ICC news

ICC approves top-level changes effective 2014

Sharda Ugra

June 28, 2012

Comments: 9 | Text size: A | A

The ICC has formally changed the structure of its top-level administrative hierarchy effective 2014, turning the presidency into a ceremonial position with a one-year term and handing over power to the new post of chairman. The annual conference, which ended on Thursday, "agreed to make the necessary amendments" to the ICC and the ICC Development International (IDI) Articles of Association to effect these changes and also remove the role of the ICC vice-president.

The changes - the fourth alteration in the president's role since 1996 - take effect when Alan Isaac's current two-year term as the ICC's last rotational president comes to an end during the ICC conference in June 2014. That's when the ICC will also appoint its first chairman.

These amendments had been agreed to in principle by the ICC's executive board, comprising the heads of the 10 Full Member nations among others, earlier this year.

The debate over the role of the ICC vice-president to go along with Isaac's tenure has been deferred to the executive board meeting in October. It is understood that the prime candidate for the role - Mustafa Kamal of the Bangladesh Cricket Board - will have to outline his plans for a two-year vice-presidency to be considered for the role.

Until now, the executive board comprised chairmen or presidents from each of the 10 Full Members, three elected associate member representatives, the ICC president, who chaired the meeting, the ICC chief executive, the ICC vice-president and on invitation of the president, the ICC's principal advisor.

By the end of the 2014 conference, the ICC and IDI board chairman, a two-year fully paid appointee of the ICC executive board, will chair the board. The newly-redefined ICC president can come into an Executive Board meeting if he so wishes, but neither will he chair the meeting nor will he have a vote.

This sets the stage for the jockeying to be the chairman, with N Srinivasan of the BCCI and the ECB's Giles Clarke widely reckoned to be the leading contenders. The ICC chairman must not be a serving member of any national board. Srinivasan's three-year term as BCCI president ends in September 2014, and Clarke's term as chairman of the ECB ends in 2015, which means they would have to give up those posts before the June 2014 conference.

Among other decisions taken at this week's annual conference, Switzerland was removed as an Affiliate member having been suspended last year for failing to comply with the ICC's membership criteria - it has two rival governing bodies of cricket in the country, neither of which is recognised by the Swiss Olympic committee - and being unable to do so by the 2012 Annual Conference. Russia and Hungary were confirmed as new Affiliate members of the ICC. The ICC now has 106 Members.

The Woolf commiteee recommendations about redefining the associate/ affiliate membership were not discussed or voted upon at the annual conference as those discussions were said to be part of talks between various boards themselves and also at the Executive Board level.

Sharda Ugra is senior editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Sharda Ugra

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by TheReverseDoosra_K on (June 30, 2012, 14:51 GMT)

@Saswatee - Agree with you on the expat teams which hamper the progress of home-grown African teams. How do you develop this game in Europe if it is just played by expats and their children? Some say that Expats are required to develop the game but they are not actually doing and playing for them as if it is their club team.. But teams like Nepal, PNG and African countries are developing with home-grown players only and becoming good. Hungary deserves Affiliate status because atleast half of the players are actual Hungarian. But the Russian is same like Germany,France etc. and why does ICC gives status to teams like this.

Posted by CricketAnna on (June 30, 2012, 9:35 GMT)

Thank you Sharda for mentioning about Associates and Affiliates in your last but not least paragraph. Though Woolf Commission recommended but was not discussed at ICC conference because how 36 Associate countries present in ICC Conference will permit ONLY 5 representatives of Affilites, representing 59 countries to talk? 36 Vs 5 are extremely POOR COMBINATION to talk or discuss in a rightful Terms and Conditions. BIG BOYS OF FULL MEMBERS MUST INTERVENE to end the unjust dominance of ASSOCIATES.

Posted by Saswatee on (June 30, 2012, 9:25 GMT)

I am a fan of Sharda Ugra because of her open and independent journalism on cricket, Probably she is the only reporter who at least in 2 previous occasions tried to push a bit ICC minnows. Here also I see she mentioned LOUDLY AND HONEST about a total of 106 ICC meber countries after Russia and Hungary joined as Affiates. What she did not mentined here that there are 60 Countries who are ICC Affiliate members comprising around 58 % of total membership of ICC where as around only 27 % are ICC Associate countries, maximum from Europe where their Crickets are runand played by Ex-pats Indians, Pakistanis, Srilankans and South Africans, not EUROPEANS and they do well and earn well for that. SHAME on you EU...........

Posted by   on (June 29, 2012, 8:00 GMT)

Contradictions...its more calculated now..!!

Posted by tonk on (June 28, 2012, 17:52 GMT)

Change is as good as a holiday, eh guys? Whatevs, check out the penultimate sentence of the penultimate paragraph. . . Look out cricket world, Hungary's coming after you! Gratulalunk-!

Posted by TheGecko on (June 28, 2012, 16:46 GMT)

What I don't understand is, if the President's role is ceremonial, why have such a position at all? Why pay an extra person for a job which he doesn't even have!?

Posted by satish619chandar on (June 28, 2012, 9:36 GMT)

@katandthat3 : Buddy.. Please respect the amount BCCI spends for cricket.. they merit a high hand in decision making.. If not for BCCI, Cricket would have been played only between Australia and England.. Still, if BCCI need to have same say as other nations, then BCCI should contributing the same fund as any other nation..

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 8:48 GMT)

good, its BCCI who is investing hugely for the development of the game.

Posted by katandthat3 on (June 28, 2012, 7:46 GMT)

Doesn't matter who they put in as ICC president, when it comes to making decisions it comes down to what the BCCI wants. The ICC is as effective as a cat-flap in an elephant house.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Sharda UgraClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days