ICC revamp February 8, 2014

BCCI welcomes approval, confirms talks with CSA for series

  shares 29

The BCCI has welcomed the ICC Board's approval of the new governance, financial and competition structures.

"After rounds of discussions over the last three weeks, the proposals were approved without any objection. Two members abstained from voting since they felt it wouldn't be prudent for them to take a call without the go-ahead of their respective boards," BCCI secretary Sanjay Patel told ESPNcricinfo from Singapore. "Now that the resolutions are passed, we can move on and the Chief Executives' Committee and ICC Board can continue to work on strengthening the structure of cricket."

On the eve of the ICC Board meeting in Singapore, Cricket South Africa president Chris Nenzani had a long meeting with BCCI president N Srinivasan. It is learnt that the meeting resulted in CSA's change of heart. Patel confirmed that the BCCI and CSA are on the verge of clinching a bilateral agreement from 2015 to 2023. While the Pakistan Cricket Board and Sri Lanka Cricket abstained from voting, CSA, who was the first Full Member to publicly call the proposals "fundamentally flawed", opted to vote in favour of the changes.

"It was nice to see that they (CSA) have realised the need to support the proposal and the BCCI had no role to play in their so-called change of stance," Patel said. "The BCCI and CSA had fruitful discussions and have almost reached bilateral agreements in the next cycle."

Another official from one of the Full Member countries echoed Patel's sentiment: "Historically for the first time everything was approved. It was not a give-and-take situation at all. It was a presumption that some of the Members might not sign anything or they will not play."

Some of the proposed changes, including the conversion of FTP agreements into legally binding bilateral agreements, required two-third majority (seven votes out of ten), while other reforms, like the appointment of a new Executive Committee, needed a three-fourth majority (eight votes). CSA's decision to side with the Big Three was a turnaround in this context. On the eve of the meeting, CSA had written a "formal response" to ICC president Alan Isaac and, citing their own long history at the ICC, asked for the hosting rights for a major ICC event between 2015 and 2023.

The decision by CSA to agree to the revamp, framed by the Big Three, could be an indication that the South African board's prolonged tussle with BCCI has come to an end. The dispute between the two boards has reportedly centered around the appointment of former ICC CEO Haroon Lorgat's as CSA's chief executive. The appointment is said to be one of the factors that led to the BCCI curtailing the Indian team's tour to South Africa last year.

Patel, however, denied that a patch-up with CSA, with regard to Lorgat, is in the pipeline. "As for Haroon, it is a matter between CSA and ICC," Patel said. "The BCCI has nothing to do with it and the matter wasn't even discussed."

With regard to the PCB and SLC's decision to abstain from voting, an official in Singapore stated that the Sri Lankan board wanted to understand more details of the new model of revenue distribution. SLC said it needed more time to go back and explain the details to its board members. The official said: "They wanted to understand how the financial calculations were made. The criteria in working out this model was told to them: the historical background, the main contributors to the ICC revenues, the performances of teams in the past and on this basis the (financial) scorecard was made."

PCB's issue could be related to their stance of wanting a written seal on approval of bilateral agreements, but the PCB was told that until the resolutions were ratified at the annual conference in July, no bilateral agreements could be made binding.

Amol Karhadkar is a correspondent at ESPNcricinfo. Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on February 9, 2014, 16:58 GMT

    Kerry Packer introduced big time money in Cricket in mid 70,s and brought most of top cricketers including then isolated south Africans together. Australian board or public never showed off for making the poor mans game a semi rich sports although Australians then were among top two ranked team.

    Nearly 35 years later IPL introduced huge money, which divided circket more than bringing them together. Even after loosing 10 of the 11 tests away,India has not right to be even in top 5 let alone top three. Sourth Africans as usual have choked.Australian tag of being a sports loving nation has taken a nose dive. More than 70% serious indian cricket loving public knows that it is all media and money game and not CRICKET which is bringing bad name for India.

  • chochotain on February 9, 2014, 13:54 GMT

    @Rubic: In case of ICC it is actually worst than this. ICC invited select members to come up with a proposal, then made sure it gets approved and then handed over the entire organization to them. I am surprised no one in cricket circles questioning ICC president as to why he secretly asked those 3 boards to come up with a proposal to revamp ICC.

    As far PAK and SL I think they should not be part of this new organization. There are a lot good and well known cricketers and cricketing authorities against this revamp in almost all the cricket playing countries including Ind. Eng, Aus. with the help of those like minded they should form new organizations/boards that represents a true international cricket organization. pretty much like they started ICL in India. if they can come up with a good financial model and FTP these big three and whoever is supporting them will have to run for their money

  • on February 9, 2014, 7:04 GMT

    Pak made right decision as there was no gaurantee to play cricket with Ind, Eng, and Aus. Pakistanis love cricket and it is in their blood so no one in the world can stop them to play. If big three can think out of the box for the destruction of cricket then Pak will play part to defend it. Some people think that IPL is successful without Pakistani players but they are wrong because with the induction of Pak players, it would be successfull more than any ICC major event. I can see the worst situation of bid three after 9 years, at that time they will be helpless. In short, I am proud to be a Pakistani. yaaay

  • cricketchopper on February 9, 2014, 4:08 GMT

    Indian purchased the world cup 2011. Now their lust of winning is become to the extent of insanity. It would harm the game of cricket.

  • Rubic on February 9, 2014, 1:22 GMT

    When Salt Lake city approached the Olympic committee with some "fruitful discussion" for their 2002 summer Olympics campaign..Olympic committee fired those contacted members..when Mr. Muhammad Bin Hammam had some "fruitful discussion" with some of the FIFA members for his president ship campaign..FIFA kicked him out…when BCCI approached CSA with some "fruitful discussion"..BCCI rewarded with the full control and power on ICC… Needless to say..Cricket is NOT a gentlemen game anymore…

  • HealthyCric on February 9, 2014, 1:22 GMT

    God only knows what PAK and SL are thinking. They have to borrow money and are desperate to play cricket as well. Its a surprise of the century if they don't vote.

  • avmd on February 8, 2014, 22:56 GMT

    Indians, for their own reasons, have succeeded in pushing Pakistan against the wall in world cricket. The only way for Pakistan to rise from the situation is by improving the team, making desperate improvement in their domestic structure, even with all the limitations they have. When Pakistan performs well and wins matches, its a very attractive team, financially ( which is the most important factor now ) and I'm sure many countries, would love to have them play bilateral series.

  • vish2020 on February 8, 2014, 18:37 GMT

    BCCI should not play any games with SLC AND pak except in trophy events. I am so tired of these boards and their fans. They used BCCI's revenue money for their things and don't stand with them

  • Cpt.Meanster on February 8, 2014, 17:49 GMT

    While I am extremely concerned about world cricket, I am not overly pessimistic or distraught at its impending demise. Cricket will live on albeit in a strange way. The ICC will clearly be a different group in the coming years with the Big 3 dominating. However, as long as they honour their promises to those who stood by them, I think things will settle down with time. Obviously the BCCI has a huge lust for IPL/CLT20 and think those tournaments need to be given even more breathing space in the international calender. Otherwise, why would they need to scrape the current FTP ? Hint, hint. We could see a lot more exhibition T20 games between IPL teams or other T20 teams from other countries from time to time. So this is all about churning in more money. Cricket is like a stock market now, buying and selling for the highest amount.

  • on February 8, 2014, 17:13 GMT

    pcb lost a golden chance and rameez raja was the only person who understood the proposal better

  • on February 9, 2014, 16:58 GMT

    Kerry Packer introduced big time money in Cricket in mid 70,s and brought most of top cricketers including then isolated south Africans together. Australian board or public never showed off for making the poor mans game a semi rich sports although Australians then were among top two ranked team.

    Nearly 35 years later IPL introduced huge money, which divided circket more than bringing them together. Even after loosing 10 of the 11 tests away,India has not right to be even in top 5 let alone top three. Sourth Africans as usual have choked.Australian tag of being a sports loving nation has taken a nose dive. More than 70% serious indian cricket loving public knows that it is all media and money game and not CRICKET which is bringing bad name for India.

  • chochotain on February 9, 2014, 13:54 GMT

    @Rubic: In case of ICC it is actually worst than this. ICC invited select members to come up with a proposal, then made sure it gets approved and then handed over the entire organization to them. I am surprised no one in cricket circles questioning ICC president as to why he secretly asked those 3 boards to come up with a proposal to revamp ICC.

    As far PAK and SL I think they should not be part of this new organization. There are a lot good and well known cricketers and cricketing authorities against this revamp in almost all the cricket playing countries including Ind. Eng, Aus. with the help of those like minded they should form new organizations/boards that represents a true international cricket organization. pretty much like they started ICL in India. if they can come up with a good financial model and FTP these big three and whoever is supporting them will have to run for their money

  • on February 9, 2014, 7:04 GMT

    Pak made right decision as there was no gaurantee to play cricket with Ind, Eng, and Aus. Pakistanis love cricket and it is in their blood so no one in the world can stop them to play. If big three can think out of the box for the destruction of cricket then Pak will play part to defend it. Some people think that IPL is successful without Pakistani players but they are wrong because with the induction of Pak players, it would be successfull more than any ICC major event. I can see the worst situation of bid three after 9 years, at that time they will be helpless. In short, I am proud to be a Pakistani. yaaay

  • cricketchopper on February 9, 2014, 4:08 GMT

    Indian purchased the world cup 2011. Now their lust of winning is become to the extent of insanity. It would harm the game of cricket.

  • Rubic on February 9, 2014, 1:22 GMT

    When Salt Lake city approached the Olympic committee with some "fruitful discussion" for their 2002 summer Olympics campaign..Olympic committee fired those contacted members..when Mr. Muhammad Bin Hammam had some "fruitful discussion" with some of the FIFA members for his president ship campaign..FIFA kicked him out…when BCCI approached CSA with some "fruitful discussion"..BCCI rewarded with the full control and power on ICC… Needless to say..Cricket is NOT a gentlemen game anymore…

  • HealthyCric on February 9, 2014, 1:22 GMT

    God only knows what PAK and SL are thinking. They have to borrow money and are desperate to play cricket as well. Its a surprise of the century if they don't vote.

  • avmd on February 8, 2014, 22:56 GMT

    Indians, for their own reasons, have succeeded in pushing Pakistan against the wall in world cricket. The only way for Pakistan to rise from the situation is by improving the team, making desperate improvement in their domestic structure, even with all the limitations they have. When Pakistan performs well and wins matches, its a very attractive team, financially ( which is the most important factor now ) and I'm sure many countries, would love to have them play bilateral series.

  • vish2020 on February 8, 2014, 18:37 GMT

    BCCI should not play any games with SLC AND pak except in trophy events. I am so tired of these boards and their fans. They used BCCI's revenue money for their things and don't stand with them

  • Cpt.Meanster on February 8, 2014, 17:49 GMT

    While I am extremely concerned about world cricket, I am not overly pessimistic or distraught at its impending demise. Cricket will live on albeit in a strange way. The ICC will clearly be a different group in the coming years with the Big 3 dominating. However, as long as they honour their promises to those who stood by them, I think things will settle down with time. Obviously the BCCI has a huge lust for IPL/CLT20 and think those tournaments need to be given even more breathing space in the international calender. Otherwise, why would they need to scrape the current FTP ? Hint, hint. We could see a lot more exhibition T20 games between IPL teams or other T20 teams from other countries from time to time. So this is all about churning in more money. Cricket is like a stock market now, buying and selling for the highest amount.

  • on February 8, 2014, 17:13 GMT

    pcb lost a golden chance and rameez raja was the only person who understood the proposal better

  • ZCFOutkast on February 8, 2014, 16:18 GMT

    Where are my Saffa buddies? Told you CSA would fold. They had to! Not only don't they have a spine, it's their only means of survival. Laughable to see arguably the best cricket side, with a big population and the best economy in Africa, being relegated to a nobody in the game! Who's to blame? The UCB&early CSA! I wouldn't be surprised to see those bilateral agreements only being effective on condition that Lorgat is absent or chucked out.

  • on February 8, 2014, 16:13 GMT

    beginning of the end of Cricket as we know it.

  • on February 8, 2014, 15:29 GMT

    India!!!!! Haters gonna hate!!

  • Greatest_Game on February 8, 2014, 15:21 GMT

    This is naked doublespeak of the highest order "It was nice to see that they (CSA) have realised the need to support the proposal and the BCCI had no role to play in their so-called change of stance," Patel said. But he immediately says "The BCCI and CSA had fruitful discussions and have almost reached bilateral agreements in the next cycle."

    Those "fruitful discussions' had nothing to do with CSA's change of stance? Really. Do you truly expect ANYONE to believe that? Mr Patel is clearly identifiable as being factually creative - his lips were moving.

  • spellbinder76 on February 8, 2014, 14:38 GMT

    The PCB chairman Zaka Ashraf did not have a mandate from his own government. Abstaining to vote does not mean PCB cease to exist in ICC. A decision had been made and all ICC playing countries are binding to the new resolution. India may not play against Pakistan any bilateral series, but even if Pakistan have supported India any assurance by BCCI means nothing as the Government of India would not give NOC for players to visit Pakistan or a Pakistani team to visit India.

  • on February 8, 2014, 13:00 GMT

    I think when things get BORED,it will return to its original form.For a time being it seems a gloom and doom for the Cricket world but isn't it all depending on us the''spectators''.See for how long EVIL prevails.Every bad things carries in itself a good lesson to be learnt.Let this current situation reveal the true color of tthe current changes.Till then enjoy what the Cricket world is offering.

  • aamer21 on February 8, 2014, 12:51 GMT

    With these changes being approved some things are a certainty....India has monopoly and what little "democracy" was there in ICC is now null and void. As a result India will play most of its series at home hence improving their (false) ranking. Most of the international events will also be held in India resulting in India winning these trophies more often than not, seeing that they are home flat track bullies. Now if any true Indian cricket fan says that they are proud to be Indian because of these facts than shame on you!! No sport is favoured that heavily in one country's favour and if it is then the purpose of competition is dead that sport isn't sport anymore. That is now the case with cricket and it's a shame that the passion of millions of people around the world has been manipulated like so. I really hope that somehow the Indian board gets bankrupted and they aren't able to show their faces in cricket admin anymore.Heartfelt prayer of someone who lives and breathes cricket!

  • jsaeed on February 8, 2014, 12:45 GMT

    @ashuhatesyou... enjoy the feeling becoz it wont last long if u love cricket as well..... n if u dont then kudos :)

  • TheCricketEmpireStrikesBack on February 8, 2014, 12:45 GMT

    A sad day for cricket. To paraphrase Churchill: if you choose shame over war in dealing with a bully you will eventually have both.

    At least the PCB and SLC have shown that being a cricket administrator and having a backbone are not always mutually exclusive.

  • ishtiaque786 on February 8, 2014, 12:43 GMT

    ICC change your name to BCCI, and give them all the power. When it comes to South Africa never trust them ever again. Shame on ICC and shame on every one who sold out game of cricket for the financial benefit.

  • on February 8, 2014, 12:25 GMT

    Good Bye Cricket :-( ....!!!!!

  • KallisTheGreatest on February 8, 2014, 11:58 GMT

    India simply can't compete with Proteas! They confirmed that month ago. No need of another Boooooooooring series.

  • on February 8, 2014, 11:58 GMT

    Bye Bye Cricket .. now see the monopoly every1 ..

  • Super_Eyes on February 8, 2014, 11:55 GMT

    This was on the cards.Welldone Cricket South Africa.You did the right thing.That is what Pakistan cricket board should have done.They should have accepted those lollypop offers.Everyone knew that whatever the stane we were taking is useless.It was only the matter of time.This proposal was gona be approved ultimately. And I dont know why so many people are disgusted with big three.They were already controlling this game behind the doors, Now they will do it officially.That is the only difference that I find in pre and post Big Three era.Nothing is gonna change in cricket.India will remain a top ranked team despite of loosing that much, And we will keep complaining about this ranking system.

  • ODI_BestFormOfCricket on February 8, 2014, 11:44 GMT

    yes, two tier system atleast allow ireland and afghanistan to play against zimbabwe and bangladesh. Test match fund should have given to these team. Why for 5 teams in top 8? They get money from icc! Atleast 2 new test team could have added, if two tier accepted.

  • DRS_Flawed_NeedsImprovement on February 8, 2014, 11:39 GMT

    What i expecting was 1. 2nd tier system with teams zimbabwe, bangladesh, ireland and afghanistan. 2. Test match development fund to these 2nd tier system to host matches, 5 day test matches between them. 3. Winner of these could play against lowest ranked top 8 (mandatery). 4. Any team which wants test matches against 2nd tier team should be allowed to play.

  • KallisTheGreatest on February 8, 2014, 11:38 GMT

    No thanks !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • IndianEagle on February 8, 2014, 11:23 GMT

    i was expecting two tier system bcz zimbabwe and bangladesh are not a good team to play against top 8 in test matches. Afgan, ireland, bang and zim should be in 2nd tier and must play 5 day test matches themselves and let top 8 to choose whom they wanted to play in 2nd tier.

  • ashuhatesyou on February 8, 2014, 11:21 GMT

    Feeling proud being an Indian!

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • ashuhatesyou on February 8, 2014, 11:21 GMT

    Feeling proud being an Indian!

  • IndianEagle on February 8, 2014, 11:23 GMT

    i was expecting two tier system bcz zimbabwe and bangladesh are not a good team to play against top 8 in test matches. Afgan, ireland, bang and zim should be in 2nd tier and must play 5 day test matches themselves and let top 8 to choose whom they wanted to play in 2nd tier.

  • KallisTheGreatest on February 8, 2014, 11:38 GMT

    No thanks !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • DRS_Flawed_NeedsImprovement on February 8, 2014, 11:39 GMT

    What i expecting was 1. 2nd tier system with teams zimbabwe, bangladesh, ireland and afghanistan. 2. Test match development fund to these 2nd tier system to host matches, 5 day test matches between them. 3. Winner of these could play against lowest ranked top 8 (mandatery). 4. Any team which wants test matches against 2nd tier team should be allowed to play.

  • ODI_BestFormOfCricket on February 8, 2014, 11:44 GMT

    yes, two tier system atleast allow ireland and afghanistan to play against zimbabwe and bangladesh. Test match fund should have given to these team. Why for 5 teams in top 8? They get money from icc! Atleast 2 new test team could have added, if two tier accepted.

  • Super_Eyes on February 8, 2014, 11:55 GMT

    This was on the cards.Welldone Cricket South Africa.You did the right thing.That is what Pakistan cricket board should have done.They should have accepted those lollypop offers.Everyone knew that whatever the stane we were taking is useless.It was only the matter of time.This proposal was gona be approved ultimately. And I dont know why so many people are disgusted with big three.They were already controlling this game behind the doors, Now they will do it officially.That is the only difference that I find in pre and post Big Three era.Nothing is gonna change in cricket.India will remain a top ranked team despite of loosing that much, And we will keep complaining about this ranking system.

  • on February 8, 2014, 11:58 GMT

    Bye Bye Cricket .. now see the monopoly every1 ..

  • KallisTheGreatest on February 8, 2014, 11:58 GMT

    India simply can't compete with Proteas! They confirmed that month ago. No need of another Boooooooooring series.

  • on February 8, 2014, 12:25 GMT

    Good Bye Cricket :-( ....!!!!!

  • ishtiaque786 on February 8, 2014, 12:43 GMT

    ICC change your name to BCCI, and give them all the power. When it comes to South Africa never trust them ever again. Shame on ICC and shame on every one who sold out game of cricket for the financial benefit.