July 3, 2011

Who's the ICC fooling?

It's laughable that cricket's global body asks its member boards to democratise when it is itself politically manipulated by the BCCI to make confusing compromises
84

In the sixties, Australian writer Hugh Lunn produced a lively story set in Hong Kong called Spies Like Us. The ICC's directors must have heard of it. The recently concluded board meeting in Hong Kong was full of moves a secretive spook would have been proud of: a furtive dart in this direction and then quickly doubling back to see who might be following.

So who is the ICC trying to throw off the scent?

Their original plan to hold a ten-team World Cup in 2015 had already ridden out formidable flak from the Associate members. Why did they need to do an about-turn and return it to a 14-team event, the same as it was for the overly long 2011 World Cup? All they needed to do was add a qualifying tournament to decide the last two teams so that all 10 spots didn't automatically go to the Test-playing nations.

Then in the classic double-back move they teach at spy school, the ICC decided to reduce the World Twenty20 from 16 to 12 teams in both the 2012 and 2014 tournaments. The Twenty20 format is the sport's best opportunity to globalise the game and extend the reach of cricket. It's also the one that can be completed in an acceptable time span, so the players aren't sitting around twiddling their thumbs for long intervals. Twenty20 is also the one chance cricket has to escape the suffocating effect of total dependence on India's wealth to finance the game.

And what did the ICC do? They effectively stifled those opportunities, at least in the short term. This is the classic case of a spy who becomes so paranoid he reaches the point of only fooling himself.

Not satisfied, they then, in an act of unbelievable hubris, asked all the member boards to free themselves from political interference by the end of 2012. It's not that this move isn't welcome; on the contrary, it's long overdue. It's just that the previous day the ICC had conjured up conclusions on both the Decision Review System (DRS) and the Future Tour Programme (FTP) that were classics of expedient compromise, the favourite tool of politicians everywhere.

Instead of insisting on important changes to the DRS, like the ICC having full control over operating the system, and also placing the reviews totally in the hands of the umpires, the BCCI opted for an ineffective and confusing compromise. Why? Presumably to avoid being forced to play one-sided and financially draining Test series against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in the new FTP.

Neither of those two nations should be playing Test matches against any country. Instead, they should be competing on a second-tier level with other Associate nations and the stronger A teams in order to improve and provide ample proof they deserve to be elevated to Test status.

And finally there was the important issue of the ICC presidency. Instead of voting to eradicate the public-service-style system of rotating presidents in favour of choosing the best person for the job, this issue has been put on hold for a few more months. Why? Presumably to give the members a chance to hammer out another confusing compromise.

In part of an ICC statement issued following the resolution to de-politicise the individual boards, the CEO, Haroon Lorgat, said: "[…] that through a democratic election process you get the right people to run the sport in the country." Why then wouldn't the ICC set an example and do exactly that when appointing their president?

What with all the efforts to placate India and the obsession with power-broking, the ICC has become the most politicised of all cricketing bodies. Too bad more people aren't actually spying on the ICC in an effort to make them more accountable.

Former Australia captain Ian Chappell is now a cricket commentator and columnist

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • ek_glassi_2g3gf on July 6, 2011, 10:32 GMT

    Though i feel good being an indian that icc is run by bcci, however, dont forget that before india, it aus & eng etc who used to rule icc. it is just that the performance of india got better, peoples interest increased in the game, more sponsors, more revenue and so on from india.. thus a chain reaction.. however, dont forget nothing is permanent.. icc has few years back also ridiculed india about their not so good performance but still trying to muscle through revenue power.. so its about who is performing and who is bringing revenue.. ultimately icc is a cost centre..

    at the same time i feel that india should adhere to all the icc rules like drs etc as it is an advanced technology and a forward looking initiative which will take cricket to further heights. evaluating historical drs non-implementation advantage through wrong umpire decision in favor of india is a passive step.. we should be bold enough to take it in its current form

  • Rakesh_Sharma on July 6, 2011, 0:07 GMT

    Agree with most which Ian Chappel said.However his opinion of having just 10 teams for 50 Over WC does not make sense. Ideal is 12 teams. If last 2 spots of 10 team wc go for qualifyingthan these last 2 teams will have undue advantage while playing associates due to the fact that team like Bangladesh plays year round against strong team to get match practice which they will use against fresh Associates without these experience. For cricket to spread T20 must be included in Olympics Period.

  • on July 5, 2011, 18:45 GMT

    I do go with chaplie... but not sure if all these things are due to BCCI or only partly

  • Sam_Patel_US on July 5, 2011, 11:37 GMT

    i think they should select Ian Chappell as ICC president as he is trying to show that he can run ICC better than anyone else. Cricket fans from Sri lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan should understand one thing if power goes back to australia and england...they would kill the subcontinent cricket for sure, They have always use devide and rule policy....now they turning all other subcontinent countries against India....Its a shame thatl Its not about cricket anymore...its all about who's got power. Just like aus and england lost their power...i am sure soon or later India won't be in the position to dectate their own terms for long. Someone else would be doing the same at that time....Look at America who has power and what they doing to the rest of the world....

  • jay57870 on July 5, 2011, 11:29 GMT

    Who's Ian Chappell fooling? Fortune-teller to spy-story teller - with his usual half-baked theories & false prophecies, and now "double-back moves"! Let's get a few things straight: (1) Ian should get his spies to check out how desperately Australia tried - with CA's divisive politics - to get John Howard to succeed Sharad Pawar as ICC's CEO! Physician, Heal thyself first! (2) Ian should stop staring in the rear-view mirror: the England-Australia duopoly is long dead. Re: ICC, their recent decisions were debated & voted on: It's a democratic process - a consensus. CA is part of it as much as BCCI. Chappell's my-way-or-highway style won't work in ICC! (3) Ian should know that cricket is the 2nd most popular team sport in the world. So, what's this "globalise" sermon? Everyone knows ICC's plate of activities is over-flowing, and its resources & finances spread too thin. And Ian wants to expand it? Who's he fooling? For sure, Ian's getting bad advice from his "paranoid" spy-friends!

  • on July 5, 2011, 11:16 GMT

    if this is what a some one like ian says this sport will never move ahead icc should actually include more teams to play tests with stronger nations . the boards will talk bullcrap and so will the heads but if this gonna keep happening cricket will only have 10 main teams for the next 100 years or till 2012, its like saying okay lets not let japan play with brazil in the soccer worldcup as they are strong ..

    ian chappell i just feel ur fooling ur self .

  • Third_Gear on July 5, 2011, 10:16 GMT

    boston_pride@ In this case why not NZ,WI also do play with Ban,Zim,Ire and Canada and qualify for the WC?? if they are so strong team what they are affraid of ???

  • Jaguar0205 on July 5, 2011, 9:29 GMT

    you glib-tonged ozzie Ian, you were happy when your ozzie board together with the so called "superior" england were hegemonious putting their say over how cricket was to be run... now, your ozzie & english boards are whimpering like wounded wolves... have you also forgotten that the ozzie & english boards had in those days 2 votes each in ICC, whereas the other representatives had one vote each... ?? so lopsided it was... pls learn to accept that ICC is now a global body and the power center is no more with oz-eng combo... ozzie teams used to impose themselves by practising cheap acts of sledging on the opponent teams' players, but they couldn't stand it when other teams started given them back a piece of their tongue...!! let the global body function now and as we go by time, this institution will be more democratized & improved...

  • Japan.Kolla on July 4, 2011, 17:24 GMT

    This is like a Politics :(

  • maddy20 on July 4, 2011, 13:36 GMT

    @MrGarreth Hardly beating WI? Our second string team(without 8 first choice players) wrapped up the ODI series in 3 games, won the only T20 , won the first test by 63 runs and are the verge of wrapping it up in style. May be its not good as some team losing every worldcup knockout game they have played, but I think they did OK!

  • ek_glassi_2g3gf on July 6, 2011, 10:32 GMT

    Though i feel good being an indian that icc is run by bcci, however, dont forget that before india, it aus & eng etc who used to rule icc. it is just that the performance of india got better, peoples interest increased in the game, more sponsors, more revenue and so on from india.. thus a chain reaction.. however, dont forget nothing is permanent.. icc has few years back also ridiculed india about their not so good performance but still trying to muscle through revenue power.. so its about who is performing and who is bringing revenue.. ultimately icc is a cost centre..

    at the same time i feel that india should adhere to all the icc rules like drs etc as it is an advanced technology and a forward looking initiative which will take cricket to further heights. evaluating historical drs non-implementation advantage through wrong umpire decision in favor of india is a passive step.. we should be bold enough to take it in its current form

  • Rakesh_Sharma on July 6, 2011, 0:07 GMT

    Agree with most which Ian Chappel said.However his opinion of having just 10 teams for 50 Over WC does not make sense. Ideal is 12 teams. If last 2 spots of 10 team wc go for qualifyingthan these last 2 teams will have undue advantage while playing associates due to the fact that team like Bangladesh plays year round against strong team to get match practice which they will use against fresh Associates without these experience. For cricket to spread T20 must be included in Olympics Period.

  • on July 5, 2011, 18:45 GMT

    I do go with chaplie... but not sure if all these things are due to BCCI or only partly

  • Sam_Patel_US on July 5, 2011, 11:37 GMT

    i think they should select Ian Chappell as ICC president as he is trying to show that he can run ICC better than anyone else. Cricket fans from Sri lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan should understand one thing if power goes back to australia and england...they would kill the subcontinent cricket for sure, They have always use devide and rule policy....now they turning all other subcontinent countries against India....Its a shame thatl Its not about cricket anymore...its all about who's got power. Just like aus and england lost their power...i am sure soon or later India won't be in the position to dectate their own terms for long. Someone else would be doing the same at that time....Look at America who has power and what they doing to the rest of the world....

  • jay57870 on July 5, 2011, 11:29 GMT

    Who's Ian Chappell fooling? Fortune-teller to spy-story teller - with his usual half-baked theories & false prophecies, and now "double-back moves"! Let's get a few things straight: (1) Ian should get his spies to check out how desperately Australia tried - with CA's divisive politics - to get John Howard to succeed Sharad Pawar as ICC's CEO! Physician, Heal thyself first! (2) Ian should stop staring in the rear-view mirror: the England-Australia duopoly is long dead. Re: ICC, their recent decisions were debated & voted on: It's a democratic process - a consensus. CA is part of it as much as BCCI. Chappell's my-way-or-highway style won't work in ICC! (3) Ian should know that cricket is the 2nd most popular team sport in the world. So, what's this "globalise" sermon? Everyone knows ICC's plate of activities is over-flowing, and its resources & finances spread too thin. And Ian wants to expand it? Who's he fooling? For sure, Ian's getting bad advice from his "paranoid" spy-friends!

  • on July 5, 2011, 11:16 GMT

    if this is what a some one like ian says this sport will never move ahead icc should actually include more teams to play tests with stronger nations . the boards will talk bullcrap and so will the heads but if this gonna keep happening cricket will only have 10 main teams for the next 100 years or till 2012, its like saying okay lets not let japan play with brazil in the soccer worldcup as they are strong ..

    ian chappell i just feel ur fooling ur self .

  • Third_Gear on July 5, 2011, 10:16 GMT

    boston_pride@ In this case why not NZ,WI also do play with Ban,Zim,Ire and Canada and qualify for the WC?? if they are so strong team what they are affraid of ???

  • Jaguar0205 on July 5, 2011, 9:29 GMT

    you glib-tonged ozzie Ian, you were happy when your ozzie board together with the so called "superior" england were hegemonious putting their say over how cricket was to be run... now, your ozzie & english boards are whimpering like wounded wolves... have you also forgotten that the ozzie & english boards had in those days 2 votes each in ICC, whereas the other representatives had one vote each... ?? so lopsided it was... pls learn to accept that ICC is now a global body and the power center is no more with oz-eng combo... ozzie teams used to impose themselves by practising cheap acts of sledging on the opponent teams' players, but they couldn't stand it when other teams started given them back a piece of their tongue...!! let the global body function now and as we go by time, this institution will be more democratized & improved...

  • Japan.Kolla on July 4, 2011, 17:24 GMT

    This is like a Politics :(

  • maddy20 on July 4, 2011, 13:36 GMT

    @MrGarreth Hardly beating WI? Our second string team(without 8 first choice players) wrapped up the ODI series in 3 games, won the only T20 , won the first test by 63 runs and are the verge of wrapping it up in style. May be its not good as some team losing every worldcup knockout game they have played, but I think they did OK!

  • Venki_indian on July 4, 2011, 13:14 GMT

    if john howard is into ICC , will he be talking the same?

  • on July 4, 2011, 10:31 GMT

    Very well written Ian. I think u hv hit the bull's eye. ICC is the most politicized and weakest sports body on earth. The reforms must be started from within ICC.

  • on July 4, 2011, 9:59 GMT

    I am with Ian. Ausies and English never done such decision which India is doing with poor countries like Bangladesh and Zimabwe. these rubbish things should be stopped by ICC and there should be only ICC dominance in every aspect of cricket.

  • on July 4, 2011, 9:22 GMT

    Why so much crying and shouting about BCCI dominance. It was Australia and England before now its India. In future there will some other country.

  • poderdubdubdub on July 4, 2011, 9:20 GMT

    Well said Ian. However, its a bit too late to talk about democracy in the ICC. BCCI is now doing what your country taught them to do when in power. Anyhow its never too late to start reformation, unfortunately the damage done to Cricket by BCCI will be difficult to reverse.

  • MrGarreth on July 4, 2011, 8:17 GMT

    @Alexk400, do not bring South Africa into this. We were the only ones out of the major nations to oppose the ICCs decision regarding Pakistan and Bangladesh cricket boards. And where you get the idea that all nations ride the coattails of BCCI is ridiculous. Ive heard a few Indian fans mention that the rest of the worlds cricketers would go back to having a job to support their cricket careers which is also an unfathomably ridiculous and completely obnoxious statement. Do you think our domestic players are doing that? Come on. We get enough money at our gates and enough viewers on our TVs to makesure our players do it for a living. What you guys are talking about is way way out dated. At least 70 years out dated. And if India decide to seperate from the other nations to teach them a lesson for not agreeing to their iron fist rule, they would be shooting themselves in the foot. The remarks of India being able to produce more than 3 sides in the top10 is stupid. Theyre hardly beating WI.

  • on July 4, 2011, 7:59 GMT

    A case of sour grapes....

    When the non-south asian nations held power in ICC, they enjoyed it to the fullest..

    Now it is South Asia's turn..

    We will also enjoy... What's your problem Mr. Chappell?

  • Notredam on July 4, 2011, 5:59 GMT

    Ireland shud get test status...an dplay 5 matches anually with zimmies..windies,,and bangla..so 15 test in all..tht wud be great

  • chunnie on July 4, 2011, 3:39 GMT

    Ian Chappell hits the nail right on the head once again.

  • IndiaGoats on July 4, 2011, 0:26 GMT

    @Kantipur, an Indian team DID win last year's Champions League.

  • on July 3, 2011, 22:11 GMT

    I get mr chappell's point of the dominance of the bcci but to be honest india and the south asian countries are now the power house of global cricket and scrapping bangladesh and zim of test matches wont help the teams rather dent there confidence and bangladesh's test performance has improved not with the won record but the way they are fighting for survival in the arena other teams like NZ, westindies havent also played great cricket so maybe 2 divisions maybe an option.

  • Stark62 on July 3, 2011, 19:21 GMT

    For once I actually think Ian is making sense! :)

  • Kavum on July 3, 2011, 18:37 GMT

    Is this payback for failed Aussie pol Howard not being given a place at the top table?

  • on July 3, 2011, 18:24 GMT

    This is all well spotted. And i can assure regarding the Presidency rotation policy, they not gonna give it to PCB and BCB. BCCI will plan something and get more support to stop this rotation policy. All countries prefer DRS system but only bcause of India its not fully going to fully implemented. Harsha Bhogle says, "DRS is not bigger than the Game", only because India doesn't like it. BCCI has not given NOC to its players to participate in SLPL, Although its in the interest of the game to support that league. This all looks one way traffic now.

  • ten_dul_kar on July 3, 2011, 18:23 GMT

    we all know the history... if england had similar powers...what do you think they would have done ( or have done )... thnx....

  • Salesh on July 3, 2011, 18:07 GMT

    Well said Charla.. sour grapes. .......

  • on July 3, 2011, 18:06 GMT

    thumbs up for ian chapple...ppl like tony greig n chapple are now speaking against BCCI...coz BCCI is damaging ICC's image n it integrity.

  • Charindra on July 3, 2011, 17:57 GMT

    Totally agree with Ian. It's ridiculous that BCCI actually got Bangladesh test status and has since refused to host them in India. In that case the least they can do is to take away the test status. What gives them the right to say that Bangla is not good enough to be hosted by them but good enough to be hosted by other test nations?!?!!?

  • on July 3, 2011, 17:45 GMT

    This is actually quite true.ICC should first set itself right

  • on July 3, 2011, 17:16 GMT

    i TOTALLY AGREE with IAN CHAPPELL that the time has came for the associate nations to participate. T20 will be the best form for them to SHOW OFF their skills! It will be financially HELPFUL as more people will be interested to WATCH CRICKET within a limited period of time.

  • rickp15 on July 3, 2011, 17:10 GMT

    @ShaniJ.... impossible "Money talks" BCCI has it and the other don"t. As long as IPL shells out those big contracts to players even they would revolt against their own Boards too play in India. ICC is nothing without BCCI as they would no TV money without the Indian team presence...... It won't change simple as that.....BCCI now controls world Cricket whether other boards like it not.... baecause " Money talks" India will enjoy its position just like the Aus and ECB did 10 years ago.

  • gujratwalla on July 3, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    You are dead on spot Ian! Is BCCI the IMF of world cricket???

  • on July 3, 2011, 16:26 GMT

    ICC should do this, BCCI should do that, etc etc... People SHOULD do a lot of things, the reality of life in general is that people DON'T do a lot of things they're supposed to do. Everyone looks out for their own self-interest. Right now, the BCCI is riding roughshod over everyone else, because of their financial clout, but also because, I believe, the Indian team is doing well. Who's to say this is not going to change?

    Also, why should Cricket be globalised? Is this a new commandment? Who laid it down? Baseball is played only in the US and in its sphere of influence, and the game is doing well. Same for American Football. I think Cricket needs to focus on its core constituency and improve the quality of the game, and the infrastructure. Focus on the next generation of stars and provide a viable A-tour series. Take care of the folks who love, understand and appreciate the game, who played it as kids, first.

  • Alexk400 on July 3, 2011, 16:20 GMT

    Top 4 runing the ICC and left everyone else rot. It is not just BCCI, Aussie , South africa boards are following the coattails of BCCI. Shame.

  • Sakthiivel on July 3, 2011, 16:17 GMT

    @ Sehwagologist Well said man. First of let me clear to all of the Srilankan cricket fans. You dont have any rights to talk about BCCI, BCCI is a cricket board of India and not srilankans, They have right to control all Indian Players. Not Like SLC after their request many srilankan players remind in IPL went in last minute to ENG tour. Its not BCCI fault, think whose is that. SLC have lots of debts and even reduce finance slash to AUS tour then how they will pay all Indian players who plays in SLPL, What they have done is put the Contract with SEV and if SLC unable to pay the players money they will say SEV not paid and send SEV to fireline n SLC escape thats why BCCI not sending even 2nd string players.

  • Cold_Drink on July 3, 2011, 16:12 GMT

    @boston_pride, okay lets talk about fairness. If you want qualification process for world cup then why only 2 positions. Look at other popular sport like soccer world cup. Nobody has a guaranteed place in world cup except the hosts. Why not implement the similar trend here in cricket. At least 5 places for qualification and make the top 5 teams to be qualified automatically. I guess you guys are scared of losing Eng or NZL from world cup because they vulnerable. So when talking about fairness then next time please think fairly.

  • kantipur on July 3, 2011, 16:03 GMT

    I can't believe they allowed Champions league a window and it is run by BCCI. And how do they decide 3 teams in the champions league from the IPL which is a world event.IPL may be popular, it may have more money but I don't think IPL is the best league in the world. For me best league is the Big Bash. Wait till BCCI adds 4-5 teams in champions league so that Indian teams may have better chance of winning.

  • ZshanKhan on July 3, 2011, 15:23 GMT

    The real reason why Indian doesn't want to play Bang and Zimbabwe is because its BORING!!!!. The ratings really tank whenever India is features with these 2 teams.

  • Zahidsaltin on July 3, 2011, 12:47 GMT

    You are spot on Mr. Chappel. India is probably not going to play any tests against Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and Pakistan, all boards are going to award a window for IPL, umpires and other officials are going to be fired if indians wish so, more international events like CL are going to be run by BCCI. ICC has become Indian Cricket Councel, an organisation subordinate to BCCI. Whose fault is this?? First of all its Australian, Soth african and English boards who are going along with it. They have given up to the power of money. Its them who have given up basic principles and are playing to indian tunes. Had they taken a stand, indian money couldn't have stayed away. Money comes from public and the public is a global concept who will always want to watch cricket. Its not indian public, its cricket public. It doesn't belong to BCCI. Its a free trade world Mr. Chappel. If the other big cricket boards wished, house could have been put in order.

  • dragqueen1 on July 3, 2011, 12:16 GMT

    T20 is Cricket best option for globalising the sport.

    OK, that's great. however is there an actual plan for what happens next. the answer, judging by this meeting & others before it, is a resounding no.

    here's the problem

    it doesn't matter how they dress it up

    there is no way at present, should a nation like, say, Chile or Vietnam, suddenly produce a generation of Cricketers capable of competing with India & Australia, they would be prevented from doing so.

    the glass ceiling of Full Membership comes into play

    their players would reach a point where, like Eoin Morgan, they would forced to make a choice.

    if they what to play at the highest level(Tests) they have to change nationalities.

    so the ICC's answer to this obvious problem.

    Err

    Globalise the sport, no point.

    cart before the horse gentleman, cart before the horse.

    this sport is at a serious crossroads & i genuinely fear for it's future as an international sport.

  • on July 3, 2011, 12:08 GMT

    Makes a Hell lot of sense! Completely Agree!

  • on July 3, 2011, 11:57 GMT

    gr8 article ...gud saying IAn chappell :)

  • shillingsworth on July 3, 2011, 11:33 GMT

    Good article, predictable response from BCCI apologists with malfunctioning caps locks.

  • rogiebone11 on July 3, 2011, 11:28 GMT

    Well said Mr. Chappell, ICC should be renamed BCCI and Mr. Sharad Pawar should be made life time president of the organization, after his death the BCCI chairman must be automatic choice for the president of ICC (BCCI), indian board is distroying Cricket.

  • The_Wog on July 3, 2011, 11:15 GMT

    @CHARLA , MAYBE IT'S ALL THE CAPITAL LETTERS STOPPING YOU GETTING PUBLISHED!

  • CharlieAlanJakeHarperFamily on July 3, 2011, 11:15 GMT

    @Herath UK 'ICC is stinkingly politicised' well what about ur own slc board with terrible charges of corruption BCCI may be a big time bully but there aint any charges of corruption on them and plz get over ur pointless SLPL no indian wants to play in it i mean what the use of playing on subcontinent tracks (had it been sa,aus may give a go)for max 30000USD whereas most of them get 500000 usd and guess what irfan gets 1.9 million USD more than mahela so look noone wants to play for money in slpl@Herath UK 'ICC is stinkingly politicised' well what about ur own slc board with terrible charges of corruption BCCI may be a big time bully but there aint any charges of corruption on them and plz get over ur pointless SLPL no indian wants to play in it i mean what the use of playing on subcontinent tracks (had it been sa,aus may give a go)for max 30000USD whereas most of them get 500000 usd and guess what irfan gets 1.9 million USD more than mahela so look noone wants to play for money in slpl

  • ShaniJ on July 3, 2011, 10:43 GMT

    Well said Mr.chappell India must change its attitude towards other member boards. Why wont they play against Ban and Zim??.Enough of this Indian domination in ICC. All the boards should unite and try to curtail BCCI's powers!.

  • Sakthiivel on July 3, 2011, 10:40 GMT

    First of Mr. Ian Should remember in old days where Aus & End had 2 votes to represent ICC and other just have only one, bec the fact that they brought money to ICC. Same is happening now, that nothing new. When ECB didnt sent its players for the IPL, BCCI DIDNT CRY LIKE BABY and BEG them. Same should be followed in SLPL case.

  • on July 3, 2011, 10:33 GMT

    @ Sakib Madridista. I completely agree. India's BCCI is now the de facto governing body of cricket. ICC might as well hand over the reigns now. India get what they want even if it is contradictory (No DRS we believe in Umpires, then hound Daryl Harper out of the test series) India are the spoilt brats of cricket. Every other nation should leave ICC and form their own body and let India do whatever it wants...by itself

  • on July 3, 2011, 10:06 GMT

    One day Bangladesh will rule the cricket world, then you will see how we host India,I think they forget that in the world cup 2007 they are ruled out losing to Bangladesh. they don't have respect for us.....I am sure one day no one will respect India like as West Indies. Till then lets see the funny ICC

  • alexkrish on July 3, 2011, 10:05 GMT

    It is only fair for a country that contributes significantly higher than anybody else to an institution has the right to play a significant role in running of that institution too. I am not an ignorant to think ICC is not politically motivated or manipulated but at the same time can't think of any other international sports body that is free from politics and power games, including the ICC when it was run by other country boards. Other members of the cricket board have important roles to play. While it is not what it used to be for them five years ago, they need to accept the reality and work together to strengthen the ICC by providing constructive criticisms, because we do not want world cup is played by 10 IPL teams in the future. [This may not be particularly bad as similar tournaments have been successful in US.] This particular article is just a rant with a provocative title.

  • on July 3, 2011, 9:05 GMT

    Mr Ian Chappel,brave comments from you when everything follows according to the wishes of one particular powerhouse of cricketing world.Definitely Sri Lanka needed a clause like that to keep the idiotic politicians out of the way to preserve the integrity of the game.Overall that recommendation was a blessing at least for few subcontinent countries and cricketers could concentrate more about cricket hopefully in future.

  • darkknight1072 on July 3, 2011, 8:50 GMT

    Agreed that BCCI played politics (So as every board) in getting few things on its favour. What did Eng and Aus do then to get more tests for them with India? Why is it always BCCI gets the stick. For god sake, Mr Chappel, get over it.

  • Herath-UK on July 3, 2011, 8:40 GMT

    Ian is right on spot here though at times he is well off the mark. ICC is stinkingly politicised and just a puppet to BCCI.See what they did with SLPL using its power to punish boards not toeing their line. I'm certain one day the other boards will unite together to get back the power. Ranil Herath -Kent

  • sheiry on July 3, 2011, 8:31 GMT

    @ ICC President.

    shame on ICC. today i read the "Future international Fixtures" and i found that INDIA, AUSTRALIA, ENGLAND, SRILANKA, SAOUTH A. have a lot of matches to play in the whole year 2011 and 2012. but Pakistan have no cricket match till April 2012. shame shame shame shame ICC shame!!!! but Pakistan is the best Team in the World, and you will found it soon. i Challenge @ ICC President Sharad Pawar. Please Go and take rest Mr. Sharad Pawar.

  • SidFromMumbai on July 3, 2011, 8:01 GMT

    Please do not mention India and BCCI in the same context. Our views of running cricket in India and world are totally different from BCCI's

  • on July 3, 2011, 7:55 GMT

    ICC a political institution which is being run by the BCCI.

  • on July 3, 2011, 7:41 GMT

    Although I disagree most of the time with Ian Chappell, this time around I must say his comment on the ICC meeting fiasco is spot on. While being a Pakistani, I should be agreeing with PCB about rotational policy for the presidency but this should not be done at the expense of a better qualified person. Also ODI WC should be 10 team tournament and T20 16. I mean is'nt T20 invented to popularize the game? and not meant for making money only, as it is being done these days.

  • boston_pride on July 3, 2011, 7:25 GMT

    @rezaul: are you out of your mind?? Bangladesh got test status right after they had a shock win over Pak in 99 WC... N that obviously was a masterstroke by BCCI to get more boards on its side... Bangladesh beat a WI B team in a test series... As far as NZ is concerned, they have been pretty consistent SF in all WC... If Bangladesh is sucha strong cricketing team why cant they play againsT Zim, Ireland, Canada, Netherlands to qualify for the WC??

  • crickstats on July 3, 2011, 7:17 GMT

    it was indeed absurd to see that reduction in teams for t20s, i think associate teams should ask for more t20 spots than 50-over spot, this would create among youth in the respective countries

  • on July 3, 2011, 7:13 GMT

    @Lovetesh - spot on mate! The moaning from Ian Chappell continues!! His blah-blah is becoming more and more monotonous, and is fast becoming a burden to read...!!

  • jagan77 on July 3, 2011, 7:11 GMT

    You just seem to try to improve on causing more damage to Indian Cricket than what your brother did.

  • jagan77 on July 3, 2011, 7:09 GMT

    Mr Chappel Bangladesh and Zim are totally different scenarios in terms of cricket.Bangladesh do definitely desereve test cricket status and Zim messed it. As usual you RANT on anything Indian, I pity you. When Eng and Aus dominated World Cricket everything seemed fined to you, including the BODYLINE bowling. But BCCI still didnt flex the muscle. But let me enlighten you as an Indian, We are hugely populated and very passionate about cricket. We are good enough to produce atleast 3 teams that can find place in the ICC 10, Purely on merit. Aus can produce 2 or 3, Eng can produce 2, SA can produce 2. Our love for the game is such we can have our own IPL(purely Indian) and still we can have the same sucees and possibly more..YOU MR.CHAPPEL IS THE LAST PERSON TO TALK ABOUT EQUALITY.

  • Shafaaqat on July 3, 2011, 7:01 GMT

    100% agreed with Ian. Cricket is no more a pure game, its more of politics now. With ICC bowing to rich board(s), game is not gonna progress at all. Cricket and its fans are bound suffer, black sheep would make fun and money out of it in future.

  • ultimatewarrior on July 3, 2011, 6:29 GMT

    Why not they let first 6 teams to qualify automatic and rest 4 decide from next 8 teams in ranking to make top 10 in one day world cup......... as well as keep top 16 for 20-20 world cup, definitely it will bring cricket closer to world's most popular sports.....for drs/hotspot/snickometer etc why not sit everybody and put some universal solution, instead of going for 1 by 1 individual series

  • mm71 on July 3, 2011, 6:27 GMT

    So much resentment against a country, money from which funds cricket development in most parts of the world. What is your problem Ian, that India contributes so much money? I feel you would prefer that India just gave you the money & stayed shut. You want to find others to fund it or do you want Indians to move on to other sports? Sure, we all can find other sports & you can go back to the days when the MOM used to win $100 & top cricketers used to do regular jobs to earn a living. Just remember this, cricket is the 2nd most popular sport in the world primarily due to the Indian subcontinent. We have done far more for cricket's development than what ICC/ MCC/ CA etc.

  • on July 3, 2011, 6:18 GMT

    we have talent and we rule ICC bcci=icc,plz keep control of ur words on bcci.

  • kabe_ag7 on July 3, 2011, 6:17 GMT

    Well India is not the only country which is not playing Bangladesh. England isn't playing them either. India got that bargain for accepting the UDRS? Well the BCCI always wanted Hotspot and doubted Hawkeye, both for valid sounding reasons and they got that. So your theory doesn't quite sit well.. And by the same theory what bargain did ECB strike to not play Bangladesh? The BCCI angle sounds just too contrived and based on presumptions.What is so confusing about the UDRS as it stands now? Suddenly you don't like it because the BCCI agreed to the UDRS. Why would giving referrals to umpires be such a good idea, when it has not been tested or debated at all? What's the guarantee that umpires would review their own decisions? Isn't the ICC trying to change the present system of appointing president by ending the rotation-system? And why is it that only the BCCI has to be held responsible for all the decisions made at the ICC? What do the rest of the members do, according to you?

  • CHARLA on July 3, 2011, 6:15 GMT

    VERY RARELY HAVE MY COMMENTS PUBLISHED,SPECIALLY REGARDING THE AUSTRALIANS AND THE LIKES OF IAN CHAPPEL.IS IT ANTI-ME OR PRO CHAPPEL/AUSTRALIA. THE PREAMBLE APART,ANSWER TO CHAPPEL IS CLEAR.ICC IS NOT FOOLING ANY ONE.IT IS CHAPPEL AND AUSTRALIANS--UMPIRES AND PLAYERS--WHO ARE SQUIRMING BECAUSE THEY NO LONGER CONTROL CRICKET,AS PLAYERS,ADMINISTRATORS,UMPIRES OR EVEN COMMENTATORS.THEY CANNOT STOMACH IT.LIKE SUNIL GAVASKAR SAID WHERE WAS THE SENSE OF FAIR PLAY WHEN AUSTRALIA AND ENGLAND WERE RULING CRICKET.ENGLAND,THE TRUE DEMOCRATS THAT THEY ARE--EXCEPT FOR A FEW COLONIALS--HAVE GRACIOSLY YIELDED SPACE.BUT NO,NOT THE AUSSIES.THE CHAPPELL BROTHERS PARTICULARLY TRIED TO RUIN INDIAN CRICKET.NONE OTHER THAN KATICH SAID HOW GREG CHAPPEL IS TRYING HIS DAMNDEST TO DO THE SAME WITH AUSTRALIA.GODSPEED TO HIM. LIKE SOMEBODY WROTE EARLIER,IAN CHAPPEL IS ALWAYS QUIBBLING BECAUSE HIS OWN COUNTRY NEVER GOT HIM INTO ADMINISTRATION.WHAT ALL HE DOES IS TO PROJECT PONTING WHEN TENDULKAR IS SHINING.AHA!

  • Lovetesh on July 3, 2011, 5:39 GMT

    As always Ian is not happy with something or other.

  • cricket__fan on July 3, 2011, 5:17 GMT

    An excellent article and as usual Chappelli has put the game of cricket above everything else. As long as capitalism exists ad there is money to be made, BCCI will always have their way. For over 100 years the MCC, England and Australia ran cricket as a sport with a heavy hand and now in line with the changing world order, India is the hub and every country has to bow to BCCI. Unfortunately, for BCCI cricket is an industry for the rich, the powerful, the politicians and the influential to make money. Sadly cricket will suffer and along with it cricket fans!!

  • cecil_bingo on July 3, 2011, 5:15 GMT

    Sack Sharad Pawar as he dont deserve to be there

  • on July 3, 2011, 5:05 GMT

    It seems that either Ian is trying to get out of Indian influence or he is no more given opportunities by India. So, now he can speak his mind. Whatever the case is, I totally agree with him. ICC is now being run by BCCI and all the decisions they are taking are biased. More people need to raise similar voice and make cricket more neutral.

  • Quazar on July 3, 2011, 5:02 GMT

    Ian, surely you realize that all international forums operate on compromises. Be it the UN, the WB, IMF, Climate talks, etc. It's not just the ICC. In fact, democracy itself runs on compromises. But it is interesting how noone ever asks what the ECB and CA do at the ICC, or condemn them for their inaction / complicity. Why is that??

  • aschisch on July 3, 2011, 4:55 GMT

    well said ian, now wait for us patriotic indians to jump to country's defence and shred you to pieces for daring to criticise the sole torch-bearer of cricket. how dare you criticise bcci, sachin, pawar, kalmadi etc. they r indians and hence can never be wrong.

  • donda on July 3, 2011, 4:53 GMT

    I think when Ian Chappel don't write on retiring old indian players then he makes too much good sense.

    This is an excellent article and i totally agree with Ian Chappel that ICC made the biggest mistake of omitting teams from T2020 format and adding more teams in ODI format in WC.

    T2020 is the best way to globalize cricket in Europe and america where people don't have more than 3 hours to watch one sports.

    I think if Mr. Chappel don't write about Indian current test team then he writes like a true journalist and i do respect him for that.

    Good article. Keep it up Ian Chappel.

  • on July 3, 2011, 4:48 GMT

    so true Mr. Chappell, BCCI should stop playing all this stupid political game in ICC.

  • Quazar on July 3, 2011, 4:48 GMT

    The T20 and 50-over WC decisions seem to be based basically on sharing the pot of (largely Indian) wealth generated by those events. All the full members want their cut... and when they had to lose some due to more teams at the 2015 Cup, they decided to compensate by culling the 2012 Cup to 12 teams.

  • Rezaul on July 3, 2011, 4:43 GMT

    Mr. Chappel, Bangladesh just defeated England in this world cup. In last world cup they even went to super six where both India and Pakistan were eliminated from 1st round. Before this world cup Bangladesh white wash your neighbour NZL by 4-0. And fresh from defeating WI in both test and ODI series. Are you still asking Bangladesh to play second tier? And why last two spots to be decided by qualification only? If we need qualification process then why not last 5 spots? After reading your column, I came to the conclusion, that being great cricketer not necessarily guarantee to be good columnist.

  • GlobalCricketLover on July 3, 2011, 4:41 GMT

    would like to see ICC enforcing the condition of 'no affiliation with any political party or movement' for all its administrators. How ironic is to have an Indian political minister as the ICC president? Kick him out! (i am in Indian btw). Most of India's regional boards are filled with local politicians. That must be stopped..

  • chad_reid on July 3, 2011, 4:40 GMT

    BLAH NOTHING NEW IT DOESNT TAKE A SCIENTIST TO FIGURE OUT THAT ICC IS RUN BY BCCI

  • demosthenes_wiggin on July 3, 2011, 4:35 GMT

    Mr Ian Chappell forgot to mention that the head of the ICC, who was former BCCI president, is one of the biggest politicians in India. Throw Mr Sharad Pawar out of the ICC and cricket will automatically become depoliticised

  • on July 3, 2011, 4:13 GMT

    Dear Mr chappel, I love ur articles and and i respect ur views. but only thing bothers me is when media and writers mention INDIA instead of saying BCCI. If u don't want to say BCCi than u can say indian cricket board. As u know india and BCCI is not the same. I m an indian and BCCI doesn't represent my cricketing view.

  • on July 3, 2011, 3:45 GMT

    What's Mr. Chappell's Problem! You should stick with criticizing players and match strategy rather than what BCCI gets and doesn't get.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on July 3, 2011, 3:45 GMT

    What's Mr. Chappell's Problem! You should stick with criticizing players and match strategy rather than what BCCI gets and doesn't get.

  • on July 3, 2011, 4:13 GMT

    Dear Mr chappel, I love ur articles and and i respect ur views. but only thing bothers me is when media and writers mention INDIA instead of saying BCCI. If u don't want to say BCCi than u can say indian cricket board. As u know india and BCCI is not the same. I m an indian and BCCI doesn't represent my cricketing view.

  • demosthenes_wiggin on July 3, 2011, 4:35 GMT

    Mr Ian Chappell forgot to mention that the head of the ICC, who was former BCCI president, is one of the biggest politicians in India. Throw Mr Sharad Pawar out of the ICC and cricket will automatically become depoliticised

  • chad_reid on July 3, 2011, 4:40 GMT

    BLAH NOTHING NEW IT DOESNT TAKE A SCIENTIST TO FIGURE OUT THAT ICC IS RUN BY BCCI

  • GlobalCricketLover on July 3, 2011, 4:41 GMT

    would like to see ICC enforcing the condition of 'no affiliation with any political party or movement' for all its administrators. How ironic is to have an Indian political minister as the ICC president? Kick him out! (i am in Indian btw). Most of India's regional boards are filled with local politicians. That must be stopped..

  • Rezaul on July 3, 2011, 4:43 GMT

    Mr. Chappel, Bangladesh just defeated England in this world cup. In last world cup they even went to super six where both India and Pakistan were eliminated from 1st round. Before this world cup Bangladesh white wash your neighbour NZL by 4-0. And fresh from defeating WI in both test and ODI series. Are you still asking Bangladesh to play second tier? And why last two spots to be decided by qualification only? If we need qualification process then why not last 5 spots? After reading your column, I came to the conclusion, that being great cricketer not necessarily guarantee to be good columnist.

  • Quazar on July 3, 2011, 4:48 GMT

    The T20 and 50-over WC decisions seem to be based basically on sharing the pot of (largely Indian) wealth generated by those events. All the full members want their cut... and when they had to lose some due to more teams at the 2015 Cup, they decided to compensate by culling the 2012 Cup to 12 teams.

  • on July 3, 2011, 4:48 GMT

    so true Mr. Chappell, BCCI should stop playing all this stupid political game in ICC.

  • donda on July 3, 2011, 4:53 GMT

    I think when Ian Chappel don't write on retiring old indian players then he makes too much good sense.

    This is an excellent article and i totally agree with Ian Chappel that ICC made the biggest mistake of omitting teams from T2020 format and adding more teams in ODI format in WC.

    T2020 is the best way to globalize cricket in Europe and america where people don't have more than 3 hours to watch one sports.

    I think if Mr. Chappel don't write about Indian current test team then he writes like a true journalist and i do respect him for that.

    Good article. Keep it up Ian Chappel.

  • aschisch on July 3, 2011, 4:55 GMT

    well said ian, now wait for us patriotic indians to jump to country's defence and shred you to pieces for daring to criticise the sole torch-bearer of cricket. how dare you criticise bcci, sachin, pawar, kalmadi etc. they r indians and hence can never be wrong.