Sri Lanka news January 23, 2014

SLC wants ICC to postpone discussion on draft proposal


Sri Lanka Cricket will ask the ICC to postpone the discussion on the draft proposals put forward by a working group of the Finance & Commercial Affairs committee, an official SLC release has said. SLC has avoided offering a definitive stance on the proposals, but has suggested it is resistant to their implementation, as it would result in a significant loss of the board's influence on the global governance of the game. The position paper is set to be discussed at the ICC meeting on January 28 and 29.

"The executive committee agreed to write to the president of the International Cricket Council and inform them the unanimous view of the executive committee of Sri Lanka Cricket is that the said position paper needs to be deferred and reconsidered on a future date," the statement said. "The executive committee further decided to discuss with the general membership of SLC too, at a future date."

In addition to the release, SLC secretary Nishantha Ranatunga said the executive committee had largely been wary of the proposals and their implications. "We feel that Sri Lanka has earned certain things at an administrative level through Sri Lanka's performance over a long time. We will explain to the ICC about the things that affect Sri Lankan cricket, which we are not supportive of."

Ranatunga also said SLC had not been in close contact with any other boards, and that Sri Lanka was unlikely to enter into a union but will, instead, present its "honest and independent" view to the ICC. CSA have so far come out in strong opposition to the proposals, with the other possibly affected boards yet to take concrete stands.

SLC's treacherous financial position leaves the board particularly vulnerable to any outcome that will hamper revenues in the short term, but the board's response thus far indicates they are also concerned about the long-term implications of adopting the F&CA committee's working group proposals. The scheduled home series against India in 2017 is the centrepiece of the board's broadcast deal with Ten Sports, and any threat to that tour will have substantial impact on the board's finances.

The proposal does contain some incentive for SLC. The proposed Test match fund, set aside to support nations where Tests are less financially viable, is a potential boon. In 2013 alone, seven Tests were either moved or postponed from Sri Lanka's itinerary, though several of these removals had more to do with the fiscal position of foreign boards with whom a bilateral series had been scheduled.

Andrew Fidel Fernando is ESPNcricinfo's Sri Lanka correspondent. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Dummy4 on January 27, 2014, 20:33 GMT

    The 80% of total cricket revenue generated by India (or Indians rather), is that solely from Dulip and Ranji Trophies? or is it a combination of revenue from IPL, which is so big because of participation by the best cricketers from AROUND THE WORLD, the games that India play with other countries ESPECIALLY VS PAKISTAN but also Sri Lanka (CWC Final) and South Africa (not just Aus or England) and also by Indians who would watch games between other countries as well? Do you think if Only India, Aus and England just played each other, there will be as much revenue? NO. Also ICC governance is already sketchy enough that it actually needs to be more transparent not less, and while India should get more money, There is no reason to give complete executive control to these three countries. Not India with a BCCI president who was only recently investigated for corruption, not a country that failed to even make the Semis in the last world cup, or one that can't win 1 test in a 5 match series

  • Muhammad on January 26, 2014, 8:52 GMT

    what the BIG3 are going to do is they are going to make cricket a la football.. 3 leagues IPL, BigBash and English County... and they want complete windows for these leagues and they will reduce International cricket plus they will make sure no other country will be able to compete them i.e. not give them a window another question can be, why BCCI needs other albeit IPL is the biggest one.. the answer is they know only ECB , Cricket Australia and RSA can oppose them and they got a two-third majority and left RSA.. indeed its RSA that is most dejected because the other boards are spineless

  • Nilantha on January 25, 2014, 13:22 GMT

    cont..and personally i dont care about the main reason for me opposing the idea of this "proposal" is the death of cricket outside the top tier and the power base of cricket being turned into a dictatorship..

  • Nilantha on January 25, 2014, 13:20 GMT

    @Raj Kumar - why do you and certain other fans think that this is due to the indian players? 80% of the income comes from the tv sponsorship deals and this will continue irrespective of whether india is involved or not..true cricket fans would want to watch the cricket all the ime not just when their team is involved..

  • Atish on January 25, 2014, 3:12 GMT

    @Wasif minhas and Asim ashraf I agree with u guys. I m an indian and dont care how much bcci gets. They can take their share. But they should not try to grab power. Also there should b a strong ftp. Current ftp is useless. They can take 21%. But should play matches with pakistan. That can help pak financially. Last ind vs pak series in dec 2012 fetched 30 millions from 3 odi and 2 T20 matches.

  • Dummy4 on January 25, 2014, 1:48 GMT

    I dont think there is any negotiation over these proposals. They will go through with some "amendments" to ensure other boards dont lose their face. But I dont see this being put off at all.

  • Rick on January 24, 2014, 20:55 GMT

    Continuation: The current ICC TV contract is based solely on the Big 3 and especially India's participation in order to maintain current or future revenue. So the rest would continue too lose money like they do today. So for how long can these Boards continue to lose money? The other boards need the big 3 more then the other way around and the Big 3 know that. Watch how the others will come into line. The Big 3 can survive on the own with them just playing each other and running IPL/Big Bash Etc if need be and probably make more revenue. 80% of ICC revenue today is because of India. … Lesson here is never bite the hand that feeds you.

  • zeta on January 24, 2014, 20:41 GMT

    Well this will be death of cricket. Cricket becomes popular only after the emergence of nations like south africa, pakistan and srilanka. without them there will be no cricket icc will be limited to these aus, eng and India. Revenue will be decreased as well.

  • Syed on January 24, 2014, 18:44 GMT

    I think rest of the nations has to show some resolve. This power grab need to stopped. I think seven financially handicapped nation starts to think about an alternate to ICC if it becomes a rubberstamp to BCCI/CA/ECB Axis Power (remember WWII).

  • Dummy4 on January 24, 2014, 18:27 GMT

    Few guys from India have a point that if a board is bringing most of the money then they should be able to get the revenues accordingly. Fellows its not a matter of money only, its about power and decision making. If India brings in more money, it can take the due share and i think at the moment they are enjoying a handful of bounties at ICC but decision making and ftp should be in hands of an independent governing body which is free from any influences from member boards. All boards have plans like SLC is looking forward to the broadcast deals in 2017, likewise other countries do plan accordingly, if we give powers to 3 boards and they would cancel any bilateral series at any point in time then it will have serious financial implications on other boards and ultimately they won't have enough money to run their affairs.

  • No featured comments at the moment.