatment.....

  • on January 19, 2014, 12:02 GMT

    This is utter nonsense!!! Not even worth a discussion.

  • on January 19, 2014, 11:50 GMT

    I suggest instead of ICC: all the remaining countries should join hands and make a separate cricket organization. That will teach them.....

    I thought it was a joke, but people actually want to destroy cricket, baffles me no end. So no Mural, no Steyn, no Amla, no De villiers, No ajmal, no waqar and wasim akrams et. al......exactly what we need at the moment....Brilliantly thought out...hope you make your pockets big.

  • Mirbazkhan on January 19, 2014, 11:49 GMT

    Wonderful........ Now we are gonna have veto powers in ICC......... As this practice in UN has done good to the world peace......... For God's sake save cricket........ Game is more important than the money...... How can other members like SA, NZ, Srilanka, Pakistan and WI agree to such proposals.........

  • ARFB on January 19, 2014, 11:49 GMT

    Let this happen. IT WON'T WORK. This plan would fail terribly & the failure of this plan might cause the loss of power of big 3 especially BCCI. They have foolishly ignored the online market & the TV interests of the remaining 7 who take Interest in the matches of Big 3 in hopes that someday these players & teams would play against their teams. When they would know that these teams would not playing against their teams then consequently they would not follow their Matches & the Big 3 cricket would get isolated, Depending only on their reduced local Market & I highly doubt that Revenues alone from these markets would sustain the profits from their matches.

  • lankantone on January 19, 2014, 11:15 GMT

    every country should stand up against this selfishness and save the most complicated but most beautiful game of the earth.

  • Tumbarumbar on January 19, 2014, 11:02 GMT

    There was a comment made about the 10 Ashes tests in a row that suggested people found it boring. Oddly enough the fourt and fifth tests in Australia, (or the ninth and tenth tests) essentially dead rubbers, had the biggest TV audiences and near sold out stadiums for days one through three. For the MCG that means almost 100, 000 people a day. I don't think the Australians were sick of it and the ECB are already expecting record attendances for the next Ashes so the supporters of both countries are clearly right into it. Can you imagine a place where over 90 000 people turn up for 3 days of a test? Love to be there.

  • elwarko on January 19, 2014, 10:45 GMT

    If test cricket is allegedly on deaths door, this is the final nail.

  • on January 19, 2014, 10:39 GMT

    i am with everyone. this is utter nonsense...

  • on January 19, 2014, 10:38 GMT

    Death of Cricket, already showed their dominance by their shortened visit to South Africa, cricket is very poor administratively

  • MAN_AT_WORK on January 19, 2014, 9:57 GMT

    We already stop watching Indian, Aus, Eng cricket

  • on January 19, 2014, 9:19 GMT

    Easy solution - Aus, India and England can bore each other senseless, like the last 10 ashes tests in a row. How good would another 10 be?

  • on January 19, 2014, 9:07 GMT

    May the other boards should stand-up and tell BCCI, ECB and CA to play only amongst themselves. Would be interesting to see how many people watch cricket in India then. I won't.

  • on January 19, 2014, 8:44 GMT

    incredible sounds like something dreamt up by Dr Strangeglove to ensure world domination. Test cricket will become a secondary form of the game as shorter formats inexorably pushed harder and harder to maximise revenue , staggering.

  • on January 19, 2014, 8:36 GMT

    What a pity, the England is now feeling the heat, as their command and control on cricket is diminishing. Again the same old formula, divide and rule. And how easily the Indian cricket administration is falling prey to the ecb. Sigh, I see it as the ecb is losing control, so they are using the shoulder of the other nations once again to show their dominance. It will go to the three bugs, but I hope only if ecb is excluded and csa be included instead.

    Bcci please I beg of you don't be a puppet of the ecb again. Don't fall prey to them.

    They have controlled the administration when they had power, now is your turn Bcci, so don't let them use you once again. Stay away from them.

    Form alliance with any other teams. Don't let the English use you again.

    Sorry to all If I have hurt anyone's feelings, but that's how I see it. Just my opinion

  • on January 19, 2014, 8:35 GMT

    this is not good for cricket if this happened then cricket will be suffer

  • hasa555 on January 19, 2014, 8:27 GMT

    Why these few people allowed to destroyed cricket. I have big heart just for cricket. this is terrible news for all of us.

  • Pindia on January 19, 2014, 8:27 GMT

    Clearly wrong- all of it!

  • Samar_Singh on January 19, 2014, 8:12 GMT

    RIP cricket.Well done BCCI.

  • on January 19, 2014, 7:42 GMT

    One of the reasons why cricket could not become a global game

  • Attacking on January 19, 2014, 7:38 GMT

    India has successfully destroyed cricket.

    Well done India.

  • BCCIRoxx on January 19, 2014, 7:04 GMT

    ICC's plan for a comprehensive structural overhaul and to cede most executive decision-making to the BCCI, ECB and Cricket Australia seems a better decision. All the fellows who are getting overly concerned about this are missing on 2 clear facts. 1) These three and especially BCCI are already the clear power holder of world cricket administration; and there is nothing wrong in that. If BCCI is ruling game's management, it is because through IPL, they have contributed way too much to the game's development; what in my opinion previous power holders ECB and CA couldn't do in 100 years. Now, friends, before you jump onto conclusion, irrespective of you admire or hate the IPL idea, you can't deny that IPL has inspired so many leagues and those inturn had made marketed cricket to previously unheard borders (like USA and Central Europe). (cont.....)

  • RyanHarrisGreatCricketer on January 19, 2014, 6:59 GMT

    if at all such a decision materialises, genuine cricket fans should do just one thing : don't watch or follow matches involving these 3 nations. This is a money-minded move and as such if we boycott these games, how on earth will the administrators get lolly?

  • on January 19, 2014, 6:53 GMT

    If ICC acts like corporate business to promote 'big will be bigger and small will be smaller', then distance between big and small will create a void whirpool for cricketing spirit to sink in. Money will stay there for cricket to be remembered, not to be played.

  • Tbilisi on January 19, 2014, 6:52 GMT

    This is idea of BCCI (indians) they want to hijack the ICC & they are thinking they can control the world cricket even there team performance is nil out of india... Matter of fact is this proposal is radeculas & should not be acceptable for other nations. Pakistan, Bangladesh, wast indies, NZ, & others must not accept this proposal. If this proposal accepted then world of cricket will suffer for sure.

  • on January 19, 2014, 6:40 GMT

    This can only happen in cricket and the reason why cricket couldn't and will not be a global sport. RIP Cricket... RIP!!!

  • rujhanmr on January 19, 2014, 6:39 GMT

    This is totally a wrong approach which would definitely ruin the future of professional cricket. This game doesn't only belongs to Australia/England/India but also belongs to all other nations who are part of this.

    This really sounds like the top officials are trying to make it a money making business and take more advantage to them. India is trying their corrupted hands here too. This cannot be a game controlled, governed and influenced by individual countries. PLEASE STOP THIS, I AM ASKING ALL OTHER CRICKETING COUNTRIES TO OPPOSE ON THIS RESOLUTION.

  • on January 19, 2014, 6:33 GMT

    By the decision of the Icc i think Only 3 county will be play cricket.For this reason cricket development will be destroy Many cricket fans do not Watch cricket match in the ground.It is also hamper the commercial benefit of the Icc.

  • on January 19, 2014, 6:14 GMT

    FTP was the only reason Bangladesh managed to play 15 ODIs in the last two years against bigger teams (and won 9 of it if that means something); International Cricket as we know it will never be the same again after BCCI officially takes over; what hurts me more is that BCB will actually support BCCI, ECB and CA on the issue fearing repercussions regarding hosting of Asia Cup and World T20; maybe 2-3 years down the line, IPL will be the biggest cricketing event for a cricket fan and International Cricket will be for vacations; it is hard being a cricket purist in an era dictated by Indians, it really is

    Invite us India, just once; we don't need a match at Wankhede or Eden Gardens, a series at Visakhapatnam would suffice; Cricket is played with heart, not money; let it be that way

  • fahd59bd on January 19, 2014, 6:10 GMT

    This will only take cricket into ancient age.....FIFA is the worlds largest sporting body but they are also working out how can more country will be able to play football. Whereas in Cricket everybody dances with the big guns....this should not be....BCCI, ECB & Ca have no rights in doing all these things because first of all these countries thinks only in earning money, but they don't think of giving spaces to the countries like West Indies, Bangladesh, NZ, Zimbabwe.

    ECB should concentrate more on cricket rather taking power cause last month we have seen what kind performance their team produced. I think Bangladesh would have played better than England.

    So i would like to request all the ICC members to decentralize the game rather going into holes.

  • ARJa on January 19, 2014, 5:51 GMT

    This is the end of test cricket. The fact even such a proposal is being considered is a clear indication of the blood money in play. Probably, they will completely get rid of test cricket and replace ODIs with 6-side games. Wow!

  • on January 19, 2014, 5:43 GMT

    All of the other countries not included in the cash/power grab can form their own organization and set up a rival system that is fairer for everybody. Abandon India , Australia and England to themselves. A 3 team competition will get boring very quickly for them.They need other teams to play .

  • on January 19, 2014, 5:31 GMT

    this will destroy the cricket. bad decision

  • on January 19, 2014, 4:44 GMT

    this is ridiculous cricket cant be played within three countries. ..this will demolish their own cricket...And BCCI is being questioned a lot in India itself...we do like our team but we do hate BCCI to the same extent. ...I hope something better will happen to world cricket

  • on January 19, 2014, 4:14 GMT

    This is a terrible decision. With this a big monopoly will take place in world cricket. Small teams are already suffering. As long as cricket is not a part of business, there will be development of this sport. Otherwise, I can see the dark corner right ahead.

  • yashusboyz on January 19, 2014, 3:56 GMT

    what the hell happened to developing the standards of the games in smaller emerging countries..?..test cricket only gets more spectators when the game is played with higher standards..watch ashes for that..south Africa too shows high commitment to improving the quality of players that play at test level....I am seriously disappointed with this...cricket is not just about the money earned...it is about sport being played with utmost passion.

  • on January 19, 2014, 3:16 GMT

    There is a simple answer to this proposal. kick them out, CA - ECB and BCCI, I would like to see how many test/ ODI /20-20's they will play each other then it becomes a bore. then watch them beg. also with 20/20 bring in countries like Ireland, Afghanistan, USA also make it that all the member countries bar all there stars from playing in these three nation and set up a Independent 20/ 20 league playing not just in on country but across all member states each country having two or three teams. some of the best cricketer come from out side these three countries.

  • on January 19, 2014, 2:57 GMT

    I can understand Australia and England feeling rich, but India is still a poor country which makes it's money out of the poor. The poor cricket fan here skips a few meals to buy a tv set and pay for cable to watch his super stars play. This money is being used to develop cricket in Ireland? just a perspective.

  • on January 19, 2014, 2:56 GMT

    As a cricket fan above all else, there is only one word to describe this attempt at coup d'état: disgusting.

  • abhu123 on January 19, 2014, 2:41 GMT

    One look at the comments section shows that almost all cricket fans are opposed to this idea of a big three. These countries may bring more revenue but cricket (for fans) is not about revenue it is about emotions, competition, sportsmanship, pride in your nation and most importantly fun. When these countries can't be relegated and make all the decisions there is no competition or fairness in the game. Soon fans who bring the revenue will stop watching the game. These proposals should be rejected as they will only harm the game. As for the proposal of the promotion and relegation system if India, England and Australia CAN be relegated I agree with this idea but along with the WTC. Each tier should have five nations with the fifth place team getting relegated each year and not getting invited to the WTC (in the case of the highest tier) while the top team in each tier gets promoted. The top seeded team in the first tier gets home advantage for the WTC which happens every year.

  • OnePercentGenius on January 19, 2014, 2:38 GMT

    Ian Chappell had pitched for this idea! It has clear positives: Cricket will now speak with a united voice, saving us the usual cloak and dagger. The Big Three will no longer have to buy votes behind close doors from the small teams which really contribute little. Think of the General Assembly as against a UNITED Security Council. Decisive steps will not only result in action, but fix accoutanbility (instead of the evasion and blame-it-on-India we see today).

    If India proves a bad leader, Australia and England will revolt. If the Trio prove bad collectively, they will have no game to run - smaller nations will just stop playing and the game will die. It will be in ICC's interest to govern democratically, in the interest of the game, and for the growth of the game. This will allow South Africa, for example, to make good decisions, take support and grow.

    Right now, the divided house just does not allow decisive global governace of cricket. Game changers needed! Take the game to China!

  • on January 19, 2014, 2:34 GMT

    Recently England got whitewashed in Australia 5-0. In abroad countries, India hardly ever wins any test match. Then how come teams like India or England get such authority not to be ever exempted from test status! Kenya was once a good team, but cricket declined in their country. In Zimbabwe, it is dying day by day. Ireland and Afghanistan are good cricket teams. So, it will be very bad idea to narrow down the paths for developing cricket nations.

  • on January 19, 2014, 2:32 GMT

    its a real shame for cricket.its a clear discrimination and disrespect to other cricket countries. cricket will never globalized by this monopoly constitution. its not for the good of´cricket rather serving the business for someone. an unthinkable step in 21st century. it seems we are going backward.

  • on January 19, 2014, 0:41 GMT

    as an englishman i find this suggestion absolutely disgraceful.

  • on January 19, 2014, 0:20 GMT

    Giving these three immunity against relegation is a joke. Has no one been watching the Ashes??!?

  • rendragnz on January 18, 2014, 23:57 GMT

    Will be interesting to see which of the smaller Test countries will vote for this, despite it not being in their best interests.

    New Zealand seems to be getting more than their fair share of India tours of late.

  • Shaggy076 on January 18, 2014, 23:51 GMT

    Think everyone is going little over the top with there condemnation of this idea, although I'm not sure its the best proposal. When they talk about the big 3 they are purely talking about administration. South Africa is a powerful cricket playing country but only young in administration. Both Australia and England have done everything to abide by the ICC committments in terms of cricket played against other nations. Both these countries know for cricket to survive all nations playing the game need to thrive. However not so confident over India's motives, hopethis proposal takes power away from India and leads to an ICC looking after all countries.

  • electric_loco_WAP4 on January 18, 2014, 23:35 GMT

    Very soon cricket will be about Ind,Eng,Aus-and SA-meaning what was essen. an 8 team sport will be reduced to 4 . Rest of them being there to supply HR to t20 leages like IPL. V profitable indeed!

  • Whatsgoinoffoutthere on January 18, 2014, 23:26 GMT

    Seems to be about power and not about cricket. Three boards selling the broader future of the international game up the river in order to establish themselves at the head of whatever manages to survive. And what will survive is, frankly, not going to be much.

  • Greatest_Game on January 18, 2014, 23:07 GMT

    O just LOVE the headline of this story: "Big Three could control revamped ICC."

    Could? How about "DO" with the current ICC anyway?

  • Itachi_san on January 18, 2014, 22:21 GMT

    Only 3 countries should play cricket, the rest can supply their talented players to these test teams, its only about money, ICC hadn't done enough anyways to promote cricket, in how many ever years, they only have 10 test playing nations , the organization is a failure. As for me, I shall only make my son play football from now on, or Rugby. As a kiwi, we are never going to be left out of these 2 sports, so he has a chance to play for his country in those sports. Just as we aren't needed, we don't need cricket.

  • kc69 on January 18, 2014, 22:02 GMT

    This is not good, , especially for countries like Sri Lanka ,Pakistan, or Bangladesh who have no other sports to look upto apart from cricket.Whose fans cherish the world cup and various series where their teams do fairly well compared to other sports.

  • Capricorn60 on January 18, 2014, 21:56 GMT

    Believe you me if the big three largely go their own & inevitably start playing each other more often than now, even Indian fans like me will get bored rigid so quickly, lose interest & probably stop watching the game in droves. Once this happens, even the commercial entities & sponsors will see this & so desert the sport - we will then be back to square one!

  • on January 18, 2014, 21:01 GMT

    If these changes come into actions then rest of the cricket world should come out of this powerless ICC and form their own organisation to run the cricket fairly all over the world. This proposal is completely against spirit of cricket and money is the main consideration. The other nations should show them that cricket can be run without their money.

  • SwingReverse on January 18, 2014, 20:42 GMT

    This proposal reflects the state of cricket as it stands today. Australia, England and India are three of the top five teams on field and with these changes they will completely dominate cricket.

    Good luck to cricket players and fans in countries like SA, SL, Pak, NZ, Bangla, WI and other full members.

  • igorolman on January 18, 2014, 20:33 GMT

    This is a terrible, terrible idea. The only morsel of good to come out of this is the killing of the Test championship.

  • geoffboyc on January 18, 2014, 20:18 GMT

    Is this the beginning of the end for world-wide Test Cricket, in particular? Will it be guaranteed to ensure the "poorer" Boards focus more of their attention on the money intensive slogathon-style cricket? And where does it leave SA, who are probably the best Test team at present. England have shown that generating more money doesn't buy inevitable success and there's a good chance Australia will follow suit in a few weeks time.

  • Rally_Windies on January 18, 2014, 20:03 GMT

    They cannot be serious ?

    how about all the other countries form another organisation and do not recognize the ICC and just leave England, Australia and India to play by themselves ...

    we will see how much money the ICC makes without WI, SA, PAK , SL -- these teams draw crowds ....

  • Mayaro_Man on January 18, 2014, 19:35 GMT

    Cricket never truly became a world sport because it was always too expensive to play: all the equipment required. Poor kids (in the Caribbean for example) kicked or bounced a ball in the street, playing with a piece of wood and some type of ball as a last dig at cricket for those who really wanted to play. It was perceived a 'gentleman's game' in the sense of privilege first, values second. Big clubs with privileged kids played 'proper' and 'preppy' cricket. This proposal smacks of a new kind of elitism in an age where social barriers are breaking down. Would Nelson Mandela support a return to a privileged few ruling the roost? Cricket, the game I love, is beginning to disgust me.

  • sapnil2000 on January 18, 2014, 19:20 GMT

    group A-- india, england, australia, south africa,srilanka and pakistan and group B-- bangladesh, new zealand, west indies, zimbabwe, afghanistan and ireland. two top teams from team B will get promotion for team A and bottom 2 teams will relegated to team B. it should be based on two year performances and everybody should play equal number of matches

  • on January 18, 2014, 19:12 GMT

    99% of ppl here opposing the ideas and hopefully they will nderstand. cricket will disappear very soon if this plan goes on. how come these 3 countries talk to each other and decide what they want to do for the rest of the countries? All other countries should form a new International Cricket Authority with AFG, IRE having test status and include all other countries like UAE, Hong kong, Nepal, Netherland, Scotland. and isolate these so called "BIG 3." let them play with each other and no one will watch cricket from these 3 countries. IND aint a Big team at all. they only won 25% test and most of the wins came in their soil. Pak is the 2nd most successful team in the Odi history after australia.

  • TheVoiceOfReason on January 18, 2014, 18:58 GMT

    Very clever of the BCCI to get the ECB and CA on board. If the BCCI think they are so special then the other member nations should stand together and refuse to play India but India have now bought the other two commercially viable countries. Although the Indian administrators might be able to play with themselves, team India cannot ;)

    India got lucky in SA, they should have gone home with a 2 nil loss. Had the timing of the wicket preparation in Durban been right the game would have ended in three days!

    Little wonder the ICC aka BCCI does not do more to promote the game in the USA and China, nobody wants to give up the crown when they are king!

  • alesana85 on January 18, 2014, 18:55 GMT

    This proposal mirrors the world we live in today. The rich getting richer and controling everything, the poor left to struggle & die. Is this morally right? To simply obey the whims of the dollar? This proposal is simply the easy way out for the rich. What happened to cricket?

  • cliveinuk on January 18, 2014, 18:53 GMT

    Now don't you think the upcoming test between South Africa is going to have just a little bit more needle in it than would have been the case. Best side in the world against one who think they have right to dictate to them off the field. Dale Steyn, you give it to them good. Bet everyone else in the world will be on our side. Aside from that it should be a formality 3 votes for the rest against.

    World great cricketers have come from Pakistan , West Indies , Sri Lanka , South Africa , cricket is cyclical. Those nations at the bottom of the ranking will give us stars again. Now England , Australia and India want to remove that from us. This whole thing puts South Africa's spat with India into perspective.

  • 51n15t9r on January 18, 2014, 18:51 GMT

    Even as an Indian, I find this arrangement shameful. I can understand BCCI's concern that it brings in most money, so should be allowed more in return. But they are already the richest cricket board and there is enough money already to develop cricket in india, just through the IPL. The extra money coming through international matches can be (actually should be) used for the benefit of the game and for development of cricket in other countries like Ireland (who lose one good player each year to England) and Afghanistan. Have a two-tier league, it brings meaning to contests, by all means .. but making sure that India, England and Australia are not relegated is just wrong. How can India even claim to be in top three right now having lost 9 out of 10 matches it has played outside India. England might just be beginning to go back to the 90s and Australia, till recently, were ranked fifth in the world. The only team that deserves to be called a good test team is South Africa.

  • Siddharth_Pandit on January 18, 2014, 18:43 GMT

    I do oppose this idea but i do get the rational here.

    To all those who refuse this idea at the outset - Do you pay the tax? Good, if yes. Would you want your govt to utilize your hard earned tax money to rescue a lazy ass who doesn't work. If administrators & viewers from other countries don't even break even, why should BCCI and others share their profit or carry baggage? How are other sports managed, do EU/US subsidize S.Asia or Africa for soccer?

  • on January 18, 2014, 18:42 GMT

    If this revamp goes through, lesser boards like CSA and NZC are simply going to make just peanuts for money, cricket will lose all the glam it ever had in these countries, lesser money would mean poor quality domestic cricket which would eventually lead to degradation of interest in the game in those countries, 20 - 25 years from here SA and NZ would be reduced to mere minnows, leave alone the dream of Ireland and Afghanistan making it to the top. So this would lead us with rich cricket in three countries while degraded cricket in the others? No, the way I see it constant cricket between just 3 heavyweights will make cricket boring uninteresting and people will switch to other (well managed) sports and cricket will simple meet death.

  • ICKY on January 18, 2014, 18:28 GMT

    What happened to my comments Mr. fair? Fail to understand why don't you agree to diagree with my comments. I am just trying to save the game of Cricket by opposing bulldozing coup ideas from big 3. I love cricket but not the game ICC is trying to create. Trust me it is the beginning of the end. With match fixing in IPL, and corruption in all affairs of the game and especially such ideas will force fans to watch other sports and it is going to be soccer. The demise of cricket is just in sight.

  • einstien_jouniar on January 18, 2014, 18:21 GMT

    if it happens, cricketing nations like Pak, SA, Sri, NZ and WI should left ICC and help each other to form another fair system. After that let associate boards to choose one suitable for them. Let CA, ECB and BCCI to earn by playing each other. Let them enjoy test cricket in tiers or in any system they want. I m pretty sure these boards will come begging because money hungers will tight their paints (in demand to excitement). We will see which council will showcase exciting cricket...? (imagine drought of excitement if india also decide to leave this group)......If these board will not create another group and such things will keep happening, i will quit following cricket. It is already getting bore day by day...

  • on January 18, 2014, 17:46 GMT

    This proposal should be booted out without consideration. This is akin to the breadwinner of a family ( for purpose of argument let us say it's the Father/Husband) demanding a larger share of the food on the table just because he is the wage earner of the family and to hell with the wife/mothers contribution and the children's needs. I am writing this comment without even bothering to read the article because that's how laughable this suggestion is and it does not warrant due consideration. The sole concern of ICC should be to foster the game of cricket and ensure and protect it's purity, not prostitute the game we love on the alter of the almighty dollar. And for the other boards to be at the mercy of the BCCI which is so mercenary and the ECB's hypocrisy does not auger well for the future of Cricket.

  • warneneverchuck on January 18, 2014, 17:41 GMT

    Fans from other countries complaining bcoz they r not accepting the fact that their teams cant generate enough money and their own boards cant go against these three major teams

  • shammini on January 18, 2014, 17:24 GMT

    Continued.. Look at Ind V SA tour - cut short due to individual differences and to accommodate selfish needs - Tendulkar send off. I am sure every cricket lover would have wanted atleast a third test instead of the entire home tour with WI - no disrespect intended to WI. Now look at back to back ASHES - purely driven by greed. Yes its brought massive monetary rewards, just look at the awesome crowds during the matches and the coverage. BUT, look at the bigger picture - whitewashes? is that really going well with the true cricket fans? How often would they like to turn up to watch games that are pathetically one sided, although not boring by any stretch of imagination? Lets face it, ECB and CA doesn't care much for cricket elsewhere, especially ECB who have only one thing on their agenda - ASHES. With the trio at helm, we will see more two test tours n more tests between themselves-not good for world cricket. As for rest of the nations playing each other - its absurd and not viable

  • on January 18, 2014, 17:14 GMT

    Let's not fight anymore. Cricket's gone, and gone forever. That's all that's left to say. Don't feel bad, everybody. It had a good run.

  • littlemastero on January 18, 2014, 16:58 GMT

    While we may think its not better for the game, that's how the world is moving. Its all business. Its not a family where the father who brings more income gets more, its a shareholder who holds most shares has the control! We just need to adapt.

  • AsifAbbasi on January 18, 2014, 16:43 GMT

    And that my dear fellows is end of Cricket as an International game. Why not just kick all the other teams out and organize all the matches between big three? Why do we even need smaller teams, when they don't generate money?

    For Goodness sake, this is a sport that we are talking about, and it is now being run by people who simply care for the monetary interests...

    Raise your hands if you agree that Cricket was much better with so much commercial thinking, and more of nations fighting each other out on the ground to see who is better....!

  • Jaga2011 on January 18, 2014, 16:39 GMT

    Beyond the sentimentalism, a few cold facts to consider please. 1) A game in which 1 country contributes 80% of the revenues can anyways not call itself a global game 2) The ICC is already an oligarchy - The difference between having 10 Full members and 3 members is really not much. 3) Test cricket is already dead. A form of sport which has virtually no attendance ON THE GROUND(except for marquee matchups) is already dead - only being kept alive artificially by TV rights. Heard of any other form of a sport being like this ? -- * Test cricket would be played only when it can offer competitive cricket consistently - GOOD THING! * Ireland and Afghanistan will get more ODI and T20 opportunities - GREAT THING! * No need for a USSR-system like FTP. Nation-bodies have enough smarts to arrange games/formats suitably to satisfy their countries viewers * More T20 leagues will come up and more players can make a living out of cricket. Quality of game compromised but, is there an other way?

  • Shafi66 on January 18, 2014, 16:39 GMT

    If this happens, the other seven full membeship nation should make a new coucil like ICC. In this comette they can be included other coutries like Ireland, Afghanistan & Netherland. This new comette can be suspended the other three countries Australia, India & England.

  • on January 18, 2014, 16:37 GMT

    No point in complaining. Just play the politics right. Form a cricket council of your own, include the test wannabies, exclude the big three from your market. See who wins and who loses. The big three aren't the only ones people crave for.The big three can sit in their own club and smoke cigars while others play more cricket. This concept that ICC 'Owns' cricket and others can't play cricket without being sanctioned by ICC will not hold in any court.

  • on January 18, 2014, 16:35 GMT

    Sheer disgrace..FTP being delinked from the ICC, Champions Trophy to be reinstated over World Test Championship, exceptions in relegation & promotions & the ACB, ECB, BCCI getting representation in the Ex.co all these wholesome changes will lessen the overall development of the game in new markets & will create boredom in major markets if you have the big 3 nations playing a lot amongst each.

  • on January 18, 2014, 16:20 GMT

    Now it has become the duty for others cricketing nation to save the cricket from those blockhead persons, who used to think that cricket is only for Australia, India & England. I can't imagine how can they produce such types of foolish idea! Cricket is no longer a worldwide sport now. Condolence from a Bangladeshi cricket fan. :(

  • on January 18, 2014, 16:18 GMT

    All of you, who are crying why don't you understand its only a money distribution model. these three countries generate the highest revenue for icc and they are asking for a proportional share. first understand both the existing and me systems before crying foul. as if your boards have done anything to make cricket better. ICC is not a government agency who gets tax payers money whether they like it or not. it has to generate revenue to use it.

  • Copernicus on January 18, 2014, 15:56 GMT

    Utterly disgraceful. And more fool am I for getting excited about the potential for a two-tier test structure. Should've known something dodgy was up ....

  • 2.14istherunrate on January 18, 2014, 15:51 GMT

    This affair sounds like one of those dodgey passages in Alice in Wonderland where everyone is about to have their heads cut off by the red Queen, Alice though can wake up out of her dream. In the case of the new proposals there is no awakening from the nightmare. We will all lose out except the inflated egos and bank accounts of certain officials of certain boards. Distasteful in the extreme.cricket should be about cricket not ego's.

  • Capricorn60 on January 18, 2014, 15:45 GMT

    Even though I am a die-hard Indian fan, such a move is simply NOT good for the long-term development of the game we love. The big three will become a monopoly, will start playing each other more often than now making it so boring & the other nations will unavoidably simply get weaker - financially & so then on the field too. Just because the BCCI has the biggest financial clout these days, it doesn't mean it has got to keep on demanding a larger share of pie to the detriment of the game. It should instead use its powers responsibly in ensuring the sport remains vibrant + solvent in ALL current ICC member countries as well as being developed in all associate member nations.

    Can already see how cricket has sadly become so much weaker in West Indies due to a lack of monies & so youngsters there are looking at get into other sports such as basketball. This proposed change regrettably will hasten this weakening process in the W.I. & elsewhere, sadly making it just a dull minority sport!

  • on January 18, 2014, 15:44 GMT

    HIGHEST TEST SCORE = 952 (SL - SL vs IND) HIGHEST WICKET TAKER = MURALI ( 800 wickets) HIGHEST RUN SCORING INNINGS = Lara (400/ 375), Hayden (380), Mahela ( 374) MOST RUNS IN CARRIER ( CURRENT PLAYERS) = MAHELA/ SANGA MOST DOUBLE HUNDRED= (bradman/lara/sanga/mahela/atapattu / sehwag) MOST HUNDRED ( CURRENT Players) = MAHELA 33 SANGA 32


  • on January 18, 2014, 15:24 GMT

    it is awesome news for India, Australia England .it is like of Vito power in cricket.who know that after 10 year India will be the BOSS of cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 15:15 GMT

    Shocking news. its sad to see our beloved game enjoyed by poor or rich has come to this state. the people who thought of a proposal like this has insulted our humble game. Cricket cannot be owned by three countries its a peoples game, don't let money take over cricket. this is our children's game. Protect it for the future generation. DONT LET THIS HAPPEN.

  • on January 18, 2014, 15:12 GMT

    Others have already started crying....

  • on January 18, 2014, 15:10 GMT

    It will be destroy the beauty of Cricket....

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:57 GMT

    This will be the end of cricket as a global sport. You cannot call it a "sport" if you exempt any country or team from relegation . You might as well just pass the World Cup, Awards and rankings among the Thug 3 based on commercial strengths. In the next 10 years no other country will be playing test cricket. What will be cricket without the likes of Murlis, Ajmal's, Inzi's, AB DeVilliers, Steyns. As if it was not enough to mutate playing rules to give unfair advantage to their own playing strengths, Batting, they had to completely destroy the game. BCCI is a cancer to cricket and has just found friends in CA and ECB. They could have done so much more for the game instead

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:46 GMT

    ABSOLUTELY DISGRACEFUL - its fixing at its highest level and so blatant and disrespectful to all the other test playing nations. Shameful behaviour by these three.

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:40 GMT

    This can change cricket into an enternatinment just like wrestling. It will no longer be a sport.

  • SarfBD on January 18, 2014, 14:31 GMT

    Ridiculous and disgraceful. The most shocking thing is these three boards were working on the proposal for the last six months or so without the consent of other members. It seems it is possible for certain boards to 'decide' anything outside ICC committees and then just approve that in a formal meeting. ICC is a failed organization. Only 10 full members (few of those are struggling to find feet) is the burning example of the incompetence of ICC.

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:30 GMT

    Unfortunately Test cricket is dying in most countries except England & Australia. I myself am a passionate supporter of test cricket however I fear that drastic changes are needed in order for the longest format of the game to survive. I propose the following : 1) 3 day matches, 2) bowling a minimum of 115 overs a day 3) mandatory declaration after 90 overs in the 1st innings 4) mandatory new ball after 60 overs 5) fielding restrictions (max 5 outside the circle) 6) 30 min lunch and scrap the tea break. 7) 10 countries in elite league 8) all tours must have only 3 tests, 3 ODi's and 3 T20's 9) all teams must play each other once over a 3 year period in a round robin format 10) the bottom team gets relegated every 3 years and the top team gets the mace I hate tampering with the format of test cricket however the game needs to adapt and modrnise in order to capture the imagination of the public. Formula 1 has successfully done it recently with DRS, weaker tyres and points system.

  • lyl67 on January 18, 2014, 14:25 GMT

    Do you smell something here, domination by the three powerful cricket nation, this never happened when West Indies cricket was TOP for a DECADE and more. Now we are being dictated to. West Indies cricket is simply not good enough presently and if the Manager and selectors cannot pick decent teams we will be dead as a cricketing nation and out of the big league. WATCH THIS SPACE.

  • Testcricketistop on January 18, 2014, 14:24 GMT

    I propose the other nations get together and make a decisin on their futures, if they have to create their own league, then so be it.

    It will take some astute planning and times will be tough innitally, but let the Big Boys entertain themselves.

  • Charith99 on January 18, 2014, 14:22 GMT

    I don't know why people are complaining, this is a good idea. They should introduce new rules like bouncers are not allowed when aus,eng or Indian batsmen are batting, boundary ropes should expand 10 yards when aus,eng or Indians are bowling, maybe they could bring a new law to allow only two stumps when the big 3 are batting. Wonderful!!!!

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:21 GMT

    this is not difficult to say that flavour of the game will down if these proposal are accepted and it is just like ICC wants to hit his foot with his own axe.

  • Sajid111 on January 18, 2014, 14:19 GMT

    All other cricket boards should boycotts their tours to these so called big 3 to make their voice heard. I hope ca,ecb and bcci listen to the concerned cricket fans around the world. I dont know why they even considering this? Each of the teams are only good in their backyard.

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:17 GMT

    No meaning to involve to cricket as Country Like Nepal. There is No meaning and No future in this game.

    Its better we should INVEST IN Football than cricket.

    Cricket will disappear with Monopoly of Indian Cricket Council- ICC

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:16 GMT

    Thats a shame if they really implement it and they have not included the best cricketing nation of today (south africa) just because of haroon lorgat BCCI matter . That shows these financially strong nations dont want cricket to spread they want it to restrict to these 3 nations . It will be really great to make 2 tiers with all other 7 nations playing together and let these three play with each other . Soon they will themselves get bored and rethink .If they implement it cricket in pakistan sri lanka and west indies will be finished . They should have sit together and worked on how to bail zimbabwe out of financial crisis how to allow ireland and afghanistan test status instead they are unhappy that their revenue share is given to poor countries . Really shamful thinking of 3 nations .

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:16 GMT

    This is why cricket will never become a global sport. RIP Cricket... RIP.

  • Thomas_Atwood on January 18, 2014, 14:15 GMT

    Terrible proposal. I won't say how terrible as covered in the other comments. I do have a question, though. As an English cricket supporter / county member is there anything that can be done to get rid of Giles Clarke at the ECB and replace him with someone who cares for cricket?

  • OttawaRocks on January 18, 2014, 14:08 GMT

    While complaining against the Big3 the Other Tier 1 nations have done virtually nothing developing the game in Associate nations and now they're crying a river for what may befall them. Laugh. What goes around comes around. The OT1 nations have been full participants in this culture of incompetence for decades and now they expect sympathy? As a born and bred Canadian I know full well of the havoc they have wreaked and am relishing their demise. Cricket is merely continuing its pragmatic approach as it always has.

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:01 GMT

    @GRVJPR so now that you are in bed with those same nations it makes it ok for you to do the same to others because you are in that same position. That for me is called "Hypocrisy" don't you think. Hmmmm........you will be no better than "them"

  • on January 18, 2014, 14:00 GMT

    This proposition is a disgrace and will destroy the game we all love.

  • on January 18, 2014, 13:45 GMT

    What happened to CA and ECB? BCCI we understand. Did they convert the other two? Or were they easily swayed by their sense of nostalgic history? Also, what happened to the one billion BCCI fans who said that they were on the right path?

    This humble fan made the logical projection that BCCI will kill cricket on this very forum and was duly struck back with a volley of protests from you know who! I am sure many held that view and expressed it but the decibels of millions of voices drowned us all!

    Everything teaches us lessons and here I learnt another, that among other things, power also skews perception so badly that truth and rationality simply disappears.

    God help cricket!

    Will the gentleman cricketers step in, please?

  • harmske on January 18, 2014, 13:44 GMT

    @Assertive-Indian & @vish2020 - it pains me to think that you guys call yourselves 'cricket fans'.

    this isn't just about revenue; we should be looking to grow the game of cricket so more countries can play and play at a competitive level.

    exclusivity is not good for the game in the long-run, no matter how much money it brings in during the short-run.

  • Imran707 on January 18, 2014, 13:41 GMT

    Unbelievable to even think about this, goodbye cricket and welcome other sports which are less time consuming and mostly much more entertaining. Irony, English team haven't won a single match since last couple of months. Indian plays immaturely, when away from home and Aussies are like big bullies and these boards going to control test cricket.......isn't that amazing? for me it is goodbye cricket!!

  • on January 18, 2014, 13:40 GMT

    This s awful, this game will be played in these 3 countries 15 years from now. ICC is already in hands of few introverts. This is evident as we haven't seen any increase in test playing nations since BD was awarded test status. Where in the few other games like soccer, there is growing competition. ICC will eventually be like UNO with few countries having absolute powers and the power to veto the decisions.

  • GRVJPR on January 18, 2014, 13:33 GMT

    @ Annz N Dipz Love, "im a proud Indian and after reading this i feel like i have been slapped on my face," Whom you are fooling man. I will never forget the days when Indian cricketers were targeted and insulted by western cricket boards.

  • on January 18, 2014, 13:31 GMT

    This arrangement will encourage only monopolistic attitude not good for the growth of the game......

  • on January 18, 2014, 13:25 GMT

    This is a very unfair proposal and will discriminate against teams other than India, England and Australia. The other teams will most probably decline and that will decrease the competition that we have in the game today. The quality of Cricket around the world will go down. Human history has been all about the powerful taking advantage of the weak and it seems Cricket is no different.

  • Mr.A2Z on January 18, 2014, 13:14 GMT

    Rename ICC to International Cricket Cartel, this is a perfect strategy to kill the cricket in the world and competition as well. All other boards should boycott ICC and come up with their own arrangement.

  • on January 18, 2014, 13:10 GMT

    OMG!! They are making ICC another IPL.

  • bobbo2 on January 18, 2014, 13:05 GMT

    This sounds like a disaster for International cricket. Everyone will suffer if this occurs as money will become the only factor in cricket planning, tours etc meaning smaller nations will be shut out. World cricket needs NZ, SL, PAK, WI, SA etc. each country has its strengths and for that to be eroded would be terrible. Over time cricket will also lose its value if this occurs as World Cups will be less competitive and TV revenue would fall. This would be a very short sighted decision if allowed to occur.

  • sushgolf on January 18, 2014, 13:03 GMT

    I am an Indian but I don't agree with what BCCI is trying to do. Unfortunately it's no more about Cricket but about Money. With Power comes Responsibility. Responsibility of top cricketing nations is to spread cricket around the world and make it a competitive global sport. Test cricket is not dead infact it has become result oriented unlike in the past. I only wish India, along with other cricketing nations, leads the cricket world responsibly for its betterment.

  • dreamliner on January 18, 2014, 13:01 GMT

    While Aus, Eng and Indian supporters may have mixed feelings about this proposal, I expect the NZ, Sri Lankan , South African or Pakistani massive will feel disrespected to understand the ambitions of their 3 fellow cricket nations in relation to this proposal. The 3-legged monster uses fear of revenue loss to suggest only their teams are beyond relegation while the rest lie at the mercy of 2nd tier operating and revenue system. Disappointed with ECB and CA for their collusion.

  • on January 18, 2014, 12:53 GMT

    Awful, just plain awful. A sad day for all cricket fans.

  • on January 18, 2014, 12:51 GMT

    im a proud Indian and after reading this i feel like i have been slapped on my face. this kind of an arrangement is a huge insult to the ICC and other counties and embarrassing and shameful for neutral Indians or Australians, people like me who genuinely enjoy good cricket. it reminds me of the nation state concept south africa tried to preach during apartheid! i strongly want other countries show some spine and boycott these three counties and make their own cricket board, world cup and other world level tournaments for the development and spread of the game. really boycott us.. let India Australia and England play among themselves and themselves only! i apologise on my countrymen's behalf to other cricket lovers across the wolrld. .. - apologies from India

  • vish2020 on January 18, 2014, 12:51 GMT

    India brings in 70% to say the least of revenue in cricket and it shares with other boards and the fans of other boards are always bashing indian cricket with their mindless thoughts. They know the very facility their players play is there because of India? So please, now don't come crying. India, England, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa can only be the cricket playing nations and it will be amazing. All other do more harm then good. Pak, Sri and WI are barely breaking even with many times asking India for help. Bangla, Zimbabwe is lost cause. I know truth hurts but this is what it is and if you think other then u don't really know what u following

  • on January 18, 2014, 12:51 GMT

    its really good to see that majority of people here are against these proposals no matter which country they belong. these proposals for ftp and power sharing will damage cricket more than anything. havr to think about game not own prefferences.

  • Farce-Follower on January 18, 2014, 12:43 GMT

    Folks, get ready for a Bermuda Cricket League, Emirates two a side tournament, African Sixers League or a Andaman Speed Fest. As BCCI's favourite posterboy, Mr. Shastri would say, "It does not get bigger than this - Darjeeling Dodos vs. Rajkot Rams". Delicious.

  • Assertive-Indian on January 18, 2014, 12:37 GMT

    Nothing wrong in this. Cricket is popular only in these three nations as is obvious from the number of spectators who come to watch cricket matches. Even in RSA, which is currently number 1 team in tests, hardly anyone comes to watch tests. Therefore, I support this move. For example, why should India go an waste its precious time to play all of two test matches in nations like NZ or SA. It is better not to play any test matches than two. ODIs and T20s are popular in rest of the nations, but even there, these smaller nations don't generate much revenue. So if India, Australia, and England are generating maximum cricket revenue, then why shouldn't they be more equal than others?

  • loudseaker on January 18, 2014, 12:35 GMT

    All The cricketing boards shall establish a new and unified cricketing body to replace ICC which is sole currpt and bootlicker Authority Shall create a new World Cricket Council with equal rights to all playing nations. ICC is going too far from the principal of its own

  • DD_f0rever on January 18, 2014, 12:34 GMT

    ICC should do something to save Cricket.

    I just saw Pak vs SL test series, even a handful of spectators are difficult to find.

    Either other nations start touring Pak...or Pak play its home games where Cricket is popular.

  • on January 18, 2014, 12:33 GMT

    IPL should be organized after 2 or 3 years. It has sabotaged Test Cricket.....If ICC dint save cricket in Pakistan and Westindies, it would be the end of Cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 12:28 GMT

    ICC should take a decision on test cricket, and ban it, the most boring and worst format a game could ever have is test cricket.

  • getsetgopk on January 18, 2014, 12:28 GMT

    Well the BCCI was no secret but the other two that have come out of the closset that is England and Australia is a big shock indeed. They just teamed up with devil, hands down. I used to have great respect for English cricket but that ends right here. And those who think it could work are simply fools. Its a sport after all, if people don't like what they see, they'll just find something else to indulge themselves so no it will not work.

  • Newlandsfaithful on January 18, 2014, 12:24 GMT

    I fail to see how anybody benefits from this proposal except India, England and Australia. The rich will become richer. The poor will become poorer. Perhaps the rest of the world should form an alternative cricket body and that focuses on cricket, and leave these three teams to play monopoly by themselves.

  • zanesm on January 18, 2014, 12:21 GMT

    Very Orwellian. And a minimum of 25 characters per comment....

  • magpie22 on January 18, 2014, 12:14 GMT

    This may actually be good for cricket as CA and ECB could loosen BCCI's python-like grip on the game, as it currently stands. However, relegation immunity is a joke considering there are so few Test nations to start with.

  • on January 18, 2014, 12:08 GMT

    If this plan comes in, forget Test Cricket it will be T20 for 11 months and 2 Tests per year per team :P

  • on January 18, 2014, 11:53 GMT

    A sad day for cricket when the BCCI stops pretending to be supporting the incompetent ICC and blatently states they are the controlling force in world cricket. CA and ECB should be ashamed of their part in this seedy initiative.

    What's particularly irrational about the formation of this triumvirate is the exclusion of the world's leading cricket nation: South Africa. It's like going to war without the best army. And yes, they would be far stronger at ODI and T20 if they played their strongest teams.

    I support the creation of a separate body to replace the ICC by the other seven boards. Sure, they won't get to play against the three stooges, but at least they won't have continue to be the butt of the stooges' jokes. No real change in the schedule anyway.

    Have fun playing continuous series against one another ; you'll quickly find them to be as meaningless as the annual IPL tournament. Have fun wallowing in your self-interest while it is relevant.

  • on January 18, 2014, 11:40 GMT

    After a few months these 3 will decide that they would automatically qualify for semis of every tournament and only 1 team will qualify from the remaining 7 nations. RIP cricket. time for trying a new sport.

  • IzharAhmadBacha on January 18, 2014, 11:22 GMT

    This Plan will limit cricket to Only 3 countries. I hope its just a plan.....

  • GRVJPR on January 18, 2014, 11:17 GMT

    I agree with this. It is unbearable to watch test cricket played between pakistan and sri lanka. We saw empty stadiums in Suth AFrica. They don't even came to farewell Jaques Kallis. If they are not serious about test cricket, why force it on them. Let they enjoy T-20 crciket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 11:09 GMT

    I for one hope that every other member will leave the ICC if this happens. As much as I love this game and would desperately not like to see international cricket come to a standstill i dislike this current proposal even more. The other boards should show some backbone and form their own organization.

  • on January 18, 2014, 11:04 GMT

    Giving the Bcci further control will be the death of cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 11:02 GMT

    In my life time, only cricket is the game which has not bring new countries and teams in it. How many time, I have seen minors trying to emerge and then vanishing away. I can count number of teams which once appeared. Why they r only given chances once after qualifying that too in big cups? Why everyone of them are not given a chance to play a full ODI or/and T20s tour once a year to one of test playing Nations?because that doesn't financially helps in short run? But look at the bigger picture, if we have 20 strong teams, everyone can play everyone. I don't agree with arrangements of ICC in past and this new thing will even close the door for the betterment of all.

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:55 GMT

    All other board will support this idea as they may get some money from BCCI but it is killer. Simply all other should create their own ICC and let these three play their own cricket

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:31 GMT

    I hope everyone will see the downsides of allowing individual boards decide the fate of cricket in general. This will only end up destroying the mindset of the ricketers of future to think of only money not the country. This iventually result in international cricket dieing out to replaced by low quality club cricket. Lesser priviledged countries will be the horses running the carts of these boards.

    It is highly essential legends of the game step up and prevent this distruction of cricket. This is the time other seven boards which includes mights of the game SA,SL,PAK,NZ,WI to make a point to the ICC.

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:30 GMT

    India has been trying to control ICC, and so far they have been very successful. Now officially india and other puppet members of india wants to take charge. If that happens I wish Bangladesh need to get out from this puppet council as well as other members. RIP cricket

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:22 GMT

    Fire in the hole...Cricket is gonna blow!

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:16 GMT

    By the implementation of this proposal the cricket will be back in 1920's where only 3 or 4 nations used to play. This is sheer monopoly. Other nations should speak up.

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:12 GMT

    The remaining cricket boards should boycott such proposal and opt out of coming t20 world cup. Time to kick some senses in these boards. Other sports are planning to increase number of nations, here we are proposing decline. Get a life!

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:09 GMT

    Game must take preference over any personal boards of the India, UK or Australia.. Lets remember its a sport not a Business..

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:09 GMT

    Hey cheer up everyone bcci ca and ecb wouldve done the same for the good of cricket had the big three comprised of other countries, they have the good of the game as their guiding principle. Right big three? Right?

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:07 GMT

    Australia-Eng only care about Ashes & Ind only care about money. Where is cricket in all this?

  • on January 18, 2014, 10:07 GMT

    Not a good decison by icc.

  • on January 18, 2014, 9:33 GMT

    We need to look ourselves in a mirror to know how we really appear to others. In essence, as I see the proposals, are based on the same principles cricket administration is run today. 1) The trio proposes that they will have veto rights to everything. Now, the Associates hardly have any voting rights. 2) The revenue will be distributed unequally and will favor the trio. Today, 75% of ICC revenue is taken away by 10 Test Nations where the rest is given to the Associates. 3) The trio will never be relegated. Today, there's no way a Test nation can lose its status and due to #2, no new nation is awarded with one. In 2003 World Cup a Test nation lost all matches and an Associate went to the Semis. But none were relegated, none were promoted. Why are we suddenly so fussy about it? If we need to fix the system, we need to take Associates into account and restructure cricket administration altogether.

  • on January 18, 2014, 9:27 GMT

    i can see cricket dying the future generations wont even know what cricket used to be the ICC have messed up cricket so much that even the avid fan is turnning his back on the game im lucky that i grew up when cricket was cricket not all this jokers T20 front foot no ball free hit power plays reviews o batsman wait the 3rd umpire will try to save you and now test championship it hurts what they have done to our beloved game bunch of greedy people ruinning thr game for millions if not billions of people

  • on January 18, 2014, 9:23 GMT

    Well the all the other countries should have big enough cricket economies to contribute as much as India does ........ He who pays the piper calls the tune. In the world it is the US and the EU .... in cricket it is India. The issue is none of the others contribute so why should they get distributed wealth.

  • on January 18, 2014, 9:16 GMT

    It would be nice if all 7 remaining permanent members decide to opt out from ICC. They can form a new association with an option to induct new members for saving cricket from these 3 egocentric bullys. Let these 3 bullys to fight between themselves to destroy their own style of cricket. I believe, FIFA would have been bankrupt by now if there was such a decision to form a EXCo type bullys to destroy soccer.

  • on January 18, 2014, 9:04 GMT

    And that is hypocrisy, plain and simple.

    why can't they follow the structure of well established bodies like FIFA with some modifications and include all the nations in Cricket Game building and develop the game at global level.

  • on January 18, 2014, 9:02 GMT

    BCCI and CA taking over ICC. What a joke ? Rest of the cricket teams should pull out of this and create their own league and play each other.

  • on January 18, 2014, 8:54 GMT

    Good Bye Cricket........!!

  • on January 18, 2014, 8:42 GMT

    first step.. signs of cricket will die in furure.. this is not fair. all boards should have power. its a sport..not politics.... guranteed cricket will be turned in to a money making tool..

  • on January 18, 2014, 8:39 GMT

    It's a dangerous precedent to concentrate the control of international cricket on a select few on the basis that financial value is of utmost importance.

    India may be the largest money contributer to the current cricket landscape, but it's arguable that the role of the IPL along with the high-handedness and selfishness of BCCI have significantly undermined the state of the game globally.

  • Alistair0610 on January 18, 2014, 8:36 GMT

    The BCCI cannot be trusted. This is a really bad idea!

  • SriLankanYoungBlood on January 18, 2014, 8:31 GMT

    This will end the Cricket. These top 3 continue reduce Test matches 4 team like SL,ZIM,BAN. Might be ODI also.Become teams like SL to only 20 specialists. Not allow Afganistan and Ireland to Test Cricket Instead start the 2 tier cricket architecture and allow them playing with SL,BAN and ZIM. These 3 teams will never give Test Matches to SL and AUS,ENG,IND,SA automatically add to 1 st Tier and Play test matches only each others and minimise ODI and T20 with other Full Members. And finally Other Countries will become full of Sloggers and Pinch Hinter not allowing Young Classy Batsmen to develop. Upcoming teams Like Nepal,PNG will vanish from Cricket. And BAN,ZIM test status will be canceled.

  • dunger.bob on January 18, 2014, 8:25 GMT

    The ICC is not a policeman. It's more like a school m'aam. It's a committee and when a committee sets about designing a horse they end up with a camel. .. What world cricket needs is a strong and enforceable plan. If keep meandering along as we are the sport will eventually die.

    Instead of a committee, cricket needs a strong and decisive board of directors to keep the sport growing. .. Politics and nationalism have to be discarded and a future for cricket decided upon soon. India brings verve and a business eye, England brings tradition and enormous experience while we in Australia bring whatever it is that makes us who we are. .. We must do this for the overall good of the game. .. Trust us guys, we're on your side as long as your side is the good of cricket.

  • hamza893 on January 18, 2014, 8:19 GMT

    So much disappointed with these thoughts and proposal.This would take cricket to the point where some nations will decide to quit cricket and that will lead to death.All I'm seeing is RIP cricket (The global sport).

  • ajudagr8 on January 18, 2014, 8:19 GMT

    End of cricket for other countries...

  • bobagorof on January 18, 2014, 8:16 GMT

    I can forsee a number of the 'smaller' cricket boards deciding to launch a 'Packer-style' breakaway league and leave the auspices of the ICC, should this type of change be implemented. After all, the implication is that the amount of revenue received by these countries would be dramatically curtailed and be more in line with their own contributions, so why not keep all of those contributions to themselves? Home series involving Australia, India and England are often one-sided anyway, so any embarrassment from being beaten will be removed, and there will be more time in the schedule for overworked players. Would also remove the need for (and disgrace of relegation to) a second tier of Test matches.

  • flickspin on January 18, 2014, 8:12 GMT

    i all for democracy, 1 nation 1 vote, the ceo of world cricket should be shared between nations and change yearly this way the icc stays in touch with world cricket, both with powerhouses and other nations.

    1 year bangladesh are in charge, the next australia are in charge, the next year zimbabwe are in charge,the next england are in charge, the next india are in charge,the next year pakistan are in charge,the next year west indies are in charge, the next sri lanka are in charge, the next year new zealand are in charge, the next year south africa are in charge.

    what would australia know about the lesser nation, what would the lesser nations know about a crowd of 90000 to a boxing day test.what expertise could australia provide west indies on high performance training academies and so on.

    the icc should do all it can to fill cricket stadiums and get people watching on tv.

    the power houses in cricket have a duty to help other nations out, we need more test nations, not less

  • AKM_Saifullah on January 18, 2014, 8:07 GMT

    This is unbelievable. If this comes true, ICC should be renamed as "Pact of 3". There was a time when sports was much too close to Heart. People didn't just liked sports, they LOVED. Unfortunately those days are history. Today, Central Governing Body understands only one thing, "money". Words are not enough to express pain and agony a true cricket lovers will go through, if this really happens. Pathetic. Really pathetic.

  • on January 18, 2014, 8:05 GMT

    I think icc is not serious about cricket. its shocking that ICC allowed to die Kenyan cricket while they talk about globalisation. Why the rest don't form another org and manage themselves within their limit? who gave these 3 the mandate to control the world cricket?

  • British_North_America on January 18, 2014, 8:05 GMT

    Why do we need ICC then? All teams can play on bilateral basis.For the global events, members will just sit and fix the fixture.

  • on January 18, 2014, 8:03 GMT

    This serves no ones interests but their own. Thinking otherwise is being naive. Cricket is not being played by three nations. People who point at test cricket seems to be conveniently ignoring T20 and ODIs. In a sport where many countries are involved delegating the power to a few is a recipe for disaster for the smaller nations as well as the sport itself. This can be easily handled if the other nations band together, question is if they have enough backbone to do so. I mean it's not these three countries would choose to play cricket among themselves forever...how boring and useless would that be?

  • Shongololo on January 18, 2014, 7:54 GMT

    And there I was thinking the ICC's charter was to grow the great game of cricket globally. Yes, something needs to be done to address the challenges in the game but to give super power to just three members and expect them to think beyond the selfish is a big ask. Which makes this spectacularly stupid thinking, driven by the dirty dollar. It will contribute to the demise of Test cricket. Animal Farm comes to the cricket oval. I guess the only positive is it's now in the open, as we've all known for a long while that England, Australia and India receive preferential treatment, on and off the field.

  • Arslan_Shah on January 18, 2014, 7:52 GMT

    Beginning of the End!!!!!!!!!

  • Sanjiyan on January 18, 2014, 7:38 GMT

    So the 3 boards want to fill their pockets at the expense of the smaller nations...The top 3 of the first tier are set which means there is, at most, 2 spots available. the rest are doomed to the second tier with a small chance of promoting to tier 1( assuming they can get a bilateral series vs one of the other 2 teams and win). So whichever countries are in tier 1 with Aus,Eng and India will most likely only be interested in playing vs those 3 teams, since losing wont hurt as much. Though im sceptical about the 3 boards having more power i wouldnt be against it, IF they agree that their positions in tier 1 arent set. The players have to earn it by beating most, not by getting it thrown into their laps.....

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:38 GMT

    ICC is going to act just like UNO veto power countries decide everything. It is not going to work.

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:38 GMT

    I am personally dissappointed and even surprised at times, as to how this global organization operates without a long term vision, structure, strategy etc.

    It beats my logic as to what their main motive is, i.e. game or profits at the cost of the game.

    No doubt, financial stability is important for the survival of the game. But for ICC the most important aspect must be to safe guard the game and wide spread its popularity for which small cricket playing nations are equally important.

    If BCCI is going to play a big role in this organization, I can say that we can soon call RIP, the noble game of cricket!

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:33 GMT

    this is not good. any changes should remove power from all boards and make the ICC a governing body. I can't see any way this power structure will work

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:25 GMT

    I understand many of the negative comments regarding the proposal but if one looks at the cold, hard facts, there are only 3 countries that are able to pull in viewers to watch test cricket. The empty stands in South Africa that greeted the farewell match for one of their heroes is testament to the fact that performance has little to do with reining in the money that the game desperately needs. Such a travesty did not happen in India (Sachin) or Australia (Ponting, Steve Waugh)

    Cricket is already being dominated by the 3 big boards with the ICC having little or no power to keep them in check. This only makes it official and there's really nothing to be done. I would rather these currently blurred lines be made clear than live forever in the false hope of idealistic values like fairness and equality.

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:21 GMT

    Cricket will now never be known as global sports.I think Associate and Affiliate nations must boycott the ICC and perhaps open their own cricket council. Ir will help the cricket teams and fans around the world and cricket will be popular all over the globe.

  • FurqanKhan on January 18, 2014, 7:21 GMT

    Seriously a death of Test cricket or I must say cricket. Why only these three are exempted from relegation. Is it fear of loss or hunger for money...? Alas the idea of making Cricket a global sport will end with the approval of this draft and I am sure most of it will be approved. Go to hell world its just three countries to control what others will do..? R.I.P cricket. If this happens then I am done watching or following cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:19 GMT

    these three plus s.a are anyway the only nations that nurture test cricket and have a decent domestic structure.

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:18 GMT

    The only prospect of this scheme working in the long run is if the power of the "Big 3' is balanced in some way by the power the other nations hold - which is exactly the fact that the Big 3 NEED cricket to be a global game. Practically, the other nations should band together and wield their power as a collective - i.e. if you want us to play with you, then these are our expectations. Fair is fair ....... the Big 3 do generate virtually all the revenues so their desire to control the purse strings is understandable - but the great game can only exist and flourish if the wider group are kept happy

  • Cpt.Meanster on January 18, 2014, 7:18 GMT

    If this proposal is put to vote, it could be defeated by other member nations. But the question remains, will they be able to stand up to the might of INDIA ? They might stand up to Australia and England. INDIA controls over 80% of cricket's revenue. Any stand off against India means almost total financial snubbing. So it's going to be an interesting and tumultuous year for world cricket. I hope justice prevails and cricket is put first above everything else. With power comes responsibility, so they have always said.

  • VisBal on January 18, 2014, 7:18 GMT

    People seem to want to compare the current proposed set up to the veto system we had up until the 90s. There are a few differences. a) Earlier, ICC was the Imperial Cricket Council, not the International Cricket Council. b) By any measure, Australia and England were always the two top ranked countries (in whichever order) until the early 1960s (about 90 years). They were so much better than the rest, the veto actually made sense. Under the current proposal, none of the three is number 1, not by a long shot. c) The ICC actually did help develop cricket in other countries and helped in their integration. This actually broke down after Dalmiya took over at the ICC. A clearly under-prepared Bangladesh was inducted to strengthen the Asian voting bloc. The new proposal does not do anything for any but the entrenched powers.

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:15 GMT

    good decision by the icc , this will develop cricket more

  • on January 18, 2014, 7:11 GMT

    Why don't we proceed with the 2 tier system with IND, AUS & ENG in tier 1 and all others in tier 2. No relegations, no promotions. Problem solved!!!

  • wimehraz on January 18, 2014, 7:10 GMT

    That's shameful . Shame on these countries who are making ICC their own company .If you guys have some little guts then don't do this . Don't be scared . Look at the football world how they are managing it . Learn from them .

  • bobmartin on January 18, 2014, 7:06 GMT

    I haven't read every comment, but it seems that the cricket supporters of the world are united in their condemnation of these proposals. I have an observation to make regarding the ICC. Since it seems to be incensed by money, maybe it should look at itself.. It must cost millions to run, and those millions come from the game it is supposed to administer. Maybe someone should run the rule over that organisation and work out whether world cricket is getting value for money from the ICC. Judging by its peformances in the recent past, My guess is that it does not.

  • GlobalCricketLover on January 18, 2014, 7:06 GMT

    why not ask all other nations to just go home and these 3 play each other until their fans are bored to death and the game ends itself and hence the revenue for these 3?? oh hang on, may be that's the only reason why still want the other countries to exist. such a shame! and that too after having seen the ordeal of Eng-Aus dynasty in the past!

  • soumyas on January 18, 2014, 7:03 GMT

    Till now CA, ECB, BCCI have controlled the world cricket due strong administrators and strong revenues. It is just becoming official now, they also want the world cricket to become truly global sport and intern generate more revenue for them. so I don't think they will do anything which will harm other cricket playing countries and dent own reputation. Every radical change will be resisted initially. People shouldn't start commenting negatively even before understanding their complete plan. Let's hope they have something good for everybody, cricket.

  • rayrizvi on January 18, 2014, 7:02 GMT

    What if the smaller countries were to stick together and played only with each other and excluded the big three from all tournaments and bi-lateral series? The fans in the big three will lose interest and the income will dry up. Sure the smaller countries will suffer, too, but they will suffer regardless in the proposed set-up. What it means is that the revenue that the big three are boasting about is only because of the participation of the rest of the world and not despite of them. History tells us that whenever the interests of the smaller states are threatened, they eventually unite against the big states and the end result is the emerging of the aggregate power of the smaller states that is the most unwelcome and unanticipated outcome of the clash that the big states always fail to see due to their arrogance. They always think that they could isolate and bully each of the smaller states using divide and rule. I hope the smaller states will use some sense and stick together.

  • dunger.bob on January 18, 2014, 6:48 GMT

    I don't pretend to grasp even half of the implications of this. To me it sounds like an autocracy where an elite few steer the ship around. .. There's a tendency for people to think that's bad with no possibility of being good but I think it doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

    It all depends on whether the autocrats (Aus, Eng, Ind) are capable of working together for the benefit of all member nations. It's not impossible is it? .. Cricket needs direction and strong leadership, there's hardly any doubt about that. The ICC can't do it so somebody has to. .. Why not entrust the game to these 3 ? Let's face it, it can barely get any worse than what it is now.

    This obviously will take a huge leap of faith for everyone to get on board. They have to trust the 3 to forget their in fighting and power plays and work for the good of cricket across the globe.

    Personally I think they CAN do it. 3 mature, confident but very different generals have been known to work together in the past.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:43 GMT

    Rest In Peace Cricket Thank You ICC

  • getsetgopk on January 18, 2014, 6:42 GMT

    Why would an Indian or Aussie or English fan want to watch test cricket anymore because they all know well in advance that doesn't matter if they lose or win, they still remain in tier 1. Same goes for the rest of the teams, why would they try to beat something that has been declared a winner long before the contest started. Whats the point of anything anymore? Cricket is a goner.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:35 GMT

    So here comes another step for the destruction of International Cricket. Some countries will dominate the whole game and will recieve loads of cash and finance. While others will wait for their turn to play few matches which will earn them peanuts. ICC instead of improving cricket you are destroying it. You should be abolished and should be replaced by another organisation.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:32 GMT

    That's just Chaos ... i mean how can you do that??? this is sure short dictatorship ... All countries should be provided with equal rights in choosing their heads and solving the problems regarding ICC ... It'll be disappointing if it happens ... and if it happens, that day will be the darkest day of the cricketing history because i don't see cricket flourish from their as it will be a Business spanned over three stakeholders ...

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:20 GMT

    Democracy is alive and well at the ICC. All members are equal, but CA, ECB and BCCI are more equal than the others.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:19 GMT

    Imperialism at its best, what Indian fought against - now they have become the imperialists, and as for England why don't they try and field a English 11 instead of a world 11.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:17 GMT

    Taking out the emotion. This might actually work. Albeit with a few changes (no one should be exempted from the tier system). You have to agree that the only way to globalize cricket is through T20 and then slowly introducing the other formats. My american friends laugh at me when I follow the same one game for 5 days. It is just not attractive. Mean while, this might actually improve the quality of the test cricket played. Honestly, I'd rather watch Che Pujara negating Dale Steyn any-day than sitting through another Hafeez-Steyn moment. And, most of the closet cricketing-communist fans here would never watch the 5 day game between Bangladesh and Sri-Lanka.

  • VisBal on January 18, 2014, 6:10 GMT

    What many commentators are not doing is asking, "How did they come up with this number of 'contribution to the finances of the game'?" Seriously, what does it mean? Is it the share of tickets purchased at ICC events? Is it the money earned by the Board for home series (is a portion of this shared with the ICC?)? Is it the notional share of TV viewership for a particular country? Is it the extent of ICC sponsors from a particular country? How do they come up with this number and what does it mean? And, as others have noted, this is the COMMON money that the ICC holds and was initially meant for development of the game. That is why it was all boards got the same amount.

  • rameshpoplay on January 18, 2014, 6:09 GMT

    Notwithstanding the demerits of return to old anarchist ways, with India joining England and Australia in trying to control the game, for whatever reasons, I feel whenever groups are setup with promotion and relegations (to start with) they should be based on following 4 groups of 5 nations each, with 1 team being promoted or relegated from each group over a period of 2 years: Group A: South Africa, India, England, Australia, Pakistan Group B: Sri Lanka, West Indies, New Zealand, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe Group C: Ireland, Scotland, Netherland, Afghanistan, Kenya Group D: UAE, Nepal, Canada, USA, Namibia

  • stormy16 on January 18, 2014, 6:07 GMT

    Two contradictions here. (1) Neither of the big three are the best team in the world but want more of the money from the deal (2) Its going back to the days where a few (ECB/CA) dominate the game and rest wait for the crumbs. Its all about money of course and the big three will hold the view that it is them who bring the money to the game and thus deserve more which is probably hard to argue against in a world money and money only matters. For the rest of us get the begging bowl ready and get on your knees and hope the big three give us enough cricket to sustain ourselves. Alternatively keep beating the big 3 but that is already the case with SA but apparently counts for little.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:07 GMT

    It does appear to be a shocking idea, it really does, but you just have to wonder if it's not just putting down on paper that which already exists? Clearly these three boards are already in control and have been for a long time and realistically it's hard to imagine any of the other boards being able to create any sort of power in the near term, with the possible exception of South Africa the other nations just do not have the economies and or population bases to be able to demand what they want. This is just the realisation of the sad reality of where our game is at. What's desperately needed is a more inclusive environment, particularly for nations with the kinds of economies that can take the game forward in their respective countries without having to rely on ICC handouts going forward.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:06 GMT

    bad decision this will ruin International Cricket but we have to see how other members respond to it.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:05 GMT

    so this means that cricket will never return to pakistan again

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:03 GMT

    For these reasons cricket is played in only few countries; it will further destroy international cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 6:02 GMT

    there will be a day when the rest of the world will find another way and will boycott the top3 or top 4 ............hope that era comes sooner for the greater good of cricket.......

  • Rohit... on January 18, 2014, 5:57 GMT

    Cricket is a time-consuming game and thus has always lagged behind other sports in terms of popularity... I don't see much of a future of Cricket except for the 4 nations (the Big 3 and SA)... And from an economist point of view, it is always better to have the big contributors controlling the game as it will bring stability to the system... The best one is the new finance model which has come into fray... Now the big contributors can spend more money for the development of the game... But there there is gain, there is a loss... Small nations will have to request the top contributors for some thing in their favor & this will be a hindrance to them... So a day from economist's point of view is a night from a fan's point of view.

  • Desihungama on January 18, 2014, 5:53 GMT

    Gee. I wonder if a Shiekh somewhere decides to invest in cricket in his country. Considering cricket is heading the soccer way in a business model. What then, they will relegate India, Australia or England from the top 4 then?. I can assure you if all it takes a financial clout for being at top, that Shiekh won't budge. This proposal is a disaster waiting to happen.

  • on January 18, 2014, 5:45 GMT

    they have reduced the game of cricket to pure Business. Cricket will never recover if this happens.

  • Kangroos.Proteas.Monkeys.Lions on January 18, 2014, 5:44 GMT

    I think SA should also be included which will make it big four, It is a good idea as now cricket is not just a game rather a global business and the four largest members should sit together to sort out the issues.

  • AamirKhan-SuperStar on January 18, 2014, 5:36 GMT

    Even ICC is struggling i guess, thats why they are trying something to revive itself. One thing is for sure bringing BCCI means more entertainment for fans and will almost guarantee raise in profits.

  • on January 18, 2014, 5:35 GMT

    They are effectively creating the permanent Security Council of Cricket...If it happens it would be a sad day for Cricket...

  • on January 18, 2014, 5:27 GMT

    This is nothing less than the Dictatorship Of The Powerful. It certainly not in the interest of Cricket. All the fun and joy will drain out of the game. The Powerful is seeking to hug all TV rights and earnings. The Lesser Nations will suffer in the Second League of Cricket. The strangle-hold of the Powerful will stifle the development of Cricket as a World game, like Football. R.I.P. Cricket

  • i_amVIVA on January 18, 2014, 5:23 GMT

    In this era of progressiveness, sharing, and democracy, the proposed cricketing helm is sure to push the proliferation of the game to a point of total destruction. Power, greed and control is up there at the front to destroy this beautiful game we love. This is very sad for all the cricket loving individual in the world.

  • on January 18, 2014, 5:23 GMT

    ICC must control the world cricket not by these 3 gready cricket board. ECB, BCCI and CA will only destroy cricket.

  • Chaminda_Rat on January 18, 2014, 5:16 GMT

    What will happen to cricket if all other countries united and play each other only boycott India Aus and Eng.?

  • on January 18, 2014, 5:14 GMT

    It would be interesting to see which recommendation will the ICC take one from cricket committee (two tier system), MCC (test championship) or the Finance vultures (Commercial Apartheid)

  • mukundh1 on January 18, 2014, 5:09 GMT

    Utter nonsense. This is killing the goose that lays the golden egg. Such short-sighted, money-spinning suggestions will kill the game's future and restrict the contest to the top four nations. The associates can never move up the rankings as they won't get enough matches to improve their game.

  • omairhr on January 18, 2014, 5:03 GMT

    It is a bit unfair to single out BCCI. They are doing what English and Aussie boards have been doing for decades.

    If ECB were interested in 'growth' and 'spread' of the game, then European teams (other than Irish) would not have been composed of Pakistani and Indian expat. English did nothing for spread of game to other European nations in two centuries, why would they do now?

    Now, had they done that sort of thing, and cricket were a fourth as popular in Europe as football is, it would have been a phenomenally competitive sport. Revenues in long run can only come through popularity of sport among developed nations.

  • Wasif_Malik on January 18, 2014, 4:50 GMT

    It is so sad to see this type of oligopoly being formed in International Cricket. It is true that there has always been a two tier system in cricket but never has it happened under the auspices of the international governing body. It is really shameful. It is perhaps the reason why, unfortunately, criket would never be able to become a truly international sport like soccer. There aren't a lot of people that play the sport as it is and the "brilliant" ICC is planning to eliminate any incentive that a board might've had to improve its cricket and compete at a global level. You can kiss any chance of a global development in cricket goodbye because these three countries are going to play five test championships every six months while all the "poor" boards would have to content with whatever little cricket they can get a chance to play. Soon there would be a two tier world of cricket in terms of ability as well as money. It is suicidal move if the ICC cedes its authority to these boards.

  • balajik1968 on January 18, 2014, 4:49 GMT

    Sad. But the other boards have themselves to blame. SLC for its colossal financial mismanagement. It has reached a point where the Sri Lankans need the money from the IPL and the profits of an India tour to keep going. You can't find fault with the PCB, the environment has been fraught with tension for a long time. West Indies seems to keep going one step forward, three back. New Zealand is a small nation, with more sheep than people, so they were always going to struggle after a point, more so because they lack support from Australia. As for Zimbabwe, the problem is political.

    Don't keep blaming the BCCI for everything. The BCCI has kept Sri Lankan cricket from going belly up, scheduling matches to the point where fans from both sides have become sick of each other. The BCCI is doing its bit. If they want their pound of flesh, we can't really complain. Actually, what the BCCI lacks is good PR.

  • on January 18, 2014, 4:48 GMT

    I see light at the end of the tunnel BUT guess What it's a TRAIN.... Coming to kill the cricket passion for all....This will for sure unplug this CRICKET FAN for sure ... RIP cricket ... Khan from TX !!

  • Charith99 on January 18, 2014, 4:44 GMT

    Cricket R.I.P 2014.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • NAP73 on January 18, 2014, 4:41 GMT

    I am not surprised. Power and money tends to take a precedence in all business models and I cannot see this ever changing. Extending business reach (including appropriate incentivisation for real improvement and meritocracy) is essential for further growth and sustainability, but this is often overlooked or delayed in association with lip-service and/or open-ended ambiguity. Still, I am curious to see what the landscape will be in say 25 years time, particularly if Bangladesh improves its economic environment ...

  • on January 18, 2014, 4:26 GMT

    This is beyond distrusting...a game I love which I might have to break it off regrettably

  • VisBal on January 18, 2014, 4:22 GMT

    The upshot of this is simple. Official Cricket will only be played by Australia, England and India, and all others can go suck on an egg. Instead of trying to increase the spread of the game, they are now concentrating it to fewer locations. What will they do when cricket loses its lucre in one of these 3 countries? Will they cut back to 2? The other cricket-playing or cricket interested countries should just withdraw from the ICC and play under the MCC: they are in any case still the custodians of the game. A parallel Test and Associate set-up should be built with a more equitable structure to help development of the game in their and Associates' countries.

  • on January 18, 2014, 4:21 GMT

    Cricket is a gentlemen's game, and ICC's people are not cricketers.

  • on January 18, 2014, 4:21 GMT

    Retrograde step! Returning to the hateful days of two Boards holding the "veto" power, and retarding the progress of the other cricket playing countries. And, this is even worse; with one more powerful board joining, and with more and more stringent "closed shop" conditions.

    If 'Logart-episode' hadn't happened, South Africa also would have been in the "inner circle", pushing everyone else to the out-field or even beyond the boundary. Instead of creating a "Cricket's Bermuda Triangle", it would have been a "quadrangle", that's all.

    Each Board keeping most of the money it generates, is understandable, in this commercialised world. This is far worse than that: with control over the COMMON pool. I was among those who commented, in earlier posts, that most of the ICC money is generated by one country; but "giving" by one hand, and "taking it back" by the other, is just not cricket!

  • Blythesville on January 18, 2014, 4:21 GMT

    This will kill West Indies cricket once and for all.

  • crick_wizard on January 18, 2014, 4:18 GMT

    This is ridiculous..freewheeling capitalism at its worst..I do like capitalism in economics and business,however even a capitalist country like US have numerous social safeguards in place to prevent the economy from crumbling under market forces..when compared to that, this is just a sport, for god's sake..so allowing market forces to take over would destroy it..it's ridiculous to term some tours as economically unviable..bcci is killing the game and the goose that laid the golden egg..people in India are losing interest in tests and even Odis..the way I see it, 10 years down the line, the only "viable" format would be IPL..

  • crick_sucks on January 18, 2014, 4:15 GMT

    i am an Australian but am ashamed of what the ca has done. it will completely destroy cricket, won't allow cricket to flourish in other parts of the world and rob other teams the chance to compete with the best. Moreover ca,ecb and bcci are relegation exceptions so in the current scenario only csa can be relegated from tier 1(if its introduced) and the teams which are lower down(india 2nd,aus 3rd and eng 4th) won't be relegated even if they slip further in the rankings.

  • on January 18, 2014, 4:14 GMT

    Ah come on! Consistently paying no heed to fans' sentiments- we're certainly on the wrong side of the cliff.

  • Nuwas on January 18, 2014, 4:10 GMT

    "On one side, they say they are following meritocracy. But then they base promotion and relegation on financial strength." Explains everything was happening with ICC during the last decade or so. Aussies is the only team performs to their potential, ENG stays in it purely bcoz of the fact that they introduced this game & India has nothing but wealth to contribute to secure their existence in Cricket. If so called "meritocracy" is truly considered why can not SA have a say in ICC? I'm afraid this is the official call of the death of True Cricket, country level cricket will die off, IPL,BBL or anyother league from Eng will take place of World tournaments, Cricket will be a carnival but a sport in the next 5 years time. If some miracle were to happen, other cricket boards will start to think as freemen & get together to bring out a new era of Ture Cricket.

  • first_slip on January 18, 2014, 4:09 GMT

    Okay, Fair Enough, those 3 countries can play cricket among themselves and other countries (SA,SL,PAK,NZ,WI,BD,Zim,Ireand,Afgan,Scotland,Dutch) can start a new Governing body and pay cricket, i bet there will be enough sponsors and TV companies who want to work with them, and regarding those 3 countries there want be a cricket team in England if few years because no SAs going to play for them and 80% England team contain imports from SA and Ireland. lol

  • cricketer4ever on January 18, 2014, 4:06 GMT

    Pathetic level of leadership from BCCI, CA, and ECB. When you have leaders of this kind what can you expect... they are busy trying to figure out how to pocket maximum money. When BCCI started getting large revenue politicians of various kind became highly interested in becoming BCCI office bearers. Not sure how CA and ECB are but quite possibly similar in DNA while methods may be more polished.

  • Zaheerahmed on January 18, 2014, 3:44 GMT

    I have been following this wonderful game of cricket for more than 4 decades and have been an ardent fan through thicks and thins, controversies, corruption scandals, doping and match fixing. But this is too much. Will look for something else in life which is comparatively purer, less corrupt and less tilted towards a few powerful nations. These jokers who are ruling cricket in a few countries should be kicked out to save this game. May Day. May Day. May Day.

  • D-Ascendant on January 18, 2014, 3:42 GMT

    Could 2014 go down as the year that people began falling out of love with cricket?

  • mensan on January 18, 2014, 3:40 GMT

    Certainly a step towards death of cricket as an international sport. A sport played in 3 countries only cannot be international.

  • getsetgopk on January 18, 2014, 3:39 GMT

    @Dhaval Brahmbhatt: That idea seems good and the only option for the rest of the nations. If the three are bringing in most of the revenues and hence want them back then there is nothing in it for the rest staying in the Indian Cricket Council. Let the three play each other and earn a lot. Time for the rest to go Kerry Packer way. Staying in a union that is not fair by definition is beyond human dignity, the very reason why people play and follow sports is to be at the very least treated as equals. They should make a new real ICC and if that doesn't work out, I'll be happy if the Pakistanis can find something else to do other than cricket.

  • tickcric on January 18, 2014, 3:35 GMT

    Basically ICC is nudging any just cricket fan to find another past time.

  • Cpt.Meanster on January 18, 2014, 3:25 GMT

    The other notable point I wish to register in this comments section is that SA are missing from the elite group. Is that the reward they get for being no.1 in test cricket and with a relatively healthy financial status ? I do not know. If this elite group is purely based on the basis of revenue generation then it is a shame because by forming such a mini NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization signed between USA, Britain and several West European nations following World War Two), they will only distance themselves from the supposed 'third world' equivalent of cricket nations. So two interesting scenarios emerge within a span of two days originating from the two tier test system. If test cricket doesn't die now, I am not sure when it will.

  • Bang_La on January 18, 2014, 3:23 GMT

    This coterie group has been trying to dish out others and by controlling ICC so there is no cricket all over! Look at the recent performances of two of the leaders, India and England, what makes them lead or decide about cricket?

  • BradmanBestEver on January 18, 2014, 3:18 GMT

    Good old human greed rears its ugly head once again.

  • on January 18, 2014, 3:09 GMT

    The way these three boards treating our game of Cricket I have no doubt it will perish, to make maximum of dirty, ugly money these boards are willing to leave the game on high risk and keep the $$$$ on high demand. IPL has already ruined the game, best players do not give damn to International Cricket example KP, Gayle, Swann, and now a complete dictatorship of these boards to keeping the affairs of ICC in their own hands is just so dangerous. I request to all other boards please for God sake boycott these three disgusting boards, if you did not soon Cricket will no more be follow anywhere.

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:49 GMT

    Why England at all ? Have they ever won a Test Championship or Worldcup ?

    No !

    Then opt out England.

    Cricket Australia - shameful

    BCCI - The new bullies of Cricket

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:48 GMT

    This is a very poor model.

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:41 GMT

    somebody needs to tell the big shots that cricket is a game that we love, not a commodity for them to sell. t20 had done enough damage already n this move will bring test cricket to the end

  • GogaryGogary on January 18, 2014, 2:40 GMT

    Question the relevance of test rankings.....I wonder if that is because neither Australia nor England are No 1. Seriously Laughable. Boycott the game all Aus and England supporters after all its not much fun when you know your team took number 1 by politics not playing.

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:39 GMT

    So world cricket will be better off by giving more money to richer cricket boards and less to poorer ones. That makes perfect sense, Bangladesh must be kicking themselves they didn't think of this earlier.

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:37 GMT

    Shocking!! If this happens then it will be the end of my cricket mania & I will look for some other sport to follow. These 3 Dictators & Bullies MUST be STOPPED NOW before it's too late.

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:35 GMT

    From a sport, Cricket will proceed to become a business only. Instead of developing new venues to spread the sport, the top three will develop a business.

    "the formation of the ICC Business Co (IBC) - a newly formed business arm which will be set up to replace the existing IDI (ICC Development International)"

    Instead of being the guardians of Test cricket, as England and Australia pretend to be with their Ashes overkill, they will go back to another lucrative limited over championship that means nothing.

    And beware whichever country tries the wrath of BCCI after this. South Africa found out to their detriment that these people are not to be taken lightly, I'm sure the rest of the low-lives who will be mere fillers in this regime will need to bow to the wisdom of the immortal gods being created here or pay dearly.

  • jrg_from_oz on January 18, 2014, 2:32 GMT

    As an Australian, I find this plan completely unacceptable. We may as well just abolish the ICC, and go back to the old arrangement where boards organised bi-lateral tours among themselves.

    The problem which no-one seems to recognise is that promotion and relegation won't work because the timeframes involved are too long. A soccer team can be relegated at the end of a season, play one season in a lower tier, and at the end of the season qualify for promotion again - because during the season the team has had the opportunity to play against all other teams, home and away.

    But in cricket, it may take a team 6 or 8 years to play home and away against every other team in their tier. That's long enough to kill cricket in some countries.

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:31 GMT

    The International Cricket Council's decision will hurt Pakistan cricket so this thing while Pakistan is already facing isolation in international cricket

  • Spinna on January 18, 2014, 2:29 GMT

    The revenues aspect I don't understand. What are these 'surplus revenues', where do they come from, how much are they? The percentages seem better aligned with where the money comes from, but are these places already well supported with "non-surplus revenues"? And just how much is taken away from the support for nascent cricket nations? The way this is written, it invites criticism.

    On the other hand, the leadership aspect is horrific. South Africa and Sri Lanka are equals of these petty boards. Pakistan has overcome huge challenges that no other country faces. The other countries may not be "best man for the job" at the moment, but with the boards in place today it won't be long. I am embarassed to be Australian.

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:28 GMT

    1) What is best for the game of cricket and its fans worldwide? 2) What is the best way to make the most money?

    It looks like number 2 is the main concern and number1 is some side issue that is no more than something that needs to be spun with PR to support number 2.

    The comments so far seem to indicate that the general public has already had enough of this kind of thinking. FAIL, indeed.

  • wik8 on January 18, 2014, 2:25 GMT

    and how must South Africa, the best cricket team of the last five years, feel about their omission from the "Big 3"? the message is clear; excelling at cricket is a waste of time and nations should aim at excelling on the financial report.

  • wik8 on January 18, 2014, 2:23 GMT

    absolutely ridiculous. cricket is in a dangerous place when the men in charge focus solely on such corporate goals as media buying, profit margins, financial growth predictions and crony capitalism at the top of the sport. where is the spirit of cricket? where are the plans and funding for associate nations? where is the incentive for teams like WI and ZIM to match the strong teams from their histories?

    this is bad news, and more bad news is to come of it.

  • bwnz on January 18, 2014, 2:15 GMT

    Fantastic. So my country (New Zealand) and others will now be completely shut out of this naked grab for power and greed. It's bad enough that the BCCI have shown so much arrogance and hubris during the last 15 years, now this move to divide the cricketing world even further.

    Where is the commitment to grow the game? All I see is 3 bullies taking away control from the other member states, and utilising it in their own interests.

    Shame on you BCCI. Shame on you ECB. Shame on you ACB. This will be the death of a game I love dearly, and I am angry beyond belief.

    Please do not destroy this beautiful game any further. Show vision and commitment instead of greed for all our sakes.

  • on January 18, 2014, 2:12 GMT

    Money Speaks...! 80% of Revenue from India. Definitely this point can not be neglected.

  • vatsap on January 18, 2014, 2:05 GMT

    "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

  • GMAU on January 18, 2014, 2:02 GMT

    Good bye Pakistan Cricket

  • Pierre_Oxford on January 18, 2014, 1:51 GMT

    This has to be the most monumentally stupid proposal I have ever read. I do not think anything good can come of a system when only three countries decide what happens. Also, the best team in the world (or at least it was with Kallis; we'll need to see how they go now) isn't one of those, which seems somewhat surprising. The guarantee for non-relegation is just plain ridiculous, but then, it would seem to me that a country being relegated would mean the destruction of test cricket in that country (since it would no longer play against the strong teams which draw the crowds), so I'm somewhat dubious about a two-tier system anyway.

    As an Englishman, I am shocked and ashamed that the ECB would consider such a solution.

  • Equanimous on January 18, 2014, 1:50 GMT

    Shameful behavior by some bullies. The fourth place will be used as a carrot to devide and conquer, you do have to give the big three credit for being absolutely blatant about their sickening intentions. It's a sad day for democracy and cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:47 GMT

    If this passes i probably will stop watching cricket. The Indians are going to nail their own coffin when they see that they cant be eliminated. All future prospects of any tours in Pakistan will forever be a dream.

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:45 GMT

    It is just a shame for these big 3 and for ICC. It is just like veto power, veto power is main reason for injustice in world and now this will become reason for dectetorship in cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:41 GMT

    Shame...... Centralizing cricket into big 3s could destroy cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:38 GMT

    Anybody loves Cricket doesn't matter where he lives, would see this through these self-centred, baised, greedy boards, trying to destroy the game and aiming to create a security council within ICC, shame on all of them but more so on BCCI, can't believe this board used to protest and up and arms with pre-eighty ICC which ECB and ACB used to control and now BCCI is very happy to join them and to become the same bully as they were back in 70's and 80's. This ridiculous idea should be nipped in the bud by other boards and everybody should protest against it, I can see even Indians are angered on this, good on you guys.

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:38 GMT

    relegation should be depend on performance of team not on money generated by particular teams cricket board ?? this is ridiculous ..IND AUS & ENG should have play all kind of cricket with themselves then ?

  • ProdigyA on January 18, 2014, 1:38 GMT

    From a commercial point of view, this makes perfect sense. The revenues cannot be distributed equally when the top 3 contribute to almost the entire revenue. Giving these boards their share of authority will ensure the revenues keep coming.

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:33 GMT

    This is like the 5 permanent members in UN, whom have the authority to over rule any decision by using there veto power....ICC is going to be a non functional organization by taking these type of decisions and hopefully will lose its so called respect like WWE. ICC should think beyond the financial issues and took strong decisions without any influence for the betterment of cricket.

  • Lion_96 on January 18, 2014, 1:27 GMT

    What a load if rubbish this is! To revamp the revenue model is similar to what led to the GFC in 2008. I suggest everyone to go watch Capitalism:A Love Story. Thats an example of what happens when the wealthy run the show (Michael Moore). But the one aspect of this supposed recommendations that has really got me angry, is that the 'Big Three' won't be relegated?Are u kidding me? Are u kidding me?? What message does this send to the rest of the cricketing world? To remain in the top Tier of Test Crickrt u need to show a fat wallet or ur out the door? I find that an ironic suggestion because since 2011 all three countries have been whitewashed, IND were whitewashed twice in the space of six months (2011) and ENG were whitewashed against PAK and AUS. If this goes thru, its good night cricket. I just hope cricket fans, journalists and administraters from all countries prevent this from happening.

  • vik56in on January 18, 2014, 1:19 GMT

    From now on ICC will exist in name only .This is the reason why cricket will never become a global sport.

  • Robster1 on January 18, 2014, 1:12 GMT

    This would be a complete travesty for all cricket fans and is solely about the $. Relegation exceptions - what a complete joke. Sport is all about the uncertainty. Are the the BCCI, ECB and ACB trying to kill cricket. Shame on them.

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:10 GMT

    I sincerely hope this does not happen. Already the Asian nations are held ransom to by the BCCI. This will only increase its power over the other Asian nations while all the other nations will have to play to the tune of CA and ECB..

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:08 GMT

    Honestly,i have no trust in ICC.cricket is already in danger and people are more atractive to Football and tennis and this saga will completely kill the game

  • on January 18, 2014, 1:04 GMT

    Had to check the date that it wasnt' April 1st!!!

  • amindenhaag on January 18, 2014, 0:56 GMT

    Comeon guys!!! ITS ICC (INTERNATIONAL CRICKET COUNCIL) NOT ICC (INDIAN CRICKET CORPORATION). Shame, shame, shame. The ECB, CA or BCCI all r very famous, well playing nation. How can b these teams b so afraid of relegation system. Actually, other nation's r following these along with PK,SA,WI's role in the world cricket. If such things happen how, what can the other's learn or how can they progress. We never heard about such things in FIFA or any other sports. ICC should not b the place to show any nuclear muscle or financial muscles, it's a sports base organization which should b sportship minded. It's not fair. If these Big 3 r not counted as relegated team, they should not participate at all for such championship. Let the rest play and decide. What r the other boards doing in such black chapter of the cricket globalization periode. Please do not kill Cricket as it have just began to spread like football even in USA, Italy....

  • kashi524 on January 18, 2014, 0:53 GMT

    BCCI is gonna be US of cricket....and England as usual is England....shame on all of them who are presenting it as savior of cricket.

  • on January 18, 2014, 0:51 GMT

    Nothing wrong with the arrangement - except for the hypocrisy, selfishness, moral corruption and injustice. Solution: have a two-layer governing body, much like the American senate and house. Senate: equal number of members from all nations; House: number of members proportional to population, revenue or whatever.

  • AnotherCricketFan on January 18, 2014, 0:45 GMT

    The lesser mortals will organize and create an association for themselves .. And with some creative marketing and the T20 format, from WI all the way to Hong Kong can jump in and make it a TRUE global sport. They can discard the mighty 3.

    Even a hard-core Indian fan will be bored to death with the same two teams playing over and over and over and over. And without the hard-core Indian market - this formation WILL DIE.

  • on January 18, 2014, 0:42 GMT

    Another UN security council sort of model has been tried to be formulated to safeguard these 3 cricket boards interests. A shameful idea and it should be resisted at all forums.

  • SportsObserver on January 18, 2014, 0:41 GMT

    It's time for the rest of the cricket world to BOYCOTT these three big BULLIES. Let those three form their ultimate TIER and "play cricket" among themselves all year long, lets see how long they survive FINANCIALLY.

  • roygbiv on January 18, 2014, 0:39 GMT

    It seems that cricket is being run by pencil pushers and number nannys with a clear lack of vision. While it is totally understandable that the ECB, CA and BCCI would want to maximise their financial position going forward, their proposal takes the easy way. A number of bilateral series not profitable? Cut. Broadcasters not keen on a World Test Championship? Cut. Other nations not contributing enough to ICC revenue? Cut their share. None of these responses show any imagination or even an attempt at a long term sustainable solution that benefits the whole of the cricketing world. Perhaps if the goal of the ICC was to increase participation and the overall quality of cricket played at the highest level, cricket would then be a better quality product, which would increase viewership and thus increase tv rights revenues. This, of course, would take hard work, dedication and sacrifice. An appetite for which cricket boards clearly lack.

  • Shaggy076 on January 18, 2014, 0:31 GMT

    Cricket needs more than 4 good sides to survive, we need the Bangladesh, Sri Lanka's, Zimbabwes, New Zealands and West Indies to flourish as well. Some of the problem is the big 3 have way more money than the others. World cricket needs all players representing there nations in which they were developed so all nations can improve. To get the other nations to improve cricket it is simple money is needed, Ballance needs to be able to earn a lucrative living playing for Zimbabwe, New Zealand cricket needs more money to stop the older players like Vettori chasing the T20 dollar. Im not sure what the answer is but hopefully the big 3 boards can realise they need all these other nations to flourish to make cricket more competetive and maintain its existence.

  • Thegimp on January 18, 2014, 0:30 GMT

    Ummmm Cricket was going quite nicely when controlled by ECB and ACB (now CA). for 100 years it was grown and cultivated and great cricket nations have flourished, Ind, SA, WI, SL, NZ. other smaller nations were doing well like ZIM, Bang, Scotland. It appears, to an outsider, that the wheels of cricketing governance have only fallen off in recent times when the push for the mighty dollar has lead to a certain cricket board running roughshod over rules, tours, splinter cricket, importance of oneday revenue over test cricket and cricket in general.

  • Westmorlandia on January 18, 2014, 0:24 GMT

    What an awful idea. Awful, awful, awful. I say this as an Englishman.

    If England played Australia and India most of the time, international cricket would get very boring, very quickly.

  • Ozcricketwriter on January 18, 2014, 0:16 GMT

    They are the 3 biggest bodies but I think it is a mistake to disregard all of the other countries.

  • Achettup on January 18, 2014, 0:10 GMT

    This is nonsense! Haroon Lorgat should be given the sole authority to make all decisions!

  • yorkshire-86 on January 18, 2014, 0:10 GMT

    If you went on pure meritocracy, based on %age of Test wins overall, the order would be Australia, England, West Indies, South Africa, Pakistan, India, SL, NZ, Zim, Bangladesh. But the simple fact is you only have to look at West Indies, South Africa and Pakistan (historically overall far superior teams on the pitch to India) as well as the teams lower than India (SL, NZ, Zim, Ban) - these 7 teams, and yes that does include SA, cannot make money from a series unless it is against the 'big three' of England, Australia, and India, home or away. Someone has to finance these worthless tours, and it is done by game against these 3 teams, so its only fair they get the biggest say, since without them international cricket would vanish. As for people complaining about the BCCI, this move actually gives them *less* power - currently in meetings between the Full Members they can count on the subcontinental bloc vote, while with this system they have to convince Eng/Aus, a much harder proposition

  • kandykolla on January 18, 2014, 0:08 GMT

    Won`t be surprised if ICC change it`s name to IPL ..!!! Then 20 over test match..!! Results would be in a day... each team batting twice...!! RIP cricket !!

  • on January 18, 2014, 0:07 GMT

    I think all the remaining teams should form a new league and allow countries like Afghanistan and Ireland to join. There is large enough of a fan base that cricket will flourish. Let India, Australia, and England play each other

  • on January 18, 2014, 0:05 GMT

    How a governing body of a world sport become so blatantly elitist, I cannot understand. Have the other 7 member countries completely lost their ability to even speak out anymore? Well the BCCI owns pretty much every poor nations' boards, so I guess I have my answer. What can I say, money is slowly killing the sport I loved through out my life, I guess the same thing which is happening to every good thing these days. First we had the colonial elite ruling our sport, now the corporate elite. Sad times.....

  • Timmuh on January 18, 2014, 0:04 GMT

    @Toto Khanyase It is far worse than the status quo remaining. This, along with divsional Test cricket, would kill the other nations entirely. There would very quickly only be five nations playing international cricket in any meaningful sense - four if Pakistan can't get itself together (inside and outside cricket), and potentially three if South Africa had a generation where they produced little talent. The big three have been over-run by short term greed (and in Australa's case the rise of professional "sports administrators" who only know about money and not about the sport) ahead of the game. They are supposed to monetise the game, not monetise at the expense of the game. If this goes ahead, and the BCCI alone has enough clout to bribe and cajole to ensure it does it will be the end of any hope for expanding the game (or even retaining what it currently has).

  • PantheraLeo on January 18, 2014, 0:01 GMT

    When we were small, we had a neighborhood group who used to play cricket in a nearby ground. We had a complete kit of 6 wickets with bails and 4 bats, thanks to a rich kid. Unfortunately, he had an entitlement complex and hot temper. Whenever he got out in not so clear cut way (bowled, caught in the outfield), or didn't get to bowl when he wanted, he would throw a fit, and leave with the equipment. After playing with proper wickets and bats, we couldn't go back to stand-in stuff. But, we were sick of this rich kid as well. So, we saved our pocket-money, had a fund-raiser and bought new equipment. Even though some didn't want to, we let the rick kid come and play with us, but he had to learn to play by the same rules. But, what did we know? .. we were just kids!

  • on January 17, 2014, 23:59 GMT

    not sure whether this is 'capitalism' or 'fascism'?

  • on January 17, 2014, 23:56 GMT

    What a shame so these ppl will nake sure that cricket will never become a global sport

  • Brahams on January 17, 2014, 23:50 GMT

    I have not seen such blatant greed, not even in Wall Street.

    A nod for Darwin again. The reptiles would be around for a long time.....


    I hope private T20s will rise, especially in India, and choke these boards. If I had money, I would invest in smaller Indian cities, which are cricket crazy.

    We need someone to bury this jokers - don't get me wrong, I am a die-hard Indian fan.

  • Moppa on January 17, 2014, 23:49 GMT

    This is a blunt but ultimately pragmatic reflection of reality. The ICC is toothless and individual boards wield their influence behind closed doors in proportion to their financial clout and in their own interest. This proposal, as distasteful as it may seem, is (like the UN Security Council) a reflection of the prevailing balance of power. My hope would be that with that power formalised, the responsibility to exercise it in the broader interests of the game would be made clearer, and the big boards held accountable by the cricketing public. As for the relegation issue, the whole issue itself is up in the air so it's too early to get excited about it. If relegation/promotion is simply an opportunity to get into the top 8 for Afghanistan/Bangladesh/Zimbabwe/Ireland, then the exemption has no real prospect of being needed and is simply to give broadcasters confidence. Again, a simple reflection of reality. There is no way India/Aust would play minnows for four years in a row.

  • Matt.au on January 17, 2014, 23:48 GMT

    Posted by Toto Khanyase: Now the bullies have actually decided to team up against the rest of the cricketing world..

    You do realise that this is just a proposal and can only happen IF the other full members VOTE for it.

    I'm betting they may well vote for it because in doing so they are going to see increased revenue payments despite not generating anywhere near what they will get.

    If sides like SA wish to push a point for being relegation free themselves, they need to start generating more income. It would be a given if a country could generate income that can help foster the game in poorer countries they would be made relegation free.

    If the SA public wish their side to be relegation free, go buy a ticket to home games SA will be playing in the future, rather than watch from home. That way you will be helping SA generate income.

    The way it works now, too many cricket boards are happy to see empty grounds, do little about it and simply get in line and put their hands out. BooHoo

  • Kirk-at-Lords on January 17, 2014, 23:46 GMT

    I really want to read the Finance Committee's draft report of 9 January, but can find it nowhere on the Internet. So I must rely on Cricinfo and outlets like Dubhai's "The National" and UK's "Telegraph". All others appear silent. Good on Cricinfo and these others for offering real journalism at some risk of being thought badly of by certain Great Men in the Skyboxes. With the exception of the beginnings of a proper rethink about the Test Championship (relegation/promotion would be just one facet however), the proposals appear unrelievedly dire for cricket as a sport seeking to diversify and globalise while maintaining a commitment to genuine competition, regardless of who ends up on top. The concern, even fear that has prompted the India-UK-AUS cabal, is however very well-placed. The sport is definitely at risk in every way. The solution is not conspiracy but the creation of proper governance. Time to call the Cricket Constitutional Convention & let everyone have a proper voice!

  • on January 17, 2014, 23:46 GMT

    And now the other teams will form a group to protect their own interest. There will be a clash of interests and all of cricket will be at stalemate. Additionally if any other country were to take interest in this sports, the chances of that has gone to a minimum. There are big countries such as the USA where the money it invests in sports is bigger than the size of 300 ICC's financial power. These small narrow minded views will push cricket back another 50 years.

  • on January 17, 2014, 23:32 GMT

    January 17, 2014. A date which will live in infamy. On this day, the Board of Cricket Control of India transformed into the Board of Cricket Control Internationally. Losing track of their noble history that helped their Asian brothers from Sri Lanka and Bangladesh join the Test fold, to paving the return to the great South African team to return to Test cricket, they have killed the dream of many cricketers all over the world to play cricket. With each passing day, they are making about a billion cricket supporters embarassed and ashamed.

  • brusselslion on January 17, 2014, 23:28 GMT

    I agree with most of the other posters to date (especially @Capt.Meanster - excellent post). So, the other boards are going to have to rely on the benevolence of the 'Big 3' to fill their belllys: Something tells me that they are about to go hungry.

  • Monjur_Elahi on January 17, 2014, 23:27 GMT

    Sounds extreme! Its looks like a form of autocracy and bound to fall apart. Everything is heading towards globalisation and ICC is swimming against the current. This would be an extra-ordinary situation and will catch attention from many concerned.

  • on January 17, 2014, 23:21 GMT

    Unbelievable...greater share of revenue and also relegation exception?????

  • Iddo555 on January 17, 2014, 23:15 GMT

    Test cricket will never be global, not in the modern world. There isn't room for a sport that lasts 5 days unless it is well established in a country. Therefore it makes sense that the teams who play test cricket and actually make money, should run it.

    T20 has the potential to be a world game, a game that is over in 3 hrs. ICC should focus on that and leave test cricket to Australia, England, India and South Africa

    I don't even see one day cricket lasting, we don't need two short formats and T20 is the game most likely to do well in the world.

  • on January 17, 2014, 23:13 GMT

    It was always the Indian Cricket Council. The ICC has, for as long as I can remember, been the most incompetent governing body in world sports. It's embarrassing for all cricket fans which means apart from these 3 teams, all other countries lose out. Pathetic!

  • on January 17, 2014, 23:09 GMT

    This will kill world cricket, pure and simple. Instead of what they should be doing and planning for the addition of one and probably two full members in the next five to ten years (Ireland and Afghanistan) both this proposal and the promotion-relegation system are squarely aimed at significantly weakening the positions of Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, West Indies and New Zealand both on and off the pitch in addition to keeping the new test capable nations in a funding pergatory of sorts, while showing absolutely no consideration of future needs of anyone outside of the big three. Sadly, I think we all suspect this will be a fait accompli (because as we are talking about cricket we know the outcome to any decision made by the ICC will be self-sabotage

  • heathrf1974 on January 17, 2014, 23:08 GMT

    If that's the case, one thing that these three have to realise is to get over their egos and focus on assisting the weaker nations with their cricket development. This includes nations like Pakistan, West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Ireland and Afghanistan. However, if they don't, which I'm concerned they will, then it will be only three nations playing each other and cricket will become a joke.

  • Masking_Tape on January 17, 2014, 23:08 GMT

    Isn't that how it is already?

  • on January 17, 2014, 23:01 GMT

    The importance of history is that we are able to learn from our mistakes. Yet here we are, about to hand out more power to those who already have the biggest say in the cricketing world. The BCCI tried to bully CSA last year and then robbed true cricket fans of a proper series; so they're being rewarded with more power to bully. The ICC are cowardly handing over powerful because they're being strong armed. DISGRACEFUL!!!

  • Rezaul on January 17, 2014, 23:00 GMT

    I cant believe my eyes what I have just read. These three boards are trying their best to destroy cricket and to make sure cricket will never become a world event. And SA is number 1 in ranking, but you can relegate them but not mediocore Ind and Eng who often gets white washed on abroad. Its a shame by the name of power misuse.

  • Brownly on January 17, 2014, 22:58 GMT

    Ridiculous. Once again the administration body of world cricket shows how out of touch they are with the fans. These three cricketing boards need to reconsider for the good of the game and not for the good of their pockets.

  • 2.14istherunrate on January 17, 2014, 22:52 GMT

    Why the hell do they have to go in for power broking. Their aims and ends are so pathetically limited and limiting. Why should these three countries get more of the profit when they are on the one hand so greedy anyway and on the other hand do not have a clue how to spend the money they already have. Farcical. It's about administrators who do not have a clue about being more than kids in mens' bodies.

  • lukiboy on January 17, 2014, 22:48 GMT

    If this becomes a reality, it will really serve as the end of cricket. It is just fundamentally unfair and biased and just altogether against the spirit of sport and fair competition. If this materialises I will boycott watching cricket. I mean who wants to see India, Aus an Eng play in a continually tri-series, just look at the most recent farcical and boring Ashes series, I've honestly have found the Pak-SL series better entertainment.

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:47 GMT

    The BCCI, CA and ECB have gone too far. This would destroy cricket in my country along with countries like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:47 GMT

    Let the other 7 test playing nations tighten their belts and refuse to accept this proposal.

    If they do not listen stop playing against the three nations, let them play against each for some time and see how they survive.

    It would be very fascinating for 7 to bring along USA in its group shift cricket to west of the Atlantic,all this will involve time and patience.l

  • KarachiKid on January 17, 2014, 22:44 GMT

    I see a split in world cricket.

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:43 GMT

    I have always preferred football over cricket and thankfully once these laws come into force, may be just may be, people will switch over to other sports in Pakistan.

  • Sudhir65 on January 17, 2014, 22:43 GMT

    This is really an interesting article. It says before today, it was just ECB and CA calling big shots. But the article goes on to say that BCCI brings in 80 percent of ICC's revenue and it wants it. And people are shocked that it will be 3 instead of 2 calling the shots? Why were not they more shocked when just 2 nations- Aus and Eng. calling the shots?

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:37 GMT

    Yes, so rest of the world can get to gather and should avoid playing the game with these three countries, let them play cricket with each other, no problem. we will play our own cricket. tell you what without India, England and Australia Cricket would be a better game.

  • duralsumo on January 17, 2014, 22:37 GMT

    It seems that administrators are trying their hand in marketing and serving up what they think is attractive. What they should be doing funding cricket from grass roots up. Funding should go to West Indies to restore what they were. Minnows like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh should get funding as well. Cricket Australia should revisit the path they took and host these teams in October in places like Cairns, Darwin and Townsville and even other regional areas and Hobart and Canberra???? Funding should also go to developing USA, baseball will always rule however a presence like baseball has here in Australia will be a start. All the Full Members should not be forced in the promotion and relegation as they live and breathe cricket in summer. Do we need to have a championship of test cricket. In years gone by we accepted that teams were number one in the world by their performances and not a championship. World Cup works however I can never see a test championship working in the same way.

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:36 GMT

    How is world cricket not up in arms about this? This is beyond ridiculous!

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:36 GMT

    Is this expected to improve cricket? Serves the West Indies right. We did nothing when we ruled cricket and were the kings for 15 years. Now we are being put with the second class. The DEATH of Cricket. Big 3 with a VETO - the UN security Council

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:33 GMT

    This is a farce, pure farce....

  • SanjivAwesome on January 17, 2014, 22:32 GMT

    In an administrative sense, Power is now the entering as the main influence of the future of the game. On the face of it, it makes sense that those with Power should steer the future. They have leadership responsibilities. But. But history is that yesteryear's Power brokers - Eng and Aus boards - rarely showed adminstrataive leadership.

  • Jonah58 on January 17, 2014, 22:29 GMT

    The only question now is will the other boards allow this 'model'? To date at least 3 other boards vote the way that India tells them to and obviously CA and ECB are in this purely for their own self interest.

    Will Zim, SA, Bang, Pak WI, NZ and SL have the courage to ALL vote against this preposterous proposal or will they be like the Turkies that voted for Christmas and help in the death of cricket and its chances to become a global sport?

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:17 GMT

    I hope this fails to be passed. If it does it would prove to the world what many suspected with the BCCI in charge. They will destroy cricket. They are well on their way!

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:16 GMT

    the rest of the cricket nations, Pak, Sri Lanka, South Africa, NZ, West Indies, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe should form a pact and not play in any ICC matches until this barbaric decision is reversed. We'll see how much money big 3 will make playing gully cricket by themselves...we'll see how much revenue a world cup of 3 teams can generate...someone just needs to have the gutts.

    And I'm sure there is a former disgruntled ICC executive that despises the ICC and would want to make another international cricket governing body. Just need to get everybody together as this will challenge the status quo. It's got to END somewhere.

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:10 GMT

    Are we missing something here? This news has been out for about 4 hours now, and every single comment I have read anywhere on the web is the same: This is a shockingly terrible idea. How is it possible that Giles Clark and the 9 others on the ICC panel that came up with this proposal are so completely out of touch with the wishes of the people that really matter in cricket - the fans? I'm looking forward to their explanation of how this will benefit world cricket. If they can't, they should seriously consider if they the correct people to do their jobs.

  • on January 17, 2014, 22:10 GMT

    This is totally rubbish...I can't believe that this can be thought of....For God shake, don't make cricket hostage to few boards only.

  • Biggus on January 17, 2014, 22:09 GMT

    Whilst it's hard to judge this proposal adequately on the basis of one fairly short article I'm against it on principle even though I'm Australian. The creation of such a 'Star Chamber' will likely only broaden the gap between the haves and the have nots of the cricketing world. I think it would be a retrograde step and I'm enormously annoyed that CA would consider this to be suitable arrangement for the betterment of the game, further evidence if any was needed that they've given in to the demands of the bean counters, that cricket governance has little to do with the health of the game and everything to do with profit maximisation. Where are the visionaries who would act in the best interests of the game, and how are their voices to be heard over the din of the money grubbing apparatchiks?

  • PratUSA on January 17, 2014, 22:08 GMT

    And one more idea, add a rule that only India, England and Australia can contest a world cup final. These 3 cannot fail to qualify for the semis to protect ICC income and 4th team in semis will be biggest revenue generator outside these 3 for the preceding 4 years. Now that's what you would call a brilliant idea.

  • MasterClass on January 17, 2014, 22:04 GMT

    Amazing how people who would not normally consider themselves socialists would in this case advocate distribution of wealth! A poor failed idea by all measures. Incentives, opportunities, and access is what is needed, as well as some good old hard work to move up: something many boards are incapable of it would seem.

  • PratUSA on January 17, 2014, 22:03 GMT

    So this was the formula, Sanjay Patel, had said that N Srinivasan had worked out. Awesome! All the reforms of past 15 years are being reversed and more. I hope that at last other 7 members stand up and form another international body. Let 3 boards play among themselves. Time will teach them a lesson when there will no media rights as you can't play any world cups when it's merely a triangular tournament, and surely we fans will get sick of these India-Australia-England contests in a year or two. After that International cricket can peacefully die. Welcome to year 1876.

  • MasterClass on January 17, 2014, 22:01 GMT

    The reason the 3 (Eng, Aus, Ind) are not subject to relegation in the proposal is because that's where virtually ALL the revenue for the ICC and world cricket comes from folks! And that's exactly why CSA is not in the list either. Which sponsor would be willing to plunk down cash for rights several years in the future if there's no guarantee that the money making countries will not still be there?!? Clearly many of the comment here are clueless and typical poor-me, evil-you responses. But, having CSA in the council I feel has merit given the strong team (albeit poor revenue).

  • ozymandiasza on January 17, 2014, 21:59 GMT

    Easy enough. Boycott the "big 3". Let them know that the fans, at the end of the day, have more control over cricket than any board(s).

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:57 GMT

    It is about Money and sorry India, England and Australia cannot be held hostage due to perilous situation in say pakistan or Bangladesh or Zimbabwe. Selfish or not the one who gets in meat also needs a bigger share. Go back and strengthen your own markets

  • Bob_Gaithersburg on January 17, 2014, 21:57 GMT

    One word -- des·pi·ca·ble

  • anoopshameed on January 17, 2014, 21:54 GMT

    Wake up ICC, this is the 21st Century-the ticket you are holding is a return to the 19th Century!

  • Neel_123 on January 17, 2014, 21:54 GMT

    And those who are bringing soccer-FIFA comparison:

    When was the last time England or Germany of Spain soccer teams visited India for matches? Why is FIFA not thinking of popularize soccer in India? Just replace Spain with India and FIFA with ICC and you have your answer Indian cricket team plays most with top-ranked team!

    BTW: Given that not many people watch NZ-WI test matches, how many of you will donate money to ICC to keep the test alive?

  • merandy on January 17, 2014, 21:51 GMT

    Money...Money...Money... No more Cricket. RIP Cricket!

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:49 GMT

    Don't kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Fans will get tired of watching the rich 3 play each other. too much of a good thing...Eventually this decision will be the downfall of test cricket

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:49 GMT

    If this happens cricket will never be same sport "ever" again and it will end up as a cricket game of 3 nations. If this happens i will never watch this game any longer and it will be pointless to watch as cricketing decisions are going to be biased for sure. A good way to end a sport.

  • philvic on January 17, 2014, 21:47 GMT

    Very very poor behaviour but pretty much what one has come to expect from this bunch. I am afraid the future of proper cricket is far from bright with this cabal in control

  • Neel_123 on January 17, 2014, 21:47 GMT

    Belated but a great decision.

    All these comments against BCCI are stupid, to say the least. How long one board is supposed to take 'care' of other boards? Hate BCCI all you want but fact remains they have popularize cricket in India and with their business acumen generated huge funds for Indian players, state board and last but not the lease ICC itself.

    Remember India is not a super rich country. Many of the cricket playing nations have much better economy than India. Population of Pakistan is large enough to exploit for funds; same is the case with Bangladesh. If Indian board can generate wealth through smart business models, why can't rest of the boards(Pakistan, Srilanka, Bangladesh, etc.)? Any cogent argument, haters?

    More than arrogance of Indian/England/Aus/SA boards, what hurting cricket today is the inept and corrupt official board members! If WI, NZ are loosing youngsters to other sports (soccer, Rugby, BB) it shows inefficiency of these boards. As simple as that.

  • Big_Chikka on January 17, 2014, 21:46 GMT

    ps... someone drew the analogy of the united nations.............truth be told...not far of from the truth there.............power brokers, not all deserving their seats responsible for corruption, mismanagement, draining funds and inaction...............and getting paid for it... nothing but token gestures

  • Timmuh on January 17, 2014, 21:43 GMT

    Disguating. India and Australia are the ones whose greed is killing cricket in other nations, and driving Test cricket to the brink. These three are the nations whoich have a choice of favouring the sport or the money, and only England even has any slight thought toward the sport. Giving India and Australia more power would ensure that the smaller nations stop playing cricket in any meaning ful way in a matter of a few years. Ths may make financial sense, but in terms of advancing the game it is hard to imagine a more damaging proposal.

  • Muely86 on January 17, 2014, 21:36 GMT

    BCCI should not have a say in anything. This is disgusting for international cricket.

  • PlaySafeus on January 17, 2014, 21:31 GMT

    Today will be marked as black day in cricket history just because these boards showed guts to surface such shameful proposal, now it does not interest me if it gets passed or not because the intentions are clear. SA has been punished for Logart's Saga and England has squeezed in their place.

    In few years we will be moving to early 20th century when all matches were between Eng and Aus, and few with WI. BCCI has brilliant minds to protect their interests and at same time destroying this beautiful game's future.

    It will not surprise me if this gets passed with unanimous vote, last few years have shown enough to indicate such results. Board heads will see personal gain and will vote in favor to put Last Nail in Cricket's coffin. R.I.P Cricket.

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:31 GMT

    One nail in the coffin of cricket. I will have to find a better way to spend my time.

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:31 GMT

    after reading a bit of this.....i'm feeling pretty sure that cricket is at the forefront of being destroyed in the near future!! I hope the other member boards do something serious to stop this trio"s dominance in cricket affairs in order to save cricket and its integrity!!

  • asim229 on January 17, 2014, 21:29 GMT

    Just a few days ago I was commenting on one of the articles about Pak-Aus series that only big three Aus,Eng, and India are getting fair share of matches and revenue and looks like they are controlling ICC and cricket and some people criticized my comment by saying that I am un-neccesserily dragging Aus,End, and India into this discussion and boards have themselves to blame.With in a few days I am proven right :) and now they are making these things official as stated in this article by creating revamped ICC, removing Ftp and creating a two-tier system.

  • Tigg on January 17, 2014, 21:29 GMT

    No. No. No. No. No.

    The Full, Associate, Affiliate system is strange enough without adding a 'super-full' member.

    As for test leagues, if you're good enough, you play in the top flight. If not, you demote. Simple.

  • shammini on January 17, 2014, 21:27 GMT

    continued.. The only way these changes can be brought about is by supporting them properly which is not going to happen if these three boards get to rule over others. ECB and CA will be self indulgent and only strive to promote themselves, BCCI on the other hand, despite all the money and power, will NEVER do one step to improve the infrastructure in their own backyard. Other boards should therefore try and prevent this from happening now or crickets future will be pushed backwards for a good few years to come - I follow India and England but dont support either boards.

  • shammini on January 17, 2014, 21:22 GMT

    Sincerely hoping this doesn't become the case. Would hate to see cricket ending up being the loser here. CA and ECB over the years and BCCI in the recent years have all shown that they are very selfish and only try to protect and promote themselves first. Agree that BCCI despite all the criticism has actually done a little bit more than the other two in getting cricket outside the confines of the Test playing nations but thats where its positive influence ends. Would like the current way to continue. Would like to see more competitive cricket from more than just the current top 4 and that is going to happen only with improvement in infrastructure in those nations. This improvement is never going to happen if these three boards get to rule at the top. Main reason for wide disparity in competitiveness is lack of proper infrastructure in the bottom half of the test playing nations. And there has to be a way for upcoming nations like Ireland and Afghanistan to be introduced to Tests.

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:22 GMT

    It will be a shame bringing Money before game

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:21 GMT

    i suggest new name for ICC/ IEACC (Indian England & Australia Cricket Council ) its worst example of cricketing capitalism

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:20 GMT

    time to withdraw from icc pakistan and south africa,and have more cricket between the 2,new zealand and sri lanka could join them too,not really into being a slave to others.

  • ahweak on January 17, 2014, 21:18 GMT

    ..."gives a larger share of control over world cricket to the Australian, English and Indian cricket boards - both in the boardroom and on the field. It also gives them a larger share of revenues"....it's all about money and power. Rich will get richer and poor will get poorer.

  • theCricketPurist on January 17, 2014, 21:14 GMT


    The first thing ICC needs to do is ban the people who came up with this rubbish.

    If this "overhaul" takes place, then the future of cricket is as follows: 1. Within 5 years only the "big 3" will play test cricket, and RSA and NZL would be the only remaining "associate" nations. 2. Within 10 years only the "big 3" play cricket. 3. After that Indian fans will surely lose interest, and the money will stop flowing. So India will also be kicked out of the "group" 4. Then cricket will be back where it began - played only between England and Australia.

    This is the beginning of the end!

    Thinking of it, most of Cricinfo's pages will need to be moved to the 'Archive' section.

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:13 GMT

    Worst thing possible - being an India I absolutely rubbish this idea..........Why don't we grant test status only to India, England & Australia if they are to make all decisions ? It sucks

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:09 GMT

    R.I.P. Cricket

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:08 GMT

    I really really hope it's April 1st.

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:02 GMT

    This will be the death of cricket as we know it. Cricket is not a global sport because it was dominated by Eng and Aus for over 100 years and now BCCI has joined them to make it an even bigger monopoly. Forget taking cricket to China, there wont even be development in Afghanistan or Ireland at this rate. Cricket will never be a global sport until such self interest reigns. Well done BCCI, ECB and CA. I am disgusted!

  • on January 17, 2014, 21:00 GMT

    Lol, this is ridiculous. I can't believe they did this with straight faces.

    What international cricket needs is the NFL model -- revenue redistribution. Otherwise it'll die a slow but deserved death.

  • Sajid111 on January 17, 2014, 20:59 GMT

    So tomorrow when die hard cricket fans fed up seeing only 3 team playing cricket? What will they do?

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:59 GMT

    This is a massive step back for the ICC and world cricket and I am extremely disapointed that my own board (ECB) have been a party to this.

  • Nerk on January 17, 2014, 20:52 GMT

    Come on other boards. Shoot this down. Cricket should not be controlled by three boards. The ICC should be looking to make cricket a sport of the people, but, looking at this move, they are making cricket a sport for the aristocrats. Boooo!

  • Nmiduna on January 17, 2014, 20:52 GMT

    im beyond words.. i love cricket to death.. and it'd mean the death of it when the day this get accepted. come on all you people, it's time to actually do sth for the game we love!!! Jrod, surely you can do sth, cant you?? release that film at the least!

  • Sajid111 on January 17, 2014, 20:51 GMT

    One word ,"STOP". This simply not good for the game. IPL ALREADY HAVE DAMAGED CRICKET.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:48 GMT

    Really Sick. Its jungle law

  • Ganan18 on January 17, 2014, 20:48 GMT

    What an absolute joke. If this happens, I shudder to think about the lack of a future international cricket has

  • huffpost on January 17, 2014, 20:47 GMT

    This move was long overdue.. and contrary to what people think, in the long run this is beneficial to cricket...kudos to Srini for coming up with this idea. ..

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:42 GMT

    And why are the so called big 3 protected from relegation when Pakistan, South Africa and Srilanka have beaten them all in the recent past in individual games as well as series.

  • yorkslanka on January 17, 2014, 20:41 GMT

    If this happens then THIS will be responsible for killing test cricket amongst countries other than Aus,Ind & Eng. I don't understand the logic of it..how about forcing the boards to stick to the FTP using fines/bans (yes that includes my own country who have chosen money from ODI's over test cricket) ..really bad idea

  • TSJ07 on January 17, 2014, 20:41 GMT

    I am from India and must admit that this is wrong move by three boards. That means all they care about is money and not development of cricket all around.We already have seen demise of Kenya and Zim crciket and now it may be PAK, WI, BD,NZ and AFGN and IRE for sure. Rip cricket!!

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:40 GMT

    Terrible decision, the game will not grow under this model and the associates and affiliates will probably never get the chance to get up to the top table.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:37 GMT

    I'm laughing. It's such an abstract draft.

  • markatnotts on January 17, 2014, 20:37 GMT

    Oh dear, I believe I have just read my first comment thread here where every serious poster is in agreement that this is just a rank bad thing for our beloved cricket world!

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:36 GMT

    i think it will be better that India ,Australia and England ban all other countries like Pak,WI,SA ,NZ,SL & BDESH to play cricket and play all kind of cricket from ODI Wcup to T20 WCUP & Test series with each other and than BCCI ,ECB CA see how much revenue they can generate ?

  • heartbreakerz on January 17, 2014, 20:34 GMT

    Time for other members to boycott the ICC n the so-called 'Big 3' n play among themselves n the associates. I know that it wont be very viable financially but still they may have to do it to keep the game alive.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:34 GMT

    Rest in peace cricket

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:32 GMT

    for once EVERY COMMENTOR AGREES ON An ISSUE! People at ICC, that alone says something.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:32 GMT

    So this mean bcci,ca,and ecb should run cricket and stop this so called icc who blindly follows these three countries..

  • Robeli on January 17, 2014, 20:29 GMT

    I had to check my calendar. Thought it was April Fool's Day.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:26 GMT

    This is begining of the end for cricket as we know it.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:24 GMT

    this is not a good idea at all because if you want to earn more money with just three power house then all other cricket team can be waste for this decision.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:24 GMT

    This just shows why promotion and relegation in test cricket is a non-starter. By making 'the big 3' exempt you remove any legitimacy and kill the concept at birth. Also what is wrong with the test rankings, surely they need to be given equal or more importance now that the World Test Championship seems to be a non starter?! Remove Zimbabwe as a test nation and replace them with Ireland, then make everyone play everyone else at home and away over 5 years. Easily doable if the boards showed a bit of foresight. Minimum of 3 tests per series to go with 3 odis and a T20, maximum of 5 tests, 5 odis and 2 t20s, and end the pointless standalone ODI series which have been proliferating of late.

  • Captainman on January 17, 2014, 20:24 GMT

    I might as well give up on Cricket. Such a great sport yet poorly run.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:24 GMT

    it looks as a sports cricket will go down with time. this so called super powers surely and slowly will kill the game.

  • usernames on January 17, 2014, 20:22 GMT

    This is shambolic beyond words. Three of them controlling the entire thing reeks of stupidity. The cricket fraternity needs to do more to encourage cricket in other parts of the world, grow their teams so that we get to see better and more contests instead of shrinking it down like this. I get self-sustenance and all that but on the part of the BCCI, ECB, and CA, this is absolutely not done.

    Cricket is setting an example for being the worst run game in the world, despite being such a wonderful game. Sad. :(

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:20 GMT

    this is stupid but if three nations continuously play each other they will get bored. seriously pakistan should quit cricket and develop football at least there wil be less hypocrisy

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:19 GMT

    I see none other than these three playing cricket in a couple of decades. Sigh!

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:14 GMT

    It's a shame that only three boards will control cricket. Cricket will never be a global game. All top boards members should be part of decision making. Democratic system should be there not veto system.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:14 GMT

    Cruel Injustice hanging over cricket. Where is Pakistan and SL and both are much ahead than Kiwis or ECB to generate funds and are big time crowd pullers. If ECB, CA and BCCI are making a trio then SL, PK and SA shall make a trio as wll which eventually will lead to nothing but destruction of cricket. Do thy think that other big revenue generators are Goofs to accept such a proposal especially when English cricket is totally finished and no genuine crowd to follow; Australia is just trying to come up after battering in post waugh brothers era . Shame to such a scheme.

  • Pippy_the_dog on January 17, 2014, 20:13 GMT

    Unbelievable! We need to get rid of the lot of them. Cricket is not a business, and I'm sick of seeing it screwed up by these unaccountable suits.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:06 GMT

    This initiative is going in exact opposite direction required to grow cricket worldwide. This proposal is narrow and short sighted in the extreme. The ECB, CA and BCCI are hastening in the contraction and not the expansion of cricket. Anyone with basic marketing sense knows you want to expand your markets not shrink them if you want to grow your business and remain economically vibrant. Shame on these three boards and their parochial attitudes.

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:02 GMT

    Cricket is never going to be a global sport. It will be interesting to see how the other members react. Puppet boards are going to shake their head. Started in 1877 with 2 teams... will end up in 2077 with 3 teams.. thats going to be the fate of cricket

  • on January 17, 2014, 20:01 GMT

    So not only BCCI, even CA and ECB also think only about money and themselves. My English and Aussie Cricket supporter friends on this forum always said only BCCI is selfish. Anyways, this is a very very bad move and will kill cricket in niche countries like NZ, WI and Sri Lanka, if it isn't already dead.

  • Brianlaramyman on January 17, 2014, 19:58 GMT

    They other 7 boards should not allow the BIG 3 to bulldoze their way through and if all efforts fail should form their own club of 7 (they have the numbers) and let the BIG 3 scratch each others backs for the next couple of years or till they come back to their senses?

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:56 GMT

    Is this an early April Fool's joke? Certainly sounds like it. How can cricket be sustained with such biased administration? Three boards control all aspects of the game and are excempt from relegation? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard. Imagine if a football league said the 3 top clubs cannot be relegated because they bring in the most revenue. That's not competition, that's a merry go round. Might as well just get these 3 nations play each other year in and year out. Their coffers will always be full and the stadiums packed. Who cares about growing the game further than that. Cricket administration is becoming a farce and as a result disillusioned fans like myself will start to move away from the game.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:51 GMT

    not surprised at all ICC seemed to me as one of the departments of BCCI because they have done whtever they wanted to starting from changing rules, editing tours and most importantly scheduling which catered for their domestic tournaments which is a pity. This is going to destroy cricket but will fill the pockets of a few. and please don't give me the crap of the revenue generation !!!

  • Maddy83 on January 17, 2014, 19:43 GMT

    Great move!!!....Capitalism in Cricket......

  • qwertyuiopqwertyuiop on January 17, 2014, 19:31 GMT

    i am an Indian but am ashamed of what the bcci has done. it will completely destroy cricket, won't allow cricket to flourish in other parts of the world and rob other teams the chance to compete with the best. Moreover csa,ecb and bcci are relegation exceptions so in the current scenario only csa can be relegated from tier 1(if its introduced) and the teams which are lower down(india 2nd,aus 3rd and eng 4th) won't be relegated even if they slip further in the rankings.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:26 GMT

    This ridiculous and just goes to show why cricket will never be a truly global sport. In the old days it was the English and Australians who were self appointed guardians of the game and did as they pleased. Then the BCCI came in and started using their financial muscle to take over from these 2 and they were sticking it to every whenever they got a chance just because they could and no one could do anything about it. Now the bullies have actually decided to team up against the rest of the cricketing world. All that this means is that status quo in the game of cricket will remain the same for the next 100 years, no chance of moving up the ladder. None of these guys and their boards actually have the best interest of the game at heart, it's just a pissing contest for them.

  • Cpt.Meanster on January 17, 2014, 19:25 GMT

    Okay. So we are going to have a mini UN Security Council here. Fair enough BUT are these 3 boards going to be held equally accountable and responsible for the mistreatment of other nations/boards ? What about the situation in Pakistan or Zimbabwe ? Will cricket be taken to countries around the world OR will it diminish and ultimately perish within the selfish confines of these 3 nations ? I am an Indian supporter BUT this is not good news for world cricket. Obviously, the BCCI will lead the other two in influencing crucial decisions. For the sake of cricket, I really hope this decision is overturned. The ICC needs to have all full member nations equally participate and have a voice. Otherwise, it will be a classic case of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.

  • Kiyaora on January 17, 2014, 19:25 GMT

    Strongly feel CSA should also be be part as they are a top team, leave alone BCCI"s reservation against Logart. Cricket is bigger than Individuals, even players will admit it. Its not a problem when administrators are true cricket professionals but when politicians play a bigger role than game.

  • akhilesh0109 on January 17, 2014, 19:24 GMT

    This is beyond limits.. Cricket in general stands to lose following this decision. The most hard done by would be the fans like us who will have to wait for years together just to get a glimpse of David vs Goliath battles.. As it is we have never hosted Bangladesh for a test series. Few more countries may soon join that new "associate n affiliate" list. Spare a thought for Ireland and afghans who are dreaming of test status. The Irish will continue to lose rankins and Morgans to English poachers. This decision needs a proper look at before being finalized..

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:24 GMT

    not a good idea. cricket is already being played among 10 full members and we already see a huge gap interms of games pkayed becausr big boards want more money and choose opponents accordingly. and giving control to 3 means they will do what they like. they already play with each othet more than others. i dont know why these plans are surfaced? just read about ftp proposal and now this. they surely are trying hard to earn more but in the process damaging cricket.

  • ferrari5107 on January 17, 2014, 19:21 GMT

    Why ICC, why are you trying to kill cricket. Are MAN U, MAN City, Real Madrid, or Barcelona exempt from relegation in their respective leagues? No, so why should India, Aus, and England be exempt from relegation in cricket? IF you are good enough, then dont worry about relegation, but if you suck you better be worried about relegation, otherwise those three will have no reason to put effort on field, they will just go for money and not put any emphasis on performance. No team in any sport has power to bend is governing body, but because of your softness India, Australia and England are taking advantage. I thought other sports need to look at cricket, for use of technology and growth, but man cricket should look at American sports (NFL expecially) how they are trying to expend not limit themselves.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:17 GMT

    Not only is this extremely selfish behaviour by the usual suspects, but it is actually self-defeating. Carry on like this and there will be just three countries playing cricket.

    Is there another sport which is run so badly? Do they want to grow the game worldwide? It appears that they don't. The other full members (and associates) need support and certainly deserve a lot better than this. Shame on the ICC.

  • Robeli on January 17, 2014, 19:15 GMT

    FAIL. This is not a model that will bring and improve cricket to the rest of the world. The 'Big 3' will always look at their own state before looking at others. Very surprised that SA is not included. Seriously? I see alot on objection from SA.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:12 GMT

    I am lost. How would boards other than these three would vote in favor of such system. Also whats the use of two tier system when the three teams would remain in the first tier and keep playing themselves.

  • PatrickJM on January 17, 2014, 19:11 GMT

    The one thing cricket does not need is the consolidation of power in the hands of powerful the few. It needs diversity in both the people who play the game and those who administrate. We need to see a more even distribution of the wealth to encourage the game beyond its current boundaries and borders. New test nations, new international teams and new cricketing environments is what is required. You can only make so much money.

  • HatersAreOrdinary on January 17, 2014, 19:11 GMT

    you gotta be kidding me. is this really could happen? i mean look at other int sports governing bodies like fifa, int. olympic, hockey etc. do they have the same system too :s this is really going to kill cricket as a game of people.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:07 GMT

    You don't the ICC to play games of cricket. If the BCCI, CA and ECB want to form a conglomeration of sorts, they are more than welcome to do so for themselves - the others just won't participate in it and will play cricket among themselves. Of course, how viable that will be financially, won't be known unless countries break out of the ICC. That being said, I am willing to bet that there are enough people out there that want to see a Dale Steyn or a Saeed Ajmal bowl against each other's respective batsmen and I am sure there will be TV sponsors for those tours as well. I think it is time to disband the ICC, it is a useless body anyways.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:07 GMT

    You don't the ICC to play games of cricket. If the BCCI, CA and ECB want to form a conglomeration of sorts, they are more than welcome to do so for themselves - the others just won't participate in it and will play cricket among themselves. Of course, how viable that will be financially, won't be known unless countries break out of the ICC. That being said, I am willing to bet that there are enough people out there that want to see a Dale Steyn or a Saeed Ajmal bowl against each other's respective batsmen and I am sure there will be TV sponsors for those tours as well. I think it is time to disband the ICC, it is a useless body anyways.

  • HatersAreOrdinary on January 17, 2014, 19:11 GMT

    you gotta be kidding me. is this really could happen? i mean look at other int sports governing bodies like fifa, int. olympic, hockey etc. do they have the same system too :s this is really going to kill cricket as a game of people.

  • PatrickJM on January 17, 2014, 19:11 GMT

    The one thing cricket does not need is the consolidation of power in the hands of powerful the few. It needs diversity in both the people who play the game and those who administrate. We need to see a more even distribution of the wealth to encourage the game beyond its current boundaries and borders. New test nations, new international teams and new cricketing environments is what is required. You can only make so much money.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:12 GMT

    I am lost. How would boards other than these three would vote in favor of such system. Also whats the use of two tier system when the three teams would remain in the first tier and keep playing themselves.

  • Robeli on January 17, 2014, 19:15 GMT

    FAIL. This is not a model that will bring and improve cricket to the rest of the world. The 'Big 3' will always look at their own state before looking at others. Very surprised that SA is not included. Seriously? I see alot on objection from SA.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:17 GMT

    Not only is this extremely selfish behaviour by the usual suspects, but it is actually self-defeating. Carry on like this and there will be just three countries playing cricket.

    Is there another sport which is run so badly? Do they want to grow the game worldwide? It appears that they don't. The other full members (and associates) need support and certainly deserve a lot better than this. Shame on the ICC.

  • ferrari5107 on January 17, 2014, 19:21 GMT

    Why ICC, why are you trying to kill cricket. Are MAN U, MAN City, Real Madrid, or Barcelona exempt from relegation in their respective leagues? No, so why should India, Aus, and England be exempt from relegation in cricket? IF you are good enough, then dont worry about relegation, but if you suck you better be worried about relegation, otherwise those three will have no reason to put effort on field, they will just go for money and not put any emphasis on performance. No team in any sport has power to bend is governing body, but because of your softness India, Australia and England are taking advantage. I thought other sports need to look at cricket, for use of technology and growth, but man cricket should look at American sports (NFL expecially) how they are trying to expend not limit themselves.

  • on January 17, 2014, 19:24 GMT

    not a good idea. cricket is already being played among 10 full members and we already see a huge gap interms of games pkayed becausr big boards want more money and choose opponents accordingly. and giving control to 3 means they will do what they like. they already play with each othet more than others. i dont know why these plans are surfaced? just read about ftp proposal and now this. they surely are trying hard to earn more but in the process damaging cricket.

  • akhilesh0109 on January 17, 2014, 19:24 GMT

    This is beyond limits.. Cricket in general stands to lose following this decision. The most hard done by would be the fans like us who will have to wait for years together just to get a glimpse of David vs Goliath battles.. As it is we have never hosted Bangladesh for a test series. Few more countries may soon join that new "associate n affiliate" list. Spare a thought for Ireland and afghans who are dreaming of test status. The Irish will continue to lose rankins and Morgans to English poachers. This decision needs a proper look at before being finalized..

  • Kiyaora on January 17, 2014, 19:25 GMT

    Strongly feel CSA should also be be part as they are a top team, leave alone BCCI"s reservation against Logart. Cricket is bigger than Individuals, even players will admit it. Its not a problem when administrators are true cricket professionals but when politicians play a bigger role than game.