Champions League news July 26, 2013

BCCI mulls ending CSA's stake in Champions League T20

Sidharth Monga and Firdose Moonda

Relations between the boards of India and South Africa are believed to have suffered a setback following the appointment of Haroon Lorgat as the chief executive of Cricket South Africa, ESPNcricinfo understands. At stake for CSA is its partnership in the lucrative Champions League Twenty20, and the hosting of a full series against India later this year.

The BCCI's concerns over Lorgat's appointment - formally announced on July 20 - were raised at a Champions League T20 meeting earlier this week, it is understood. The meeting in London, attended by representatives of BCCI, Cricket Australia and CSA, was not a pleasant one - one source said it got "very uncomfortable". The BCCI said it hadn't ruled out ending the CLT20 association with CSA, which like CA holds a stake, although South African teams' participation was to continue regardless.

When CSA announced Lorgat's appointment last week, it said it had been under BCCI pressure to do otherwise. Having gone ahead regardless, CSA and Lorgat said they hoped they could iron out their issues with the BCCI.

"We went to India and talked to the president of the BCCI and they raised their concerns about Haroon [Lorgat]," Chris Nenzani, the CSA president, said at that time. "We told them, 'We will not undermine your concerns but we will have to take decision based on the interests of CSA.' We have a long history of friendship and a good relationship with the BCCI, and we value that relationship. We have no reason to believe this appointment will jeopardise the relationship in any way."

Early rushes suggest CSA might have underestimated the BCCI's ire, which is believed to stem from Lorgat's promotion of DRS and his insistence on the implementation of the findings of the Woolf Report during his time as ICC chief executive.

CSA's next plan of action is to wait for a report on the meeting, which Naasei Appiah, the CSA CFO and its acting CEO in the London meeting, is preparing. It then hopes that Lorgat can salvage the relationship.

The BCCI's working committee, meanwhile, will meet on Sunday, and is expected to finalise its requirements regarding the schedule of India's tour of South Africa. Jagmohan Dalmiya, the acting president of the BCCI, told ESPNcricinfo that the board hadn't sent an alternative itinerary over to CSA yet, and was expected to do so only after the Sunday meeting.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Kathir on July 29, 2013, 8:32 GMT

    If BCCI bullied and succeeded, then now CSA's top official could hv been another man.They were not bullied CSA.Just they said abt their point of view n concerns abt this man who opposed BCCI in d past. Mr.Lorgat himself not a saint,who opposed BCCI in every opp he got.Its quite natural for any one gets displeasure when an enemy into ur friend's place. CSA said it was only looking for its own interest, and now BCCI is looking for its own interest. They can't go n converse with Mr.Lorgat as he treated BCCI an enemy b4.Mr.Lorgat will go ahead with his agenda n might oppose BCCI's opinions,not bcz its against d game, just bcz its BCCI's. So BCCI is assessing things for d future.If some1 is already ur enemy,then U'll not like him to be in a position of rights to oppose u n that 2 be from a frd's place.This is just showing their displeasure, not bullying.cicinfo pls publish.

  • Nikhil on July 29, 2013, 8:32 GMT

    It's funny to see these overreactions. BCCI and CSA are not countries, both are business bodies. Bad relationship of a one representative of a company can derail relationship in any business. CSA must have taken this calculated risk. Anyways CLT20 is just another private event by 3 boards, and its upto BCCI, CSA and CA to decide how to deal with it. International fixtures are not at stake and there are no details in this article about what exactly is BCCI's problem of working with Lorgat. Let the details unfold before concluding anything.

  • Dummy4 on July 28, 2013, 11:59 GMT

    As a simple thought experiment, let us just reverse positions here. What would the reaction have been if, say, Aus or SA administrators publicly expressed concerns about BCCI's own internal affairs from recently? I daresay the first reaction would've been outrage: who're you to tell our board how to handle its internal decisions? If that was the reaction, to turn around and praise the BCCI for openly interfering in SA's internal board decisions is pure hypocrisy.

    And lets face it, Lorgat has even less power now at CSA than he did when he was at the ICC. There is literally nothing he can do to the BCCI any more. This level of opposition to his appointment smacks of a vendetta, an opportunity to stick it to him.

    Finally, the Woolf report's main reforms will not be implemented any time soon. The DRS, problems and all, is only used on a series-by-series basis. The BCCI got everything it wanted. There's no need to turn into Michael Corleone (a la Godfather II) and wipe everyone out.

  • Dummy4 on July 28, 2013, 10:47 GMT

    Why is BCCI so concerned about appointments happening in other Cricket Boards? They need to keep their heads out of these matters.

  • aravind on July 28, 2013, 9:59 GMT

    If the BCCI argues and reduces the number of test matches to be played in the coming series, they will be the most hated board of all.

  • Dummy4 on July 28, 2013, 6:26 GMT

    @Posted by Nishantha Ratnayake on (July 27, 2013, 16:18 GMT). Do you have any idea, why India have played Sri Lanka so frequently, in recent years? Please ask someone in the Sri Lankan Board; and if you can get some insight into the reason, you would realise that it is easy to TALK big, but tough to ACT big!

  • Luka on July 27, 2013, 19:52 GMT

    I dont understand why expressing an opinion is causing such an uproar.Even during his tenure are ICC chief, Lorgat was not the best advocate of Indian cricket, and it was only because of BCCI's firm stand that things were not forced onto the game. BCCI is right in stating that the DRS does not improve the game much, and as seen presently in the Ashes, causes more bad blood than helps. Now that India is the place to make money, everyone wants a bite of the cherry and does not want BCCI to regulate how much they can siphon off. And what is this ignorant talk about two wrongs not making a right. Eng and Aus were brutally biased upto 20 years ago. No one cared or raised any concerns then. Now that BCCI is taking a stand on who they, THEMSELVES want to interact with, everyone has a problem. A cricketer naturally wants to make money in his playing years to save for the future 40+ yrs. Readers should put themselves in the player's shoes and then talk abt selflessness.

  • Sreekanth on July 27, 2013, 19:31 GMT

    Don't understand the BCCI hatred here. They did not influence any election, or any appointment, they just told CSA beforehand that Lorgat's appointment will impact relations due to the history they have with Lorgat and the Woolf report. People supporting woolf report, just want to forcefully take a bigger pie of BCCI money nothing else. It is standard communism nonsense.

    CSA still went ahead and appointed Lorgat, so I assume they don't care too much about relations with BCCI. So, why cry now? Frankly, looking at all the other cricket boards out there, BCCI definitely seems the best of the lot. Pak and SL boards are just shambles, CSA has been running without a Chief for 9 months, CA has put the Big bash in the middle of the Sheffield Shield for money, ECBs handling of Kevin Pieterson, Strauss was pathetic, NZ and its problems with Wright and Taylor are there for everyone to see. Lets not even talk about WI or Zim.

  • ian on July 27, 2013, 18:42 GMT

    Odd that the BCCI should still be throwing its weight around when it's deeply mired in all sorts of litigation as a result of the fall-out of the IPL fracas. Two countries may have elected presidents that don't exactly hit it off on a personal basis. No matter. It's the job of the two governments concerned to make it work for the possible benefit of all. India (I mean the BCCI) seems to have gone into seige mentality & consequently surrounds itself with all the paranoia that comes from having a reputation for using financial muscle ( here called 'inducements') in place of patient & coherent arguments. The BCCI is never close to being loved, or admired, or respected, because it's never bothered to court favour beyond proffering the purse-with-strings. Was a feudal lord ever really respected by his subjects if he never listened to them, tried to win their hearts & minds, even if he scattered a few coins around for the grateful peasantry to pick up while he watched.

  • Syed Asad on July 27, 2013, 17:18 GMT

    More than the other boards need support of BCCI, it is BCCI which need the support of other boards. And it is not in BCCI's monetary interest of having any home or away series being cancelled. One high profile series in India could fetch between $250 and $300 million in revenues to BCCI and its affiliates, including the broadcasters. Partners and affiliates, all have provided bank guarantees to BCCI in millions of $$$ for next five to ten years in sponsor-ships for home and away series.

    BCCI can cancel or alter the tour of SA but what is gonna happen if SA do the same for their return visit to India? The funny part of this whole saga is, if BCCI decide not to tour SA, the losses for BCCI affiliates will be much/much higher as compared to CSA and it's affiliates. BCCI is not happy with CSA but not willing to take any action against it's contracted players and affiliated clubs. With millions of $$$ in IPL and CLT20 at stake, banning CSA clubs not in the monetary interest of BCCI.

  • No featured comments at the moment.