ICC news

Draft proposal could hit a snag

Nagraj Gollapudi

January 21, 2014

Comments: 78 | Text size: A | A

AHM Mustafa Kamal, Alan Isaac and David Richardson at the ICC executive board meeting, London, Friday, October 18, 2013
The proposal caught the ICC top brass unawares when it was presented in the January 9 meeting © Getty Images

With Cricket South Africa making public its opposition to the revamp of ICC's structure, formulated by the triumvirate of BCCI, Cricket Australia and the ECB, there is a possibility of the proposal getting blocked should it come to an early vote at the ICC board meeting on January 29.

The proposal, it is understood, was only known to a handful of senior officials from the Big Three who formed part of the "working group" that drafted the document. For it to progress from merely being a proposal or a recommendation - which any individual of the ICC can make - it would need to be approved by a majority during an ICC board meeting.

There is a possibility that the draft "position paper" could be treated more than a routine recommendation. Considering that the draft of the F&CA "working group" has far-reaching changes in administrative structures, financial distribution and the creation of an entirely new commercial wing of the ICC, it could require a "special meeting" to pass what the ICC's constitution refers to as a "special resolution".

To get a special resolution passed, eight out of the 10 Full Members will need to back the proposal according to the ICC Constitution. Article 6.12 a)3)b) in the constitution, which deals with voting on a special resolution, reads: "Resolution proposed at Conference or at a Special Meeting shall be deemed to have been carried as a Special Resolution only if not less than three-quarters of the aggregate number of votes exercisable by all the Full Members shall have been cast in favour of the Resolution, irrespective of whether or not all of the Full Members shall have actually been present in person or by proxy."

Some of the officials from group of seven members, outside the Big Three, ESPNCricinfo spoke to admitted that they were concerned by development. "We have been talking between ourselves. Everyone is disturbed because the draft proposal will have greater repercussions on futures of members' cricket," a senior board official from the seven-member group of nations said. His greatest fear was the Australia-England-India triad were getting the majority of the funds while the G-7 were left with nothing much. "You need money to run the sport. They have proposed to make FTP optional. For such decisions you have to have everybody along. They are acting like UN Security Council where the Big Three have veto powers," the official said.

The "position paper", as the 21-page document was titled, was revealed to the Full Members for the first time during an additional ICC Board meeting to discuss "financial matters" called suddenly on January 9 in Dubai. When the proposal was presented, it not only took the representatives of the rest of the seven Full Members by surprise but also caught unawares the top brass of the ICC, comprising of president Alan Isaac, Mustafa Kamal (vice-president) and Dave Richardson (chief executive).

The meeting will be significant because of the immediacy and urgency spelt out in the "position paper" with respect to the formation of the ICC Business Co (IBC) - a new commercial arm of the ICC which will be set up to replace the existing IDI (ICC Development International). The proposal states that the IBC is to be "established immediately" in order to take overall charge of the next cycle of ICC media and sponsorship rights that cover 2015-2023, starting with the task of issuing media rights tenders. The chairman of the ICC's F&CA committee will also be the chairman of the IBC, appointed through nomination by either the BCCI, Cricket Australia or the ECB.

Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Nagraj Gollapudi

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by Kazi_Rajib on (January 25, 2014, 11:22 GMT)

An appropriate story for Big 3: A poor man and his wife owned a very special goose. Every day the goose would lay a golden egg, which made the couple very rich. One day the man's wife thinks if we could have all the golden eggs that are inside the goose, we could be richer much faster."You're right," said her husband, "We wouldn't have to wait for the goose to lay her egg every day." So, the couple killed the goose and cut her open, only to find that she was just like every other goose. She had no golden eggs inside of her at all, and they had no more golden eggs."Too much greed results in nothing."

Posted by Twinkie on (January 23, 2014, 16:21 GMT)

New riddle people! How shortsighted can you get? As shortsighted as the BCCI, ECB and CA! Let's boycott them and make them play themselves forever! Well maybe not forever. After a year or so no-one will be watching them and they will no longer be playing. Let them pass their proposal. They stand to lose more eventually.

Posted by   on (January 23, 2014, 13:32 GMT)

does ICC work with as one-board-one-vote? If so, then should the story NOT be about the big-three proposal, but about how the big-three plan to bully/coerce the other 7 to vote against their own interests? Why can't the other 7 bring a rival proposal and pass it while they still have this right?

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 21:52 GMT)

@Sayak Bhattacharyya, I am completely agree with you.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 18:16 GMT)

@Barry Glynn: The 3rd test between Pakistan and Sri Lanka played on a slow pitch, where Pakistan won in an exciting finish was a real mockery of test cricket!!! Wasn't it. How matches in the sub-continent played in the recent years have ended in a draw? Not many and substantially not many compared to those played in other parts of the world. We recently had a drawn match in New Zealand, South Africa and two in England compared to one in the UAE.

Posted by CM1000 on (January 22, 2014, 15:44 GMT)

@Proud_GhorJamai - I think you would think very differently if your team did better on fast bouncy pitches. I have visited the sub-continent to watch cricket three times and enjoyed it immensely, but there is no doubt that cricket is far more exciting to watch on fast bouncy pitches where you have a serious fear factor involved. The only truly great sides I have ever seen, the West Indies in the 1980's and Australia in the 90's/00's, won everywhere in the world, in all conditions. That is the challenge, and a great challenge it is. But I don't think a sub-continental team will be able to do that until they spice up their pitches a bit more, encouraging fast bowlers to develop, and developing batsmen who can thrive in all conditions. I don't mind the status quo either, when conditions are very different in different countries, but I think its silly to pretend fast bouncy pitches are "futile and a mockery" just because your team hasn't had success in those conditions.

Posted by CM1000 on (January 22, 2014, 15:26 GMT)

@Rasheed Khan - while I agree with your sentiment that this would be very bad for world cricket, I can't agree with your crystal ball. If this goes ahead and most of the money were to go to the Big 3, then cricket will go backwards in most other countries - sport is a profession these days, and without a good income to offer, many of the really talented sportsmen will shun cricket and pursue other sports to make a good income. And the decent talent would probably move to England (who are very open to foreigners in their national side) to play county cricket, earn a decent income and qualify to be part of Tests amongst the Big Three if they are good enough - like is happening to Ireland now. I think a more likely scenario would be that, say, Sth Africa would continue on ok, because there would be demand from the Big Three for them to come, and the hosts would have to make it worthwhile for SA financially. But you would get many more KPs and Trotts moving to the UK, weakening SA.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 15:20 GMT)

This resolution has to be thrown to the dustbin without any further delay. I am a supporter of Indian cricket team, but about BCCI the least said is the best. They should bother more about setting their own house in order. The person who formulated the idea of permanent spot for big three in top tier in Tests due to financial considerations should be awarded a Nobel. Tomorrow they might ask for automatic births for big three in WC semi finals along the same line.

Posted by Proud_GhorJamai on (January 22, 2014, 14:23 GMT)

@barry glynn- we find playing on fast bouncy tracks futile and mockery as well. Its all about the perspective. We don't need England/Australia or India to come over as long as the other 6 keep touring us.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 13:31 GMT)

Riffat As I said it's about money, end of. No mileage in England playing in Bng, no money to be made and playing on low slow tracks is a mockery anyway. More boring Tests have been played over the years on such sub continent pitches than anywhere else in the world. Producing such pitches does Bng no good as India have found out.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 13:23 GMT)

Completely agree with @Rasheed Khan, it is time that the rest of the 7 Full Members kick out the Big 3 Bullies and let them play among themselves for the rest of their lives lets see where that takes them, the rest 7 may not be the richest or have huge TV rights or sponsorship deals but they will still will be able to run a legitimate sport league among themselves.

Posted by rshan on (January 22, 2014, 9:36 GMT)

Fully agree with Rasheed Khan's post. Telling the so called big-3 to shove their proposal in its due place, solidarity among other nations should be firm. CSA taking the lead role, they should form a breakaway league naming it "World Cricket Federation". Let the Big-3 play among themselves, which would become stale in a couple of years even to their ardent fans and supporters. When boredom creeps in, their fans would switch to watch others playing. Seriously, food for thought, and I'm sure it will be a huge success.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 8:51 GMT)

Rubbish Idea. destroying cricket. Three are not big we 11+ are big... (PAK,SA,SL,WI,BAN,ZIM,NZ,IRL,AFG,NET,SCO).... how they think like this....this type of decision will destroy cricket.

Rest of the world will hate and avoid 3 nations macth. Remember it.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 7:09 GMT)

Three are not big we 11+ are big... (PAK,SA,SL,WI,BAN,ZIM,NZ,IRL,AFG,NET,SCO).... how they think like this....this type of decision will destroy cricket.

Posted by HabeebRaja786 on (January 22, 2014, 6:57 GMT)

Imagine English Premier League with big four saying they will be playing Champion League every season, no matter what happens in the league.It needs intellect of a 5 year old to produce such a draft.It reminds me of my childhood .A kid with bat and ball wants to open the batting and bowling as other kids are using his bat and ball to play.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 6:57 GMT)

Well this is the end of cricket, it will be more like the WWE wrestling, where everybody knows a drama is being played on, still gallery full of spectators.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 6:52 GMT)

It's very simple. Let these so called big 3 play among themselves and let the other nations form another icc and basically a break away league. These 3 are the judas of world cricket with India the biggest hypocrite. The second league will be poorer but believe me people there are more to life than money. It will be poor but there will be love for the game and respect for us spectators like me who pay lots of money to dish network for the cricket package and stay up late to watch the game. It's almost 2:00am here in New York and I'm up watching India vs New Zealand. If the big 3 get their way do you think I'll ever do this again? Never!!! And I'm sure there will be millions like me.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 6:51 GMT)

This would be murder of the cricket. We are already see depleting crowds in various test matches. If they do this, their will only be pigeons and crows from India as spectators in a 5 day test match.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 6:45 GMT)

@ Barry Glynn - No, its not entirely our fault. Our improvement is slow because of ridiculous FTP of ICC, we play less than 60-70% tests compare to other nations. Second, please check how many tests or how many years it took for others. We are the current runner up of Asia Cup beating both India and Srilanka. If England is whitewashed in Aus, India is struggling everywhere outside subcontinent, whats wrong if we lose a few test series in the process? If no one wants to see BNG play over there in England (which I doubt; Shakib has more than 1M fb fan….LOL), then send your team here to play in front of a full house crowd. I am pretty sure, on a turning slowish track, it will be difficult to beat us.

Posted by wapuser on (January 22, 2014, 6:39 GMT)

this type of decision will destroy cricket.

Posted by ODI_BestFormOfCricket on (January 22, 2014, 6:17 GMT)

i love competetive international matches, i love IPL, I SUPPORT HUGE SHARE FOR BCCI that reflects their contribution BUT I OPPOSES TOP THREE CONTROLLING GAME still they didnot say that they will not play teams below ranking 3.

Posted by buddhikapm on (January 22, 2014, 6:13 GMT)

If this is going to be implemented then the rest of the countries have no option than establishing an alternative Cricket council to take care themselves....Though this capitalist market is driven by the money factor people must understood that it is not the right path

Posted by veerang on (January 22, 2014, 6:06 GMT)

people of cricket loving nations wont spent a penny to watch their own match.

Posted by wwisher on (January 22, 2014, 6:05 GMT)

This type of oligarchy must be stopped for shake of globalization of cricket. This will just kill cricket that's all. Cricket should be spreading al over the world rather than be killed. ICC please don't make yourself laughing stock any more. Team like BD and ZIm will be vanish if this happens.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 5:53 GMT)

I don't understand What ICC wants to do. If they want to give supreme power to AU IN & EN, that they can. If ICC wants its control among to these nations, that ICC can. But If ICC wants to spread up the cricket to the whole world, this draft proposal can never bring that kind of reality.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 5:27 GMT)

Lets boycott India, England and Australia. let them play their world cup series. 3 out of champion, runner up and 2nd runner up.. ha ha .. Stupid thinking.

How mean minded they are? Shame on them. they are killing cricket. a virus of the cricket. if the minors never played with big team , how they learn? where over the world.. all playing is trying to globalized. then these 3 team thinking to heavy their pocket. sharing cricket to their business?

lets boycott them... Rest of other is much enough to create new ICC who will control Cricket for the best of it.

Shame of India. How mean minded and comes to their head....

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 5:24 GMT)

Riffat You say "is it our fault we are not improving on Tests?" Er, well yes, it's no one else's fault! Secondly, why do not England want to play Bng in Tests in England? Answer is no one wants to watch it and yes, to a large degree, it is all about money. No one wants to pay to watch Bng play over here. I'm afraid that's life. There's no money to be made with small crowds. Maybe sad but true I'm afraid.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 4:45 GMT)

Not fair at all. This will vanish cricket loving nations.

Posted by Udendra on (January 22, 2014, 4:42 GMT)

Even if this paper is withdrawn/amended, it has already created great shame to the "Gentleman's Game".

Posted by Riffat on (January 22, 2014, 4:10 GMT)

This is ridiculous oligarchy. How can you improve in test unless you play with all the better teams, in all conditions? How many tests Bng have played compare to AUS, ENG and IND in last 10 years? Is this our fault that we are not improving in test? We just whitewashed NZ, beat WI in last ODI series, became runner up in Asia Cup, conducting T-20 WC. What more improvement are you looking for? Plus even the big three suffer huge defeat when they travel abroad. England just whitewashed in Aus; earlier Aus was whitewashed in Eng. India was whitewashed in both Eng and in Aus. So, if Bng / ZMB / NZ lose in Eng or in Aus, whats wrong with it? I think these 'three' are afraid to play with the rest; they want to eliminate this embarrassment. Everybody is talking about revenue where the problem lies elsewhere. I have never heard of such oligarchy in other sports. ICC is always a laughing stock to me. They always think of money, revenue, profit, power; they don't think of the passion.

Posted by shafiqul_alam2000 on (January 22, 2014, 3:36 GMT)

Disgusting and unacceptable proposal by ICC. What England, India and Australia think themselves.......do they think cricket means three countries. At the moment more than 20 countries playing serious cricket. I think 7 other test nations should kicked out three countries from ICC or they should form another body....this will give opportunity for three countries to play themselves and keep money among themselves. Every test nations have every right to get equal share of ICC income. If cricket only played between three countries ICC never able to raise such amount of money. Now time to revolt 7 test nations and give strong message never this sort of proposal put forward by any other body. My proposal adding Ireland and Afganstan as test nations and divide two divisions. First division will comprise 6 top teams and every two years two team will relegated and second division will also elevate two teams to first division. There will be no advantage for India, Australia and England.

Posted by OttawaRocks on (January 22, 2014, 2:50 GMT)

I agree with Testcricketistop. The big 3 should be free to capitalize on and market any games that they themselves are involved in (with all those revenues accruing to their own cricketing bodies) but the power within ICC should remain a separate concept where ICC acts independently representing all cricket playing nations equally. In this kind of world the ICC would see their financial power shrunk due to less funds coming in from the Big 3 but on the other hand, they would retain their autonomy and power.

Posted by TMuhammad on (January 22, 2014, 2:23 GMT)

In continuation to my earlier post when I tried to point out that this could create new cricketing bodies like in wrestling, WCG or in any other form and imagine if this new body start giving membership to non test playing countries like Scotland, Ireland, Afghanistan etc?

Posted by TMuhammad on (January 22, 2014, 2:19 GMT)

Those who are trying to be the big bosses of the cricketing world are only looking for the short term earning. What they are not realizing that they are paving the way towards making of something like WCC ( world cricket congress) or ICG International Cricketing Group like that of Wrestling world. Believe me if the draft approved, sooner or later this is going to happen and then several teams will be emerging from within each country. Imaging India, Australia and England having two or more cricketing bodies as the other group like WCG not accepting teams from ICC.

Posted by Humdingers on (January 22, 2014, 2:01 GMT)

@First_Drop - you obviously have not been around long enough to remember what cricket administration was like 20 years ago. Nothing has changed mate. Back in the day it was England who called the shots, then Australia joined in. If the BCCI wanted to, it could go the same way if it wanted to. Money talks mate.

Posted by bzzd on (January 22, 2014, 1:53 GMT)

This is a terrible idea. India has the most followers and most financial clout but they cannot win outside of the sub-continent. I am not sure that England can win anywhere right now. Australia have the cojones but do they have the real thing right now? Too many good cricketers in the rest of the world for our game to be hijacked like this. Probably even worse than when the game was administered by the MCC in the far distant past.

Posted by   on (January 22, 2014, 1:15 GMT)

Let those big three play among themselves and the rest of the countries form a separate committee to lead in future. Because if these three get so much power then globalization of cricket is a day dream. If they are so concerned about revenue , my suggestion , let them play only with each other. Let's see how much revenue still ICC can earn??

Posted by VisBal on (January 22, 2014, 0:42 GMT)

@ CricketisKing: The money that they want to redistribute is not money that they generate. It is ICC income, income derived from ICC contracts.

Posted by asporag on (January 22, 2014, 0:29 GMT)

This system will kill cricket forever in long term. Why the other nations will accept this proposal? If this 3 nations will not withdraw their proposal others should get rid of this 3 and should make their own world cricket.They shouldn't worry about money because when money was not a big factor in cricket even on those time cricket was going on smoothly then why to worry for now? Moreover, when more countries will be playing cricket the cricket will be more exciting and money making for the cricket word like FIFA. We want cricket as a world game not a 3 nation owned game at all!!!

Posted by redneck on (January 22, 2014, 0:15 GMT)

disgusting power grab, disapointed cricket australia agreed to go along with india!! even more so by their attempt to pass this through the icc by stating it is trying to grow the game by offering test relegation and promotion to give ireland etc a chance to gain test status. no point giving ireland test status when they wont have the money to even buy a lawn mower to prepair a pitch!!! its just not cricket!!!

Posted by shafiqul_alam2000 on (January 22, 2014, 0:02 GMT)

I am disgust with the proposal...........I would suggest India, Australia and England should be either kicked out from the ICC or other 7 test playing nations can form another body and boycott those three teams. Let's see how only three countries make money from playing themselves. Cricket could be much popular but few conservatives such as Boycott trying to keep between rich nations. For example, if Bangladesh would not get chance they would not able to produce Shakib or Tamim....and they are improving. I am sure if Bangladesh if get another 5 years they will beat Australia in Bangaladesh in Test match. Therefore, I want at least one country in between Ireland and Afganstan to play test cricket. Yes there can be two divisions if Ireland and Afganstan included......First division first six teams and second division remaining six teams. Bottom of second division can down to play with Intercontinental cup. Bottom team of First division will relegate to second division.

Posted by Sajid111 on (January 21, 2014, 23:57 GMT)

Solution: KILL test cricket! No one have time to watch it in this day and age.

Posted by wapuser on (January 21, 2014, 23:51 GMT)

BEING an Indian,the things Wat the board does make me ashamed..

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 23:47 GMT)

Like it or not, the big 3 are very important financially for the other 7. South Africa may be No 1 in tests, but that hasn't made the fans flock to the grounds. The India test series was played in front of empty stands. This after so much heartburn for the cancelled cape town test! Whatever money CSA made from TV deals for the India series is crucial for their finances,making up for losses due to their series with Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The same with Zimbabwe, the financial losses due to the Pakistan series were compensated by 5 ODIs with India. Pakistan fans are not going to like this,but India is indirectly subsidizing Pakistan Cricket.

Posted by Biggus on (January 21, 2014, 23:46 GMT)

I have made my horror at the proposition plain to CA in no uncertain terms and ALL Australians who feel similarly should do the same. I doubt the BCCI takes all that much notice of Indian fans and I'm not too sure how much attention ECB pays to the English, but I reckon if we Aussies make life as uncomfortable as possible for our board we could make a difference, by filling their inboxes with emails politely but firmly making our opposition as clear as we can and reaffirming our commitment to an ICC properly representative of it's constituent parties. Unless that body is fully representative it can never have any moral right to police the game. The ICC may need a rework, but this is the worst possible way to go about it. I'm mad as hell about this, mad enough to do something about it. You should too.

Posted by espncricinfomobile on (January 21, 2014, 22:54 GMT)

australia india and SA wouldnt be dagt. But england what the hell.

Posted by espncricinfomobile on (January 21, 2014, 22:19 GMT)

Despite all this activity the BCCI will still find time to organise an exciting 7 match ODI series with Sri Lanka because the 2 sides have not played each other in the last 5 minutes. I cannot wait, a series bursting with context!

Posted by Desihungama on (January 21, 2014, 22:19 GMT)

Let Big 3 play a World Cup among themselves and let Small 7 plus 3 Associates have a Word Cup of their own. We will see by the time World Cup 2019 comes around where will the fans interest and TV revenues be. Most Indian fans are true Cricket lovers and not blindly supporting BCCI and naturally at the end of day any fan would want to see a competitive cricket no matter who is playing.

Posted by espncricinfomobile on (January 21, 2014, 22:04 GMT)

There should be 8 teams, with equal power!

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 21:51 GMT)

@Viswa Santhanam. I think that you have missed the point completely. Yes, I'm not 100% sure if the proposal was made with accordance to the rules of the ICC, but I think that you are missing the bigger picture. The implications are HUGE. Please watch the video "will the rest of the cricket world stand up to the big 3 in Dubai" for a sense of what is actually going on. The big 3 are doing their best to intimidate the rest of the members. The manner in which they sprung the document on the panel without first revealing their intentions at all amounts to espionage. As the document stands, CSA will lose out a heck of a lot and all because of appointing Mr Lorgat. If that whole debacle had not occurred prior to this point, maybe CSA would have been part of the big 3 and not England, who knows? Anyway, I hope that the other nations rally behind CSA, Pak and Sri Lanka and nullify the big 3. Hopefully sense will prevail and this will not happen, it cannot be allowed to!

Posted by philvic on (January 21, 2014, 21:48 GMT)

A centrally coordinated program is dead. Countries need to be proactive and arrange series against teams they want to play. There is nothing to stop anybody playing anybody else. CSA administrators must not depend on FTP and must never again tolerate so little Test action for SA team - certainly not while they are the best in the world.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 21:24 GMT)

Even if the draft does not go through this whole sorry episode will leave a bitter taste in the mouth of fans worldwide

Posted by hst84 on (January 21, 2014, 21:02 GMT)

@viswa : @cricket is king: with due apology guys, cricket is not for the business minded neither its played by players who would think of money all the way. Now that the proposal is lurking about, one can notice that the mind-set of everyone will change going for money rather than improving their own game. There could have been several other options for the so called big 3 if they were thinking positive for cricket. How far positive is the relegation system that these 3 teams will not be removed at any stage? Support something that is understandable guys, dont support just because your team is part of the big 3.

Money and power should be exercised with control rather than being self-centered and egoistic in one's approach.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 20:46 GMT)

This proposal appears to be driven by short-termism and self interest. It is not in the interest of preserving and developing the great game of cricket.

Test cricket is a conundrum. How do you attract viewers to 5 day test matches when people are time poor. This great game was developed in a different era when nobility had plenty of time. Surely it has no place in this day and age. Or does it?

Is not golf a game dating from a similar era which also takes days to complete. Golf is enormously popular globally with huge money involved. The majors are played at historic courses like St Andrews and Augusta, at set times of the year and involve the world's best players.

What can cricket learn from golf? Cricket has great grounds like Lords, Trent Bridge and the MCG, similar to golf's historic courses.

Surely if self interest could be put aside some passionate commercially astute people could develop a plan for growing this great game. Its a shame Kerry Packer isnt around.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 20:39 GMT)

This is just a ground preparing for another less radical proposal which may come out in near future and might be more acceptable..

Posted by Monjur_Elahi on (January 21, 2014, 20:08 GMT)

The next thing on the card will be Ashes series between India and England; India and Australia. ECB and CA will comply as they are not as wealthy as BCCI. Hold on, India cant have Ashes, since the history doesnt involve India ;-) They have to have trophies instead... Sad!

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 19:54 GMT)

That's hijacking cricket seriously. I mean what's this crap "Big Three", that doesn't include the world number 1 team South Africa, A team like Pakistan, which has a legacy of producing world class fast bowlers every now and then. Even Sri Lanka and Newzeland deserve to be there, and yes the ex-giants WIndies. So it should be the 8 Top Test Playing nations, not the Big three nonsense. Let's keep it and international game, paying respect to every decent team, instead of hijacking and restricting it to three nations.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 19:51 GMT)

Why no one is talking about the consequences if this proposal doesn't go through? What else the big three can come up with? I don't think they won't take defeat at their face but will try to punch back. The draft doesn't outline the consequences of the failed-deal case.

Posted by android_user on (January 21, 2014, 19:48 GMT)

So, what the Big Three have prepared is a proposal "which any individual of the ICC can make"? Why then is CSA claiming the constitutional process was not followed? If the proposal is so outrageous as to fundamentally restructure the ICC, I would think two more members would agree with you and the proposal will be voted out. What is the need for an open letter accusing the proposal as being unconstitutionally prepared? Grow up, CSA. Those with deeper pockets have always had the last say in any business. And world cricket IS business. In fact, if it didn't involve big bucks, I doubt that you will give a hoot. You are going to have to work with the Big Three or they will find other "constitutional" way to stick it to you!

Posted by AndyZaltzmannsHair on (January 21, 2014, 19:29 GMT)

Other news media outlets are reporting the PCB is strongly opposed to the draft. All the board members in Pakistani cricket have told PCB Chairman Zaka Ashraf to do everyrhing in his power to stop the "big three". That includes forming an anti-big three bloc of nations. The gloves are off ladies and gentlemans. And once again Pakistan finds itself with its back against the wall. Cornered Tigers here we come.

Posted by CricketisKing on (January 21, 2014, 19:00 GMT)

Like the old saying "Those who have the gold will make the rules". Cricket is big business and it is being controlled by India, Australia and England. If the others want to control let them develop cricket in their own countries rather than looking for handouts. Look at the state of cricket in most of the countries. Pakistan cannot play in Pakistan. Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh are nearly broke. WICB has killed WI cricket. Why should India, Australia and England support any of them? What happens if the three say "enough is enough, we are breaking away from the ICC"? I am not saying whether the draft is good or bad but I do have a feeling that the big three are getting tired of supporting the others when they are not supporting themselves or trying to improve cricket in their own backyards. The ICC is an impotent organization. They are the main reason why cricket is having issues.

Posted by PrasPunter on (January 21, 2014, 17:50 GMT)

@First_Drop , absolutely, i felt exactly the same when i saw CA being a party to this. How can they accept this ? I don't bother much about bcci's acts - but CA ?!! Hope this proposal is defeated for the well-being of the game.

Posted by itisme on (January 21, 2014, 17:43 GMT)

Everybody, all the boards are talking about money and funds. Nobody is talking about the miain problem, which is cricket itself. This so-called position paper recommends a two-tier cricket system. Fine. But what is objectionable and disgusting is that the Trio are guaranteed a place in the top league irrespective of their team's performance on the field. Even if they lose 4-0 or 8-0 they will not be relegated. What non-sense. Why nobody is raising this issue?

Posted by Stark62 on (January 21, 2014, 17:42 GMT)

@ bigdhonifan Yeah, I guess you'll really enjoy watching the same names and teams!!

If the other 7 get together with the Associates, then that will expand the pool and vary the competition, meaning you won't be watching the same teams and players repetitively. It will be an arduous journey in the beginning but a positive, in the long run.

Seriously, I found Pak vs SA an exciting series but there came a point, where I thought "Can we play someone else?" because it does become tedious seeing the same thing or did you enjoy the constant SL vs Ind series'?

What will the FTP be for the big 3: Aus vs Ind in Jan-Feb, Ind vs Eng May-Jul, Eng vs Aus Jul-Sep, Ind vs Aus Oct-Dec, you get my drift.

Lastly, would you enjoy eating daal everyday (same kind of analogy to the FTP)?

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 17:36 GMT)

It would be a great idea for other countries to organize at20 league with them having 7 to 10 teams ,the minimum salary should be a million dollars,and best players from around the world should play in it,south africa and pakistan could possibly have 2 teams ,pakistans's team can use UAE as homeground for now.and stop complaining about the big 3,that is counterproductive.

Posted by Testcricketistop on (January 21, 2014, 17:27 GMT)

The structure of revenue in world cricket should come into question first.

From what .i understand all revenue earned goes directly to the ICC, then countries get a Grant for their expenditure.

That should not be on the table, let each country keep the revenue they bring in, broadcasting revenue, sponsorships and gate money. That way let India keep their money.

But, and this s important, every nation must get the same number of tests to host per year.

It is then up to each ation to market and anage cricket in their own country.

As for the big three controlling cricket, no way, keep your money, but you aren't getting the power as well.

As for ICC events, the revenue must be split evenly amongst all nations participating.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 17:19 GMT)

Let ICC be just big three, led by CSA and PCB the rest of the Cricketing world should form a another governing body. BCCI, ECB, CA have colluded in mafia style to generate this proposal.

Posted by 22many on (January 21, 2014, 17:18 GMT)

The BCCI needs to understand that it does have a responsibility to not only the other cricketing nations but also to the tens of millions of its fellow Indians based around the world. You just look how many Indians will turn up tonight at Seddon Park to see their home town heros....Eden Park will have its biggest cricket crowd for years. The game world wide has to come before money.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 17:16 GMT)

I can't sleep since I heard this Big 3 revamp news; following cricinfo every 30-40mins and expecting a response from these 7 boards, was extremely happy to see South African opposition; and the day when this paper scrapped or rejected will be the happiest of my life; Indian boards as we all know will continue to behave nasty while I was surprised to see English And Aussies helping them, terrible and extremely dangerous for cricket and fans. hoping for the best.

Posted by mrabkhan on (January 21, 2014, 16:54 GMT)

This is like burning of Cricket lets ask these countries to play cricket for themselves other countries should Create a new cricket council shameful . this will destroy the game totally

Posted by bigdhonifan on (January 21, 2014, 16:53 GMT)

@Ashik Imran First of all I am against of this draft. But let me tell you, BCCI brings 70% of its revenues for ICC and rest almost from ECB and CA. May be the other G-7 (as you call, but in real its S-7, smaller 7's) bring 5%. If India, Eng and Australia plays cricket only among themselves then that can be enough for the respective boards to survive. Meanwhile a combo of IPL, Big Bash and Friends T20 can be as better as a cricket world cup. Meanwhile that will be end of cricket in NZ,WI, Ireland, SL etc. And countries like pakistan and South Africa will struggle to pay their cricketers like whats happening now in Zimbabwe and Srilanka. So better talk with big three and settle this up for cricket.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 16:47 GMT)

IN CRICKET : The Performance on International stages should talk ! India , Australia, England r not great performers on Other Countries ! So IT WILL BE a great cheating with Indian & other 2 countries peoples by their boards ! if u want to rule cricket then win outside ur country & Produce talent , INSTEAD of producing cheating with ur own People!

Posted by khanofcricket on (January 21, 2014, 16:47 GMT)

CSA was bold enough to publicly oppose the proposal whereas NZ is in favor of it. Now it is upto the other 5 boards (excluding the so called big 3) to let their positions known. They need to be bold enough to let their positions known publicly rather than sucking up to the 3 boards. If they can not do that then they are the ones who will be responsible for the future of Cricket, whatever happens to it. These 5 boards should never put any blame on to the 3 boards ever if they side with them now or are lame enough to put any opposition. Those who remain silent are as much involved in this proposal as the ones who put it up. Let your conscience make the decision. In the meantime, we the spectators and lovers of the game (the silent majority), who no one cares about, remain in limbo. Cricinfo should also publish that if this proposal goes through then many of the die hard fans will lose interest in the game of Cricket which will ultimately lead to revenue downfall.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 16:44 GMT)

This is all about money, the heavy weights are determined to fill their coffers whilst the smaller cricket playing nations are made to suffer. Is it not the responsibility of the ICC to promote and develop the sport by sharing decision making and being transparent?

Posted by First_Drop on (January 21, 2014, 16:33 GMT)

I'm an Australian cricket fan. It's been clear for some time that the BCCI, in particular, are a law unto themselves. Certainly, they cannot be trusted to form 33% of the governance of our great game. I love cricket and can't see how this is anymore than simple greed. And I'm particularly disappointed to see Australia's invovlement.

Posted by Greatest_Game on (January 21, 2014, 16:25 GMT)

I surely hope that South Africa will not stand alone in opposition to this naked attempt to to hijack international cricket, and return to the dark days of colonial rule, with India so effortlessly switching roles from victim to novou riche economic colonizer. It remains to be seen whether the other test playing nations have been bought off, or whether they will stand up and be counted. New Zealand's signal that it will support this overthrow is heartbreakingly indicative of how a token place at the table and a few trinkets can sully a proud record. I'm sure the All Blacks would not sell out their Rugby team as cheaply!

South Africa's position, in an ironic twist, makes clear the implications of this power grab. The team & country that India, Eng & Aus can't beat at cricket, they will try to beat to death with the blunt end of an economic club.

<Insert name of favorite dictator here> would be proud of the work of the BCCI, ECB & CA, while cricket supporters are horrified in disgust.

Posted by MCC_Tie on (January 21, 2014, 16:23 GMT)

World cricket needs to be incredibly careful here. The sport is not yet truly global and I just fear that should it's future be put in the hands of the 3 wealthiest nations, that we will see a surfeit of Ashes/Indian tours to the detriment of making the sport genuinely widespread. With efforts already being made in China and the US, now is not the time to shrink the power base and influence of ideas. The time is ripe for cricket to grow on a truly global scale and in order to do that, I believe we need greater input than just from 3 main boards.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2014, 16:23 GMT)

I think G-7 should consider another international organization....... it may take some time to be financially stronger but it is necessary for the greater good of cricket and its globalization.......It's is a game, where politics is taking a nasty shape.......... the cricketing world should prevent it from happening. Let them play against each other..and the others should play amongst themselves...let the game expand......in the era of t 20 the game will obviously expand.......but playing tests cant be only some nation's rights.....that just seems so un justice to to other nations.... If money is the only thing let them play against each other only.........

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
Nagraj GollapudiClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days