ICC revamp

Changes in resolution forced PCB, SLC to abstain

Umar Farooq

February 8, 2014

Comments: 66 | Text size: A | A

PCB chairman Zaka Ashraf at a press conference, Lahore, April 18, 2011
Zaka Ashraf said the decision to abstain from voting in Saturday's ICC Board meeting had bought the Pakistan Cricket Board time to consider the resolutions © AFP
Enlarge

The Pakistan Cricket Board and Sri Lanka Cricket, the only Full Members to abstain from voting in the ICC Board meeting on Saturday, said that they had done so due to changes in the "comprehensive resolution" that required the approval of their respective governing boards and stakeholders. Their decision to abstain from voting, however, did not stop the ICC Board from approving a large number of changes affecting the governance and structure of international cricket.

In the lead-up to the meeting, the PCB, SLC and Cricket South Africa had been vocal in their opposition of the proposed changes to the ICC. Zaka Ashraf, the PCB chairman, however, said that the resolution presented to the Full Members for a vote on Saturday was a revised one that differed from the earlier draft. CSA's decision to vote in favour of the proposal also affected the other two boards.

"They got the revised proposal with many things toned down," Ashraf told ESPNcricinfo, without getting into the details. "Now we need to take our governing board into confidence before returning in April. We had a mandate to oppose the revamp but we were forced to rethink after the present situation and after South Africa opted to vote. Maybe they saw things differently and in their interest."

SLC clarified that the revised resolution presented to the board required a fresh mandate from its executive committee and stakeholders, which the board was unable to obtain at the last minute.

"At the ICC Board meeting … the revised resolution relating to the governance, competition and financial models of ICC was presented," a release from SLC said. "The scope of the resolutions presently proposed was substantially changed, for which SLC required a fresh mandate from the executive committee and stakeholders.

"As this was intimated to SLC this morning, the SLC representative at the ICC Board meeting abstained from voting as SLC were unable to obtain such mandate today, and would therefore have to go back to the executive committee and stakeholders before voting on the resolutions. We will seek to obtain a fresh mandate based on the above in order to express SLC's stance at the next ICC Board meeting scheduled in April."

Ashraf stressed that the move to abstain would not have an adverse impact on the PCB and had bought the board some time to think over the proposals before the next ICC Board meeting in April.

"We are not a loser in all of this," Ashraf said. "We and Sri Lanka stood on our principle stance but it's important to mention that we are not against any board. We want to address the concerns before reaching a consensus. We understand there is a need for change in the ICC structure but it has to be on an equity basis. India is already not playing Pakistan and there is no remedy if any board pulls out of its commitment. There should be a legal course we can pursue being an aggrieved party if any board deviates from their commitment until the new FTP comes into being."

The ICC paved the way for the end of the Future Tours Programme (FTP) in its current form, with future tours being dependent on "contractually binding" negotiations between boards. The governing body, in its release, also urged members to enter into bilateral agreements "as a matter of urgency" to confirm a schedule of the matches between 2015 and 2023. The ICC Board also approved the "contribution cost" model of revenue distribution and said that Full Members would gain greater financial recognition based on "the contribution they have made to the game, particularly in terms of finance, their ICC history and their on-field performances in the three formats."

Ashraf said the Pakistan board did not object to the financial model and said the ICC had promised a financial value that would not fluctuate from the present revenue Pakistan was getting.

"They didn't give us a precise figure but asked us to trust them," Ashraf said. "We are not worried about any repercussion as we are still financially sound, if not the strongest without playing India, as other boards are fulfilling their commitment. Despite the fact that no international cricket is being played in Pakistan, we are not in deficit or debt."

Umar Farooq is ESPNcricinfo's Pakistan correspondent. He tweets here

RSS Feeds: Umar Farooq

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by   on (February 10, 2014, 9:11 GMT)

I think the concept of Big 3, has been turned upside down. The level of International cricket among 10 nations is very high. it is nineteen and twenties between these countries. Home conditions give an advantage. Australia loses in India and England. England lose in Australia. India generally loses overseas. One team plays good cricket and wins on a day. The other team plays at peak intensity and comes back to win the next match. The Big 3 are big in size and not in quality. Only, playing against them brings in big revenue. It is because of this they have been singled out. Their national following is numerically bigger and matches bring in higher revenue for teams playing them. But, try telling this to Pakistanis! The mere mention of India is enough for them to get charged. Sri Lanka obviously is in the wrong company and for sake of cricket lovers it will correct course and join the mainstream. As for Pakistan- logic has never been its strong point, let it froth in its bitterness.

Posted by   on (February 10, 2014, 9:00 GMT)

so sad friends. this is end of cricket................................... .

Posted by   on (February 10, 2014, 8:18 GMT)

So, it appears Pakistan & Sri Lankan cricket lovers are blessed by whiter than white Boards. Boards of other 8 countries who voted for the revamp are wrong to say the least.

Good luck, to cricket lovers from these two countries. May you enjoy cricket with each other and stay away from rest of the countries!

Posted by   on (February 10, 2014, 6:51 GMT)

My dear friends / brothers from Pakistan and Srilanka, I am an Indian based in USA. I love the game of cricket and love all teams (and specially Players ) who play good cricket no Matter which country they belong too Thus not supporting any particular team... Just want to enjoy great cricket. Now in my point of view, Their is no need for Pakistanis or sri Lankans to be proud of their boards for the decision they made. Actually the people in Power in PCB and SLC have made a fool of the common cricket loving citizens of their country. Abstaining from voting does not mean they opposed the revamp or changes, it just means they got more time... and people are thinking they did not vote in protest and are opposing (and that is what they want to project to people of their country). Please mark my words, come April (Next ICC Meeting) both of these boards will vote for the change saying they have worked out a good deal with BIG3 (so called). So please abstain from criticizing each other. Thanks

Posted by alipk52 on (February 9, 2014, 17:50 GMT)

@Tanvir..very well said mate, spot on! That's why I said without Pakistan and SL, cricket fans will see India/Australia/England winning at home and receiving humiliating defeats when they will be tourists, definitely this predictability will put real damage to the game, hats off to PCB to stay committed throughout, we know they (big 3) can't be able to any harm to Pakistan Cricket, don't go too far away guys, Indo-Pak games generates most revenue than any other cricketing contest :) Will they lose it? Definitely no...so I quitely laughed at bcci proposals..bcci also tried to convince Pakistan to vote and they'll play a series in UAE if PCB will vote, lol...take that bcci and PCB haters!!

Posted by   on (February 9, 2014, 15:35 GMT)

Once cricket return to Pakistan (after peace), the whole world cricket (apart from Ind, Aus and Eng) will come to Pakistan and play and will generate decent revenue. Meanwhile Pak ought to stage T20 league in UAE/South Africa/SL until cricket returns to Pakistan. This will groom their players and will get some revenue as well.

Posted by   on (February 9, 2014, 14:51 GMT)

The "big three" are only so in name. England suffers humiliating defeats in Australia, India in SA and NZ. Mediocre teams with a lot of money. Big Money trumps good cricket.

Posted by ARJQ on (February 9, 2014, 14:04 GMT)

I believe PCB & SLC knew that they will be left alone and CSA will choke out in the end as usual. I see nothing wrong in taking stand against this biased revamp. PCB had no objection on financial model as principally Big Three are right to take bigger share based on their contribution in revenue but why take control of ICC?? I wonder how 3 countries will now be taking care of interest of other 7 countries when their own stakes clash with other 7 any time in future?

Posted by 0mar1 on (February 9, 2014, 13:51 GMT)

Well done cricket lovers of Pak and SL- to take a stand for Principles and Fairness, against Greed and Power... puts one in distinguished company: read Mandela, Gandhi, MLK and other giants who took on the powers of their day.

In any case, no need to worry about patching up with BCCI... for the same reason one does not worry about wooing a "lady of the evening" ... as long as there is enough money in your wallet - they both will be yours for the next hour (or series).

Posted by pakpanther on (February 9, 2014, 13:04 GMT)

@ Tanvir Ahmed bang on my friend.. the so called world # 1 are flat track bullies. Their recent away performances have been pathetic and as you have mentioned they have been thrashed 4- 0 by New Zeland and now so called 'world champions' have lost first test match as well. what a joke. :) . and remember.. last time a Pakistani played in the IPL he was man of the tournament ... Sohail Tavir. and thats is the reason why Pakistani players are not been included in IPL since then.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Umar FarooqClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days