ICC revamp

Big Three offer redraft to ICC as lobbying intensifies

Sharda Ugra

January 27, 2014

Comments: 90 | Text size: A | A
'Revamp has many legal implications'

Cricket's formally-united Big Three - the BCCI, Cricket Australia and the ECB - will present the seven other Full Member nations with a set of re-drafted "resolutions" around their radical "position paper" at an ICC executive meeting in Dubai on Tuesday.

The resolutions - five in number - were being talked through the first official meeting of the Finance & Commercial Affairs (F&CA) committee after its "working group" - made up of the heads of the BCCI, Cricket Australia and the ECB - came up with the proposal in a 21-page document that called for a complete overhaul of the ICC's administration and its revenue distribution.

The first of the proposals to be watered down is expected to be the one pertaining to a two-tier format for Test cricket and the relegation of the bottom two ranked into the ICC Intercontinental Cup. The other proposal which could be reworked pertains to a newly formed Executive Committee (ExCo) and it's possible expansion from four to five, with a second nominee coming in from the "small seven," as opposed to only one according to the draft position paper.

As the ICC's Board met for its scheduled quarterly meeting in Dubai, the Big Three were known to be in discussions with six of the Seven in order to ensure their support should the proposal go to vote on Tuesday.


Fans turned up in large numbers to support Nepal, Hong Kong v Nepal, ICC World Twenty20 Qualifier, quarter-final, Abu Dhabi, November 27, 2013
There could be some radical changes to international cricket if the ICC Board accepts the proposals © ICC
Enlarge

One board chief said the BCCI, ECB and Cricket Australia had been "surrounding people, taking them in, we'll give you this, we'll give you that." Another said that BCCI led the majority of such discussions, their offers being enhanced with every meeting, "Individually they call every board and offer them something each time."

The only vocal objector to the proposal, Cricket South Africa, has been left out of these discussions and the benefits being offered to the rest of the boards. The main negotiations took place on governance issues with FTP agreements - particularly those pertaining to tours by India - being used as "bait". The resolutions, first expected to be presented in a list of 50-plus points, were later gathered together under five categories.

While in the past governance issues had dominated revenue matters, on Monday evening, one of the Big Three officials said there could be "further discussions rather than negotiations around revenue models" with an attempt to explain how they would work in real terms and the guarantees being offered.

The main boards involved in the talks are the three Asian boards - the PCB, SLC and BCB - who have been left mulling over their options due to various reasons. There has been public protest in Bangladesh, including a crowd gathering of close to 3000 in Dhaka on Saturday, over the possibility of their cricket board ceding Bangladesh's Test match status and calendar in the face of the proposals.

A senior Bangladeshi cricket official said, "It is a big thing, (to us) this status. In 13 years Bangladesh have managed to win four Test matches. India and New Zealand did not win their first Test till 30 years. So how come these people are now telling Bangladesh that you will need to fight out in the I-Cup to retain your Test status." Should the relegation issue be diluted from the resolutions, the Big Three may find the leverage they need with the BCB.

With the PCB, the main issue concerned their FTP arrangements particularly with the BCCI, in the light of a fluctuating political climate. SLC finds itself in a state of financial crisis, an application pending for an $8m loan from the ICC and the prospective carrot of a 2017 tour from the Indian team. Plus, officials are under pressure from former players and administrators who believe the rights they won at an ICC table, "the hard way" should not be surrendered for "short-term gain."

Former Sri Lankan captain Arjuna Ranatunga said accepting the proposal would take smaller countries back to the skewed international calendars of the 1980s. "From 1987 to 1990 in four years Sri Lanka played just seven Tests. After that, ICC's Future Tour Programme ensured that there were equal opportunities for all countries. The proposed system will take smaller nations like Sri Lanka to the situation in 1980s."

Zimbabwe Cricket, despite its financial debt to the tune of $18m and its player strike due to non-payment of dues, is expected to vote in favour of the proposals largely because of their good relations with the BCCI. In the last 10 years, India has played two Tests, nine ODIs and two T20s in Zimbabwe, compared to Australia's three, England's four and South Africa's three ODIs.

Among the other Full Member nations, New Zealand Cricket had come out in support of the proposal while the West Indies Cricket Board only stated that they had taken a position "in the best interests of West Indies cricket" following two board meetings in the past ten days.

With inputs from Andrew Fernando, Firdose Moonda, Nagraj Gollapudi and Mohammad Isam

Sharda Ugra is senior editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Sharda Ugra

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by   on (January 30, 2014, 3:26 GMT)

There has been a protests in Bangladesh which just shows you that cricket is a big deal in Bangladesh. Inshallah none of these altruistic and egotistical big 3 do any damage to the integrity of cricket!

Posted by   on (January 28, 2014, 20:52 GMT)

Earn and let earn is ''The motto'' of Big three. The big three can't do much better if others left aside and same applies to the others. All be happy of getting on with the flow. Think out Big people.

Posted by Tokai69 on (January 28, 2014, 14:19 GMT)

Now the gloves are off, and the division in cricketing countries are clear than ever. Every Board should think about benefit of it's own, at the same time the love of the game per se. Politics in this game is another reason why this game is got an world class event yet!

Posted by muzika_tchaikovskogo on (January 28, 2014, 12:25 GMT)

Call me cynical if you like, but the most likely outcome of this entire affair will be additional tours by India to those countries. I'll be delighted to be proven wrong btw.

Posted by   on (January 28, 2014, 10:12 GMT)

@Neel_123 The above said four boards are taking measures which are their best interest at the same time those measures are not putting other boards survival in jeopardy. But the draft paper is ensuring only the benefits of the big three.

I hope you will understand my point. If you only run after money leaving the spirit of the game far behind which BCCI is doing, soon you gonna end up with money only with Indian team doing good only in home series and Indian players only shining in IPL and your so called super league. Think about it. Cricinfo please post.

Posted by   on (January 28, 2014, 9:47 GMT)

@Neel_123 BCCI's demand for more financial share is fare demand but the way in which position paper was drafted secretly make it looks like a conspiracy. It wud have been better if these suggestions have been discussed openly and input from other full members have been taken. 2nd point more financial contribution doesn't guarantee a good performance or gives a board more executive and financial decision making power

Posted by zarasochozarasamjho on (January 28, 2014, 9:42 GMT)

It is not Big 3 but Big 1 which is Australia. India is test-ranked 7th historically by win/loss ratio; and look at way England has been humiliated by Australia and Pakistan.

Let the rest kick out Aus, Eng, and Ind anf form their own club; and let us watch the Big "3" losing popularity over time as England will continue to lose to Australia as is historically the case and India will simply continue to be whitewashed by the other two.

Posted by Neel_123 on (January 28, 2014, 9:27 GMT)

So, essentially, these 4 crickets boards are doing what is 'good' for THEIR respective countries! Why is BCCI wrong if they want to do what is good for Indian Cricket??

Look at all these comments degenerating India & Indian cricket. Yet, all these boards beg money from BCCI and beg BCCI to arrange a tour or two to for their survival.

It would be awesome if BCCI proposal for higher share of revenue gets REJECTED and I hope BCCI start India Super League 50-50 during winter season (Nov-Feb) every year. There are enough money and enough apatite for cricket in India to make it a grand success much like IPL (despite many predicted IPL to doom in 2 years; 6 years and it is going stronger every year). I can not wait to see India leaving ICC and going on its own NFL, MLB style!!

Let us see if 'true cricket lovers' commenting here from these 4 countries would keep cricket alive in their nation or if their boards go bankrupt in 2-3 years and close their shops for better options!

Posted by Almightys on (January 28, 2014, 8:17 GMT)

Being Indian I am writing this, good option is all other countries (than these 'Big Three' should come together and start their separate council for cricket. SA, WI, SL, NZ can take initiative, its better for them for longer duration. Let these three countries play together every time.

Either give every test playing nation equal number of matches to play as home and away basis with every other test playing country and make standard format, else make separate council for all other contries.

Posted by   on (January 28, 2014, 7:29 GMT)

Shame on India, England and Australia. They should have their own council and other 7 must kick them out and let them play in their circle.

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
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!