ICC news June 24, 2011

DRS, World Cup 2015 format top agenda

ESPNcricinfo staff

The Decision Review System (DRS) is likely to be the focal point at the ICC's five-day annual conference that begins on Sunday in Hong Kong. The ICC's cricket committee had unanimously recommended the use of the DRS in all Tests, but the system has been a source of disagreement among the boards, with the BCCI opposing its implementation.

"The ICC cricket committee is in favour of employing DRS in all formats of the game," ICC chief Haroon Lorgat said ahead of the conference. "They were quite impressed with the success in terms of all the research and feedback they received. It was very strongly evaluated during the cricket committee meeting in May, and after long deliberation they were unanimous in supporting the application of DRS across all forms of the game."

The cricket committee also proposed changes to enhance the ODI format - stricter penalties for over-rate offences and amendments to the law pertaining to runners - all of which will come up for discussion in Hong Kong.

The other issue likely to dominate proceedings is the revaluation of the ICC's decision to restrict the 2015 World Cup to its 10 Full Member nations. "The board had decided earlier that 2015 will be a 10-team Member World Cup, but that did not go down well and the president [Sharad Pawar] decided to reconsider the topic," Lorgat said. "I do support that there should be some sort of qualification process for all members to get to the World Cup. I do favour a 10-team World Cup with a qualification process."

Also on the agenda are possible amendments to the ICC's constitution, aimed at ensuring free elections of Member boards and avoiding undue government interference in administration. "We are going to discuss the concept of Member boards ensuring there is no government interference in the sport, that they are able to hold free elections and make appointments of members to the boards from among themselves," Lorgat said. "In other words it [needs to be] a democratic process, where elections are free, and people who are elected come in to administer the sport." The Pakistan board had sent a legal notice to the ICC raising questions - and threatening legal action - over this proposed amendment. The PCB is one of the boards directly affected by the amendment. Its constitution states that the President of Pakistan - invariably but not always a political figure - is the patron of the board and the sole authority in hiring or firing the chairman.

The ICC's full council will also consider a constitutional change to the process of nominating and electing the ICC president. Under the new proposal, the executive board will decide the process and term of office from time to time, subject to certain qualifying criteria. This would replace the current rotational system of nomination and the fixed term of appointment. Pakistan and Bangladesh - the two members who are to nominate the next candidates for president and vice-president - are believed to have objected to the change.

"There is a view from among boards that the best person should be nominated as the president," Lorgat said. However, he said that "for a constitutional change to go through, you need 38 of the 50 members supporting the change, and of the 38, eight will have to be Full Members, so it is quite a hurdle to cross".

The inclusion of cricket in the Olympic games is one of the peripheral issues that will be discussed. "We need to do a proper and scientific evaluation of cricket's participation the Olympic games," Lorgat said. "We need to do this evaluation to put this debate once and for all to rest, and on a scientific basis prove that there is a case for participation, or no case."

Lorgat also expressed his satisfaction with the Pakistan security task force set up after the attack on the Sri Lankan team in Lahore in February 2009. "I am encouraged by the work and results I have seen through the engagement of the Pakistan task team with the PCB, and I hope the PCB themselves feel as excited as I do about the contents of that report. It is a very thorough report, and we will be tabling what I would hope to be the final report.

"Once the board reviews it, and the PCB accepts and hopefully implements the recommendations in a manner they have done before, we can conclude the work of the team."

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Who Cares About IPL on June 26, 2011, 17:32 GMT

    The many Indian fans may be correct in saying that ICC depends on India money, but that has nothing at all to do with whether international cricket is played. The idea that without BCCI or ICC that cricket would just collapse is laughable, it might actually work rather better, since ICC representatives are rarely the best thinkers or contributors to the game, but career business people and "managers". What about Mike Brearley as the new ICO (International Cricket Organisation) President...

  • JM on June 26, 2011, 15:27 GMT

    If they take an opinion poll my guess is that over 90% of Indians will want the DRS. Why is the $60k being disclosed now to the public and not earlier. What exactly is the reason for BCCI in opposing DRS...is it money or other reasoning? First of all I dont believe what Shah is mentioning about the cost part. There is no way the smaller nations would vote for DRS if it were so. Let the ICC/BCCI disclose the cost involvement to the general public. If the owners of the various DRS tools are really charging more then they should be pressurised to lower the charges. The BCCI is giving the impression to the rest of the world as being stupid,unreasonable,arrogant and greedy. They need a good spanking. Sachin and MSD may be important people but it doesn't mean that their thinking is right.

    The bottom line is that with DRS the wrong decisions are much,much lower. The whole world including the Umpires, Indian Public want DRS except BCCI,SRT and MSD.

  • Umair on June 26, 2011, 14:59 GMT

    to all indian fans why you hate drs and if there is no drs how can you win the worldcup saeed ajmal lbw remember

  • Pradeep on June 26, 2011, 13:30 GMT

    Why dont on field umpires carry smartphones or some smart device, check out the replays whenever they have doubt through smartphone and give their verdict. Why do we need DRS which costs $60k. $60k is lot of money just to check few LBW decision, I am sure all 4 umpires and match referee combined wont get $60k salary for a match.

  • ranjith on June 26, 2011, 11:20 GMT

    Guys who are for UDRS please understand that this technology is not error free. What is the point in using a tehnology which is not eror free to compenstae for the human error!! The suppliers themselves admits that the ball trajectory prediction is not correct beyond 2.5mtrs. So are you guys are advocating to use this partially?? The trajectory prediction works on the assumption that the ball takes the same path even after hitting the pads, but is it so always? what if the ball looses its trajactory aftre the point of hitting the pads due to wind or any other factors? There are company's who is eager to make money in selling these technology..lets live and play in a world with errors..To err is human..but not technology.

  • Pramesh on June 26, 2011, 8:51 GMT

    Its a ridiculous that BCCI is not want to use UDRS in international cricket. ICC should make it compulsory rather than make its subject of controversy.

  • Riaz on June 26, 2011, 6:04 GMT

    Without anyone else to play with, BCCI's revenue is zero.

    The revenue is generated by two parties playing against each other only one of which is India. It is time the BCCI were made aware of this fact.

    Actually it is nothing to do with BCCI as such, just the Indian advertisers. The rest of the world should continue with the ICC having a team of Indians. When the ICC team of Indians play against the other teams the revenue will come straight to the ICC and from them distributed fairly to world cricket. BCCI can do what they like with themselves.

  • Dummy4 on June 25, 2011, 18:29 GMT

    Oh well, i am laughing on reading some comments from Indian fans. They say India provides 90 percent revenue to ICC. So, India should quit ICC and the cricket will finish accross the world. Oh really??? Are you in your senses??? Come on and comment sensibly. And tell me will India play only IPL after quitting the cricket world and that too without international players:))))

  • sri on June 25, 2011, 18:00 GMT

    @randika_ayya "Daryl Harper and Steve Bucknor are both very fine umpires " I rest my case.

  • Sanjeev on June 25, 2011, 14:35 GMT

    If the ICC doesn't pay heed to India's objection to the implementation of the UDRS system, the BCCI should just quit the ICC and then see who comes crying. With 90% of the money gone, the ICC would have no means to sustain itself and the BCCI, with all its money, can actually set up its own worldwide board to recruit cricketers from around the world to represent their countries and thereby completely dictate the cricketing schedule in the world. It would be funny to see who generates the greater revenue -- the BCCI or the ICC (if it survives at all).

  • No featured comments at the moment.