Champions League news July 26, 2013

BCCI mulls ending CSA's stake in Champions League T20

Sidharth Monga and Firdose Moonda
119

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

  • kathirraj 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.

  • TheNick 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • indianfan535 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.

  • 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!

  • Triple_A 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.

  • yoohoo 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.

  • Nutcutlet 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.

  • tapooori 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.

  • kathirraj 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.

  • TheNick 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • indianfan535 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.

  • 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!

  • Triple_A 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.

  • yoohoo 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.

  • Nutcutlet 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.

  • tapooori 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.

  • on July 27, 2013, 17:16 GMT

    For my 2 penny worth, BCCI has an absolute fundamental right to object to Mr Lorgat's appointment but having said that CSA does have a right to appoint Mr Lorgat and then face up the music when other nations who do have a problem dealing with him as a person. Knowing all these issues if CSA thinks that it is worth going through this appointment and go through the painful journey, then so be it, it is their call.

    Like it or not, BCCI is money making machine and with that any nation who has that so called "power", will act/ play a powerful role. May I also add here with this "power" there comes a responsibility so BCCI also has to come to accept that side too!!.

    Bruce - I have a little time for your comments around DRS, as we all know that DRS does not really work and to demonstrate that in England (going through now with Ashes) we are just going through this wonderful DRS, that even confuses test umpires/ players.........I am not really sure who is in charge here - is it the umpires

  • tapooori on July 27, 2013, 17:15 GMT

    Whether or not BCCI is within its rights to agree or oppose the selection of an official of another board is debatable. However before that we should know why Haroon Logart became "Persona-Non-Grata" for BCCI. Haroon as CEO of ICC initiated following without taking the blessings of BCCI.

    1. DRS, 2. Woolf Commission's findings, 3. The involvement of Pricewaterhouse Coopers (with Lord Woolf Commission) 4. One small concern from BCCI was Haroon's over exposure to media.

    The main role of cricket boards is to manage the cricket affairs in their countries. In order not to become a political wing, Woolf commission proposed, boards should be democratically elected and should not be under any governmental influence. BCCI, though an independent board however always influenced and/or headed by politically motivated businessmen. Interfering in CSA's business, I believe is politics. Just like the selection of Sriramakrishnan?

    Why BCCI will not, repeat not cancel the SA tour? continue....

  • tests_the_best on July 27, 2013, 17:10 GMT

    Trying to control who gets on the ICC panel is one thing but I fail to see how BCCI can dictate to individual boards who should or should not be the head. Matters are getting out of hand. As an Indian fan I am concerned about how BCCI is using its clout in the cricketing world. It's not good for world cricket for one particular entity to have so much influence and try to dictate internal matters of another country.

  • ODI_BestFormOfCricket on July 27, 2013, 16:33 GMT

    @bruce-mclennan: I think you are immature from following lines in your comment, 'we don't like 1 person in that organisation so we will hold it against the entire organisation'. How could it possbl 2 negotiate with a person who had always against ur interest and he is just not a another member, he s goin 2 be a BOSS of RSA and he is the one going to take all decision in cricket SA.

    DRS is where BCCI and lorgat dared each other. BCCI criticised accuracy of DRS, aftr d 2 ashes supporters of DRS too accepting the fact that process of implementing DRS needs to be altered.

  • Sanjiyan on July 27, 2013, 16:26 GMT

    I dont understand what the BCCI's problem is. Their beef with Haroon dates back to when he was doing completely different things, and on that issue they got what they wanted. Haroon has specifically said he wants to mend the relationship he has with the BCCI. And there basicly refusing his offer and are contemplating(read threatening) to remove CSA's stakes in the CLT20. They have every right to expres 'concerns' with Haroons appointment, but by throwing his act of goodwill in CSA's face(thats how i see it) is downright childish behaviour

  • on July 27, 2013, 16:18 GMT

    Time has come to stop this BCCI menace for the best interest of cricket. All others should get-together despite their financial strenghth then they will come come behind. They cannot survive without others.

  • sachin_vvsfan on July 27, 2013, 15:43 GMT

    We Indian fans don't approve this sort of behavior from BCCI (a private entity headed by some myopic people). I would actually suggest CSA(and AUS) to back out from CLT20 (which i think is less interesting now-a-days anyways). Let us see how TV rights work then. BCCI needs others as much as others need them

    @getsetgopk, @CricketFirstLove and other pak fans I know you take every opportunity to ridicule us but don't stereotype every Indian fan as the eye of BCCI

  • on July 27, 2013, 15:38 GMT

    For all those that agree with the BCCI , have you asked yourself why they have "issues" with Haroon Lorgat. Why the BCCI and no other cricket board or prominent cricketing persons ? Whats the agenda behind it ? Could it be because of DRS and the Woolf report oh could it ? One possibility is that they don't like Lorgat because as president of the ICC he tried to push through DRS and the Woolf report. Could the Woolf report be the major issue here oh could it ? Could it be because the BCCI would have ended up with less power and control over the global game if the Woolf report recommendations were implemented which Lorgat was pushing for ? Putting that aside for the moment isnt it possibly just a little bit immature to say we don't like 1 person in that organisation so we will hold it against the entire organisation ? Think about it ....

  • ProdigyA on July 27, 2013, 15:32 GMT

    Haters will always hate...no matter what. BCCI contributes 75% of cricketing money but haters will still hate even if the contribution is 100%. Even if u don't give any reason they will still find some silly excuse to hate... So no point convincing the haters, it's not even worth trying. BCCI has every right to express their views, if u can't take it it's ur problem not BCCI's. Way to go BCCI, U ROCK.

  • on July 27, 2013, 15:24 GMT

    Those who say, BCCI should NOT bully the other boards are conveniently forgetting that others have no business to bully BCCI either. By the way, I am NO BCCI fan. But, I believe BCCI have every right to decide whom they will deal with and whom they will not; the only thing is that they should not tell others what they should do!

  • NeoTheSaviour on July 27, 2013, 15:24 GMT

    Protecting somebody's interest is not "reaching low". If they dont like somebody they tell on face. CSA is protecting it's interest and BCCI theirs. Whats the problem??

  • on July 27, 2013, 15:19 GMT

    @CricketFirstLove. It is easy to TALK the talk. It is tough to ACT the talk! By the way, it is even easier to talk the talk under a pseudonym! You have just now proved it to yourself!

  • on July 27, 2013, 15:15 GMT

    CSA should realise, that business relationship is important in the real world. Cordial personal equations, especially at the very top, is part of it. South Africa has so many business houses, both successful and not so successful. Can't CSA learn by observing them? Or, are they thinking that they know everything, and there is no need to learn anything from the business world.

    Cricket is business, for quite some time. It is fact, no one can escape from. Even when Lorgat was pushing DRS, he had been effectively lobbying for the businesses, who own those respective technologies? Lorgat being a very intelligent person should know that!

    CSA can NOT have the cake and eat it too!

  • vish2020 on July 27, 2013, 14:55 GMT

    CSA wants money that's the issue here. BCCI said we don't like lorgat. They can say that what wrong in that? Media makes big deal about BCCI but in old days when ECB was playing games then nobody cared.

  • arnie66 on July 27, 2013, 13:59 GMT

    Agree with BCCI on this one. They can always indicate to other countries that the relationship would be affected if a certain individual is appointed. CSA still has the right to take its own decision. Doesn't this happen all the time in business where companies indicate their concern to partners/customers etc on having to deal with a particular individual in the other company ? As BCCI has hada difficult relationship with Haroon Lorgat when he was head of ICC, it is to be expected that things are not going to turn rosy suddenly (Btw Haroon Lorgat is a south african of Indian descent, his parents hailing from Gujarat)

  • Ravishastri848 on July 27, 2013, 13:56 GMT

    I think the BCCI is making the right decisions. Our focus should solely be on what is beneficial for India, and not worry about what the rest of the world thinks. After all the rest of the cricketing world would not be able to survive without BCCI money. If other cricketing boards/personalities/teams want to criticize India, our approach should be to stop playing with them, and stop the money flowing. Eventually they will come back to the BCCI for forgiveness. Of the pitch we are the driving force in world cricket. On the pitch we are the best team by some distance in all formats, India should surely stop playing second tier teams that are clearly not in their caliber.

  • Stateside_Steve on July 27, 2013, 13:32 GMT

    It was BCCIs fault for thinking that they had an ally in CSA. BCCI suggested anyone but Lograt as they don't have a good working relationship. CSA went ahead and still got Lograt. I don't see what he brings to the table but it is CSAs call. Lot of the posters are saying that it is the internal affairs of CSA and BCCI shouldn't interfere. I agree, also it is within BCCIs interest to decide how many games they play in SA. They have the right, they can't go back on the number of tests played but one days and T20s are always negotiable. CSA just can't dictate BCCI to play 7 one days and try to reap the associated windfall and think it is easy money.

  • on July 27, 2013, 13:06 GMT

    those who r blaming only BCCI are naive and far from reality,fact is all the boards are responsible for such mess,if they are against BCCI then y not unite against BCCI and stop their bullying,but NO nobody will do that because it hurts their interests monetarily..so blame goes to everybody...

  • KapilJoshi on July 27, 2013, 13:06 GMT

    To people criticizing BCCI - Isnt this like a situation where you want to play with your friend but not with your friends brother since you have issues with him? So you tell your friend, I can play with you if you dont bring your brother? BCCI is just doing that. They are openly saying they have a problem with this person and will not like to deal with him. While BCCI should not force anyone, others should not also force BCCI to like or work with anyone. Its ironic everyone wants BCCIs money but dont want to respect BCCI

  • on July 27, 2013, 12:19 GMT

    This is Ridiculous BEhaviour by the BCCI I want to Remind tHem that they are here bcoz of Cricket but Cricket can be Played Without them How Can you want a person to not to be the president of any other board.if thats the case that we as cricket lovers demand BCCI to Remove JAgmohan Dalmia Because we didnt like his decisions

  • brusselslion on July 27, 2013, 11:58 GMT

    At a simple level, I'd argue that there is nothing wrong in the BCCI saying to CSA: "We'd prefer you picked someone other than Lorgat as your CE", however, CSA's response: "Thanks for the input, but we think we'll appoint him anyway" should be the end of the matter. It is CSA's decision.

    The Champions League contract is one for CSA/BCCI to sort out between themselves; no doubt, the ICC would mediate if asked: I'm not sure what contractural arrangments govern the 'Future Tours' schedule, but the ICC should insist that India honours its' SA tour committment. So far as I'm aware, Mr. Lorgat (nor anyone at CSA), have broken any laws, taken any morally repugnant e.g racist/ sexist actions, or made any anti-Indian comments/actions: Simply not liking the opposing board's CE is not a good enough reason to cancel a tour.

    It's refreshing to see that, with the very 'odd' exception, the overwhelming majority of Indian posters here have also been critical of the BCCI stance.

  • gdavis on July 27, 2013, 11:39 GMT

    A sad situation indeed. No country should be allowed to dictate such terms to another. I hope India with all their power realizes that they need the rest of the world to play cricket against. India now, in five years who will be the dictator, hence the Woolf report, all nations must fight for it only if it prevents other nations from the arrogance being displayed, and that of past 'super powers'.

  • AJ_Tiger86 on July 27, 2013, 10:37 GMT

    BCCI have every right to express their "concern" about the CEO of another fellow cricket board with whom they have to maintain a working relationship. It's upto CSA to decide how they will respond to those concerns. BCCI are not forcing CSA to remove Lorgat. It's quite the opposite. CSA want BCCI money badly, and that's why they are making such a big deal out of it.

  • pon009 on July 27, 2013, 10:19 GMT

    hi i dont understand why people moan about bcci powers.if any member try to isolate bcci for whatever reason cricket without india or BCCI is not viable.do realise that.After a long time people realise about BCCI stand about DRS after ashes DRS disaster

  • a4abhik on July 27, 2013, 10:01 GMT

    @simpleguy2008, If Lorgat calls off the tour, that will be minor loss for BCCI, but will be disaster for CSA for sure. So don't just speculate on baseless assumptions.

  • Stark62 on July 27, 2013, 9:54 GMT

    Ramdin was banned for going against the "spirit of the game" but didn't Broad do the same?

    The bcci should try to make the international circuit a fair ground, then no one will mind what they do (except Aus, Eng and maybe, SA).

  • CricketFirstLove on July 27, 2013, 9:51 GMT

    Interest of the game should reign supreme. And interest of the game is to take all cricketing nations together. Just because one nation has more money gives it no right to dictate terms to the rest so that one member's ideas are implemented. India's stand on objection to DRS was totally unjustified. ICC buckled under BCCI pressure. That was the first mistake and a sign of weakness.

    They should at least now stand firm. In fact all cricketing nations should stand firm in favor of CSA on principle. India has no business to dictate terms to another member nation. No. India loves to bully in all international matters be it its relations with neighbors - all, or in cricket. Time for ICC to talk tough and worst come to worst de-recognize IPL and put a restriction on foreign players to play in India. As it is no more than four foreign players can play in a team. Let BCCI then conduct a local IPL.

  • muzika_tchaikovskogo on July 27, 2013, 9:30 GMT

    Just when you think they couldn't sink any lower, the BCCI surprises you by reaching a new low. They're the USA of cricket. The BCCI's conduct is a constant and massive embarassment for we Indian supporters of the game.

  • iccchariman on July 27, 2013, 9:29 GMT

    Guys- Why so much uproar in this. I stand with BCCI!! They have only said if Mr. Lorgat is their chief, they do not want a tie up with CSA. what is wrong in it?? Isnt it BCCI's right to decide what they want to do? it is upto CSA to decide on this. BCCI has never told them to appoint anybody or not to appoint any one. It is bcos other countries dont want to spoil a relationship with BCCI. BCCI has never told any one to stand with them.Look at the facts and then comment. BCCI can take any decisions what they want to like wise other boards can take their decisions! End of discussion :)

  • hhillbumper on July 27, 2013, 9:20 GMT

    The fact that BCCI feel they have the right to challenge another countries appointment just goes to show that power without responsibility leads to events like this.Indian cricket is entering a very dark period. The old card about imperialism is a mockery. Because England once behaved in a certain way generations ago does not validate the current BCCI position. By that logic it would be fine for people to keep bombing each other for ever. It is a ludicrous argument used by people who see everything in a nationalistic light. This game is more important than one Board deciding it runs the world.

  • CricLook on July 27, 2013, 8:55 GMT

    Cricket board around the world should united against BCCI. They try to bully all. From games perspective to internal affairs of other board , from commercial rights to even broadcasting channels or online content. You just find how BCCI controls the game.. all the channels are occupied with indian cricket programes , even cricinfo prioritize an indian domestic or less important issue than more important internal cricket affair. Somewhere , someday it should stop to save the fairness and good of cricket

  • on July 27, 2013, 8:42 GMT

    People (and organisations) with power throw their weight around. That is a given. The meek have to learn to counter it. That's the way it rolls. Quite another matter that we Indians are not used to being in positions of power and do not very well know how to throw that weight around. Incidentally, BCCI's stand on DRS is getting more and more vindicated. So I would go with BCCI on that any day.

  • baghels.a on July 27, 2013, 8:34 GMT

    While i agree behaviour shown by BCCI if these alleged reports are true is appaling and indicative of blatant misuse of power , but i strongly disagree with some posters who state all other nations should unite and boycott India, i am sorry to say all other nations need India and not other way around , if pushed to a wall we should go American pro-sports way and form 20 or so franchises who will play T-20,ODI's, Tests and increase the foriegn players qouta in each team to 5 or6, i am telling you now all the best internatinal players will play in such a league.We all seen how Madrid v/s Barca and other top European leagues are so popular and American pro sports atleast in USA.

    I repeat these kind of actions are condemnable and there should be no interference in other cricket board affairs but sad realiy as we see in football / other sports big clubs call the shots and only way to check them is to have a competent,fair and all powerful Governing body which is sadly lacking in cricket

  • on July 27, 2013, 8:22 GMT

    @ Zaccharia - So, if England and Aus can dictate terms, so can India. Personally, 2 wrongs do not make a right. But, if Eng and Aus don't admit that were wrong, then even BCCI is not wrong.

  • aditya.continous on July 27, 2013, 8:21 GMT

    The biggest financer of world cricket today is BCCI...they are in a position to get their things their way, which ofcourse they will...We know how fair the English and Australian teams were when they used to rule the roost...Unites States today is the most powerful country in the world...it gets is way in whatever it seems best in the interest of its nation...same goes for BCCI...

  • omairhr on July 27, 2013, 8:14 GMT

    To the commentators mentioning dominance of Eng and Aus a couple of decades ago: Two wrongs do not make a right.

  • jackthelad on July 27, 2013, 8:05 GMT

    I don't think BCCI's antagonism has much if anything to do with the DRS, which is not compulsory and is utilised patchily in any event (usually as a result of financial considerations). The Woolf Report, however, had as one of its main platforms the widening of representation on the ICC Board and Committees for the 'lesser' cricketing nations, and consequent dilution of the power of the Big Guns to control world cricket; it equally insists on an increase of transparency in the way that major decisions are reached by the ICC. I can't see BCCI, as it is currently constituted, ever agreeing to either of these provisions, hence their antipathy to Lorgat, who has been a strong advocate of these changes. My guess is that this will all turn out to be a storm in a teacup, but it's one more indication of the way the current BCCI believes it can hold the cricketing world to ransom because of its financial clout. Such a situation cannot be accepted.

  • WaryAry on July 27, 2013, 7:38 GMT

    CSA should call off the tour. So naive. There is a very good reason why CA and ECB obey BCCI. If you cant understand it fine, atleast dont make the mistake of undermining it, This is true inspite of the fact that other than BCCI, CA and ECB generate enough revenues to be completely self-sustaining. Other boards buckle under pressure you say. Well then shame on them and shame on their supporters for their pitiable plight. Is it because of BCCI that sponsors dont invest in your country's cricket. The point is simple. Other than BCCI, ECB and CA, the other boards are just incompetent which is reflected by their economic plight. If you feel so bad about the state of affairs, whine on you crazy ...

  • on July 27, 2013, 6:47 GMT

    Dashgar, what's even wrong with England and Australia dictating terms. There would be no significant international competition without those initial two nations. They're also traditionally the most successful nations (statistically).

  • venkatesh018 on July 27, 2013, 6:28 GMT

    This should be the last straw. England, Australia and other Permanent members of the ICC should stand united with S Africa and say enough is enough.

  • Dashgar on July 27, 2013, 4:41 GMT

    This argument that Australia and England used to dictate terms so what goes around comes around is rubbish. If that's the case then why aren't SA, SL, Windies, Pakistan and NZ allowed to bully sides. India isn't evening any ledger, they are taking over to the detriment of all other boards and to cricket in general. If India were interested in fairness they would only interfere in Aus and England, yet these are the nations they interfere with the least. They bully small boards constantly.

  • mihir_nam on July 27, 2013, 4:32 GMT

    Board which can interfere with internal elections of other countries Board..That board can do anything. Even Set up games and make their team win every game .

  • simpleguy2008 on July 27, 2013, 4:27 GMT

    Now the Haroon Logart the Cheif Executive of CSA now he should go for the DRS in the series and if BCCI again reject then Haroon Logart should call of the tour

  • dukhimanmere on July 27, 2013, 3:53 GMT

    I felt cheated reading this article. What were the concerns that BCCI had with Lorgat appointment?

    @SurlyCynic: well, we can't judge BCCI by this article. This article isn't even telling us story from one side.

  • on July 27, 2013, 3:46 GMT

    y clt20 not been played in australia.everytime india and sa has hosted clt20.its morethen 21 years were a icc event hosted in nz and australia

  • on July 27, 2013, 3:34 GMT

    BCCI seems intent on creating enemies all round -regardless of long term consequences. A time might well come when the hatred for BCCI will outweigh the lure of lucre. If the rest of the world decides to unitedly bite the bullet and not to play India, where will the revenues come from? Corporates will not think twice about ditching BCCI should such an exigency arise.

  • Tmalik on July 27, 2013, 3:34 GMT

    For CSA and CA I would say "you reap what you sow", BCCI is become like spanish BULL let out of cage, So world be careful... They needed to be isolated for little while and they will come in place. BCCI is nobody to tell the world how and where to play cricket... but i dont think any of CSA, CA or ECB or even ICC for that matter got enough courage to stand up to BCCI, all are after money so keep bowing to BCCI and get bullied every here and then!!!! BCCI is just a member not regulator!!!!!! Taimur - Australia

  • on July 27, 2013, 3:29 GMT

    Don't know why Indians are behaving like a kid. Be it about DRS or be it about Haroon Lorgat.

  • on July 27, 2013, 3:26 GMT

    After tendulkar retires! throw these useless guys out of BCCI and make sachin the head of bCCI! and also Include dravid and laxman then BCCI will be better along with other Cricket Boards in the world !That is the best solution right NOW

  • ReverseSweepIndia on July 27, 2013, 3:23 GMT

    @SurlyCynic, we Indian feels the same way, it getting way too much. Individuals can have problem with other individual but to involve whole institution in this is not acceptable. With power comes responsibility and I do not think that is as hard to understand.

  • on July 27, 2013, 3:18 GMT

    There is no way this BCCI will mend it's ways on it's own. The only way to permanently stop this is to make ICC financially independent from the percentage of funding it gets from the BCCI. All the boards should unite against BCCI to end this. Threatening again and again to cancel tours will not only hurt other boards financial interest but also of BCCI. It's high time BCCI must be taught a lesson.

  • nlegendbucks on July 27, 2013, 3:06 GMT

    @surlyCynic: Why it is Hard to digest this facts when even now governments in less developed countries are formed on opinion of dominant countries, it is prevalent even in Football, we prevail over others because we have got the dominance in Cricket Hierarchy. It is Simple as that & you are talking in a way that vouches that prior to India no one dominated Cricket Hierarchy in such a way, England & Australia both have dominated Cricket Hierarchy at sometime, its just that you dont like getting dominated by a country which got ahead of you in last decade in all parameters.

  • Edassery on July 27, 2013, 3:04 GMT

    Don't know what BCCI think of themselves - really arrogant bunch! SA rendered great helping hand to quickly organize IPL 2 at a very short notice when India had issues in domestic hosting. SA's CLT share was based on such mutual cooperation in the past. SA and Indian boards have been in good terms ever since SA came back to International cricket a couple of decades ago. If BCCI keeps flexing its muscles purely due to its recently (read 10 years) acquired money power, please note that all that is not permanent...

  • getsetgopk on July 27, 2013, 2:48 GMT

    I mean is it even legal if not outright diabolical to ask a fellow board that we wont play sports with you if you select a particular individual to run your board? Haron was elected to CEO of ICC and he did his job which is by all accounts, the betterment of the sport and if one board does not agree, well good luck to them but people disagree all the time that doesn't mean you stop playing the sport. That is really astonishing to see the Indian's feeling 'uncomfortable' over an independent board's decision as to who should run it. The whole point of playing sports is honesty, integrity, courage and character and if SA yield to the 'demands' of BCCI there will be no point in playing cricket to begin with.

  • on July 27, 2013, 2:45 GMT

    What really is the issue with Logart's appointment?

  • on July 27, 2013, 2:45 GMT

    @SurlyCynic, We wouldn't really care about that. But yeah, just because BCCI owns money doesn't mean they own everyone else. But, who's gonna tell that to them?

  • DC75 on July 27, 2013, 2:44 GMT

    @SurlyCynic, just like how indians felt when they were told what and what not to do with their lives and country, cheers mate

  • Aashi_sl on July 27, 2013, 2:34 GMT

    here is a solution. why cant ICC allow BCCI nominate the Chief of cricket boards of all cricket playing nations ? then finally BCCI will be happy. after all that s the whole objective of playing cricket these days. BCCI can start with appointing Srinivasan to CSA.

  • Thomas_Ratnam on July 27, 2013, 2:31 GMT

    What more needs to be said. BCCI is behaving as expected!

  • Dilmah82 on July 27, 2013, 2:28 GMT

    This is rediculous how the BCCI can dictate how other boards are run and who they comprise. Where is the gutless ICC? Keeping quite for handsome money?

  • crick_wizard on July 27, 2013, 2:28 GMT

    Why is BCCI meddling with the internal matters of CSA?

  • on July 27, 2013, 2:18 GMT

    Exactly, BCCI has no right to poke it's nose in internal matters of other countries..., BCCI should behave like professional unit, rather than "I don't like your face" attitude....

  • RaadQ on July 27, 2013, 2:15 GMT

    BCCI is sending an obvious message: "do as you're told or suffer the consequences". A bunch of bullies in suits.

  • Mumbai_Kar on July 27, 2013, 2:11 GMT

    Please remember that BCCI is not India, is not elected by Indians and does not represent any Indian views. BCCI is a private incorporation (yes, that's true), with the sole purpose of generating profits for its stakeholders, using a sporting team. All of BCCI actions are towards that profit motive. If Haroon Lorgat appeared a threat to it, they react, albeit crassly. Does any Indian 'approve' of it, or is 'impressed' by it? No, but that's just the same as Dell corporation's relationship with the average US citizen : nothing. So Indian people cannot help the BCCI's behaviour, nor change it. We are just happy when 'our' team wins, and sad when it doesn't.

  • on July 27, 2013, 2:07 GMT

    All about the money ..BCCI has the money and all other boards must have to comply to its demands .. ICC should change its name to BCCI

  • on July 27, 2013, 1:59 GMT

    You're absolutely right SurlyCynic. As an Indian, I don't like this at all. I believe most of the Indian fans also won't entertain this move by BCCI. Said that, they're the biggest powerhouse among their counterparts, obviously are (mis)using that advantage.

  • on July 27, 2013, 1:56 GMT

    The BCCI needs to grow up fast. This whole saga is nothing short of bullying, with the BCCI trying to flex its muscles over other associations, something it has been increasingly trying to do.

  • RajaHindustani911 on July 27, 2013, 1:54 GMT

    very hard to say but must admit that BCCI is a bully and is very selfish.

  • fairwicket on July 27, 2013, 1:31 GMT

    There are some individuals and boards that have very predictive and biased (depends on which side you are) behaviors in cricket. Each board has their fair share. There seems to be a lot of bad blood that starts within ICC and spills over into daily routines of the boards. It is troubling and unfortunate that BCCI thinks it can influence how other boards should / can run their cricket boards.

  • Dashgar on July 27, 2013, 1:29 GMT

    Well I don't know how this works. Surely BCCI have to buy out CSA, they can't just fire them from their stake. If they did CSA could sue them for millions of dollars. If BCCI continue these tactics then something will give eventually. The cricket world shouldn't be ruled by a dictator, it should be a community. I'm sure even the Indian fans are outraged by this.

  • billNCat on July 27, 2013, 1:28 GMT

    @ SurlyCynic, et al: I'm not a big fan of BCCI. But, how do you know their reasons for opposing Lorgat? Up until a few years ago, let alone elect heads of boards, the Eng/Aus combine pretty much dictated terms. What goes around comes around I guess but I must say how the un blocked posts on this forum usually come out bashing Indians, as if the BCCI were a body elected by the billion plus population of India to represent its views. In fact, the BCCI is still a private entity whose top brand is making a lot of people a lot of money the world over and hence the aforementioned parties keep mum. By the way, if one were to gather the number of Indians who actually are anti BCCI, that collection would outnumber the entire populations of AUS/ENG/RSA/WIS combined!

  • on July 27, 2013, 1:25 GMT

    i agree with surlyCynic, its none of BCCIS' business who is CSA's head, they should stop crying and bullying. they should mind their own business, they think they can buy everything with money.!

  • sgma on July 27, 2013, 1:17 GMT

    If the only issue is Mr. Lorgat's appointment, then BCCI should mind their own business. As an Indian, I criticize BCCI's conduct.

  • on July 27, 2013, 1:16 GMT

    This is really getting out of hand. I was really a supporter of BCCI until hearing this news. It is none of BCCI's business on who is appointed in a different board they have crossed the line. CSA should not give in to BCCI's demand. I am an Indian,if I get angry hearing this news, I could guess how a SA fan will feel.

  • ODI_BestFormOfCricket on July 27, 2013, 1:10 GMT

    @surlycync it's expected one, bcz horgat as icc head always gone against bcci's intrest. bcci has long relationship with rsa, so bcci had told rsa that his appointment would effect our relationship. But rsa didnt mind. very simple if rsa want horgat, bcci dont want rsa. This is not about bulling rsa to oppoint the favourable person, it is about protecting bcc's intrest.

  • RameshSubramaniam on July 27, 2013, 1:09 GMT

    It is not BCCI bullying. It is SA who need BCCI money. If SA go-ahead, no one can stop them but why should BCCI share their income?

  • themightyfenoughtys on July 27, 2013, 1:07 GMT

    call their bluff CSA. South Africa go out of the champions league, Star will use as excuse to cancel the disastorous tv rights deal for champions league. BCCI will lose hundreds of millions of dollars. They might not like Lorgat's independence - but post Srinivasan - they don't care that much.

  • BravoBravo on July 27, 2013, 1:02 GMT

    Its only the money which is talking, there IPL is failing in near future, if there is no foreign players are playing in IPL, IPL would have been demised by now. But IPL end is coming sooner than later.

  • on July 27, 2013, 0:51 GMT

    I am an Indian. The behaviour of BCCI has been nothing short of shameful. In any sport, you respect the rules and authorities. More than anything you stick to your own word. When we agreed that boards will nominate ICC chair turn by turn, we don't pick who others should nominate when its their turn. BCCI has been known to be arrogant, for example, they dared say that players play for BCCI and not for India. Outrageous. About DRS, we should just accept it. Mercenaries in BCCI are responsible for negative publicity in India that DRS enjoys. Their reasons are more financial than cricket related. Nobody opposes them because they have some of the most influential people in the Nation at the helm or controlling from behind the scenes.

  • IndianSRTfan on July 27, 2013, 0:48 GMT

    Posted by SurlyCynic on (July 26, 2013, 18:36 GMT): I don't disagree with you that BCCI is being bullish here but Indian people don't have a say in who runs BCCI.

    Lorgat is no saint neither are the BCCI. I still remember during his days at the ICC his attempts to blame BCCI for their opposition to DRS so no surprises.

    Honestly this is one dumb T20 league organized for all participatory boards to make some easy money. It has no national identity for anyone to relate with and it is a lame attempt to copy football's champions league. If this league gets shut down, I'll be very happy.

    CSA should just do what is better for them, no matter how powerful BCCI is, no way they are gonna cancel any SA-Ind tours. Public interest in this and coming such series is high and will remain so. Currently BCCI is not exactly in any favor with Indian public to take drastic steps. Recent unpleasant events are not forgotten.

    So hope CSA are served by Lorgat in a better way than he did at the ICC.

  • on July 27, 2013, 0:31 GMT

    BCCI is a joke. Dangling carrots and threatening to take them away in order to maintain control of world cricket. Take care of your own affairs and leave other boards to do the same.

  • anur8g on July 27, 2013, 0:27 GMT

    @SurlyCynic:100% agreed with you, I think Cricket Australia and ECB should step back themselves from this tournament, only BCCI's team should play CLT20 :) Stupid board

  • knpradeep77 on July 27, 2013, 0:24 GMT

    BCCI is not doing anything good for india or indian cricket, by these kind of actions, they are creating a bad image for our country. How will we feel if some other country advice us not to let a particular person be the prime minister of our country?

  • SnowSnake on July 27, 2013, 0:19 GMT

    In any business whoever owns the maximum shares owns the company. If CSA wants to have its way then bring in more business. Otherwise, BCCI reigns supreme. I just don't buy a minority stakeholder having its way.

  • chandajaan on July 27, 2013, 0:16 GMT

    I would not only blame BCCI but also all Indian Fans as i don;t see any comments on this article. BCCI is Culprit of all this. Where the Heck is ICC on this. There should be a respect for all the ICC Board members decision. And no one should be black mailing other boards what to do.

  • lazytrini on July 27, 2013, 0:13 GMT

    The rest of the cricketing world needs to start doing their thing regardless of the BCCI. Major teams like Eng, Aus and SA need to schedule full test series during the IPL. The power and money behind Indian cricket is one of the worse things to happen to the world game.

  • Crikoot on July 27, 2013, 0:09 GMT

    BCCI acting like a child -- with a little bit of rich makes BCCI so much arrogant blind and disrespectful of reasonable opinion and decisions. They want to live in the past. They did not even bother to change their name from BCCI to ICB ( when others did ) - simply because they live in the past.

  • avis1001 on July 26, 2013, 23:55 GMT

    @SurlyCynic - although I say it is not comfortable, but at present there is no other way !!! Its all rich - who control the entire world !!!

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:54 GMT

    What CSA does or appoint to anyone, who is BCCI to talk about? It looks they want to reign all over the world. All other nations should boycott the BCCI for such unexpected approach.

  • mumbaiguy79 on July 26, 2013, 23:37 GMT

    @SurlyCynic BCCI doesn't represent Indian people and Indian people don't represent BCCI. This is pure politics and gets played all the time when you have lot of money at stake.

  • snbirdi on July 26, 2013, 23:36 GMT

    As an Indian, I'm kind of embarrased by this behaviour of BCCI. You have no right to interfere in other boards' matters. ICC is a spineless organisation for even allowing BCCI to threaten to pull out of a series planned by the FTP. This is getting ridiculous.

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:35 GMT

    I'm Indian and this is absolutely unacceptable! We would never tolerate some other country telling us how to run our board. I know there will be trolls saying we control revenue so we get to call the shots but even at the peak of the English-Aussie domination of the ICC, they never told a member board who to appoint as their head. Remember...what goes around comes around.

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:29 GMT

    that's absurd how can BCCI dictate who to become chairperson of another board? its really embarrassing for us.

  • here2rock on July 26, 2013, 23:29 GMT

    India should mind their own interests, if that means breaking ties with South Africa then be it. Haroon Lorgat is a known trouble maker.

  • ARad on July 26, 2013, 23:25 GMT

    Woolf report wants ICC to achieve more independence. It does not want a single person to hold multiple positions of authority. According to the link in this article, N Srinivasan rejected these changes when the report was released. BCCI now even shows personal acrimony towards those who promoted its implementation. If we love cricket, we should not condone this.

    This is the SECOND WAKE UP CALL to all cricket fans. After the gambling allegations during IPL and the subsequent political maneuverings, most observers realized that concentration of power could easily become detrimental to better/transparent governance within BCCI. This episode equally illustrates why it is bad for one entity to have too much power within ICC. In other words, we need transparency and professional management for ICC as recommended by the Woolf report (instead of all the behind the scenes power brokering a la BCCI.)

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:21 GMT

    Good job CSA. An one man show came to end. This will be a good lesson for those who are willing to put their noses in to others'. An identity should not be ruled out anyway. Thanks Lorgat, a fearless man.

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:17 GMT

    @SurlyCynic

    They already do that. And moreover there are always fines against Indian players for bowling slow or saying something on the field.

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:15 GMT

    Don't Understand such an Interference, What BCCI want?

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:14 GMT

    @SurlyCynic - The shoe doesn't have to be on the other foot to think this is a bad idea. I'm Indian and I think this sort of bullying is totally unacceptable.

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:07 GMT

    Agree it is going a bit too far. But, the clout is financial. USA does this to the whole world because of its financial clout. Will it ever change in the world scenario? Not for next few decades. Will it ever change in cricket? Never.

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:03 GMT

    Who is to say what stake should a country have in CLT20 -- I wish for total disintegration of their relationship so CLT20 is just IPL-Scene2

  • on July 26, 2013, 22:42 GMT

    In the interest of sports in general and cricket in particular BCCI should tone down their high handedness.

  • Raas76 on July 26, 2013, 22:25 GMT

    I don't think BCCI is telling anybody who to elect, rather they raised a concern that Mr. Lorgat and BCCI were not on great terms and if you want to do business with BCCI we would rather work with another candidate that doesn't have that baggage. We see that every where, you send the best guy/gal possible if you want to do business with somebody and not the one they don't like.

  • TheUltimateTruth on July 26, 2013, 22:17 GMT

    BCCI is protecting its interests using its power of persuasion. I see nothing wrong. CSA should persuade back if they have what it takes. In the long run India needs SA, Aus, and Eng to schedule interesting matches for the Indian public. That should be SA's leverage if they can get things coordinated with the other teams.

  • CricLand on July 26, 2013, 22:02 GMT

    @SurlyCynic, I'm a proud Indian, I don't like this act from BCCI no matter what the reasons are. We shouldn't meddle with other board's internal matter. BTW, don't hold all indian people accountable for couple of individuals making stupid decisions. Not every indian (majority of us) don't necessarily agree with BCCI arrogance and actions.

  • JetsFanInDenver on July 26, 2013, 21:54 GMT

    India is not bullying anywhere here. The state of affairs in world cricket are such that there are tournaments like CLT20 where multiple boards have joint stakes. So its not unreasonable to expect that you get to work with someone you have a good working relationship. If you want bullying behavior you have to go all the way back to the 80's when Australia and England controlled the state of affairs at ICC and they used to just change the rules of the game to just suit their needs. In the mid 80's both Australian and English teams were beaten black and blue by the West Indian pace attack. So what did they do ? They changed the rule to allow only one bouncer per over effectively ending the West Indian domination by a cowardly off the field move.

  • GavtheKiwi on July 26, 2013, 21:48 GMT

    SurlyCynic is spot on - the meddling here is a disgrace. Countries pick their cricket bosses, other countries have to work with them for the good of the game... simple.

  • Cric_Freak0 on July 26, 2013, 20:59 GMT

    I completely agree with you. I'm an Indian cricket fan. But I don't like the way our cricket board functions.. What has BCCI got to do with the appointment of the head of CSA. Every board has a right to share it's opinion when it comes to ICC heads selection, not other nations board members.

  • SurlyCynic on July 26, 2013, 18:36 GMT

    This bullying behaviour of the BCCI is getting out of hand. How would Indian people feel if other countries told them who to elect as head of their board?

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • SurlyCynic on July 26, 2013, 18:36 GMT

    This bullying behaviour of the BCCI is getting out of hand. How would Indian people feel if other countries told them who to elect as head of their board?

  • Cric_Freak0 on July 26, 2013, 20:59 GMT

    I completely agree with you. I'm an Indian cricket fan. But I don't like the way our cricket board functions.. What has BCCI got to do with the appointment of the head of CSA. Every board has a right to share it's opinion when it comes to ICC heads selection, not other nations board members.

  • GavtheKiwi on July 26, 2013, 21:48 GMT

    SurlyCynic is spot on - the meddling here is a disgrace. Countries pick their cricket bosses, other countries have to work with them for the good of the game... simple.

  • JetsFanInDenver on July 26, 2013, 21:54 GMT

    India is not bullying anywhere here. The state of affairs in world cricket are such that there are tournaments like CLT20 where multiple boards have joint stakes. So its not unreasonable to expect that you get to work with someone you have a good working relationship. If you want bullying behavior you have to go all the way back to the 80's when Australia and England controlled the state of affairs at ICC and they used to just change the rules of the game to just suit their needs. In the mid 80's both Australian and English teams were beaten black and blue by the West Indian pace attack. So what did they do ? They changed the rule to allow only one bouncer per over effectively ending the West Indian domination by a cowardly off the field move.

  • CricLand on July 26, 2013, 22:02 GMT

    @SurlyCynic, I'm a proud Indian, I don't like this act from BCCI no matter what the reasons are. We shouldn't meddle with other board's internal matter. BTW, don't hold all indian people accountable for couple of individuals making stupid decisions. Not every indian (majority of us) don't necessarily agree with BCCI arrogance and actions.

  • TheUltimateTruth on July 26, 2013, 22:17 GMT

    BCCI is protecting its interests using its power of persuasion. I see nothing wrong. CSA should persuade back if they have what it takes. In the long run India needs SA, Aus, and Eng to schedule interesting matches for the Indian public. That should be SA's leverage if they can get things coordinated with the other teams.

  • Raas76 on July 26, 2013, 22:25 GMT

    I don't think BCCI is telling anybody who to elect, rather they raised a concern that Mr. Lorgat and BCCI were not on great terms and if you want to do business with BCCI we would rather work with another candidate that doesn't have that baggage. We see that every where, you send the best guy/gal possible if you want to do business with somebody and not the one they don't like.

  • on July 26, 2013, 22:42 GMT

    In the interest of sports in general and cricket in particular BCCI should tone down their high handedness.

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:03 GMT

    Who is to say what stake should a country have in CLT20 -- I wish for total disintegration of their relationship so CLT20 is just IPL-Scene2

  • on July 26, 2013, 23:07 GMT

    Agree it is going a bit too far. But, the clout is financial. USA does this to the whole world because of its financial clout. Will it ever change in the world scenario? Not for next few decades. Will it ever change in cricket? Never.