ICC news

'We missed a golden opportunity' - Lorgat

ESPNcricinfo staff

December 1, 2011

Comments: 47 | Text size: A | A

Haroon Lorgat speaks about the ticketing fiasco, Bangalore, February 26, 2011
Haroon Lorgat described his ideal vision of an ICC board as one that would have independent directorship so that "there's at least a voice spoken without self-interest" © AFP
Enlarge

Haroon Lorgat, the ICC chief executive, has admitted that his board could have taken "a more strategic decision" in implementing the Test championship and a ten-team World Cup. He said the Test Championship is on track for 2017, while the ICC, as a whole, would benefit from fewer weak member boards and independent directorship. He also revealed that there was a threatened elite breakaway of India, Australia, South Africa and England over the Future Tours Programme.

"We got the balance incorrect [on the Test championship and ten-team World Cup]. There was a strategic choice that had to be made, it was an investment to be made and the leadership chose not to do it," Lorgat told the Abu Dhabi-based The National . "It will happen eventually. I hope it doesn't happen when it's too late. It's a new cycle. There's absolutely no reason why it would not be in the schedule of events. We missed a golden opportunity in 2013 because Test cricket was starting to go on an upward trend."

While Lorgat conceded that the commercialisation of the cricket played some role in the decisions, he said it was not solely based on broadcast rights and profits. "The broadcaster [ESPN STAR Sports*] is but one party to the discussion," he said. "It's a board decision."

He said the ICC have not under-prioritised Test cricket, but that, on occasion, specific member boards are guilty of doing that. "There was a two-Test series in South Africa recently. People were desperate for a third Test. That is an example where it [the boards] has not leaned towards Tests," he said referring to last month's series between South Africa and Australia that was drawn 1-1.

During that series, players such as Graeme Smith had voiced their disappointment at missing the chance of participating in a Test championship and Lorgat sympathised with them. "We have some seriously good players at the moment, shining in Tests. The chances of them being around in 2017 is zero. That is a particular disappointment."

To avoid such setbacks in future, Lorgat said he hoped the ICC's leadership would form a strong enough collective to make decisions in the "best interests of the game". Currently, the BCCI is a dominant presence, but Lorgat's worry is that other member boards have not shown a strong enough hand. "What concerns me is the weakness of other boards. They need to find ways and means of generating revenue, of sustaining the game. They cannot operate on a dependency mentality."

India' reluctance and ultimately refusal to use DRS is an example of what Lorgat called weak leadership by other members. "It's up to others to stand firm, to have the courage of their convictions, to show leadership, to oppose that process. That's more a reflection of weak leadership on other boards."

If the dissenting voice cannot come from within, Lorgat suggested that it may have to be from outside. He described his ideal vision of an ICC board as one that would have some form of independent directorship so that "there's at least a balance of debate or a voice spoken without self-interest".

He indicated that an external hand, coupled with stronger member boards would help prevent problems such as the one that occurred during the drafting of the most recent FTP. Lorgat said he led the movement to reach a solution after the threatened elite breakaway. "There was a risk of that [a breakaway]. The initial drafts were leaning in favour of that. It was not agreed to. It was a role I led from the front.

"Fortunately, we've got a better balance in the FTP. That is a reflection on the leadership of each of the boards. So whether you are Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Pakistan, or Sri Lanka, you've got to have the right people leading your cricket, because you require stronger leadership in view of the challenges such countries face."

*ESPN STAR Sports is a 50:50 joint venture between Walt Disney (ESPN, Inc.), the parent company of ESPNcricinfo, and News Corporation Limited (STAR)

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by g.narsimha on (December 3, 2011, 11:28 GMT)

IT is wrong to blame that INDIA is responsible for cancelation of SLPL.IND IA just not cleaned its players to participate in that leage fearing of players burn out as they have been playing too much cricket .The SL board cancelld that leage fearing in absence of INDIAN players there may not be huge fan following as indan sponsors aswellas broadcsters bach tracked . IN THIS PAGE SOME oooooooONE IS DREAMING OF INDIAS downfall so that BCCIs hagemony is contained but inreality INDIAs domination on & off the field will remain intact as TEAM INDIA IS AS FORMIDAL A FORCE ON THE FIELD AS BCCI OFF THE FIELD Every body wants INDIAS HELP , to run a leage SL WANTS INDIA , PAk WANTS india series for financial benifits as its board is already is in bankrupt , but coments from few people on india is just disgusting .

Posted by mihir_nam on (December 3, 2011, 11:23 GMT)

Why ICC is not bringing more teams in T20 to globalize the game.. ICC should have atleast 16-20 teams in T20 WC .and also should host T20 champions trophy hosted by Associate Nations. T20 Champions Trophy will have Six Teams 1.Associate Host 2.T20 WC Champions 3.ODI WC Champions 4.No1 Ranked in T20 if it is same with T20 WC champions then no2 should be considered 5.No1 Ranked in ODI 6.Defending champion of Champions trophy( for 1st edition may invite runners up of T20 wc or ODIWC

only associates should host T20 Champions trophy to promote the game daily 3 games, total of 18 Matches in round robin league .8 Day tournament ..with good TV viewership and sponsors ICC can do it . It will also boost cricket in associate nation.

Posted by Simoc on (December 3, 2011, 10:18 GMT)

I don't care so much for a test World Cup cricket either.We see in Football(soccer) and rugby union World Cups that the product is so boring compared to normal international games. It's all about defence, and then in cricket it would be the wicket & home advantage. In three tests the visitors have time to adjust. World Cup T20 is ideal. It could be played every year easily with-in two weeks and even one week if they got serious.They're only playing three hours.

Posted by dicky_boy on (December 3, 2011, 6:39 GMT)

Haha MAXIMUM 6 you and other English fans are soooo jealous BUT BCCI ARE THE KINGS OF CRIKCKET WORLD AND BCCI CAN GO AGAINST EVEN 1-30 VOTE LOL

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 20:35 GMT)

I think Dravid, Sachin and Laxman will retire after winning the Test Championship in 2017 :D :P

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 20:31 GMT)

ICC Think wisely , if you want to compare football with cricket you should focus on T20I. At least 20 team T20 WC. Plus You Have to think About Champion trophy also.. In Test Apply Same Logic As You Implied In ICC INTERCONTINENTAL $ DAY CUP. It Will Work Better. At least 12 teams should Play Test. Thats All.....

Posted by Sakthiivel on (December 2, 2011, 18:28 GMT)

@LillianThomson : BCCI not fools to go with test championship bec VSS,Dravid, Sachin is around. I tell you it will also not happen in 2017.. For sure ..

Posted by drsankalp on (December 2, 2011, 17:07 GMT)

Important for logart to stay in his limit. He is nobody to decide what world needs. He did not become ICC chief on any special talent. Better he keep his mouth shut.

Posted by 2.14istherunrate on (December 2, 2011, 15:56 GMT)

The principle inherent in any democracy needs to be enshrined in the workings of ICC and signed up to by all full members upon pain of exclusion-ie a majority vote is binding upon all Full members,without exception. End of story. A 9-1 vote is not something that the windbags of BCCI can brush aside . Mercifully in reality they got hoisted onj their own petards in the summer. Hooray. it is incredibly weak of other members not stand up to these self aggrandising megalomaniacs. Seriouslty they need to look at themselves. With 2 Test series, if they count at all then they should count as half what a proper Test series counts as in the ratings. there should be no easy route to the top. I for one was unimpressed by the whole charade of India's no.1 position. I have been similarly unimpressed by other Boards kowtowing to them.

Posted by correctcall on (December 2, 2011, 15:16 GMT)

The issue of a draw during the deciders between the top 4 nations for a world test championship is not insurmountable. A draw can be resolved on average total runs per total wickets. If due to weather only one side has an innings (or part thereof) then the higher ranked team proceeds. The host country for the Test Championship should be determined by Test rank in the year preceding the first final ie the Championship host country is determined for 40 years in advance. If a country does not wish to host, the the ICC should hold a bidding contest for that year.

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 15:13 GMT)

@Lillian Thompson - some of us believe that the Test Championship is not a sound idea, reasons have been mentioned underneath in the comments. SO, yeah, we really don't care if our best team in a decade ever plays a 'Test' Championship - a totally manufactured product.

Posted by Winsome on (December 2, 2011, 15:04 GMT)

I've never understood the necessity for a Test Championship. Whoever heard of one-off tests except for teams like Zimbabwe? Sounds like a waste of time for all concern.

Posted by mathewjohn2176 on (December 2, 2011, 15:01 GMT)

@lillian Thompson,It's not about BCCI decision,if you think so,then BCCI should have kept the test championship when their team ranked no 1 last year? At the end of the day,it's all about money,broadcast interest also.The Pakistan cricket names you mentioned may not play test cricket in future,who knows.Every team goes through transition period,and new set of players come up.so there is no guarantee that these players will continue to play at that time.Its very easy to blame on BCCI for everything.why there is no DRS used in srilanka Pakistan test series even though both team supports DRS?then what's the point in talking about BCCI reluctance when other boards don't use it? I am not an Indian but I don't agree for everything happens in cricket we need to blame BCCI.Other cricketing boards should generate money as much as equal to BCCI and should not act as a weaker board to have a say.Its a sad condition that everything depends on financial power nowadays be it sports or whatever.

Posted by Afta on (December 2, 2011, 14:53 GMT)

It is sad that there aren't any level playing fields. Its always a power struggle. Its clear now that India rules the roost. Why call the ICC a toothless tiger, you can call it a spineless ... They cannot implement the DRS, even though most member countries approve of it. With India throwing its money weight and threats how could poorer boards stand up to it. And now there are threats from the so called elite group..! Wow... where did these guys come from? Don't tell me that there is a class system in sports..! Even though Lorgat doesn't admit that it is not all money which influences decisions, at the end of the day when all conclusions are made, its about additions, subtractions, divisions and multiplications. Can't you understand why we are living in such a divided world..! How can I enjoy my world of cricket..! (May be its time to bring china into the picture)

Posted by allblue on (December 2, 2011, 14:46 GMT)

@John-Price Yes, the draw. In the context of the mooted championship we could have six-day Tests which would pretty much guarantee a result, but then the defining tournament would be playing to different conditions than the games preceding it. Not ideal. Otherwise, in the semi-finals a draw could be decided by a toss of the coin, again not ideal. In the final, a draw could result in a shared title. Not ideal once more. There are other possibilities of course, but I think the ones I've suggested are the least not ideal (if you can follow that!) of the lot. The point is we already have an effective way of determining teams' relative merit, namely the series. Put those together in a league format (as the current ranking system sort of does already) and you could produce something definitive. However, to make a bona fide league work would probably mean having two divisions (fraught with complications and objections) and the end of the 5, or even 4 Test series. No easy answers I'm afraid.

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 14:00 GMT)

the ICC should be a governing body not one that is a puppet of the bigger boards...it should make decisions in favor and intrest of cricket not in what the boards want. of course the boards dont want to qualify for a worldcup yet that is the start point of globalising the sport that is what the ICC's main goal must be. not what teams want what the sport NEEDS.

Posted by IPSY on (December 2, 2011, 13:56 GMT)

A central agency with a mandate for the management of International cricket (as the ICC is said to be) should do their business based on democratic principles. And when the majority of members vote in agreement on matters related to the administration of cricket, then a minority group who is not in agreement must be ignored. And if that group wants to go on its own, so shall be it. But we can't have any single memeber dictating what the others must do. Example, India use its vast cricketing wealth to defy every decision that is made for the fair administration of the game - on the field and off; yet the greed of the world's best players allow India to get away with anything they want to do. I'm sure if the world's best players boycott India's local tournaments, they would have to comply with the decisions of the ICC. The Umpires need to know that the Indians make themselves Gods, so the umpires should just watch their 'BIG' names and decide in their favour! Why they want no DRS!

Posted by HSPatel on (December 2, 2011, 13:49 GMT)

BCCI rules man! Indians have grown up now. Powerfull board, Winning team, Good captain and billions of supporter. Let's show some power to world cricket. Nothing wrong about doing it. Australia and ECB have been doing it for years and they have found a healthy compitior. This is going to be interested in future and will be good for world cricket.

Posted by LillianThomson on (December 2, 2011, 12:33 GMT)

There is some sensational historical revision going on in this thread. Shane Bond's ICL contract specified that he would always be released for international duty, and he signed it only after obtaining written confirmation from NZ Cricket that he had their permission to do so and that it broke no ICC rules. Then the BCCI threatened to boycott NZ Cricket unless they stopped picking him and other ICL players, and they even did the same to Sky TV which employed Craig McMillan as a commentator. It was the BCCI which pushed at the previous Future Tours round for the introduction of 2 Test series. It is the BCCI which blocks DRS and a World Test Championship. Fine. When the 2017 Test Championship arrives there will be no Laxman, Dravid, Tendulkar, Sehwag, Dhoni or Zaheer. Ironically there will still be Amir, Gul, Umar Akmal and Azhar Ali. Perhaps the BCCI should be pushing to have a Championship while their best ever team remains intact!

Posted by pavan210 on (December 2, 2011, 11:19 GMT)

Mr.Logart himself commented that there was a need for a third test between SA & AUS...India just completed 3 test series with WI...who is playing lesser tests??? on the other side ICC wants India to play more tests coz India is a bigger crowd and revenue puller thn other nations...inspite of lesser sledgin and dramas... Test championship was cancelled because the broadcasters felt that it wont pull in even as much response as a two nation or a tri nation series...obviously it wont if ICC understands that drawn matches have maximum possibility in Tests...BCCI arranged a T20 IPL to earn revenues...may be coz it understands cricket better than ICC and is a better manager... The DRS system clearly has faults which are very much visible in every series this tech is used...so why use unproven non reliant assistance...just to earn few bucks...thats not how you would earn revenue... Ipl has given livelihood and support to many younger players...how many weaker nations has ICC supported...???

Posted by John-Price on (December 2, 2011, 10:33 GMT)

Glad to see a couple of posts about draws in the context of a Test Championship. I do not understand why this obvious and basic flaw is so generally ignored. The various means occasionally suggested of resolving the matter are all hopeless. Setting aside the idiotic timeless test option, they all provide ways of winning matches without taking 20 wickets - and the ability to bowl teams out twice is the absolute core of a good test team. The idea of making a side world test champions on the basis of (say) of a huge first innings score alone is absurd and an insult to the history of test cricket. It would also take declarations out of the game. The whole idea should be abandoned and more emphasis placed on much longer series between the best and most committed teams.

Posted by Sakthiivel on (December 2, 2011, 10:20 GMT)

@getsetgopk : India will not even sent our 2 nd or 3 rd string players for playing free in SLPL or any other league. See whats happening in SLC they have not paid the SL Cricket players from end of the WC 2011. It would be the same fate for our players. What good BCCI have done was it saved all the player not only from India but also other countries not wasting the time, energy and money. Kudos to BCCI...

Posted by jasonpete on (December 2, 2011, 9:49 GMT)

@mr.sun,when it comes to cricket between Pakistan and India,I guess Indian government said no to play against Pakistan due to terror attack in India.It was all about political pressure ,whereas other countries don't have to deal with such things playing against Pakistan .

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 9:22 GMT)

Bring back Test Championship in 2013.. i want to see Sachin, Laxman and Dravid... please hear the viewers interest too.. without us there could be no cricket for sure.

Posted by satish619chandar on (December 2, 2011, 8:51 GMT)

@LillianThomson: Bond was clearly told not to play in ICL as it was declared a unofficial event.. Inspite of it, he played in it and he didnot care of not being selected for national team.. It is his fault.. Regarding Champions trophy to test championship, you cant fight with the broadcasters changing the contract as per your wish.. ICC prepared a FTP and gave the contrats and now, ICC should wait for the contract period to begin a new thing.. Test championship was not something in frame for years.. Suddenly some nations are finding themselves as savior of test matches just because BCCI has IPL!! Actually in last full year, India played the maximum tests and they will in future also.. Don't blame BCCI for everything.. the smaller nations have more voice now than it was before with the other administrators.. Plus, what is wrong if India has more voice? ICC to function need 70% of money from India but want India to keep mum when making any decision??

Posted by maddy20 on (December 2, 2011, 8:43 GMT)

@mr.sun India is contemplating about a Pak series early next year. If you don't screw your chance there might as well be one!

@LillianThmopson India is only giving back what it was given. When teams like Aus and Eng were ruling the roost, there was always stuff like biased umpiring(wiz: Sydney test) just to stay on top. We have had enough and want to return the favor. And India blocked 3-test series? Thats pure bull. India is played 3 against WI, will play 4 against Aus and 3 against England next winter. Other countries choosing to play 2 or more tests is upto their discretion. As far as test championship is concerned, I think ratings are more than enough to do the job. And the brief stint at the top you referred to lasted 2 and half years. They were trailing Aus at no.2 for two years. Its only a matter of time before we get back on top, whether you like it or not!

Posted by satish619chandar on (December 2, 2011, 8:17 GMT)

I think more interviews like this is not going to behold the image of the guys in the public.. As far as i have seen in cricket, none of the Indian or Asian members have ever publicly fumed like this while the old ICC(Under England and Australian control) took the decisions which were purely aiding them only and never cared about other teams or even waited for their opinions.. Since there are some quarters in media which is happy to pull BCCI into each and every issue, they are just using them to vent their frustration.. We all saw how selfish they were when trying out a WC with 10 nations.. Already cricket is played only by small number and instead of spreading it, they are trying to make it even smaller.. Long live BCCI for opposing each and every wrong decisions put forward by certain selfish member nations.. They gave voice to the smaller nations!!

Posted by LillianThomson on (December 2, 2011, 7:48 GMT)

It was bad enough that the old Imperial Cricket Conference tolerated disgraceful racism in cricket - such as in Apartheid South Africa, or the old West Indies teams with white captains. But the current ICC is even worse, because whereas Lords used to run cricket with benign neglect we now have the BCCI using its financial clout to bully everyone else into submission. So Shane Bond lost two years at the peak of his powers and the world watches with a mixture of disbelief and contempt as the BCCI blocks DRS, 3 Test series and a World Test Championship. The India of Laxman, Dravid, Tendulkar and Zaheer was always around number 3-4 in the Test rankings and rose briefly to top spot only as the opposing teams fell during transitional periods. And now the rest of the world has to pray that India's team continues to decline so that the BCCI's power follows suit. I defy you to show me anyone who cares about cricket who wants a Champions Trophy instead of a Test Championship.

Posted by mr.sun on (December 2, 2011, 6:43 GMT)

@maddy20 point 2 almost every test playing nation play against Pakistan not at their home land but at other venue like UAE, England etc but ONLY Indian team was not play against them.

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 6:35 GMT)

Its not about the ICC..ICC has no power, its BCCI making the decision behind the scenes, everyone should know that and the only reason there will be no Test Championship is because its not in the best commercial interest of BCCI.

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 5:58 GMT)

Again, regarding the Test championship- as someone said, what are they going to do about drawn matches? Seriously, first innings lead can not be a basis for points. And a timeless test is the worst idea possible in a fast-paced world that is short on time. And morever, as might as a gripping narrative that a Test match can provide, who can drive it into the ICC's head that in the future, people are going to get very very tight on time, and who but a handful of people are goin to watch every single ball? They had also tried a Asian Test championship some time back and the team that won it was not the 'best' team at that time. SO thumbs down.

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 5:52 GMT)

In spite of being a Cricket fanatic from India, I am appalled at Lorgat's short-sightedness. Is one not fed up of watching the same ten countries play each other, most of the time? Is it all we can offer our great sport? A ten-member closed shop? Is that the best we can do to enhance the profile of our beloved game outside of the Test world? If anything, Lorgat should be disappointed that he did not lay down a procedure that would ensure that the ten 'self-obsessed' 'test' teams play their Associate counterparts more often, even if just limited overs cricket. And the 50-over WC, and the T20 WC should be of 14 and 16 teams respectively. Because those are our sport's show-piece events - a chance to show the other sports that ours too is a truly global game. But no, it's time for Lorgat to whinge about a 'Test championship' that God knows how it will decide which the best team is.

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 5:45 GMT)

The biggest worry for most of us is that, there is ZERO chance of witnessing the all time test greats like Sachin, Dravid, Ponting, Kallis, Laxman, Chanderpaul, J'Wardene, Sanga, Z.Khan...... in 2017 Test Championship. Atleast to honour these legends ICC should come back from 2017 and to try their level best to organize it in 2013/2014.

Posted by mrgupta on (December 2, 2011, 5:16 GMT)

@getsetgopk: If SL is so dependent on Second grade Indian players to earn money then it would be hard for them to earn it. They were starting their T20 league counting that Indian players will join them and then they will earn big bucks. Can you imagine someone starting a shop in a neighbourhood just thinking that he has a rich neighbour who will make it a succecss? SLB should have been confident enough to go ahead with the idea as Pakistani and WI players were ready to join it, were they trying to showl cricket to Sri-Lanka and the world or trying to become rich by selling Cricket to India?

Posted by johntycodes on (December 2, 2011, 5:15 GMT)

Gee india would have been hoping the breakaway didn't happen because with the other teams in the group india would have to start winning at least one test series outside the sub continent.

Posted by maddy20 on (December 2, 2011, 5:11 GMT)

I for one think that IPL and CLT20 are two useless tournaments that have to be stopped. May be BCCI thought that there is too much T20 cricket these days. Also its all competition my friend. Big or small no business would encourage their competitors to prosper.

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 4:15 GMT)

This man is in charge of a 105-member global organisation and he has just stated openly that he wishes 95 of his member countries will have no part in 50-over World Cups again, without giving any reason. Where on Earth in all this is there ''a balance of debate or a voice spoken without self-interest''? How could this and having ''fewer members'' possibly be ''in the best interests of the game''?

Shame on Lorgat. Shame on the ICC.

Posted by getsetgopk on (December 2, 2011, 3:44 GMT)

@maddy20 "india just refused" just refused is not good enough mate without any credible reason when sri lankan players can play in IPL why cant fringe indian players play in SPL? why does it hurt BCCI so badly if a fellow cricket board get a few bucks while its struggling. no other board around the world has ever stoped its players from playing in the countless T20 leagues around the world so whats wrong with BCCI?

Posted by SanjivAwesome on (December 2, 2011, 3:32 GMT)

Why do departing-CEOs like to become whistle-blowers?

Posted by Naren on (December 2, 2011, 3:32 GMT)

He is absolutely spot on on the issues in Cricket today. Other country boards are so scared of putting their foot down and say what they want in DRS. In an Australia home series why should India dictate terms. We are watching the Aus-NZ and I see the DRS working perfectly.

Posted by maddy20 on (December 2, 2011, 1:38 GMT)

@FARRUKHARIF 1)India has played a full test series against Ban in Ban. Infact Bang is scheduled to tour India next year 2)As far as our friends accross the other side of the border are concerned well nobody tours there no more for playing cricket. Its a pit that you have dug for yourselves. You cannot conveniently blame your neighbors for everything. 3)For all WC matches taken away from you country read no.2 again. 4)As for SLPL . India just refused participation. It was upto the SLC to decide whether they want to go ahead or not. Nobody stopped SLPL from staging it. They stopped themselves.

Posted by   on (December 2, 2011, 0:24 GMT)

@ D.V.C Lorgat is upset because the weak boards didnt support him where as farrukh is upset because the strong boards have influenced ICC for far too long, the difference is one is upset at weaker boards showing him their backs, and other is upset at the strong boards showing backs to cricket it self! so no its not the same thing.

Posted by allblue on (December 2, 2011, 0:06 GMT)

Of course by delaying the Test Championship the ICC have avoided the big question - what do we do about draws? How does Test cricket fit into what would essentially be a knock-out format? There's no easy answer to that one.

Posted by D.V.C. on (December 1, 2011, 22:02 GMT)

@farrukharif: You are missing the point. The member boards are the ICC. The ICC could not show leadership because its controllers - the member boards - would not let it. Lorgat and you are upset about the same thing!

Posted by   on (December 1, 2011, 21:23 GMT)

I seriously do not understand ICC's role. it seems it just exists to pander to the whims of the more influential cricket boards. There are so many scenarios that are hurting the game & they are either incapable of taking a stand or just refuse to take a stand. e.g. poor quality of pitches, DRS usage not to mention the poor management of cricket boards like the PCB & WICB. Thank God the picture in Pakistan is improving since Butt has left the scene but in the case of the WICB it is obvious that it is being run by persons who have their own personal agendas and do not have the best interest of West indies or International cricket at heart. Also they could try to help BCCI to come up with a schedule for the IPL that dont clash with West Indies cricket season every year. If ICC is truly in charge of cricket Internationally then these are some of the stuff they should be fixing or at least make a concerted effort to fix before they think of planning a test championship.

Posted by Vilander on (December 1, 2011, 19:20 GMT)

it appears he does not like India.

Posted by farrukharif on (December 1, 2011, 19:10 GMT)

With due respect, now Mr. Logart is concern over stand not coming from the weaker boards. Now he mentions of India, England etc. of being the dominant force and in better words "dictatorial force" on ICC. Why? Oh,I know the answer because he is about to leave his post in a few months time. Why should the weaker boards help ICC to maintain a balanced approach? Did ICC set right precedents itself ?the answer is "BIG NO". What happened when bigger teams boycotted playing in Zimbabwe?What happens when a team like India does not want to play a full test series against its next door neighbors BD & Pak? What happened when Indian influence did not allowed SL to stage SPL?above all ,what happened when WC2011 matches were taken away from Pak? Pak took a stand & instead, where ICC should have taken the stand (just as it did for SL in 1996) it did whatever it could have to corner Pak. The problem is not the weaker boards Mr. Logart, the problem is ICC commercial mentality.FIFA for Cricket required

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
ESPNcricinfo staffClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!