Player association news June 5, 2013

Frustrated Tim May quits FICA

  shares 65

Tim May has stepped down as chief executive of the Federation of International Cricketers' Associations (FICA) barely a month after he controversially lost his position on the ICC cricket committee to Laxman Sivaramakrishnan. May has been in charge of FICA since 2005 but said he realised over the past 18 months that he was "tiring of working in a sport that was increasingly at odds with the principles I respect".

The loss of May from the ranks of player representatives marks the end of a 16-year era, for he has been involved since becoming the inaugural president of the Australian Cricketers' Association in 1997. However, May said he had become increasingly frustrated at the direction cricket administration was taking, including its apparent unwillingness to make governance changes recommended by the Woolf Report.

"More and more we see allegations of corruption and malpractice on and off the field dominating headlines," May said. "As stakeholders in the game we look to leadership from the ICC to address these and other issues - a vital ingredient of any organisation is the ability of its leaders to set the moral and principled example to others, and to police its organisation from top to bottom to ensure adherence to those principles.

"Yet cricket increasingly seems to be pushing aside the principles of transparency, accountability, independence, and upholding the best interests of the global game, in favour of a system that appears to operate through threats, intimidation and backroom deals. Despite FICA and many other stakeholders pushing for the recommendations of the Woolf Report to be implemented to address these shortcomings, the ICC board see no reason to change."

Among other things, the Woolf Report of 2012 recommended the ICC executive board becoming more independent and less dominated by the bigger countries, and also called for greater transparency at board level. May said both the Woolf Report and 2001's Condon Report into cricket corruption should have led to positive change in the sport, including in its relationships with the players.

"I hope that the ICC and more of its board's members take heed of the recommendations of both Lord Condon and the Woolf Report and form closer and more productive relationships with players and their representatives - rather than the current trend to resist proper player representation; the players deserve better," May said.

"Increasingly the administrators of the game seek to force out or alienate those who question its alleged misuse of power, or those who seek greater transparency, or provide rational argument against the ills of the administration. It appears that some administrators just don't want to be held to account to the standards that are expected of them.

"There is a great opportunity for the ICC to arrest this trend and become one of the world's best governed sports. For the future of the global interests of the game, I hope this happens sooner than later - because the current system is failing us."

Tim was a very good cricketer but without question his greatest impact on the game was to provide a voice for players where there had been none previously
Former New Zealand captain Stephen Fleming

May told the FICA board of his resignation, which is effective immediately, at its recent annual meeting. The organisation is expected to announce a new leadership structure in the coming days. Michael Clarke, the Australia captain, said the players of the current era had plenty of reasons to thanks May for his contributions to their cause.

"When I heard the news that Tim May was resigning from FICA, my immediate thoughts were that this was a sad day for the game and the world's players," Clarke said. "Throughout my time in cricket Tim has been a constant presence, taking on the tough issues on behalf of all players and doing so with amazing passion, strength and leadership. From a players' perspective, his influence on the game should never be forgotten. It's difficult to imagine where the players of today would be without Tim May's contribution."

Former New Zealand captain Stephen Fleming said he was thankful to May in helping them form the New Zealand Players' Association in 2001. "I watched with interest as Tim established the Australian Players Association and he was then a great help to us as we got our own Association organised in 2001," he said. "Tim was a very good cricketer but without question his greatest impact on the game was to provide a voice for players where there had been none previously. This takes tremendous strength of character and real understanding of not only the playing of the sport, but also the business of the sport. The players of today and those of the future have a lot to thank him for."

Brendon McCullum, the New Zealand captain, and AB de Villiers, the South Africa captain, also expressed gratitude on their team's behalf and said May's work meant players around the world were in a much better position.

Brydon Coverdale is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY Harmony111 on | June 8, 2013, 22:20 GMT

    @Venkat: Welcome bro. :-)

    @Raghzzz: Bingo !!!. Pity no one says anything about that piece of lobbying.

    @Dhanno:

    The so called 1st election that May had won in Jan was not as per rules, why should it count at all? By your own logic, the 1st election too was CONTROVERSIAL and trcieks were used to win it by whosoever and later it was nullified. So where exactly is the problem? Why should so much be made of what he had won in Jan? Moreover, Tim May never represented ALL players ever so pls stop misleading people.

    Lees_Legends's arguments are non-existent, I wonder what you made of his words.

    If India doesn't have a players association, should they have no representation in ICC's committee too? What logic is this?

    @Lees_Legends:

    Your hollow reply to my pointed questions shows that you have no basis to say what you have said earlier here.

    You are creating a new jurisprudence where evidence is not needed to back up claims. Anyone can say anything to label something as controversial.

  • POSTED BY Raghzzz on | June 8, 2013, 16:40 GMT

    To begin with, the technical committee role was an individual post which Tim May was contesting. He's trying to use his contacts and lobbying power acquired from being chief of FICA to get into ICC Technical committee role which is in an individual capacity.. this is as much abuse of power as it would be for BCCI which "supposedly" pushed the case of LS. Neither of them (Tim May nor BCCI/LS) are right in their way , but as it always works, the theory of survival of fittest came to the fore.

    Secondly, blaming ICC to be toothless and rigid?? Why don't you try and fix it. Fight it.. Don't be a quitter!! Why to contest the election and one losing why blame the system? This is clear sour grapes..

    Lastly, FICA has nothing to do with ICC Technical committee post. So, don't understand the logic of quitting FICA when not elected in the committee..

    Poor Tim May..

  • POSTED BY Dhanno on | June 7, 2013, 21:45 GMT

    @Lees_legends, we would not give up the parochial views so better take your arguments to some other forum. The original cricinfo article as well as several others note that the vote was cast first time favoring May. Then some questions were "raised", backhand tactics employed, revote done and Voila we had Siva as the representative.

    No one would want to Lees_legend but the point he is making is May had represented players in one capacity or other for 15 years, spoken about their payment issues/ scheduling of T20 leagues in last 2-3 years to make few enemies. India as a country does not even have a player association, and still its Siva who gets to represent the players on global level. Again, only if we could open our eyes.

  • POSTED BY Lees_Legends on | June 7, 2013, 1:05 GMT

    I answered it Harmony but not everyone is lucky enough to get all of their comments published and I'm not going to type it all out again. The gist is, 'controversial' and 'undemocratic', two different words. I've had 2 comments published already and if you still can't understand what I'm saying then there really is no hope. I can't dumb it down further. And yes if you want to call DRS controversial (not relevant though) you certainly can, and you don't need any evidence for it. Same way our author here doesn't need evidence to call the election result controversial. I'm not going to pick you apart and say you did a bad job just like Mr. Venkat did earlier.

  • POSTED BY Harmony111 on | June 6, 2013, 18:24 GMT

    @Lees_Legends: Where are you hiding now Mr. Legend? Are you of the opinion that the election was controversial simply cos May lost? Are you of the opinion that just cos the losing camp made plenty of noises, cast aspersions on some entities and that is enough ground to call the election process as controversial?

    You've implied precisely this in your last comment here. Since you are not responding now I think it's fair for us to assume that either you have no evidence to share or that you believe in the word of the losing side.

    On a diff note, if I carry on using your own logic(?) then would you agree that DRS is controversial? You see, DRS has been heavily criticized by BCCI. As per your own logic, BCCI need not give any real evidence for this, saying something against something should be enough, right?

    DRS wasn't the moot point here but using your own premise, why should the RoW be so eager to adopt such a controversial system?

    Pls answer the prev ques before you try this new one.

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 6, 2013, 17:33 GMT

    @Nutcutlet:What really is being done about women's cricket in Pak & India - You read a few articles here and there and base your conclusions.

    Have you been to India? Have you seen Women's cricket in India?. Are you aware of the culture in India?. Not every place on earth has the same culture as the UK or the Australia.It does take time for somethings to change and it is more at the cultural change. It is changing , we need to be patient.

    Yes, there are issues but dont say "how Revealing it was". How Revealing it was when the Indian cricket team was given poor accomodation and village grounds when they toured England int he 70's and 80's. Ah, thats in the past why bother. Well the Women's WC is also in the past!

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 6, 2013, 16:12 GMT

    @trav29: I would not have resorted to 'the two wrongs" philsophy, if the first wrong did not happen. Sorry, I will not agree to that. Why do a wrong in the first place ?. Can you answer that. If someone were to admit it, then all this would never happen. Simple!.

    @Harmony111 : Thanks buddy for your support.

    @Lees_Legends: I still dont get your logical conculsion.

  • POSTED BY Harmony111 on | June 6, 2013, 7:13 GMT

    @Lees_Legends: Well your comments are built on nothing but air, you yourself make comments that have far away from logic and you have the gall to say that Venkat's 2nd comment made no sense? How could his comment make sense when he was building up on your own illogical comment? You need to pay attention to what you type.

    @6:32, you said that May's loss at place A was controversial cos he had been at place B for 16 years. Show me the logic in this comment pls. Venkat simply asked if a candidate's longevity was the main yardstick.

    Venkat also asked if you have any actual evidence to say that the elections were controversial except the noise made by the losing side. Had you been logical & serious you would have presented some evidence. But @3:34, you exceeded yourself & said that it was controversial cos it was controversial !!!

    Wow, brilliant logic from you. You really are a legend.

    Twice you have asked others to be sensible & use the brains but may be you forgot it yourself.

  • POSTED BY Lees_Legends on | June 6, 2013, 3:34 GMT

    @Venkat: No, you're clearly confusing the words 'controversial' with 'undemocratic'. You don't need evidence for something that while it was democratic, legal and followed all the laws in principle, it was still controversial. Thank you. As for your second point I'd ask you to clarify what you're trying to say about Clarke and Sachin quitting cricket. It makes no sense.

  • POSTED BY KingOwl on | June 5, 2013, 23:59 GMT

    Tim May thinks the ICC should be less dominated by the bigger countries - he should have said this when England and Aus were dominating the ICC. Then it would have been more credible. Now it just sounds like sour grapes.

  • POSTED BY Harmony111 on | June 8, 2013, 22:20 GMT

    @Venkat: Welcome bro. :-)

    @Raghzzz: Bingo !!!. Pity no one says anything about that piece of lobbying.

    @Dhanno:

    The so called 1st election that May had won in Jan was not as per rules, why should it count at all? By your own logic, the 1st election too was CONTROVERSIAL and trcieks were used to win it by whosoever and later it was nullified. So where exactly is the problem? Why should so much be made of what he had won in Jan? Moreover, Tim May never represented ALL players ever so pls stop misleading people.

    Lees_Legends's arguments are non-existent, I wonder what you made of his words.

    If India doesn't have a players association, should they have no representation in ICC's committee too? What logic is this?

    @Lees_Legends:

    Your hollow reply to my pointed questions shows that you have no basis to say what you have said earlier here.

    You are creating a new jurisprudence where evidence is not needed to back up claims. Anyone can say anything to label something as controversial.

  • POSTED BY Raghzzz on | June 8, 2013, 16:40 GMT

    To begin with, the technical committee role was an individual post which Tim May was contesting. He's trying to use his contacts and lobbying power acquired from being chief of FICA to get into ICC Technical committee role which is in an individual capacity.. this is as much abuse of power as it would be for BCCI which "supposedly" pushed the case of LS. Neither of them (Tim May nor BCCI/LS) are right in their way , but as it always works, the theory of survival of fittest came to the fore.

    Secondly, blaming ICC to be toothless and rigid?? Why don't you try and fix it. Fight it.. Don't be a quitter!! Why to contest the election and one losing why blame the system? This is clear sour grapes..

    Lastly, FICA has nothing to do with ICC Technical committee post. So, don't understand the logic of quitting FICA when not elected in the committee..

    Poor Tim May..

  • POSTED BY Dhanno on | June 7, 2013, 21:45 GMT

    @Lees_legends, we would not give up the parochial views so better take your arguments to some other forum. The original cricinfo article as well as several others note that the vote was cast first time favoring May. Then some questions were "raised", backhand tactics employed, revote done and Voila we had Siva as the representative.

    No one would want to Lees_legend but the point he is making is May had represented players in one capacity or other for 15 years, spoken about their payment issues/ scheduling of T20 leagues in last 2-3 years to make few enemies. India as a country does not even have a player association, and still its Siva who gets to represent the players on global level. Again, only if we could open our eyes.

  • POSTED BY Lees_Legends on | June 7, 2013, 1:05 GMT

    I answered it Harmony but not everyone is lucky enough to get all of their comments published and I'm not going to type it all out again. The gist is, 'controversial' and 'undemocratic', two different words. I've had 2 comments published already and if you still can't understand what I'm saying then there really is no hope. I can't dumb it down further. And yes if you want to call DRS controversial (not relevant though) you certainly can, and you don't need any evidence for it. Same way our author here doesn't need evidence to call the election result controversial. I'm not going to pick you apart and say you did a bad job just like Mr. Venkat did earlier.

  • POSTED BY Harmony111 on | June 6, 2013, 18:24 GMT

    @Lees_Legends: Where are you hiding now Mr. Legend? Are you of the opinion that the election was controversial simply cos May lost? Are you of the opinion that just cos the losing camp made plenty of noises, cast aspersions on some entities and that is enough ground to call the election process as controversial?

    You've implied precisely this in your last comment here. Since you are not responding now I think it's fair for us to assume that either you have no evidence to share or that you believe in the word of the losing side.

    On a diff note, if I carry on using your own logic(?) then would you agree that DRS is controversial? You see, DRS has been heavily criticized by BCCI. As per your own logic, BCCI need not give any real evidence for this, saying something against something should be enough, right?

    DRS wasn't the moot point here but using your own premise, why should the RoW be so eager to adopt such a controversial system?

    Pls answer the prev ques before you try this new one.

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 6, 2013, 17:33 GMT

    @Nutcutlet:What really is being done about women's cricket in Pak & India - You read a few articles here and there and base your conclusions.

    Have you been to India? Have you seen Women's cricket in India?. Are you aware of the culture in India?. Not every place on earth has the same culture as the UK or the Australia.It does take time for somethings to change and it is more at the cultural change. It is changing , we need to be patient.

    Yes, there are issues but dont say "how Revealing it was". How Revealing it was when the Indian cricket team was given poor accomodation and village grounds when they toured England int he 70's and 80's. Ah, thats in the past why bother. Well the Women's WC is also in the past!

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 6, 2013, 16:12 GMT

    @trav29: I would not have resorted to 'the two wrongs" philsophy, if the first wrong did not happen. Sorry, I will not agree to that. Why do a wrong in the first place ?. Can you answer that. If someone were to admit it, then all this would never happen. Simple!.

    @Harmony111 : Thanks buddy for your support.

    @Lees_Legends: I still dont get your logical conculsion.

  • POSTED BY Harmony111 on | June 6, 2013, 7:13 GMT

    @Lees_Legends: Well your comments are built on nothing but air, you yourself make comments that have far away from logic and you have the gall to say that Venkat's 2nd comment made no sense? How could his comment make sense when he was building up on your own illogical comment? You need to pay attention to what you type.

    @6:32, you said that May's loss at place A was controversial cos he had been at place B for 16 years. Show me the logic in this comment pls. Venkat simply asked if a candidate's longevity was the main yardstick.

    Venkat also asked if you have any actual evidence to say that the elections were controversial except the noise made by the losing side. Had you been logical & serious you would have presented some evidence. But @3:34, you exceeded yourself & said that it was controversial cos it was controversial !!!

    Wow, brilliant logic from you. You really are a legend.

    Twice you have asked others to be sensible & use the brains but may be you forgot it yourself.

  • POSTED BY Lees_Legends on | June 6, 2013, 3:34 GMT

    @Venkat: No, you're clearly confusing the words 'controversial' with 'undemocratic'. You don't need evidence for something that while it was democratic, legal and followed all the laws in principle, it was still controversial. Thank you. As for your second point I'd ask you to clarify what you're trying to say about Clarke and Sachin quitting cricket. It makes no sense.

  • POSTED BY KingOwl on | June 5, 2013, 23:59 GMT

    Tim May thinks the ICC should be less dominated by the bigger countries - he should have said this when England and Aus were dominating the ICC. Then it would have been more credible. Now it just sounds like sour grapes.

  • POSTED BY Nutcutlet on | June 5, 2013, 20:30 GMT

    In all of this unholy mess (and losing Tim May is something that no genuine lover of cricket in any country can greet with anything other than regret) there stands the figure of Mr Dave Richardson, CEO of the ICC. He's qualified lawyer (although his use of spoken English doesn't always stand too much scrutiny) & there are matters aplenty that have happened on his watch (he's held this position for nearly one year & what a year it's been!) I would ask him to make himself available for critical cross-questioning by a senior member of the cricinfo editorial team. The cricket world needs to hear from him because this is the very point when matters need clarity, honesty & straight talking. Just how much arm-twisting power is exercised by the B**I? How free & fair are the elections to sensitive & important positions? What really is being done about women's cricket in Pak & India (Some of us don't forget the Women's WC. Revealing, wasn't it?) Who wd do the honours, Mr Coverdale? Gideon Haigh?

  • POSTED BY Ckt_Lover on | June 5, 2013, 19:41 GMT

    Share the feelings of nutcutlet, milepost and others. Over the past few years, the ones riding the tide have been gradually spreading their strangling tentacles over the beautiful game of cricket. The past weeks have been excruciating. Monsters continue to infest. Another angel has fallen. The sport of cricket is fast dying. Tide riders are taking the life out of cricket. They want a zombie with strings attached. To make a circus out of it, to fool the less informed, and encash their time and fancies. I hope the genuine cricket fans unite, irrespective of where we're from.

  • POSTED BY ThyrSaadam on | June 5, 2013, 18:42 GMT

    Not sure what this means to international cricket? May be i am naive, what did he achieve for the 40 % of players he represented during his time as the players representative. All he did was voice the opinions of the players to media. I still remember him complaining about players not getting their payments from SLPL/BPL/IPL. Guess what, players could have done that themselves.

  • POSTED BY BoonBoom on | June 5, 2013, 18:34 GMT

    Mr. May: you need to understand that cricket is no longer the game of gentlemen. Cricket is now an industry where it's all about investment and quick return of investment very often thru unethical means. Instant cricket commonly known as T20 has simply destroyed all moral requirement. Since cricket is no longer the game of gentlemen, we need ungentlemen people to run the affairs of cricket. All unethical people and boards getting powerful and cricket is now the game of vulgars and corrupts. It's natural that people like you who value all sorts of professionalism and ethical behavior do not fit in this new changing scenario. The way you lost to Sivarama simply proved that point.

  • POSTED BY stormy16 on | June 5, 2013, 18:11 GMT

    All players seem to think May did a great job and will be a big loss - so why does he have to go? That's right Sivaramakrishnana with little knowledge or experience in the matter won a dodgy election - I am afraid it smells of politics and all things corrupt. Not everyone will like this but the reality is the power has shifted and this means all things good and bad that go with it.

  • POSTED BY Harmony111 on | June 5, 2013, 18:09 GMT

    If Tim May was really all that important or influential then at least his interview published on this site would have had more comments (so far ZERO) lol.

    Stop hyping May up. He supposedly did a few things but they are not known to us and those so called good deeds were limited within a small circle. Outside that small circle ppl do not even know who Tim May was and what exactly he did or was supposed to do.

  • POSTED BY trav29 on | June 5, 2013, 17:39 GMT

    @venkat if you have to resort to the two wrongs makes a right argument than you have already lost.

  • POSTED BY InsideHedge on | June 5, 2013, 17:05 GMT

    When Kerry Packer produced his circus - "World Series Cricket" - I recall, not a single Indian cricketer was selected, I also recall not a single cricket journalist questioning the exclusion of our players. Nothing was ever explained.

    At least Tim May receives much fanfare for supposedly "changing the face of cricket". If you were to believe Michael Clarke, he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. May never learned to compromise, he was far too headstrong, if you keep headbutting a brick wall, you'll come out worse.

  • POSTED BY on | June 5, 2013, 15:01 GMT

    Very diplomatic of cricinfo not to mention the board he was most annoyed with, but we all know. Never liked the guy, very opinionated when it came to Pakistan, glad he is gone.

  • POSTED BY Herath-UK on | June 5, 2013, 14:51 GMT

    When I read this it reminded me how right was Arjuna Ranatunga telling ICC is a toothless tiger sometime back.Let's see ICC has the bottle to stand upto the ethos otherwise the game will be the loser. Ranil Herath - Kent

  • POSTED BY on | June 5, 2013, 14:11 GMT

    The game of cricket and ICC are in tatters. In fact, this was time FICA needed Tim May the most, rather than him stepping aside. TIM May should have taken inspiration from the great Nelson Mandela, who didn't quit his followers under the worst of times of his 29 years worst incarceration. As they say never say die.

  • POSTED BY samincolumbia on | June 5, 2013, 14:10 GMT

    Best thinng to happen to cricket in the last 10 years!

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 5, 2013, 13:03 GMT

    @Selassie-I: Why would i need a revolution. Yes, there are problems with my board no doubts. But my board does a lot for grassroots cricket in my country, makes the domestic circuit very strong. Why should we be having issues with it.

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 5, 2013, 12:57 GMT

    @trav29: No offence meant, Whatever you said is what you call " Getting a taste of one's own medicine". Right or wrong is a different debate. Now that we have Cricinfo to share views and so on, But back in the 70's and 80's , I didnt not like cricket in Aparthied SA,could not write it anywhere ..No. Sorry, Cant help it, live with the times, Just like how we were helpless back then.

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 5, 2013, 12:51 GMT

    What has Tim may done for ZIM cricket?, we all know that a Cartel of nations even refuse to tour there, he could have convinced them.

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 5, 2013, 12:48 GMT

    @Lees_Legends: No logic in your point. If Clarke or Sachin quits after 15 years of cricket , as per your logic it is controversial. Wow!

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 5, 2013, 12:47 GMT

    @Lees_Legends: I ask a honest question, "How does Brydon claim that the election process was controversial", does he have the evidence to prove so?.EI

    I can write whatever I feel like, but is that responsible journalism?. I know you are upset for some other reasons, that does not mean this article is credible. No evidence , no credibility!.

  • POSTED BY Selassie-I on | June 5, 2013, 12:46 GMT

    Shame to see May go, he's done a lot for the players.

    The way it's going with administration, we won't have a sport soon, we'll have somethign akin to a mix between WWF wrestling and the X factor; with only selected 'markatable' players being picked for teams in order to maximise marketing revenue, matches fixed and buisnessmen getting involved purely to cash in on our great sport. What an aweful shame that would be.

    Hopefully this and the recent events at the BCCI will start a revolution, but I somehow doubt it - The great cricket fans of india deserve more than the BCCI are giving them at the moment.

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 5, 2013, 12:43 GMT

    @Jayzuz: Every coin has 2 sides.You see, whenever I post a something about Zimababwe and the reluctance of a few countries to tour, it never gets posted, despite the fact that cricket takes precedence above all.

    We live in a world of double standards. Democracy and ethics not apply to one nation or one organization. It is a collective effort. I hope you get the point.

  • POSTED BY on | June 5, 2013, 12:24 GMT

    A sad day for cricket and more particularly cricketers. I always found Tim passionate, helpful, incredibly hard working and not willing to be bullied. Cricket the loser here, just don't expect his going to be mourned by those running world cricket.

  • POSTED BY satishchandar on | June 5, 2013, 12:13 GMT

    @WheresTheEmpire : First of all, Corruption is not something which is happening in recent times.. There were reports on Warne and Mark in 90's, Tillekaratne reported fixing was common in his playing days, Hansie happened in 1999-2000, Azhar, Malik all were of the previous era, And we have several instances where the home umpires were used to advantage(which may not be money but still FIXED).. @trav29 : Conflict of interest is something which is there in everything.. We all believe a captain/coach/selector is impartial and believe them to be working without looking at the zone/state of the players for selecting them.. Players do indulge in the ads for huge companies as a group and they do play in IPL with different sets of people.. If we start speculating, all these can be a cause for conflict of interest.. Region, state, IPL team, Pepsi ad companion, all these can be.. Really.. It doesn't need MSD to be a shareholder of a small company to indulge in these activities..

  • POSTED BY Karanmsays on | June 5, 2013, 10:33 GMT

    While there is very little doubt that cricket fans globally should be worried by how the game is currently by administered and how redundant ICCs position as the global custodian of the game has become, I'm not quite sure I see much merit in what FICA has been trying to achieve, outside of its central mandate, which according to their mission statement is, "To co ordinate the activities and advance the objectives of all member associations which protect the interests of professional cricketers throughout the world."

    Quoting Tim May, he says "Despite FICA and many other stakeholders pushing for the recommendations of the Woolf Report to be implemented to address these shortcomings, the ICC board see no reason to change."

    My question is, is it for FICA to push for implementation of the Woolf Report? It's one thing to be an over concerned cricket enthusiast, and another to poke your nose into a domain, which is none of your concern.

    Best wishes to Tim May. Long live Test cricket!

  • POSTED BY Harmony111 on | June 5, 2013, 10:15 GMT

    @Nutcutlet: No one hates May, no one hated May. He wasn't even disliked actually. It was just a case of a man who may have had some partial success in his sphere of influence somehow being called a global leader with appeal across the board. When the actual elections were held, the reality came out and then those who were supporting him found it hard to accept the truth and so decided to discredit the very process which they were earlier relying on for his election. I think that is the real sad part of all of this, everything else is ok.

    I want to tell you that there was a canard earlier that May had WON the election in Jan and a 2nd round was conspiratorially held where Siva won with some mischief. Pls read article ------ICC denies voting impropriety--- which clarifies that the JAN ELECTION WAS NOT AS PER RULES AND SO NULL & VOID. The May election was not 2nd round but fresh election.

    And pls tell me how is lobbying/canvassing a bad thing? Didn't May have a lobby behind him too?

  • POSTED BY Farmer_Oak on | June 5, 2013, 9:34 GMT

    Tim May's decision appears to me to be the incorrect one. As the head of a a players association his job is to ensure that the powers that be are kept in check. I'm sure that what he does must be frustrating and akin to hitting his head against the wall on a daily basis. But isn't that what union leaders are supposed to do for the betterment of their constituents (in this case the players). On a completely (un) related point, it oftens occurs to me that Dave Richardson is the biggest "sell-out" there is in cricket circles. As a former test criketer and player rep/lawyer (if I recall correctly) should he not be someone within the hallowed walls of the ICC that would put player issues first.

  • POSTED BY xxxxxxxxxxxxxyyyyyyyyyyyyyyzzzzzzzz on | June 5, 2013, 9:28 GMT

    I partly agree with @satishchandar with his use of the phrase 'tide change'. But where is this tide change taking cricket? With the torrent of corruption now engulfing cricket many would argue that it is taking it in a dangerous and self-destructive spiral.

    Unlike the tides, however, the change in cricket is not natural - it is man-made. Happily or unhappily, the solution is also in the hands of administrators. For the sake of cricket and all remaining cricket-lovers change direction before it is too late.

  • POSTED BY hedleyvertiyisgod on | June 5, 2013, 9:22 GMT

    What we need is more folk with integrity shepherding our sport not them being forced away from the pitch.Cricket unsurprisingly mirrors the context of poor morals and ethics seemingly present in the wider global context.

  • POSTED BY trav29 on | June 5, 2013, 9:22 GMT

    @satish so its acceptable for the BCCI to just do whatever they want , and based on recent events that should be something any cricket fan should be worried about given the conflicts of interests that are being exposed. take those blinkers off and look at the damage to the sport that is being done atm.

  • POSTED BY satishchandar on | June 5, 2013, 8:47 GMT

    My sincere opinion for BCCI bashers and the guys saying all teams in ICC need equal representation.. Will you guys ask the ICC for all the teams having equal ratio in providing funds to the ICC? Just remember the crowd the SC teams pull for the game even abroad.. they are real crowd pullers which is keeping the game alive in many parts of the world.. They are the power house when it comes to revenue but you guys don't want them to be power house in decision making? How crude it is..

  • POSTED BY satishchandar on | June 5, 2013, 8:45 GMT

    @Nutcutlet : As per your views, May can still continue as a force in Australian cricket - where he had done good enough things to continue.. Frankly speaking as a Non Aussie, i am really not aware of things that May did enough to win vote of Asian quadrant.. I see one of his big achievements as the "Tsunami welfare match".. Frankly speaking, if BCCI was the chief organiser, they would do more than that one match.. BCCI has sent a entire best team to SA for one single T20 match which was credited to Kallis.. And also, they played in a Ntini welfare game too..

    ICC has always been a plaything of someone at every point of its functioning.. BCCI is the master now..

  • POSTED BY Biggus on | June 5, 2013, 8:31 GMT

    Big Brother has been with us for some time. Cricket is fast becoming an Orwellian '1984' style system, and unless there is a change of direction there will be a split in the cricket world. Personally I'd welcome it, cricket governance has become the plaything of businesmen with no interest in the game apart from buying themselves time in the reflected glory of the people who make it what it is, the players. I fully expect this post to attract all sorts of nastiness but I'm past caring, soon there will be nothing left of what was once a beautiful game.

  • POSTED BY on | June 5, 2013, 8:29 GMT

    If the current situation regarding cricket in India is any indication as to how low standards at the hjighest levels in the game have sunk then it's no wonder Tim May decided that enough is enough. Power and money is king...Well you can have both, but one thing you have to earn is respect.

  • POSTED BY milepost on | June 5, 2013, 7:55 GMT

    With T20 taking over from our sport, the BCCI and IPL in tatters (due to zero credibility), the ICC praying to the altar of the bigger powers and a schedule so packed full of absolute fodder - if fans haven't noticed something is devastatingly wrong with the current state of cricket you haven't been paying attention. Tim May has stuck up for players and fans and his stepping down is nothing but more bad news for cricket. The game is gone. I have played and watched cricket for 30 years. The game is gone.

  • POSTED BY smudgeon on | June 5, 2013, 7:53 GMT

    I can't remember who said it, or the exact words, but to paraphrase that person: "anyone who isn't worried doesn't really understand what's going on".

  • POSTED BY Lees_Legends on | June 5, 2013, 7:49 GMT

    @Satishchandar: You are right, but May's post cricket career would have made him more suited to this position then Laxman's. The best scenario would be for Laxman Sivaramakrishnan to do a good job in his new role, which I hope he does.

  • POSTED BY smudgeon on | June 5, 2013, 7:48 GMT

    Interesting posts here. Just needed to add my piece: it doesn't matter how much money you pour into something, it doesn't make it (and I mean cricket) your personal plaything. The sport should belong to the people who love it for the incredible game it is, and if there is one thing that worries me more than anything else, it's that ethics have long since been discarded in favour of money and those who wield it as if it is the only thing that matters. If anyone wants me, I'll be down at the park playing cricket with my mates, without the interference of those who are supposedly entrusted with the game's good governance.

  • POSTED BY Nutcutlet on | June 5, 2013, 7:17 GMT

    @Jayzuz: I concur with every word you have written. I have sent off dozens of balanced, informed & well thought-out posts on cricket-related subjects that should enjoy the benefits of the free press. It seems to me that if you are from the subcontinent, uninformed & semi-literate with a bias towards all matters that are easy on the B**I, then your views are aired on cricinfo.This bias & selectivity reminds me not of China (where I've never worked), but another SE Asia country where personal mail (it was the late '90s!) was opened & if one wanted to have a proper discussion in which matters could be aired without fear, then it was advisable to go on a quiet rural walk. It is difficult for those of us who have been educated & brought up in mature & secure democracies to live easily in the half-light of pseudo-free speech. Here, May has been outragesously treated & if my post that precedes this one sees the light of day, then it will be apparent to fair-minded people everywhere. BW.

  • POSTED BY Hammond on | June 5, 2013, 7:16 GMT

    A simple case of ditch the white guy, regardless of how good he was at his job.

  • POSTED BY haq33 on | June 5, 2013, 7:09 GMT

    Tim May has always been very good at lecturing various boards, organisations and even individuals about what he believes is good and what he believes is bad in cricket and yet when it comes to actual constructive solutions or actually engaging with people to find solutions to truly complex problems that he may not himself have considered, he has been sorely lacking. He will be remembered as a great one-man travel advisory service.

  • POSTED BY satishchandar on | June 5, 2013, 7:07 GMT

    @Lees_Legends : Like with every good/bad thing, it has to come to end. Just because he held post for 16 years, it is not mandatory for him to continue life long.. Yes Siva is a occasional commentator but still, what was May before he became the inaugural CEO of the Australian Cricketers' Association in 1997? A normal player.. It doesn't matter what Siva is now but what he is going to do after he gets appointed..

  • POSTED BY satishchandar on | June 5, 2013, 7:03 GMT

    Is it wrong for boards to advice their captain to vote for someone? After all, the captains are never independent.. It is not their team but the boards which they lead.. It is perfectly natural for the board to do the things they feel that will complement their functioning.. After all, will Aussie captain vote for May if his board doesn't wish the captain to vote for May? Will a English captain play in IPL against the wish of ECB? I don't think so..

  • POSTED BY Nutcutlet on | June 5, 2013, 7:00 GMT

    Few people have done as much as Tim May to improve the financial status of cricketers. May's negotiation with the ACB (now CA) on behalf of the all conquering Ozzies of the late '90s & early naughties was crucial in complex renegotiating realistic salaries for those great Ozzie players & their successors. I am not making this up; it comes from the respected pen of Steve Waugh in his autobiog. 'Out of My Comfort Zone'. He (May) has a long & sustained record of working hard & honestly on behalf of players & it was a shameful insult to him & his track record when he was replaced on the ICC cricket committee by Sivaramakrishnan (an appointee of the discredited BCCI, now mired in criminal proceedings) but it was democracy (Indian style) in which certain board capts were leant on to ensure that they voted accordingly (or lose inducements). The ICC has been a plaything of the BCCI for a while now & no one with an ounce of understanding can doubt that May resigns on principle, not a hissy fit.

  • POSTED BY Lees_Legends on | June 5, 2013, 6:32 GMT

    @Venkat (and anyone else): It was controversial because he had been an executive of a board for 16 years (and chief executive for at least 10) working with all kinds of boards across the world whereas Laxman is an occasional commentator. Please use your brains before commenting, please. Thank you

  • POSTED BY Harlequin. on | June 5, 2013, 6:28 GMT

    @jayzuz - that was a great post

    These are concerning times indeed, and you don't even need to read inbetween the lines anymore to realise that: in the past 3 years, players from 4 different countries have been caught spot fixing, the lack of support going into the womens game, the lack of support given to teams like Ireland trying to get test status, teams refusing to tour other countries, corruption on a collosal scale in the ipl. And now, someone who has spent the last 16 years working to enhance the game he loves finally packing it in out of frustration.

    I am confident cricket will continue, there is enough passion at the amateur level, but the professional level now seems to be so diseased that it is hard to see how it can continue in it's current form

  • POSTED BY satishchandar on | June 5, 2013, 6:26 GMT

    Thanks for ur service Mr.May.. You are one of the victim of the tide change.. I am pretty sure whoever takes charge next time will remove LSRK or guys appointed by BCCI irrespective of the fact of how good they may do the job.. That is how the bigger bodies with cross cultural countries work... There is none to blame as it is just a action caused by change of direction of the tide.. Good luck for next endeavors.

  • POSTED BY on | June 5, 2013, 6:16 GMT

    @vish2020.....He lost his position because certain boards told their captains who to vote for !! Nothing bias about the article at all.

  • POSTED BY Cobra0077 on | June 5, 2013, 4:59 GMT

    "For player associations, where we don't have that sort of political pressures . . . it's pretty hard to get your head around why some of those decisions have been made, apart from the fact it's what India wants. "The ICC directors are there to operate for the best interests of the global game, not India or their own individual country."

  • POSTED BY Jayzuz on | June 5, 2013, 3:29 GMT

    I share May's concerns. The degeneration of ethics by certain administrators over the past decade has been dramatic. Once the greatest concern was with the odd bit of sledging on the field, but the current problem is much, much greater, beginning at the top with money & power. It filters down to cricket web sites, where attempting to discuss the issue in any detail invariably results in your post not being published. I can't even mention specific events or individuals or this post will never see daylight. But we all know the source of the problem. Note also that this article does not name the offending party.

    In many ways this entire discussion reminds me of my time in China, attempting to discuss government policy. You had to use code words and oblique references, as the control and power of the overlords was so pervasive.

    Meanwhile those profiting from the problem - including fans of the rich and powerful - sit back and justify it, or attack the messenger.

  • POSTED BY vish2020 on | June 5, 2013, 3:10 GMT

    "Controversially lost his position??" Didn't he get voted by 10 captains and 6 voted against him? Since when is democracy a controversy? aaaahhh its because Tim lost it that's why. I see... He is a representative for players and players voted for him and he lost... No controversy at all from where i see it. Another bias article by cricinfo. this is a trend now!

  • POSTED BY vish2020 on | June 5, 2013, 3:05 GMT

    Oh jeez here comes Tim May in the picture. He got beat out by Laxman and now he steps down. He wanted something and didn't get it, so he is resigning. All his comments are towards BCCI. Here goes media crying tears for Tim May. Do they know that if it won't be India and BCCI the cricket revenues will be so low that the sport will be even worse state. Of course, these issues Tim mentioned were not a concern when CA and ECB ran cricket. Nothing but another episode of sour grapes.

  • POSTED BY on | June 5, 2013, 3:00 GMT

    case of "sour grapes"? Had he not lost the ICC position!!!!!

    so, what was more dear to him? players association or ICC post?

    draw your own conclusion........happy cricket spirit..........

  • POSTED BY Mr_Anonymous on | June 5, 2013, 2:50 GMT

    Tim, thank you for all your work. Can't help and think that there must have been a better way to exit than saying "The grapes are sour" although I am sorry to see you go. I wish you could have worked constructively with the Asian countries rather in an adversarial manner while you were Chief Executive of FICA. Hope Siva can work more closely and constructively with the Asian countries going forward and establish player's unions in those countries.

  • POSTED BY Damian123 on | June 5, 2013, 2:31 GMT

    Another sad day for cricket, players and genuine lovers of the game will miss Tim for sure.

  • POSTED BY Kteam on | June 5, 2013, 2:00 GMT

    Salute and regards to Tim. He was a pioneer of sorts, and it is indeed sad that he was brought to this by the ICC. It is really the sign of the depravity that is plunging the sport downwards -- the sport as we know it, is dying.

    Whatever the reasons behind this, and whatever the motives of the FICA be ; it sure has to be working amicably with the ICC, and the fact that these things happen, says that not all is well.

  • POSTED BY CricFan78 on | June 5, 2013, 1:59 GMT

    Haha so typical ... whine and throw out your toys out of pram when you lose

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 5, 2013, 1:26 GMT

    " controversially lost his position " - Brydon what evidence do you have to call it controversial?. Really disappointed with the piece of journalism.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY Venkat_Gowrishankar on | June 5, 2013, 1:26 GMT

    " controversially lost his position " - Brydon what evidence do you have to call it controversial?. Really disappointed with the piece of journalism.

  • POSTED BY CricFan78 on | June 5, 2013, 1:59 GMT

    Haha so typical ... whine and throw out your toys out of pram when you lose

  • POSTED BY Kteam on | June 5, 2013, 2:00 GMT

    Salute and regards to Tim. He was a pioneer of sorts, and it is indeed sad that he was brought to this by the ICC. It is really the sign of the depravity that is plunging the sport downwards -- the sport as we know it, is dying.

    Whatever the reasons behind this, and whatever the motives of the FICA be ; it sure has to be working amicably with the ICC, and the fact that these things happen, says that not all is well.

  • POSTED BY Damian123 on | June 5, 2013, 2:31 GMT

    Another sad day for cricket, players and genuine lovers of the game will miss Tim for sure.

  • POSTED BY Mr_Anonymous on | June 5, 2013, 2:50 GMT

    Tim, thank you for all your work. Can't help and think that there must have been a better way to exit than saying "The grapes are sour" although I am sorry to see you go. I wish you could have worked constructively with the Asian countries rather in an adversarial manner while you were Chief Executive of FICA. Hope Siva can work more closely and constructively with the Asian countries going forward and establish player's unions in those countries.

  • POSTED BY on | June 5, 2013, 3:00 GMT

    case of "sour grapes"? Had he not lost the ICC position!!!!!

    so, what was more dear to him? players association or ICC post?

    draw your own conclusion........happy cricket spirit..........

  • POSTED BY vish2020 on | June 5, 2013, 3:05 GMT

    Oh jeez here comes Tim May in the picture. He got beat out by Laxman and now he steps down. He wanted something and didn't get it, so he is resigning. All his comments are towards BCCI. Here goes media crying tears for Tim May. Do they know that if it won't be India and BCCI the cricket revenues will be so low that the sport will be even worse state. Of course, these issues Tim mentioned were not a concern when CA and ECB ran cricket. Nothing but another episode of sour grapes.

  • POSTED BY vish2020 on | June 5, 2013, 3:10 GMT

    "Controversially lost his position??" Didn't he get voted by 10 captains and 6 voted against him? Since when is democracy a controversy? aaaahhh its because Tim lost it that's why. I see... He is a representative for players and players voted for him and he lost... No controversy at all from where i see it. Another bias article by cricinfo. this is a trend now!

  • POSTED BY Jayzuz on | June 5, 2013, 3:29 GMT

    I share May's concerns. The degeneration of ethics by certain administrators over the past decade has been dramatic. Once the greatest concern was with the odd bit of sledging on the field, but the current problem is much, much greater, beginning at the top with money & power. It filters down to cricket web sites, where attempting to discuss the issue in any detail invariably results in your post not being published. I can't even mention specific events or individuals or this post will never see daylight. But we all know the source of the problem. Note also that this article does not name the offending party.

    In many ways this entire discussion reminds me of my time in China, attempting to discuss government policy. You had to use code words and oblique references, as the control and power of the overlords was so pervasive.

    Meanwhile those profiting from the problem - including fans of the rich and powerful - sit back and justify it, or attack the messenger.

  • POSTED BY Cobra0077 on | June 5, 2013, 4:59 GMT

    "For player associations, where we don't have that sort of political pressures . . . it's pretty hard to get your head around why some of those decisions have been made, apart from the fact it's what India wants. "The ICC directors are there to operate for the best interests of the global game, not India or their own individual country."