ICC news

BCCI against key points in Woolf report

ESPNcricinfo staff

February 13, 2012

Comments: 189 | Text size: A | A

The BCCI's working committee has rejected the key recommendations of the Woolf report concerning the restructuring of the ICC, the Indian board president N Srinivasan has said. This is the first formal response from any national board to the recommendations - made public ten days ago - and, given the BCCI's dominant position in world cricket, could render the report a non-starter for all practical purposes.

"The working committee discussed all the main recommendations of the report submitted to the ICC by a committee headed by Lord Woolf. The working committee was of the opinion that these recommendations were not acceptable and rejected it," Srinivasan said after the meeting in Chennai. "The working committee was in particular not agreeable to the changes in the structure of the management of ICC that had been proposed."

Srinivasan, however, did not specify which of the several recommendations of the Woolf report the BCCI was opposed to.

The suggestions of the review are not binding on the ICC, which will examine it at the next board meeting in April.

The ICC's independent governance review, headed by Lord Woolf, had called for sweeping changes in the administration of cricket and the functioning of its governing body. It recommended a restructuring of the ICC's executive board to make it more independent and less dominated by the bigger countries and also a re-examination of the rights and benefits of the Test-playing Full Member nations, calling for measures to increase transparency in dealings by the ICC and its members.

The most important recommendation concerned revamping the ICC's executive board, its top decision-making body, to reduce the numerical strength of the Full Members and to offset their influence by bringing in independent directors, in keeping with best corporate governance practices.

The board currently comprises the heads of all Full Member nations, three representatives from the Associates and Affiliates and the ICC's president, vice-president and chief executive. Woolf's plan incorporated five independent directors - three from within the game and two from outside to bring in diversity of opinion and experience - with voting rights and the additional stipulation that they should not be in a minority. It suggested that the Full Member nations eventually have four representatives, and the Associates two, with the chairman, president and chief executive making up the desired dozen.

It also suggests that an ICC director should not concurrently hold any leadership or executive post with their home boards. For example, N Srinivasan is currently both an ICC director and president of the Indian board but, if the recommendations are accepted, he can't retain both posts. As for independent directors, they must not have recently held positions of authority on any member board or any commercial body that has had significant contractual relationships with the ICC.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by Fast_Track_Bully on (February 15, 2012, 4:12 GMT)

boss will order, a..will follow..:)

Posted by screamingeagle on (February 14, 2012, 18:09 GMT)

I was reading Cricinfos report on the Woolf report, found it pretty strange on some parts and somewhat idealistic in others. Unfortunately, not much was realistic. Anyway, I am sure people will be happy to scream about how BCCI is holding the innocent cricket world and the other saintly cricket boards to ransom. Sad the way people react and hilarious to read some of the comments.

Posted by theswami on (February 14, 2012, 15:46 GMT)

We can get around the 3 independent directors from within the game clause & allow the BCCI (sic. ICC) to appoint to that place Messrs.Gavaskar, Shastri & Manjarekar. haha ... They are'nt aligned to any country ....... proofof their neutrality lies in that they ( the former 2 actually) are employed by an American company owned by an Aussie as well as the Indian Board.

Posted by eddsnake on (February 14, 2012, 15:39 GMT)

The ignorance and pig headedness of the majority of Indian fans commenting on here is really quite shocking. Please look at the history of the game as well as the Woolf Report (which he was assisted with by justice Mukul Mudgal, former chief justice of the Punjab and Haryana court, which seems to have very conveniently been forgotten by all of the Indians commenting) before coming out with your 'we rule the cricket world because we make lots of money selling the tv rights blah blah blah' responses. With power comes responsibility.

Posted by timohyj on (February 14, 2012, 13:58 GMT)

first of all, does the bcci really get whatever they want? The new rule of using 2 new balls in ODI's are tailor made to suit england and Australia. There was enough evidence on the performance of hot spot and hawk eye that it is unreliable for the ICC not to make it uniform. And why do england and Australia get to control cricket for so long and when india becomes powerful all of a sudden everyone gangs up to stop them from "ruining cricket" in the 80's when the aussies and english were getting befuddled by the indian fielders and they made a rule that you can't have more than 2 fielders behind the popping crease

Posted by screamingeagle on (February 14, 2012, 13:39 GMT)

@Randikyaa, leaders? Well, just that we are much better than some of the sad boards of other countries who start getting nervous when it comes to talking shop with Bcci. I am not saying bcci is the best, not by a long shot, I am saying that the other boards are just plain pathetic and have no backbone. Please deal with that first and then ask us Indians to 'deal with it'. Cheers.

Posted by Real_Floatyman on (February 14, 2012, 9:47 GMT)

Reading some of these comments really does disappoint me. The ignorance and evidence people haven't read this article let alone the Woolf report. So here are some points from peoples comments:

1. Woolf report was commissioned by the ICC themselves unanimously 2. 'Independent Directors' are to come from within cricket (ex players, commentators etc) but not aligned with one particular country 3. The change in structure is to try and shift the balance of power away from any one nation whoever it might be. In the past it was England and Australia, now it is India, in the future it could be someone else if things stay the same 4. Report says the ICC should be for the good of 'Cricket' all over the world not just the current elite countries 5. Currently all nations pay into the ICC and then get an amount back of whatever profit the ICC makes. The Woolf report says the ICC should be self funding, meaning the BCCI and India can keep all their own money

Posted by randikaayya on (February 14, 2012, 7:16 GMT)

@IndianKumar001: "To other countries : We are the world leaders is cricket deal with it".. Aha ha hahaa.. Just lol mate.. Leaders you say? Where have you led by example to create a better game then? New innovation? Better technology? More global reach? Kids interest raised worldwide? Better Cricket? On what grounds do you say you are leaders? Atleast a win-loss record? NONE.. Deal with it

Posted by Deepak on (February 14, 2012, 6:52 GMT)

Who is 'Lord' Woolf anyways ? Who cares about his suggestions ? 2 directors from outside of cricket - are you serious ? This is a BIG joke.

Posted by Taimur.Khan on (February 14, 2012, 5:38 GMT)

Nations should dominate cricket on field rather than in board rooms. Controlling ICC by one nation will ultimately deteriorate cricket as a whole. BCCI should act professionally and maturely. They should have given reasons, of course which they always have, before out rightly rejecting the report. There should be a level playing field for all and like the sports man spirit encouraged on field, it should be exercised at all levels. And BCCI please don't eat the cake before it is half baked.

Posted by   on (February 14, 2012, 3:05 GMT)

The way to make cricket better is very simple, 3 Test playing countries and 9 independent directors, the test playing countries should be England, Australia and NZ and the remaining 9 - 3 each from the above countries and cricket will go back to good old days when every thing was rosy and it will rain candy and rivers will be filled with chocolate.

Posted by SanjivAwesome on (February 14, 2012, 2:54 GMT)

I hate to say this - but I knew it! No body - person or ogranisation - will accept any proposal which dilutes their power. There are other ways to get them to share or dilute power and Lord Woolf forgot to research these before publishing his report. He could have googled the approach! We have sadly missed an opportunity to set up world cricket for the next 100 years, so that the next power block does not rule the roost. It used to be England and Australia, now it is India, in the future, it could be ?

Posted by mughal29173 on (February 14, 2012, 2:45 GMT)

i thinks one must break the hold of big money. that is important. money has spoiled spirit of the game. Its time that we should look at this issue in Gentlemen's way.

Posted by Glorious_Cricketorious on (February 14, 2012, 2:44 GMT)

BCCI has got this right. Can the same rules be ever applied for baseball, soccer, rugby or any other sport for that matter? There is no doubt that reforms are needed in ICC but this report if a joke..

Posted by SnowSnake on (February 14, 2012, 2:37 GMT)

I haven't read the report, but I don't have any problem with the richest board having major stake on the issue. That is how it works in a capitalist system. I never buy everyone is equal philosophy because it creates chaos and unnecessary fights. If other boards don't like it then grow cricket revenue contribution and you will run ICC-- it is that simple. I believe that cricket is one game that is constantly changing and evolving. Someone needs to stop all the change that is going on in formats, structure and decision making (UDRS) or just invent a new game altogether.

Posted by Ameega on (February 14, 2012, 2:17 GMT)

@satish619chandar, I normally do not agree with you mate. But here, spot on buddy!

Posted by Doggy74 on (February 14, 2012, 1:52 GMT)

When the BCCI have replaced bowlers with BOLA machines or ground attendants with sidearms, finally give up all pretense of pitch preparation and just cement the square to save on curators fees, bring the boundary into 45 meters and raise the price of admission above the current unteanable amounts, we'll all have what we wished for.... it just won't be cricket will it, but the broadcasters will giggle with delight as batsmen breach the 1000 run per innings mark in a T20.....

Posted by IC_M on (February 14, 2012, 1:46 GMT)

Well said biddhonifan, western cricket playing countries are trying everything to break BCCI's dominance, guess what it is pay back time. It's not just BCCI, anyone who is dominant will do these things. With the people power which India have, we should come out of ICC and start our own world series. If american do it, everyone likes it, if India or some other asian country tries it they call it dominance.

Posted by Sports4Youth on (February 14, 2012, 1:22 GMT)

ECB wanted to sell the costly but useless hawk-eye and hot-spot in all cricket games. Also they would get unprecedented power of controlling the outcome of all games. BCCI did the right thing by rejecting it. Now they will just keep trying someting or the other. They Just want to make money at every ones cost.

Posted by WristyFlick101 on (February 14, 2012, 1:20 GMT)

Total support to @NaniIndCri. These people just hate dominance of BCCI and India over Cricket. Go and read the report first and then talk.

Posted by Vinod on (February 14, 2012, 1:15 GMT)

ICC structure should be revamped be it for Lord Woolf's report or not. Because of the current structure, only a few teams are playing cricket. Other minnows qualify for the world Cup, play a few matches with the strong teams and then they disappear for another 4 years. The ICC should accommodate minnows in its decision making body. Cricket should not be for only a few nations. There is also a strong need for revamping the future tours program. It doesn't make sense and is not enough to keep the romance of cricket intact. ICC should structure its Test Matches, Limited Overs Cricket and T20 in such a way that, 14-16 teams should fight it out for a World Series League over a period of time. Test League can be for every 2 years, whereas limited overs can spread across a year. Test League should involve test playing nations play against other teams in 2 test matches on a home/ away basis. The same thing for limited overs could be 3 each. The bottom teams should make way for tier -2 nations.

Posted by Sports4Youth on (February 14, 2012, 1:09 GMT)

At whos behest was the Woolf report called. Why is the need of restructuring felt and who felt it. Since the England and Australian boards have lost control over the ICC, they are trying ways and means to curtail the powers of the ICC. This they would not have done, if they would have been in control.

Posted by PYC1959 on (February 14, 2012, 0:57 GMT)

I can see a Breakaway coming..... maybe another world cricket scenario????

Posted by amrishraje on (February 13, 2012, 23:56 GMT)

why do you all keep blaming BBCI and India? Common, India is to cricket what USA is to world economy. Get used to it...

Posted by notvery on (February 13, 2012, 23:46 GMT)

@bigdhonifan - i think your attitude is what everyone is worried about. its called ABUSE OF POWER... what did England and Australia do so badly wong before when they held power of veto? and being as England invented the game and they and Australia are the oldest continuous international sides wouldnt you expect that they would have maintained a certain level of control up until a point?? lets not forget this control they gave up. could you imagine India ever giveing up that control... certainly not when your attitude is prevelant.

Posted by DingDong420 on (February 13, 2012, 23:12 GMT)

Why have non of the other boards made a comment??????? are they too shy to talk!

Posted by NaniIndCri on (February 13, 2012, 22:45 GMT)

lol!!! people just love hating BCCI, I'm sure 99% of the people who gave -ve comments abt BCCI did not even read the report.

Posted by cisco420 on (February 13, 2012, 22:39 GMT)

BCCI uses its power to control ICC. BCCI and ICC is the same thing now. Thats why there is so much corruption in cricket. Big changes are needed.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 22:27 GMT)

Well said Frozeninusa....i agree with you. Too bad, BCCI holds the sway politically and financially in cricket. Why can' BCCI eat the cake that they make?

Posted by bigdhonifan on (February 13, 2012, 22:25 GMT)

Lets see Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, South Africa, Pakistan, New Zealand will be with BCCI. All wants BCCI's money. ECB try something better to regain power.

Posted by bigdhonifan on (February 13, 2012, 22:09 GMT)

ECB jsut remember, now its payback time.. Be obedient to BCCI otherwsie you will be bankrupt soon..

Posted by MN-USA on (February 13, 2012, 22:02 GMT)

Why wouldn't they oppose it? if they are to lose the grip over ICC. It's like asking US or England to give uo their VETO power...ICC is even worse than UN...It is suppose to be a Democratic entity and make decisions through consensus... Its a SHAME

Posted by sportofpain on (February 13, 2012, 21:57 GMT)

@frozeininusa - well said. Don't forget the time when England and Australia ruled the roost and condescended to talk to the others for a seat at the 'mighty' table. Heck, it was even called the 'Imperial' Cricket Conference.

Too many people rushing to judgement and bashing the BCCI - take it easy. Most cricket boards are profitable because of the huge following for the sport in india. It happens to be run by the BCCI and it was the same BCCI that used to run it, when the riches were scarce.

So don't bash the BCCI, IPL etc. Which International Player does not like the IPL? They are all lining up to get contracts...

Posted by shillingsworth on (February 13, 2012, 21:52 GMT)

@Maddy20 - you've missed the point. It's about the sport being properly governed at last. If that results in issues involving the future of the sport or indeed trivial changes to ODI playing conditions being decided by people free of the influence of self-interested national boards, it surely has to be a good thing. The BCCI could have used its power responsibly and accepted the report, as England and Australia did when they relinquished their power years ago. Have you actually read the report?

Posted by mcj.cricinfo on (February 13, 2012, 21:48 GMT)

It is significant that the BCCI hasn't given reasons as to why the recommendations from the report are not to their satisfaction. Is it because those reasons would show their true colours? The BCCI has discriminated against Pakistan players, there are lingering doubts about the backroom deals being done - is this existing structure going to improve cricket as a whole? No.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 21:47 GMT)

There is an urgent need to induct the likes of Kapil Dev, Sunil Gavaskar, Mohinder Amarnath, etc (1983 world cup heroes) into the BCCI. Present ones are only interested in the monetary part of cricket. They must be kicked out and fast to save the game of cricket.

Posted by Skylight28 on (February 13, 2012, 20:57 GMT)

@ frozeninusa and Munno Smith - Well said! Lord Woof-Woof writes a report that he expects the very same people to enact who will be the most detrimentally impacted by that report! Smart move!

Posted by eddsnake on (February 13, 2012, 20:51 GMT)

This: @ unregisteredalien on (February 13 2012, 10:37 AM GMT) Surprise surprise. Srinivasan is more interested in filling his boots with gold than with helping cricket to become one of the world's leading sports. No to governance and accountability, no to honesty and transparency, no to global vision and ambitions, no to the long-term interests of the sport, no to technology and continuous improvement. Yes to secrecy and back-room dealing, yes to rampant conflicts of interests, yes to preserving entrenched privileges, yes to short-term monetary gains, yes - in short - to the mighty dollar. Remind me, what fine principles - sporting and otherwise - is cricket supposed to represent?

Posted by WillPash on (February 13, 2012, 20:42 GMT)

How can I say I am surprised. Typical politicians running the ICC (Indian Cricket Cartel), holding self-interests; not serving for the overall benefit to the game. When I see the way ICC is run, I just look at envy at the way FIFA is administered. Even though FIFA has it's MAJOR problems, it does not allow politicians to be involved in national boards. ICC should follow suit. The Woolf report has set some interesting recommendations, and again the BCCI has objections. This is not against Indian cricket, it is against the BCCI; I have serious issues with the ECB (my country's cricket board). ICC in it's pathetic excuse of running a world-wide sport within a tiny cartel dominated by one nation is making the sport look insular and weak. Now I admit cricket is not a major sport, as around 230 nations do not compete or not have any chance. I am guessing this won't be put through to the comments page.

Posted by Dave_Chatterjee on (February 13, 2012, 20:39 GMT)

Why don't ICC dissolve BCCI altogether and invite a new election for all posts of BCCI composing of former players?let them bar any Indian participation till the board do not fall in line.

Posted by Sam_k14 on (February 13, 2012, 20:37 GMT)

Ahhh the BCCI. That thing (refuse to use the word cricket in association with the Indian board) thinks that it is bigger than the game itself. So Sirinivasan wants to have the cake and eat the cake! typical Indian mentality. The ICC should tell these jokers to go and fly a kite. World cricket is better off without these folks. But we appreciate the entertainment by the Indian board.

Posted by vj3478 on (February 13, 2012, 20:36 GMT)

I m not sure what made BCCI take so long to REJECT the report! May be the Sahara sponsership dispute and hope this will be the last time BCCI taking so long. One thing I love is they didnt mention the reason:) and I m sure they come up with some at a later stage :) Luv u guys.

Posted by Nutcutlet on (February 13, 2012, 20:09 GMT)

If a major report (any major report, not just this one) has been painstakingly composed, it obviously takes a great number of hours of intensive labour that includes applied intelligence, analysis and closely-argued discourse. Any such work deserves serious and detailed consideration. A rejection of it has, by the universal rules of common courtesy found in all professional and academic organisations throughout the world, to be detailed, formal and offer a full explanation for its rejection. This common courtesy has not been extended to Lord Woolf and all those who have been engaged in his report's construction. The BCCI therefore has insulted Lord Woolf & co. with high-handed arrogance. To use an analogy, if a student submits a PhD thesis to her professor, would you expect the professor to reject it out of hand, no explanation forthcoming? Would that be regarded as professional behaviour? Would the student fell justifiably aggrieved and have grounds for complaint? BCCI - shame on you!

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 20:09 GMT)

I swear it's like the BCCI only exists to obstruct every opportunity of the game moving forward, next we're gonna hear "BCCI Rejects Suggestion That Bowlers Be Allowed to Tie Their Own Shoes Between Overs"

Posted by bobmartin on (February 13, 2012, 20:08 GMT)

Amongst all the rhetoric and biased opinions from people who have mostly obviously not bothered to read the complete Woolfe Report, there is this gem which is the most sensible comment on the subject I have yet to read and well deserves to be read again: @ unregisteredalien on (February 13 2012, 10:37 AM GMT) Surprise surprise. Srinivasan is more interested in filling his boots with gold than with helping cricket to become one of the world's leading sports. No to governance and accountability, no to honesty and transparency, no to global vision and ambitions, no to the long-term interests of the sport, no to technology and continuous improvement. Yes to secrecy and back-room dealing, yes to rampant conflicts of interests, yes to preserving entrenched privileges, yes to short-term monetary gains, yes - in short - to the mighty dollar. Remind me, what fine principles - sporting and otherwise - is cricket supposed to represent? Indian cricket is suffering already but thep

Posted by frozeninusa on (February 13, 2012, 20:03 GMT)

Let's revamp the UN to reduce the influence of the big countries like the US. Let's give the security council veto power to every member, not just the five. Let's have everyone fly in the first class regardless of the price they paid for the ticket. But wait! Let's just give the ICC powers back to England and Australia and everything will be forgotten.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 19:58 GMT)

Where was Mr. Woolfe and his recommendations when BCCI had no power ,but a whole lot of grievances? Wish I was a fly on the wall during the 70s and 80s ICC meetings. You don't think BCCI's attitude is a direct by-product of all previous unfairnesses? What goes around comes around. Please don't the take the moral high ground. Come on now!!!

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 19:48 GMT)

Ha, typical . Why doesn't that surprise me. It's amazing that one of the first to cry foul is India and when something comes out help erradicate the issue, their board rejects it. The BCCI is a bunch of hypoctrical idiots.

Posted by libinbond on (February 13, 2012, 19:45 GMT)

The Woolf report aims at reducing powers of not just BCCI, but the top 3-4 boards that dominate the ICC - ECB and CA too. Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon and starts bashing the BCCI left and right for every stand they take, wait for the other boards to respond as well. See if any of them are also interested in giving up all their powers and remaining altruistic members of the organization.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 19:36 GMT)

Not good at all, BCCI should use its influence for the betterment of the game. This is the reason that cricket never has and never will be popular worldwide. Look at FIFA, they have spread football all over the world by thinking of the game not individual countries. Anyways we can't do anything but wait for the BCCI to fall on its face.

Posted by seand64 on (February 13, 2012, 19:32 GMT)

and this is the exact reason i completely ignore Indian cricket. It's my only way of saying i refuse to accept this. It's such a pity that the Indian cricket supporters keep going to the matches. If they were to stay away the IPL would fold and the BCCI would come under increasing pressure. Meaningless ODI series' against anybody willing to play, ridiculous T20 'competitions' with results that do not matter and which are taken with a grain of salt and revelations of blatant corruption are just the tip of the iceberg. I hope that one day every player who was involved with the IPA and who was forced out of International cricket can get together in a class action and sue the BCCI.

Posted by puneet_usa on (February 13, 2012, 19:27 GMT)


Posted by Rahulbose on (February 13, 2012, 19:20 GMT)

The Monarchs are opposed to the revolution referendum. Quelle surprise !

Posted by Charindra on (February 13, 2012, 19:17 GMT)

What a surprise! I'm shocked!!! Who thought the BCCI would oppose this??? I mean, BCCI has cricket's best interests at heart right? Right.....?

Posted by simon_w on (February 13, 2012, 19:15 GMT)

surely no-one can possibly be surprised by this. the major nations, and most obviously India but including especially England and Australia, run the game in their own self-interest. this is not a problem from the perspective of the boards, of course, so why would anyone expect them to do anything about it?

Posted by hhillbumper on (February 13, 2012, 19:12 GMT)

yep BCCI get criticised and some people start claiming racism.Lets face it given the fine mess of their cricket that IPL has made and the politicking that goes on maybe we should just turn cricket over to the PCB they can't do any worse.Cue more years of dodgy politics

Posted by Venkat_Gowrishankar on (February 13, 2012, 19:10 GMT)

@ bobmartin: "Whinging about what went in the past serves no purpose"..So it re affirms that the anglo australian boards were dominating and used cricket for their own interests, but its a thing of the past..so one should simply move on, As simple as that !. No ways, there is no need, just a few years of domination by the BCCI is bringing out so much hatred against it, just imagine how much has been built up all these years. There is no need to forget the past, as the present and the future are consequences of the past. i would suggest to stop whining about the BCCI and start moving on. Cricket is financially more stable and in a beter shape than it ever was!. To all english fans, atleast BCCI provides free online streaming of all matches in India, Hmmm..How much does ECB & Sky Co charge ? .

Posted by hulk777 on (February 13, 2012, 19:04 GMT)

This is where the FICA should come and show its power. What will happen if the cricketers don't play unless they implement the recommendations in woolf report. Administrators dont care about cricketers why should cricketers care about adminstrator.They make cricketers play like puppets one series after another non stop and drain them. People like Sachin,Ponting, Dhoni, Sangakkara etc should show the leadership quality in implementing change. A Leader is not just leading the team,he is also the one who opposes and fights for a cause.

Posted by Dr.M.S.ARVIND on (February 13, 2012, 18:51 GMT)

@Sunny Jahangir : What has India done to the Cricket World. They backed ur BD side to get test status prematurely. They created an environment out of England - Australia who ruled the world of Cricket for a century. Asia - The Real Hub of Cricket (rather India to be precise) got the importance it deserved. BCCI is wrong on many accounts but Cricket right now can't exist without India. if at all a full member be demoted in all sense it should be Bangladesh for neither is the side worth its merit nor have they contributed much. But we won't press for it. After all BD is fellow Asian nation

Posted by SagirParkar on (February 13, 2012, 18:50 GMT)

ahh so finally, the BCCI have come out with an opinion have they.. did they forget that the Woolf report was meant for the ICC rather than BCCI.. it is for the ICC to reject or accept it.. clearly the reason for the rejection has to be on monetary grounds as much as it has to do with devolution of power.. it wont be surprising if the other full member boards were come to a similar conclusion considering that they were to lose a substantial amount of influence had the Woolf recommendations were to be accepted. it is a very tight and close nexus of power in the ICC.. and given that BCCI currently has the financial might, it is pulling the strings.. they shouldnt forget that the high and mighty do fall eventually.. and when they do, it is not a pretty sight..

may God bless world cricket.. and no, i am not referring to SRT..

Posted by Desilathha on (February 13, 2012, 18:37 GMT)

Totally agree with comments made here, India should not be within ICC. But think who needs who, If India give up playing cricket OR walked away from ICC, NO OTHER country's cricket board would survive, broadcasters won't be interested. So just enjoy watching cricket and pray India don't give up on cricket

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 18:25 GMT)

Right and good decision by BCCI. Why to lost power when you have it on you hands. Dont be critizing blindly. Comparing BCCI Decision on DRS with this rejection is wrong.

Posted by Baundele on (February 13, 2012, 18:22 GMT)

Indians should speak out for the sake of Indian cricket. People pay money and BCCI exercises power without considering people's benefit.

Posted by Dhumper on (February 13, 2012, 18:19 GMT)

Being a Pakistani, I still support BCCI's stance on this even though the 2 boards are not on good terms, which they should be, as reflected by IPL exclusions and all! I totally agree that where were these changes when CA/ECB were more powerful? Let the Indian board dictate terms for now before things shake up and someone else enjoys an upper hand. Enjoy BCCI!

Posted by hur979 on (February 13, 2012, 18:08 GMT)

@samincolumbia, some Pak Vs India stats for your consideration. Tests Pak won 12, India won 9. ODIs Pak won 69, India won 47. Pak is number 3 all time in tests and number 2 all time in ODIs. India is just above BD, Zim and NZ in Tests.Now go sulk and stop harping on one stat that is in your favor. India not only has just lost 8 consective overseas tests they also lost 17 consecutive overseas tests in the 50s and 60s. BCCI should strong arm ICC now to hold all the Tests and tournaments in India only. And BTW Shahid Afridi just bowled a 131 kph ball, he is a leg spinner and does not bend his arm. Maybe your rag tag "fast" bowlers should learn the art of fast bowling from Afridi since he is faster than your "fast" bowlers. Also, last but not least Saeed Ajmal and other "bent arm" bowlers have their actions scrutinized and cleared by ICC and the University of Western Australia. Stop yapping about things that are beyond your comprehension.

Posted by St.as.ram.rod on (February 13, 2012, 18:04 GMT)

@Nirad_N: So Dear,what do u think, BCCI is supposed to be "Business Unit" or Sports Authority who does what is best for the sports and takes sports ahead... You are talking abt Ranji Trophy, did u see the finals?? Did u see the pitch, richest board in the world cant get the lush outfield which my college can and you talking abt best managed?? Grass root level improvements???

And guys think, it is as u said "Business Unit" only feeding on our passions and making money.. its like someone making fool out of us and having a big laugh at the end of the day.. Ask any former cricketers, they are happy abt player salary but what they think abt the attitude of young IPL stars.. respect for Indian CAP.. this too is BCCI responsibilty..

Posted by maddy20 on (February 13, 2012, 18:03 GMT)

@clarke501 I am sure the two new balls was not BCCI's idea. Wonder which cricket boards may have done this to decrease the effectiveness of spinners. Wake up and smell the coffee. "no individual country should exercise control over the ICC. England and Australia recognised this years ago. Now it's the BCCI's turn. ?" Like you said it nothing could be further from the truth.

Posted by Mappi on (February 13, 2012, 17:59 GMT)

Why report had been rejected no expalination, the reports says that all power has to be decentralize from CA & ECB powers, BCCI like to poke their nose everywhere without thinking ,they objected on DRS, all other 09 countires are fine to implement it, reports says that more associates country should be sitting in decision making. BCCI is bulling with other boards, they make hell of a money which they can afford to put in for infrastructure in Indian, good for Indian cricket even then India had been losing badly in TEST cricket for last two away series.in IPL BCCI are making big money , they are not doing charity to players, if they dont pay no one will play non stop T20 matches for 6 weeks, hope common sense will prevail.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 17:58 GMT)

BCCI is a complete opposite of what India as a country holds value for so dearly. Some saying that BCCI is paying ICCs bill,, well maybe we should do what other entities are doing, cut cost and be self reliant than depending on BCCI. BCCI paying more to ICC does not mean that it can rule the rest of the cricket world. ICC survived for many years before BCCIs sudden fat wallet and it can survive without India too.

Moreover, I think this is the very reason ICC should be revamped. I dont think India has done any good for world cricket in recent times other than giving birth to Sachin Tendulkar. Rather they are creating obstacles one after another ( i.e., opposing DRS, hindering all other sub-continent boards on T20 leagues etc. , influencing umpire selections, etc.).

If India's only contribution is their % of earnings and not any 'intelligent ideas' or better governance; then India does not deserve to be in the leading circles for ICC.

Posted by Raj1960 on (February 13, 2012, 17:58 GMT)

The recommendations are clearly to reduce dominance of big controlling board like BCCI. In the past when English and Australian boards dominated the ICC, it was ok. And now that BCCI has the power, we have Wolf report to marginalize BCCI influence. I am glad BCCI is pushing its weight around.

Posted by satyat on (February 13, 2012, 17:27 GMT)

Wondering how the ICC would have been if was in PCB's control.

Posted by prashkannam on (February 13, 2012, 17:01 GMT)


Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 16:55 GMT)

this wouldnt matter if the BCCI had crickets best interest at heart but its run by currupt politicans and businessmen.

Posted by Nnskrish on (February 13, 2012, 16:51 GMT)

For ppl who criticize bcci....pls realize that it's one of the worlds best run sports group....you know what is the match fee for a single ranji match it's 1.5 lakhs if a player is in the starting 11,it pays it's players even after retirement..they take very good care of their players which is very important for any sports body to run successfully and they invest their money in development of cricket in India....and yes every one may not agree with their decisions but they have done exceptionally well till now as a business unit.

Posted by unbiasedfan on (February 13, 2012, 16:50 GMT)

Not surprised with BCCI's reaction. I am sure the only topic they discussed was to reject the proposal. BCCI is nothing more than a school yard bully.

Posted by applethief on (February 13, 2012, 16:33 GMT)

Won't find me agreeing with @maddy20 all that often, and it's clear that 2 wrongs don't make a right (making the BCCI's stance unfortunate), but he's right to point out that it's hypocritical to make a huge fuss about their ethics. Today, in 2012, it's impossible to sustain an argument that the historic Anglo-Australian powerhouse of world cricket ever acted for anything other than narrow self-interest, so it's hypocritical to criticise them for doing what you guys did for decades. It's easy to take the moral high ground when there's nowhere else left to stand, and if the rest of the cricketing elite don't like what they see in the BCCI today, then they should realise that they are simply a reflection of themselves, a manifestation of their own sins against fairness for so long.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 16:32 GMT)

Well this wasnt accepted . when did our board accept any good things

Posted by sweetspot on (February 13, 2012, 16:27 GMT)

For all the yapping about the BCCI - they have done more for world cricket and the well being of players from all over the world than any cricket administration in the history of the sport. Has any player ever heard of a six figure US dollar income before the IPL came about, leave alone some getting seven figures? Show some gratitude. If you travel through India you will see how much infrastructure is being built in the smaller towns so that cricket can go deeper and even allow people from very poor rural backgrounds to make a living out of the game. The game was in English hands for over a 100 years. Was there a single cricketer who could retire in comfort during that period? Now, even 24 year olds can do that if they choose to, thanks to the BCCI. As for Pakistan being left out, please think about how things were before those terrorists attacked SL players. Remember the first season of the IPL? Remember Sohail Tanvir's deal or Afridi's? Just shut up and face reality.

Posted by Dashgar on (February 13, 2012, 16:07 GMT)

Of course the BCCI oppose it. The report basically says that they, CA and the ECB have too much power. The report is an attack on them. Anyone who is surprised they oppose this is simply naive.

Posted by inswing on (February 13, 2012, 16:07 GMT)

As someone who pays most of ICC's bills, BCCI _should_ have more power. If you generate most of the revenue to run cricket, it is appropriate and desirable that you have more say. England and Aus enjoyed this position for decades. Where were sweeping changes 20 or 30 years ago? Why was the structure appropriate then, but not right now?

Posted by shillingsworth on (February 13, 2012, 16:04 GMT)

@Anil Babladi - you suggest that the Wolf report involves re-instating the dominance of England and Australia over the ICC. Nothing could be further from the truth. Wolf concluded that no individual country should exercise control over the ICC. England and Australia recognised this years ago. Now it's the BCCI's turn.

Posted by karthikfromchennai on (February 13, 2012, 15:59 GMT)

Woolf missed a point that I would like to add..."why dont the tainted trio who earned millions for bowling no balls share the money with fellow prisoners?"

Posted by TwitterJitter on (February 13, 2012, 15:48 GMT)

In other news Lord Woolf's also mentions that 75% of national incomes and wealth of England and Australia should be redistributed on needs-basis as opposed to people in these nations being automatically being entitled to it. Also, the veto powers of nations be taken away at the U.N. and all developed nations collectively be entitled to 5 votes,5 votes for developing nations and remaining 5 votes for poor nations.When Great Britain and other developed nations opposed the report, the people from other nations voiced their discontent on cricinfo calling the governments of these developed nations as bullies and how they should be kicked out of "league of nations".

Posted by TwitterJitter on (February 13, 2012, 15:35 GMT)

@BarmyIan - Going by that logic of needs-based what he is suggesting is that of out of 75% of revenues ICC generates (pretty much 99% of it from 2 or 3 nations) none of it will go back to those 2 or 3 nations that generated it because they might not need it. Last time I read Karl Marx his philosophy is - "From each according to his ability and to each according to his need". In other words"Rob the wealth creators and feed the parasites". All the more incentive to boards to cease wealth creation and be more parasites.

Posted by RajArya on (February 13, 2012, 15:35 GMT)

An earlier post said "SOMEONE" should tell BCCI : "ICC are in charge, you are not, deal with it"

Well guess what - BCCI does not dispute ICC is in charge and infact BCCI are dealing with it... by rejecting these nonsensical recommendatiosn that are so visibly Anti-BCCI.

I am Indian fan and dont always agree with BCCI decisions - but they are in charge of cricket in India - not ICC, AND their priority is to first and foremost look after the interest on Indian cricket. BCCI has only very recently become profitable and they have a long way to go to improve cricekt in India... so ultimately respect and kudos to BCCI for not just rolling over and agreeing to every nonsense recommendation proposed by ICC.

Posted by Brumby90 on (February 13, 2012, 15:29 GMT)

Gee, what a big surprise. The BCCI have no interest in cricket at all. Only in what money they can make no matter what damage it does to cricket. the have already got rule changes and it seems diffferent rules for India compared to other countries. Wont be long before the rest of the world breaks away from the ICC just like the world series days. Then India can play these stupid IPL tournaments all the time till they go bankrupt

Posted by bobmartin on (February 13, 2012, 15:11 GMT)

Quote from the article "It also suggests that an ICC director should not concurrently hold any leadership or executive post with their home boards. For example, N Srinivasan is currently both an ICC director and president of the Indian board but, if the recommendations are accepted, he can't retain both posts. As for independent directors, they must not have recently held positions of authority on any member board or any commercial body that has had significant contractual relationships with the ICC." If you want unbiased and professional people running world cricket, these particular proposals seem to be sound. If you don't, then I suggest you are not a true cricket fan. Whinging about what went in the past serves no purpose. You cannot change what has happened no matter how bitter you are. But what you can do is ensure that it doesn't happen again by having the ICC being run by people with no conflict of interests, because if it isn't the danger is that history will itself.

Posted by KingofRedLions on (February 13, 2012, 15:00 GMT)

@Dinesh Vishwanathan - If other boards oppose it, then we will rightly criticise them as well.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 14:57 GMT)

@ samin columbia we cannot just take out world or sharjah talk overall and feel shame lol

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 14:55 GMT)

For all those who hate BCCI, live with it. Because of BCCI, half of the world cricket is living and Oz Eng and SA want to rule it like they used to before. Sorry Wolf can#t accept that.

Posted by Venkat_Gowrishankar on (February 13, 2012, 14:55 GMT)

I dont think its fair for BCCI to accept whatever thats proposed to them, BCCI as an independent body has its own rights. Where are the comments of CA and ECB?.. why are they Mum ? .. why dont they pubicly issue a statement embracing the " Lord's " comments. BCCI atleast has the guts to tell publicly that it rejects it. And regarding bullying, i know it hurts when people are given a taste of their own medicine. ( Bullying and domination by CA and ECB in the 70, 80's and early 90's ). So all BCCI haters, go on and express your opinions, as they are not going to make any difference .( atleast wil make you feel a little light! ) .

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 14:52 GMT)

Re: @Maddy20 or anyone one paying attention to it...Can you please tell me on exactly which page it says, and I quote from Maddy, "The ICC should distribute 75% of the profits equally among all the full members and the associates."

This sounds confusing because what I read suggests otherwise.

Posted by apurav_jain on (February 13, 2012, 14:34 GMT)

the way this article is written it is just to portray a particular line of thought and using words to make it sound correct. Depicting facts is what you should be bothered about.

Posted by BarmyIan on (February 13, 2012, 14:33 GMT)

@maddy you need to re read the Wolfe report. At present 75% of ICC's net income is distributed as you state. The Woolf report states ""The distribution model should be revised so that amounts distributed to Members are on a needs basis as opposed to an automatic entitlement,"

Posted by samincolumbia on (February 13, 2012, 14:15 GMT)

It's hilarious to read Pakistanis still whining about their World Cup loss to India...Being thrashed 5 times and never been able to win a single match in the history of the WC against India, what with all their 'fast' bowlers and bend-arm spinners must be really painful and hurting them day in and day out!!

Posted by 360review on (February 13, 2012, 14:04 GMT)

Woolf report more appropriately can be compared to social services at the expense of tax payers. By the way why are we referring him as "Lord"? England no longer has the power to tweak ICC as they please and the best way out of it was to not let anyone else have it, hence the Woolf report. Plain and simple. I support BCCI on this. Let's not make circus out of ICC. Woolf report will turn ICC into Britain's parliament where everyone will squabble and no decisions will be made.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 13:57 GMT)

All said by maddy20, nothing more to add:-) pathetic followers who dont use their brain to analyse , just bash indian board.. Fellows , indian board is the only board in all over the world to give monthly pension to players even who had just played domestic matches, got any idea how much it costs, now where does the money come from and where it goes..? ?? Just use your half kg brain before critisizing.. Dont be like stupid indian news channels

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 13:43 GMT)

dont know why people r complaining so much abt bcci...icc gets most fund from bcci..so they listen to them..its natural.everything happens in this way only....no one is power likes to get his power reduced..any other board in place of bcci would have done the same...

Posted by unregisteredalien on (February 13, 2012, 13:38 GMT)

@those cheerleading for the BCCI on the grounds that "it's now India's time" (thankfully the minority here), do you think Srini and his stooges are on your side? @TheBengalTiger: pot, meet kettle.

Posted by triassicpark on (February 13, 2012, 13:33 GMT)

Kudos maddy20. Well said. But all in all this forum is going to be another BCCI bashing !!! Welcome other non Indian cricket fans. Come and bash us verbally.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 13:32 GMT)

Can't say that I'm that surprised they have rejected the Lord Woolf report.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 13:29 GMT)

I wonder what will happen if every other full member accept this proposal. Could be a new era for cricket!!!

Posted by Lovetesh on (February 13, 2012, 13:19 GMT)

Where were these transparency issues, monarchy loathing when ECB and CA use to rule the cricket till early 90s. Now that BCCI is ruling there is a woolf commission. Why people expect BCCI to reduce its influence over ICC? Way to go BCCI, I agree with you on this. Let people crib because they can only do that.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 13:18 GMT)

I see that all the anti-BCCI shills are out in full force. How about waiting to hear from all the other boards? I doubt that any of them will be in favour of "independent" directors who have no position of authority with the home boards. I personally think that it's a great idea. But all the curmudgeons that populate the boards of world cricket will surely shoot down the idea and stomp all over it. I hope Mr. Woolf received a tidy packet for his efforts.

Posted by Scube on (February 13, 2012, 13:09 GMT)

The guy has just paid 6 million dollars for the one & only RJ! Does anyone on this forum expect anything better from him / his team!?!

Posted by girdoc1 on (February 13, 2012, 13:00 GMT)

What are you people cribbing about, I dont see any wrong doing by BCCI. Ofcourse it has not owned DRS system - but its matter of debate. About Pakistan in IPL, its the Govt of PAkistan and PCB refusing these players participation in IPL, as it was so obvious in IPL-2. Cmon, some Lord cannot dictate BCCI - never cricket has been as fair as in the current era.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 12:59 GMT)

BCCI will not let cricket to be popular game in the world. It will always oppose any plan in the ICC. BCCI see's that it will loose power in cricket

Posted by maddy20 on (February 13, 2012, 12:58 GMT)

Contd... Its like buying 1 share in Microsoft and demanding equal share of profits from all the shares anyone has ever purchased from it. It makes you sound not just silly but outright stupid. There are several other clauses in the Woolfe report that are utter nonsense. If anything it was a waste of time & money. Nothing more. I would like to explain about them too but I do not wish to smear my comments all over this board. @kardar01 I suppose you are Pakistani still reeling from the fact that we have thumped you in the world cup. We did not buy it. We earned it by playing good, fair and competetive cricket. We could field a full strength team because our players are not interested in bowling no-balls for money coz we can pay them well enough. Get over it already!

Posted by maddy20 on (February 13, 2012, 12:54 GMT)

It is not surprising that all the members of the anti-BCCI force are up in arms as soon as they say something regardless of whether they have read the woolfe report are not. The report was a farce and some of the aspects of the clause are nothing short of hilarious. There is one particular clause I have read where in it says "The ICC should distribute 75% of the profits equally among all the full members and the associates".So let me clarify why I thought it was stupid 1)Nobody lobbied for India or any other Asian country for that matter when they were playing cricket. My grandpa used to play for Madras Cricket Club and he says there were times when they had no proper shoes to wear. MCC, ECB or ACB did not give a damn. Now that BCCI is the richest these whinging trolls want to bend the rules in their favor. 2)Secondly no business model(ultimately it all comes down to$) works this way. India cannot just go to FIFA and say we want equal share of the profits.The same thing applies here.

Posted by TheBengalTiger on (February 13, 2012, 12:50 GMT)

Remember when England and Australia dominated world cricket. They abused the system for their own gaines, which were completely and utterly racist. While the BCCI arent perfect, at least arent trying to discriminate against non asian countries. Brilliant to see an asian board in charge, rather an a racist english or australian one

Posted by Ramesh_Joseph on (February 13, 2012, 12:46 GMT)

People love to jump on the BCCI, because it helps them to escape responsibility. Just because other Boards have not made any comment, doesn't mean that they approve of the changes. BCCI as usual has become the scapegoat. If all the other members vote for the changes, BCCI cannot do anything about it.

These proposals involve considerable reduction in power of the Test playing nations and is tilted in favor of the associate members. Let us see which of the Test playing Boards support the Woolf report.

Posted by Dhushan on (February 13, 2012, 12:45 GMT)

Why don't we see what the other national boards have to say about this. If majority of the others are for it, the method ICC should take is to say that those who oppose should get in line or lose out. But no, not in cricket, not at the ICC. Even though all other national boards are for it & BCCI is against it, the spineless ICC will grovel at BCCI's feet asking what changes need to be done so that the BCCI is happy. What a disgrace!

Posted by northumbriannomad on (February 13, 2012, 12:45 GMT)

I'm just sick of it all, to be honest. I don't enjoy the game any more. Because I love the game and it's painful to watch it being slowly bled to death. It is actually a game, not a business. I'd rather watch a group of kids playing cricket on the beach for the love of it. When I read people "arguing" that because the MCC behaved badly in various ways in the past, it's only fair that the BCCI should behave badly now, it really depresses me. Why make all the same mistakes again, but bigger and worse? Why not try something new, like actually running the sport openly and without corruption or favouritism? Sorry, but it's all too stupid. Have fun wrecking the world.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 12:43 GMT)

I am sorry but is "NO" the default answer when it comes to BCCI?

Posted by reality_check on (February 13, 2012, 12:35 GMT)

I think this is the best time PCB should break away from under the big shadow of BCCI and join the "other" side. There is no benefit to PCB from BCCI's hegemony in the world cricket actually the reverse is more true. BCCI will dictate, rather block, any India/Pak series which is financially beneficial to PCB plus they won't allow (actually secretly sabotage) Pak players into ICC sanctioned IPL so what is the benefit apart from being geographically close? NONE. Pak players participate in English counties and Aus T20 tournaments plus now BPL. It's time to say adios to BCCI. They won't miss PCB BUT they will miss the crucial vote in ICC.

Posted by Dhushan on (February 13, 2012, 12:33 GMT)

I'm not at all surprised. The BCCI thinks they're IT and the ICC is playing along as the BCCI wants. Why can't the ICC being the world governing body put BCCI in it's right place & make them follow suit? FIFA does this with all it's nations. IRB does the same & so does every other sport but not in cricket. OH NO! Everyone has to bow down to BCCI! What disgusting administration. Utterly disgusting!

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 12:29 GMT)

it is called power of money my friends, this game is nothing but business now and that is big Shame!

Posted by IndiaNumeroUno on (February 13, 2012, 12:27 GMT)

Agree 100% with IndianKumar001... Indians should support BCCI... every country is looking out for their interests.. India provides the financial and fan power to cricket so nothing wrong if it defends its interests... its not that we are exploiting anyone or making slaves!

Posted by correctcall on (February 13, 2012, 12:24 GMT)

@johnnybox - nice one! perhaps that will give Sutherland and Clarke a giggle while they decide how to "engage" with Srini. Interesting that all the anti Woolfe comments seem to forget that the report was co- written by a respected Indian Judge.

Posted by heathrf1974 on (February 13, 2012, 12:17 GMT)

It does amuse me that some fans are seeing this as a tit-for-tat by Indian cricket getting there own back on England and Australia and almost justifying their decisions. The fact of the matter is that the members of the BCCI do not care what you think they only care of how much money they can make for themselves through bribing poorer nations and supporting teams they have a financial interest in. The people of India need to stand up against them because the interests of Indian cricket are far from their thoughts.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 12:15 GMT)

bcci is right i agree with BCCI....

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 12:06 GMT)

@bharath74 - No, it is NOT time for that. Just because someone bullied you does not make it right to then become a bully yourself.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 12:05 GMT)

A lot has been said about BCCI giving up power in ICC workings, but realistically it is not feasible. Power often lies with the rich and when BCCI generates three-forths of global revenue, it is bound to have a sway over the proceedings...whether we like it or not. Though I am an Indian, I do not support the BCCI. It is all well to reject a certain Woolf report, but if BCCI likes to keep power it also has to lead by example. It has to help in spelling out more to develop world cricket by increased funding for the 95 non-test playing nations. By acting grumpy and developing this as a global sport played by many more countries, BCCI may be killing the proverbial 'hen that lays the golden egg' ....Global cricket

Posted by St.as.ram.rod on (February 13, 2012, 12:03 GMT)

@IndianKumar001: There is not much difference in the way u and BCCI thinks, enjoy till it lasts... dude have u heard of something called "With Powers comes Responsibility".. And the gracious leader is more lasting than the Authoritative leadership.. And ur analogy..OMG God help us.. UK doesnt join Eurozone to safegaurd their interest, it is not affecting other countries.. but with BCCI's constant bickering, it is bringing down game for their personal interests... The analogy will fit if India decides to opt out of ICC and play only IPL and and create their own BCCI Worldcup.. Then it is their interest..

Anyways we shouldn't also jump on to BCCI bashing, the points and reasoning should come out in Public and then only a real picture can be depicted but i m sure it is nothing brighter than anyother issues..

Posted by Muzgrob on (February 13, 2012, 11:57 GMT)

The BCCI is a disgrace and a blight on world cricket, I don't care if they are the main/sole monetary power, they need to be removed from power.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 11:57 GMT)

ofcourse, anything intended to increase transparency in the game goes against everything that the BCCI stands for. their motto is to keep the world in the dark about their actions and keep its political dominance over world cricket alive. however everything should be done in the best interest for the global game and no individual boards should control the decision making process for their own advantage.

Posted by johnnybox on (February 13, 2012, 11:52 GMT)

Perhaps the BCCI should consider referring their opinion to the DRS.

Posted by bharath74 on (February 13, 2012, 11:52 GMT)

UK,Aus,NZ ruled the cricketing world for decades by making their own rules,right now it is time for BCCI or other Asian Nations to dictate the rules. Lord WOOLF is not from the Subcontinent to make Pro-Asian Amendments

Posted by anuradha_d on (February 13, 2012, 11:52 GMT)

cricinfo is churning up too many tabloid styled senstaional news items to stir sentiments against BCCI......be careful they might blacklist cricinfo :)....consider yourself warned :)

Posted by Dr.Vindaloo on (February 13, 2012, 11:51 GMT)

@Indiankumar001: no one disputes that India holds all the aces in the administration of world cricket. We all just wish that with this power would come some sense of responsibility for the betterment of the game rather than the naked self-interest for which BCCI has become notorious. Now that self-interest and short-termism is harming Indian cricket itself: test team in freefall, IPL interest on the wane etc. Chickens coming home to roost.

Posted by ROLAYH on (February 13, 2012, 11:51 GMT)

The reason why we are frightened of BCCI supremacy is very simple. The efforts they are doing to make Pakistan alone in the world cricket, that was never the case when Aus/Eng were in-charge. There were many biased decisions made in that era but maliciousness was no match to the one shown by BCCI over the years..Instances, excluding Pakistan from IPL and Champions League, World cup omission (although it was effort of Pakistan chiefly that helped sub-continent to keep the cup) and I don't know what else is happening at the back end....

Posted by GlobalCricketLover on (February 13, 2012, 11:51 GMT)

Did anyone expect any different reaction from BCCI? huh.. How can BCCI support anything that asks BCCI to behave with commonsense and responsibility! Having known how strong ICC is, at least against BCCI, we know where this report is going to end up. Yep, Mr. Srnivasan's bin !

Posted by filizant on (February 13, 2012, 11:47 GMT)

A corrupt BCCI...the worst thing to ever happen for the otherwise beautiful game of cricket...

Posted by kardar01 on (February 13, 2012, 11:45 GMT)

BCCI should let go the Monarchy within ICC. let the poor countries benifit from it. if Woolf recomendations followed then it may prevent a few countries from buying the tournaments as world cup :)

Posted by rish5107 on (February 13, 2012, 11:40 GMT)

come guys .... if u are earning 75% of your family income you would like to expect to be heard as the leader of the pack rite ... it may not sound fair but that's how the world is ... examples USA in world politics, BCCI in world cricket

Posted by Fast_Track_Bully on (February 13, 2012, 11:40 GMT)

funny to see someone bashing on this news. This is a regional news and BCCI is the first one to take a decision on that report. None of the other members responded. Wait for others response and majority will win. Then why the hue and cry over BCCI's decision??? every one have the right to object/accept the decision. Some people using every oppertunity to bash BCCI that's all!!

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 11:35 GMT)

So far only Australia and England were ruling cricket and now it is the time for India also have their say. When only five Countries have veto power in the UN which decides all other Countries and it has been accepted by the World and why not BCCI have a say on the ICC.

Posted by Ben1989 on (February 13, 2012, 11:35 GMT)

ridiculous, why do we even have ICC, why not just structure it how it really is behind the scene's & have BCCI run everything.... what a surprise they're the only country against the report...

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 11:31 GMT)

Rewind back to 70's... had these recommendations made at that time would English/Australians accept them? Mind you this is not a racial comment. Back then those boards were financial stronger and they had their say. Now it's BCCI. Tomorrow it could be (and I hope) someone else. They should not try to lessen the importance of BCCI but make them share their profits with financially weaker boards to help promote the game.

Posted by Sakthiivel on (February 13, 2012, 11:19 GMT)

BCCI always take the final call.. Thats the way we rocks..

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 11:16 GMT)

One thing i dont understand this if for some rule over 20 boards agree and 1 board BCCI does not agree why does it needs to be changed. I am disgusted by the ICC attitude of treating BCCI as their god and letting the cricketing community suffer..balance of power must be practised otherwise soon this whole game is gonna be filled with greedy indian bussisman like sharad pawar.Also there are accusations of corruption on sharad pawar who is a minister in india government.

Posted by Axe11029 on (February 13, 2012, 11:12 GMT)

Who Cares what the BCCI thinks ?? No other board has responded to the woolf report yet , why is a head of one country's board (who has no knowledge or interest in the furtherment of the game ) responding to something intended for the International ... once again , INTERNATIONAL !!! cricket council . Everybody in the world knows that the BCCI is only interested in filling their coffers with money , so come on other country's cricket boards , tell the BCCI to get lost and make all the changes necessary to improve the game and disregard anything they have to say !!!

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 11:11 GMT)

Everyone has had enough of Corruption running the game, IF YOU ARE ON A THE BOARD FOR YOUR HOME COUNTRY YOU SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO GOVERN THE WORLD GAME. Cricket needs more direction from top, otherwise rubbish T20 leagues will keep appearing and everyone else will no longer exist. BCCI = bad.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 11:10 GMT)

These report was very important in order to develop cricket in new nations. Rejection of Woolf Report will be detrimental to cricket as a whole. The problem is full members want the power to be concentrated only in a few hands rather than sharing it with all.

Posted by IndianKumar001 on (February 13, 2012, 11:04 GMT)

It's a good decision by BCCI, and we Indians need to stop being defensive about BCCI. Why should we let go of our power in the cricketing world? Every country thinks of their own interests - the UK doesn't join Eurozone to save its economy, the US doesn't sign on climate/nuclear pacts to keep their control on the world. Why should we get defensive about our grip on world cricket. Be proud of it.

To other countries: We are the world leaders in cricket - deal with it!

Posted by CricSpirit on (February 13, 2012, 11:02 GMT)

It should be much appropriate if we called the next world cup as " BCCI Cricket World Cup 2015"

Posted by chad_reid on (February 13, 2012, 11:01 GMT)


Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 11:00 GMT)

what else we can except from BCCI.how can mr N Srinivasan accept wolfs report he will not going to be ICCI president anymore if he accepts.....hypocrates.is tgere anybody in officials who can stand again BCCI.

Posted by crikbuff on (February 13, 2012, 10:59 GMT)

hahaha hahaha hahaha wot a surprise!!!! BCCI does not accept changes!!! HAHAHA

Posted by brainbox on (February 13, 2012, 10:57 GMT)

As usual the BCCI completely disregard helping cricket improve, and just care about themselves and the money. The BCCI should concentrate on improving their rubbish team.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:56 GMT)

Rick Seymour - 100% right!!!! BCCI need to remove their heads from their....

Game is being ruined by greedy administators!

Posted by Green_and_Gold on (February 13, 2012, 10:51 GMT)

The BCCI dont want DRS in place - how on earth are they going to say yes to such a major reform.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:51 GMT)

It is normal. Golden Goose is here with BCCI.

Posted by Hrit24 on (February 13, 2012, 10:50 GMT)

I knew this. I expected only this from the BCCI. They don't want the game to spread. They want to utilize the ICC and the game for selfish gains. They want to poach the Associates/Affiliates and want to achieve a target that at some point all the countries will stop playing cricket, the ICC will become a puppet under the BCCI, and only India would play cricket. That will be really hurting for us, cricket fans. Come on, ICC and the rest of the cricketing world, ignore the BCCI and implement the changes.

Posted by mjrvasu on (February 13, 2012, 10:49 GMT)

The British are at it again! Give them an inch and they will eat you for breakfast. Let us not forget what happened with East India Company who sneaked in on the excuse of Trade; then took over controlling our affairs; they ruthlessly murdered thousands of Indians before they got booted out of the country. Now they are trying through 'Aid' and 'Business Investments' and similar back doors to get a foot in India's door again. We have to be watchful, as we have a dangerous situation with all our infighting politicians and corruption all over the place. Who is this 'Lord Woolf' anyway? Let the English keep all the Lords to themselves. India does provide more than 70% of sponsorship to cricket, so, YES, we WILL call the shots, whether the rest of the world likes it or not.

Posted by gurumaster on (February 13, 2012, 10:49 GMT)

It may be time to dissolve the ICC itself and start a new world cricket body to look after our kids future in this sport we all love. Revolutions happen in politics when impasses like these occur.

Posted by unregisteredalien on (February 13, 2012, 10:37 GMT)

Surprise surprise. Srinivasan is more interested in filling his boots with gold than with helping cricket to become one of the world's leading sports. No to governance and accountability, no to honesty and transparency, no to global vision and ambitions, no to the long-term interests of the sport, no to technology and continuous improvement. Yes to secrecy and back-room dealing, yes to rampant conflicts of interests, yes to preserving entrenched privileges, yes to short-term monetary gains, yes - in short - to the mighty dollar. Remind me, what fine principles - sporting and otherwise - is cricket supposed to represent? Indian cricket is suffering already but the BCCI won't be satisfied until they've dragged the world game down to hell.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:37 GMT)

And why should BCCI give justification for their opposition??? They're the BCCI!!!

Posted by IndiaNumeroUno on (February 13, 2012, 10:27 GMT)

"Hey, we are the ICC, we are in charge, you are not, deal with it"

REALLY?! :-))

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:27 GMT)

I believe that money should not disturb a such interesting game like cricket. and I don't understand why the inventors of this game can't step up and say its about time that we stop this nonsense. I hope there are so many countries and companies who can sponsor this wonderful game.

Posted by satish619chandar on (February 13, 2012, 10:24 GMT)

First of all, who appointed the Woolf to produce a report.. BCCI should have a view and not simply put an end to everything that comes across.. They need to have a healthy discussion with the members and then make the decision.. To reject a idea, they should come forward and give a reason for the rejection.. I wish they take a stand which is good for the game and not to any particular board..

Posted by Vilander on (February 13, 2012, 10:24 GMT)

@rahul_78, how do you know without getting the details that BCCI is wrong in this.And its 'for once' not 'for ones'.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:23 GMT)

I am Pakistani fan but think BCCI is right, most of the time Eng or Aus got hold of ICC and they were moulding rules there way. Now they want to change everything because BCCI is a real power now. why did they not change these dominations in pasts. BCCI should enjoy this dominance but get some boards with them because they may be alone in future....

Posted by davidatlas999 on (February 13, 2012, 10:23 GMT)

bcci hahhahah just a joke.they never going with icc they want power simple.

Posted by Hypocracy on (February 13, 2012, 10:22 GMT)

So when it was Aus or England it was ok to do whatever was necessary to keep dominance and dictatorship, but when it is a non-white nation suddenly we need to dilute power. Well done India , keep it up!

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:19 GMT)

I know, many people will be shouting at BCCI now......cant people see the motive behind these recommendations? There is nothing here called transparency, there was no transparency when BCCI are supreme or when England and Australia were supreme....Its an effort from England to regain the power they lost to BCCI...pls learn the politics here

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:18 GMT)

BCCI wants to run ICC as they wish and they are doing so with the power of money which is not good for the game, DRS is not implemented bcoz of India only and now BCCI is against changes in the administration of cricket and the functioning of its governing body to make it more independent and less dominated by the bigger countries and also a re-examination of the rights and benefits of the Test-playing Full Member nations, calling for measures to increase transparency in dealings by the ICC and its members.

Posted by ROLAYH on (February 13, 2012, 10:16 GMT)

I am shocked.... NOT....

Posted by correctcall on (February 13, 2012, 10:15 GMT)

Over to you Mr Isaacs!!!!!

Posted by GASyed on (February 13, 2012, 10:12 GMT)

BCCI is just opposing these recommendations to run the ICC under BCCI not the other way around. Its shame that BCCI run politically is also trying influence ICC by its own politics damaging the spirit of game. There is no cricket but the likes of Indian politics. Helpless ICC......

Posted by PanGlupek on (February 13, 2012, 10:12 GMT)

Surprise, surprise, the turkey doesn't vote for Christmas. A particularly stubborn turkey with a cringeworthy record of disregarding the global good of the game for a bit of extra corn as well. I'm sure the turkey analogies & metaphors don't stop there either.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:10 GMT)

Why does BCCI always have a problem with everything going on in this world?

Posted by simpleguy2008 on (February 13, 2012, 10:08 GMT)

It is time for ICC to peanlise those boards specially BCCI if they make there own rules rather then the ICC who make rules .

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:05 GMT)

Well I think we should hold our comments until we find out exactly what the BCCI are opposed to.

You may find you actually agree with their argument.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 10:02 GMT)

Sad. But the BCCI has got the ICC by the short hairs.

Posted by Attractivue on (February 13, 2012, 10:01 GMT)

I don't understand, just how much money BCCI gives to ICC? Other than BCCI, who wouldn't want fair and neutral governing body? Does England have any say in FIFA when it brings majority of the money into the sport?

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 9:56 GMT)

ahahha...shame on ICC.......ICC better to change its name to BCCI..!!....soon Cricket will be vanished from the world scene as the currrent authorities of ICC sorry BCCICC has made the game a Politics rather than a game..they just want to destroy the game and make money..!!..out of 100%..70% money goes to BCCI, 10% to England and 10% to Australia and the rest 10% BCCI decide what to do..!!

Posted by reality_check on (February 13, 2012, 9:56 GMT)

It will be interesting to see which *key points* BCCI has objection on but going by the recent history of BCCI they will be against anything that makes common sense.

Posted by harmske on (February 13, 2012, 9:55 GMT)

Surprise, surprise. BCCI rejecting a new proposal, nothing new.

Posted by PiyushD on (February 13, 2012, 9:54 GMT)

ICC is a like a king who is bullied all the time by its minsters or I say a minister called bCCI, ICC stand up behave like a king, no board can stand on its own no matter how rich they are.

Posted by Mervo on (February 13, 2012, 9:50 GMT)

Too much Indian control! Let's change the structure and elect new members who are for rather than against progress.

Posted by Rahul_78 on (February 13, 2012, 9:46 GMT)

I am an Indian fan but for ones I do appeal to all the boards, administrators, players and fans of the game across the world to unite against these bullies and make amendments to the rules and regulations of the game to provide the noble governance. Stop this nonsense.

Posted by pb10677 on (February 13, 2012, 9:46 GMT)

well they wouldn't be would they????? Hardly a surprise.

What a waste of time - why get the recommendations if they were never going to follow them.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 9:44 GMT)

You don't say. Colour me surprised.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 9:44 GMT)

They never accept anything other than money.. Try you luck later its like playing jackpot in casino.. you are almost sure u would never get any profit but u still try.

Posted by anuradha_d on (February 13, 2012, 9:43 GMT)

what else did you expect ??...those who have battled ( politically) for and earned power....to give it up on a platter to those who could not win it in the battle :)

It was a chimerical report and got the point blank rejection.

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 9:43 GMT)

Is this news to anyone? We weren't expecting anything different were we?

Posted by deepak_sholapurkar on (February 13, 2012, 9:42 GMT)

BCCI first they will reject any suggestion by ICC then they will try to understand what is that

Posted by   on (February 13, 2012, 9:40 GMT)

it's about time someone said to the BCCI: "Hey, we are the ICC, we are in charge, you are not, deal with it"

Comments have now been closed for this article

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