New Zealand news January 20, 2014

NZC not worried over power takeover - Snedden

ESPNcricinfo staff

Martin Snedden, the New Zealand Cricket (NZC) director, has said that the possibility of the ICC handing over power to the Big Three - India, England and Australia - and allowing them to control the game's finances may not be a bad thing for world cricket.

The proposals from the ICC's Financial & Commercial Affairs "working group position paper" seek, among other things, to scrap the central FTP agreements between the ICC and its members and replace it with bilateral agreements between member nations. It led to concerns that the other Test playing nations, including New Zealand, might not get the share they deserve, at the expense of the Big Three, but Snedden was confident that NZC's interests will be enhanced if the latest proposals are approved.

"Do we [NZC] have power at the ICC table? No, not a hell of a lot. Do we have the ability to influence and persuade? A little bit. The critical thing is to identify the things most important to us. That means ensuring the stability of our playing programme and revenue generation," Snedden told the New Zealand Herald.

The reason the FTP is to be removed from central ICC control, according to the position paper, is because "the draft FTP, as it stands, contains a large number of unviable tours." Cricket Australia, the ECB and the BCCI it is stated, are "committing" to enter into FTP agreements from 2015 to 2023.

"It's a fundamental outcome for us to be left with a playing programme which sees us play all the Test-playing countries in a four-year cycle like in the FTP. Ratification of the existing schedule would be an excellent outcome. It's early stages but we've got a good chance of doing that. I need to stress there's nothing wrong with India, Australia and England working together to produce something for everyone," Snedden said.

"Don't jump to the conclusion what they're doing is not good for world cricket. Get this right and the FTP playing programme can be extended to 2023 and we can line it up with ICC events like the World Cup and World T20. That'd be a stable platform to work from."

The BCCI continues to generate the majority of the income for the ICC and though Snedden admitted that it will be more of the same, he said that cricket boards will have to embrace India's control.

"I've walked back into a different world from what I left in 2007. When I exited, there was no IPL and the broadcasting rights were headed in India's direction but that has escalated over six years," Snedden said.

"Whatever the formula reached, India will take a greater slice. I think that's fair because they create 70-80 per cent of the revenue. That's not unusual in the world of sporting rights agreements. The Indian market's escalated out of proportion to everyone else since last time.

"We need to remove any doubt over their involvement in 2015-23 tours. If they're fully committed to the programme, that puts the ICC negotiating team in a strong position to exploit commercial rights."

The proposals will be presented to the ICC Executive Board during its quarterly meeting in Dubai on January 28 and 29.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Dummy4 on January 27, 2014, 21:33 GMT

    "the BCCI for everything in spite of it single handedly keeping the sport alive"

    And here I thought it "takes two to tango". But apparently not. What is India's Test XI without world class opposition, such as South Africa's Test XI?

    If Indian fans love cricket so much, that they want to see only India, then I say BCCI may have killed (international) cricket, not cultivated it.

  • Shiv on January 24, 2014, 21:34 GMT

    " I think that's fair because they create 70-80 per cent of the revenue. That's not unusual in the world of sporting rights agreements." - How hard this fact must hit the haters. Blame the BCCI for everything in spite of it single handedly keeping the sport alive.

  • Dummy4 on January 23, 2014, 7:10 GMT

    It is very sad that world cricket is passing a very difficult time now a days. Where is viewer are demanding more cricket, but the decision which is going to take place at ICC will be devastating for World Cricket. This is money play. The viewers will suffer in the future if it pass through ICC.

    One side ICC is telling us they want to expand the cricket sport all over the globe, one the other hand they are restricting through this arrangement. Bad luck for World Cricket.

  • rob on January 22, 2014, 22:00 GMT

    As is so often the case, NZ is a sole voice of reason among a shed full of headless chooks. I don't pretend to understand much of what these proposals actually mean or what the long-term implications are but simply condemning them out of hand because you don't like the look of them is, well, stupid.

    Why not hear the 3 out? Get them to lay their plans out fully and then examine them closely with an open mind?. .. What's to be lost by doing that? .. As it stands the FTP is a mess anyway so I would have thought that ANY plan to improve it should be considered calmly and rationally.

    Good on you Sneddon. Sometimes it takes real courage to NOT jump on a bandwagon and as usual the Kiwi's show us what real courage is.

  • Dummy4 on January 22, 2014, 19:21 GMT

    The non-relegation clause has to be done away at all costs. It is about the financial security of the "Big 3" (and not of the game) at the cost of the other teams.

    There are writers mentioning that the smaller boards will have to become more efficient. But with the non-relegation clause this will not be possible. What will be the reward for promoting the game when you can not pass the Big 3 in rankings.

    The incentive of better performance in cricket on the field is to have a higher ranking which will create more interest for the team translating to more sponsorships and higher revenues. But the non-relegation clause ensures the opposite. It ensures that even if G7 reach the top of the rankings, the Big 3 will not relinquish a place for them ensuring that the G7 can not increase their share. Revenue will be guaranteed for the Big 3 and a lack of it for the G7.

  • Dummy4 on January 22, 2014, 10:22 GMT

    I believe this could lead to the end of cricket in New Zealand as we know it... it is very sad... the sport is being sold off all for the mighty dollar.. or should that be the rupee....DON'T VOTE for this proposal NZC...if you do it will be too late to put the genie back in the bottle...

  • Damian on January 22, 2014, 0:10 GMT

    Contrary to what many of the posters here are saying NZC does not appear to have decided on it's response and I don't think a vote for the proposal is guaranteed. This article doesn't contain anything saying that NZC will vote for the proposal, it more states that this MAY not be as bad as it is being made out to be. He says that NZC has no power atm anyway.

    I have just read an article on a NZ website that states that NZC board have just held a meeting and will only consider this if the FTP is kept as it is until 2020. It also states that they agree with CSA that any changes need to meet the ICC constitution and should not be rushed through.

    From a personal point of view I am hoping that Snedden and the other members of NZC come to their senses and vote against the proposal. I think the fact CSA and PCB have come out strongly against the proposal in public is excellent. Hopefully it will encourage other boards to also vote against the proposal (knowing they won't be the only ones).

  • Leigh on January 21, 2014, 23:13 GMT

    Martin Snedden is one of the best sporting administrators around. He will approach this from a pragmatic point of view and reach a compromise that benefits NZ Cricket don't worry about that. I don't think his words are "gutless" I think, in the circumstances they are smart. I don't think any party should be forced to undertake tours that will cost them money but surely the ICC could find a system that underwrites these tours while allowing countries to develop in crease the fan base by holding tours in countries less exposed to cricket

  • Sabih on January 21, 2014, 21:22 GMT

    The fact that many non-big3 nations generate so little in revenue is because the big 3 do not want to play with these countries, thereby creating a cycle which is hard to break.

  • Garry on January 21, 2014, 20:44 GMT

    Crips, I thought Snedden had more ummm marbles than that. Was a great CEO back in the day. I guess John Key's bend over attutude is rubbing off on the general population now.

  • No featured comments at the moment.