India, Australia and England in attempt to take control of cricket

[alexander]

I would be very sad if WI were relegated into tier 2 which on current [and prolonged] form is possible. WI v England has tradition, history, gravitas and depth to it beyond the field. As it stands, WI and NZL will probably be the last 2 top 8 sides for a long time, and so they alone would face genuine fears of losing their place. Cant accept that. Just get rid of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe who dont enrich the game (nod to past Zim players of class).

[Chandan]

Another article which discusses the pros of this: http://goo.gl/Nmkstm Big Three v Small Seven not the end of the world Anand Vasu | 20 January 2014 The Small Seven have a chance to defeat this proposal, should they believe it only serves to strengthen the strong and destroy the rest. Whether they will do so is another matter altogether. © Getty Images The proposed restructuring of the International Cricket Council has been widely described as a death sentence for the global game as we know it. If the move is ratified, and it does kill Test cricket, then Test cricket was dead in the first place. The suggestions are a diagnosis of several things that afflict the global game, and a proposed course of treatment. To be sure, most patients would prefer to be able to choose their doctors – in this case, representatives of the Board of Control for Cricket in India, the England & Wales Cricket Board and Cricket Australia have taken it upon themselves to produce this 21-page draft Position Paper – and then have the final say in the course of treatment to be undertaken. Representatives of the seven countries not supping at the head table, who Osman Samiuddin, who first alerted the world to this story, describes as the ‘Small Seven’, will have a chance to block this proposal, should they so desire, when the ICC board meets. In the past, various cricket boards have been shown to be utterly duplicitous, shouting from the rooftops about the dominance of one group or another, planting stories in various media outlets, but eventually voting solely to protect their own interests. Now, in what will change the way they run their own affairs, the Small Seven have a chance to walk the talk, with their votes, and defeat this proposal, should they believe it only serves to strengthen the strong and destroy the rest. Whether they will do so is another matter altogether. There is an opportunity here for the Small Seven to come together, and they will have to be led by Cricket South Africa, the only truly strong cricket nation not to be invited to the big feast, but each of these members may decide that the risk of being locked out entirely far outweighs the rewards that the Position Paper bestows. Certainly, if there was unity in the cricket world, the time to come together would have been for a Nervous Nine to square off against India, and put the BCCI in its place. Even contributing 80% of the cricket world’s money, India could not sustain itself with no one to play against. In that scenario, however, the ECB and CA showed their truest colours, working furiously to ingratiate themselves with the BCCI rather than mount a challenge or provide leadership to other boards who wanted to stand up to the powers that be but did not have the means to do so. This move will not kill cricket, but it will certainly change the global landscape, although not necessarily anywhere near as dramatically as the doomsday prophets suggest. Greedy as they are for more lucrative cricket among themselves, the BCCI, ECB and CA are unlikely to simply stop playing opposition outside their own club. In the current scenario, several cricket boards are bankrupt, or so heavily indebted to financial institutions that only the occasional visit from one of the Big Three keeps them afloat. Many of us have warned for years that this dangerous dependence on a few could end only in disaster. In an ideal world, each of the ten Test-playing nations would play each other equally, but the world we live in is governed not by idealism but the hard reality of commerce. It was often said that the ICC should ensure a level playing field, but none of the people suggesting this ever explained who would pay for this. Certainly, it’s farfetched to expect the BCCI, ECB and CA to subsidise a bilateral series between, say Sri Lanka and New Zealand. And the fact of the matter is that it is these bilateral tours that are mandated by the Future Tours Programme (FTP), involving any two of the Small Seven, that are bankrupting those very boards. If such tours are effectively killing off the home boards that undertake them, should they be played as often as they currently are? A game that is actively played at the highest level by only ten of its 106 constituents should not be allowed to constrict further, but the new proposal sets aside a Test Fund to allow teams to play each other even when the market says otherwise. As for the FTP, it was hardly worth the paper it was printed on, for the BCCI have never invited the Bangladesh Cricket Board over for a tour, the Ashes are played as often and involve as many Tests as the ECB and CA can agree to, and other countries have begun to tailor the content of their tours based on broadcasters’ demands. An FTP that was, for all practical purposes, non-binding, served no real purpose, and its scrapping can only be welcome as it’s a move towards greater honesty and clarity. A natural fallout of this would be that the World Test Championship, a non-starter at the best of times, is scrapped as there would be no time frame in which all teams would be required to play each other at least once, home and away, making the rankings system even more meaningless than it already is. What this means, also, is that introducing a multi-tiered Test system could prove problematic. If all teams do not play each other often enough, how would you fairly judge who should be in which tier? When South Africa’s greatest cricketer, Jacques Kallis, bid farewell to the pinnacle of the game, only a few thousand turned up in Durban. This is sad, but it is unfortunately the way of the cricket world at the moment. © Getty Images The one stinker in the new proposal is that India, England and Australia will be exempt from relegation, and while this is understandable in limited-overs cricket, where the absence of one or more of these teams at a World Cup would spell disaster for the event, there is no call for such protectionism in Tests. Presumably, even if one of these teams were to go from Tier A to Tier B, the commercial value of a series involving them would not be greatly impacted. While most cricket boards have maintained a studied silence on the leaked proposal, there have been several strong reactions from around the world. In these pages, Dileep Premachandran has argued that the potent mix of greed and amnesia points to an ugly future. Elsewhere, Samiuddin says the proposal should be met with outrage; Jarrod Kimber urges fans to let cricket boards know they’re being watched; Gideon Haigh bats on in his Cuts and Glances blog. And this is only to be expected at any moment when a game finds itself at the crossroads. The fundamental source of anger stems from two things. Firstly, few trust the representatives of these three boards, as part of an ICC committee, to do right by the global game, to take those who are not fortunate to boast the backing of a big market or a traditional Test following, with them, rather than trample them underfoot. Secondly, there is a lack of transparency in the process that makes suspicion inherent, even desirable, and when you couple with being unable to precisely predict what the outcomes may be, there is anxiety. However, the cricket world has changed drastically in the last decade or so. If this revamped structure made it possible for more Sri Lankan cricketers to earn a living from the game by playing in T20 leagues around the world, would that be all bad? To suggest that you can only love a sport if you support country-versus-country competition is a uniquely cricketing outlook. Fans of baseball in the United States are no poorer because their country does not tour the world around the year playing five-match series. Many English Premier League season-ticket holders spend considerable time, effort and energy to support their team, without ever having gone to an international. In England and Australia, Test grounds are full, and certain centres occasionally attract decent crowds. At Kingsmead in Durban last month, when Cricket South Africa threw open the gates on the final day of the second Test, when South Africa’s greatest cricketer bid farewell to the pinnacle of the game, a few thousand turned up, even as twenty times the number thronged North Beach a kilometre away. You can argue that this is sad, but it is unfortunately the way of the cricket world at the moment. It has been suggested that this proposal would destroy the foundations of democracy and lead to an oligarchy. I’m afraid it always was, it’s just that the new order formalises this in no uncertain manner. To go back to the original analogy, a diagnosis has been made, and a course of treatment decided on. This will result in pain, and discomfort, and there is no guarantee that the patient will be cured. However, doing nothing was not an option, as that could have ended only one way.

[BeautifulGame]

PCB are angry probably because this draft requires their accounts to be mandatorily audited by ICC unlike in the past So now they cant spend the ICC funds for their lavish life style.

[BlackMamba]

Something I have been recommending for more than 5 years now. Even SL and Zim Should be Audited. And I am thinking BCCI is being audited by Independent Auditors, if not even they should be.

[Chandan]

http://goo.gl/zR8TCF Lanka to oppose Indo-UK-Aussie proposal By admin on January 20, 2014 Sri Lanka has decided to oppose a draft proposal to be submitted to the International Cricket Council (ICC) by three countries, including India, which looks to give those three countries greater rights in the ICC. The decision to oppose the draft proposal was taken at a meeting held this evening between Sports Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage and Sri Lanka Cricket. The proposal has been jointly drafted by India, England and Australia and under the proposal even future cricket tours will also be decided by the three countries. Aluthgamage told a private television station this evening that the Executive Committee of Sri Lanka Cricket will meet to take a final decision on the proposal. The Minister said that the draft proposal is damaging not just to Sri Lanka but even to the other cricket playing nations other than India, Australia and England. He said that the final stand taken by Sri Lanka Cricket will be conveyed to the ICC this month. (Colombo Gazette) ---------------------------------------------------------- http://goo.gl/Oc0TIO Test cricket: CSA asks ICC to withdraw 'flawed' proposal Cricket South Africa has called on the International Cricket Council to withdraw the 'fundamentally flawed' proposal to give England, Australia and India greater control of the sport. A 21-page "position paper" is scheduled to be discussed at the ICC's executive board meeting on 28-29 January. CSA argue that the plan is in breach of the ICC constitution. "We propose the draft proposal be withdrawn immediately," CSA president Chris Nenzani said. Test rankings 1. South Africa 2. India 3. Australia 4. England 5. Pakistan 6. Sri Lanka 7. West Indies 8. New Zealand 9. Zimbabwe 10. Bangladesh The position paper proposes the formation of a four-man executive committee, on which the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), Cricket Australia (CA) and the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) would be guaranteed a place. The other position would be selected by the three boards annually. The powers of that executive committee would supersede those of the ICC's executive board - a panel on which all the full-member nations sit to agree major decisions. CSA argue that any proposed amendments to the ICC constitution or to ICC competitions first need to be discussed in committee before they can be voted on by the ICC Board. Key proposals the ICC will discuss *Setting up a new executive with permanent memberships for governing bodies of England, Australia and India, with powers over all other committees *Relegation and promotion in Test cricket, with exceptions for England, Australia and India *Scrapping the Future Tours Programme, with bilateral agreements taking over New finance model of ICC revenue distribution *Reviving of Champions Trophy in 2017 and 2021 in place of the World Test Championship *New finance model of ICC revenue distribution *Reviving of Champions Trophy in 2017 and 2021 in place of the World Test Championship "Without addressing the merits of the proposal insofar as it concerns constitutional amendments and changes to ICC competitions, these proposals should first be referred to the relevant ICC committees or sub‐committees for proper consideration and to make recommendations to the ICC board," Nenzani wrote in a letter to ICC President Alan Isaac. "Although there is nothing to prevent a review of the ICC funding model or finances, the proposal self-evidently is inextricably tied up with a fundamental restructuring of the ICC, which has far‐reaching constitutional implications. "The draft proposal is, therefore, fundamentally flawed as regards the process and, therefore, in breach of the ICC constitution." Any decision on potential changes to the structure of cricket's governing body will be made solely by the ICC board, with further discussion to take place, if required, in its meetings in April, July and October.

[Chandan]

http://goo.gl/IhBfOV Secrecy with which ICC want to ring in changes has board members peeved Osman Samiuddin January 20, 2014 Updated: January 20, 2014 22:54:00 One of the most revealing aspects of the attempt by the boards of Australia, England and India to take over the administration of the game has been the surreptitious manner in which a key report was drafted – “as if in a smokey, dark, back room somewhere,” one official said. Cricket Australia, the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) and India’s Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) worked on the report for six months, unbeknownst to any other board or the ICC, officials said. It was only after a full meeting of the ICC’s Finance & Commercial Affairs (F&CA) committee in Perth during the Ashes Test in December that the three key players behind the report decided to ask the ICC to send out invites to all full-member boards for a January 9 meeting in Dubai. The invite was unusual and without much precedent. Such meetings usually are initiated by the ICC president. In this case, Alan Isaac, the incumbent, was sent an invite himself. Tellingly, given the implications in the report for them, no member from the associate boards was invited. Very little was revealed in the invites about an agenda, as is generally the process. There was, according to one board, a vague reference to financial discussions. One attendee said that between the invites being sent and the meeting date, board members had begun to suss out something big was up. Some felt the meeting was an ambush. Giles Clarke, the ECB chairman, reportedly started proceedings before the BCCI’s N Srinivasan took over. Clarke has since reiterated that this report is merely a draft and thus not worth commenting on yet because it could change shape, but that was not the impression left upon attendees. “They are overturning the entire formula of equity but they are saying take it or leave it,” one official said. “If you don’t want to take it, lump it, we are going ahead anyway. That was the way.” There was not much protest at the meeting, though some of the smaller boards asked basic questions about how the calculations had been arrived at, and why others were not consulted. They were summarily turned away. One official eventually turned to one of the “big three”: “Are you asking us to take it or leave it, here? Are you doing a [uN] Security Council veto on us? He said, ‘Well, I guess you could say that’.” The management of the governing body was present at the January 9 meeting, but they were not officially provided with copies of the report. The ICC’s members on the F&CA committee include David Richardson, the ICC chief executive, and Faisal Hasnain, the chief financial officer, but nobody on that committee, outside the big three authors, knew of the existence of the report. The proposals will now be discussed during a three-day ICC meeting in Dubai from January 27. They could be voted upon during that time. “The recommendations, which have been put together by a working group of ICC’s Finance and Commercial Affairs Committee (F&CA), are to be discussed by the full F&CA and ICC Board when it meets in Dubai from 27-29 January,” the ICC said in a statement. “The ICC will only make a comment on this matter once the Board has had the opportunity to meet and properly consider the proposals.”

[BeautifulGame]

One official eventually turned to one of the big three: Are you asking us to take it or leave it, here? Are you doing a [uN] Security Council veto on us? He said, Well, I guess you could say that.

DON SRINI

[BeautifulGame]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jan/21/the-spin-icc-reform-proposal-cricket

[BlackMamba]

The biggest sufferer of all of this would be CSA. It was the dumbest move by CSA to appoint Haroon Lorgat. They did not achieve anything and they are set to lose a lot. CSA is completely isolated and out in the cold all by itself.

[Chandan]

http://goo.gl/V1y3Ka Greed and amnesia – cricket’s ugly future Dileep Premachandran | 19 January 2014 It is the match made in heaven – the meeting of the forces of greed and commerce with amnesia. The lure of those few dollars more can make you forget anything. Yesterday’s enemies become today’s friends. Those that slighted you repeatedly once are now your brothers in arms. If you follow cricket, you would know this. There has been so much evidence of this celestial partnership over the past few years. The recent revelations about an ICC revamp make for alarming reading if you love the game. But they come with a silver lining. The fact that such sensitive information was leaked into the public domain suggests that there are still some in cricket administration who care about more than just the bottom line – men with at least a smidgen of integrity. Sadly, there aren’t enough of them; else the game wouldn’t be in such a state. Make no mistake, if the proposed changes come about, the spineless bunch that let India, England and Australia do as they please deserve the sort of withering contempt reserved for men like Neville ‘Peace in our time’ Chamberlain. There are seven other countries that are full members of the ICC. If some of the administrators that represent those nations can still stand upright, this frankly gangster-ish attempt to hijack the game’s future may yet fail. How would things be any different from the way they are now, you might well ask? Despite a Future Tours Programme being notionally in place, the big three pretty much do as they want, and play each other as often as they can. What these proposals would do is rubber-stamp that, and ensure that they no longer even have to pretend to be interested in playing West Indies, New Zealand or Bangladesh. The idea of the poachers guarding the game reserve finds ultimate expression in the promotion-relegation system that has been mooted for Test cricket. In theory, it’s not an appalling idea. If nothing else, it would give each fixture some context and ensure that there are no dead rubbers. But the way it’s likely to be implemented – with India, England and Australia permanent fixtures in the top tier “to protect ICC income due to the importance of those markets and teams to prospective ICC media rights buyers” – would be hilarious if it wasn’t so pathetic. What is being proposed is little more than match fixing. Assuming that we’re talking about two divisions of six teams each, with two sides going up and down in each cycle, you could find a scenario where the teams that finish second and third are relegated just so that the three bullies can continue to stuff their faces at the top table. It isn’t as implausible as you think. These moves have their genesis in arrogance and ignorance. The arrogance is easy to explain. It comes from the money that these boards make, based on sweet deals with the likes of Star Sports, Sky and Channel Nine. The ignorance comes from a lack of love for the game, and witlessness about the cyclical nature of sporting success. In America’s National Football League, the Green Bay Packers won 13 championships before 1968, five of them under the stewardship of the legendary Vince Lombardi. It would take them nearly three decades to add another Super Bowl to the collection. They have won one more since. Real Madrid, the most successful club in world football and nine times champions of Europe, didn’t win that most prestigious trophy once between 1966 and 1998. Then, they succeeded thrice in five years. The current drought goes back more than a decade. Those that talk glibly of merit should be grabbed by the throat and forced to look at Test results from the 1980s. That was a decade when New Zealand were unbeaten at home, when West Indies thrashed most teams for fun, and Pakistan were the second-best side around. England’s win-loss record in that decade was a pitiful 20-39. In the 1990s, it was scarcely better – 26-39. As for India, they won just 11 of 81 Tests in the ’80s, losing 21. Australian cricket was such a basket case midway through the decade that they would even have lost at home to India but for umpiring dodgier than two-day-old prawn sandwiches. Now, these three, who have all known what it feels like to hit rock bottom – one could argue that England are there now, with India having experienced the sinking feeling as recently as 2011-12 – have no qualms about kicking the others when they’re down. Such an attitude should be especially cringe-worthy if you’re an Indian, who knows what it’s like to be on the receiving end. England didn’t even bother sending a full-strength side to India until 1976-77. Australia visited precisely twice between 1969-70 and 1996, when they deigned to play a one-off Test in Delhi. Then, the Indian economy went from bust to boom and everything changed. Yesterday’s pariah became Mr. Popular. Before they nudge the likes of West Indies towards the exit door, India’s administrators would do well to think of debts owed. In the days when others couldn’t be bothered to send their stars on what was considered a punishment tour, West Indies sent Weekes and Walcott, Sobers and Kanhai, Hall and Griffith. Watching these legends inspired two generations of Indian cricket fans. Contrary to what the Bible says, the meek seldom inherit anything. But at least in other sports, they get a semblance of a level playing field. This decade, Spain, world and European champions, have played 49 football matches, 18 of them in major tournaments. Tiny Andorra, with no hope of ever qualifying for a major event, have managed 25 games in the same period. Spain, fortunately, don’t have the luxury of scheduling games only against England, Italy, Brazil and Germany. No sport is perfect, but few get it wrong as often as cricket does. With Ireland and Afghanistan making a big push, this should be the time to open doors, not slam them in others’ faces. Cabals are not the future, founded as they are on greed and deceit. As fans of this great game, we need to keep banging our heads against the brick wall for as long as we can. This is a cause we must not abandon. If we do, the sport as we know it is as good as dead. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://goo.gl/w2KJfJ The plot to destroy Test cricket By Tim Wigmore Sport Last updated: January 22nd, 2014 South Africa opposes the proposals by Australia, England and India If there's anything more tedious than another pointless one-day international, it's cricket politics. But this time it's worth paying attention: Test cricket as we know is on the verge of destruction. This is what's going on. In a week's time, the ICC board will meet to discuss an audacious power-grab by Australia, England and India. They want more money and more control over cricket, and don't even bother to be subtle about their intentions. What the self-proclaimed "big three" (which excludes, of course, South Africa, the best Test team in the world) seek is the right to be ungovernable. They want a new executive committee to run the game, consisting of four members – one each from Australia, England and India, and another stooge agreed to by them. The future tours programme, which aims to give smaller Test teams a decent Test programme, would be scraped. The big three could then play each other with impunity – Test cricket reduced to one never-ending Australia-England-India triangular tournament. Naturally the proposals make a big play of words like "meritocracy", but that's a sham. Calls to introduce promotion and relegation to Test cricket will attract many. But there's just one snag: Australia, England and India would be immune from the drop "solely in order to protect ICC income due to the importance of those markets and teams to prospective ICC media rights buyers." How noble. And, under this new world order, all ICC tournaments would also be held exclusively in the "big three" countries. It is "meritocracy" defined by revenue-raising ability alone. The real motivation is simple: the big three want more cash for themselves. Hence the recommendation of a new funding distribution model, which would increase the money that India got from the ICC by about a fifth. As cricket revenues grow, Australia, England and India propose that they claim a progressively higher share of the bounty. For all the other Test nations, the proposals would be catastrophic. The document says that there should be no more "economically unviable" tours. Translated, that means that Test cricket would near extinction in countries like Pakistan, South Africa and West Indies, so integral to cricket's rich tapestry. Just this week, Pakistan chased over 300 to beat Sri Lanka. But under the dystopian vision of this document, such matches would soon become history; the proposed "Test Cricket Fund" is hopelessly light on the funds needed to sustain vibrant Test cricket outside the big three nations. Without guarantees of tours by these nations to subsidise their other fixtures, Test cricket would face an existential crisis. Any redeeming features of the proposals are a mere by-product of the determination of the big three nations to formalise and entrench their cartel. Nothing is more revealing than the timeframe for the proposals: they would be voted on next week, with the envisaged new business arm of the ICC in place by April. It shows utter contempt for any notion of putting the interests of the game first: we wouldn't have even known what was being voted on next week had there not been a leak. It's a classic despotic technique: bundle together constitutional changes and rush them through before giving the opposition a chance to organise. So cricket's future now depends on whether the big three can cajole four allies from the other seven nations – and confirm a new dawn whereby cricket doesn't so much need money in order to exist but exists to make money. Through bullying tactics – threatening to pull-out of looming tours, which would threaten smaller countries with financial disaster – the big three could well get their way. They deserve to be called out before they irrevocably bend cricket's future to their will. Contacting the ECB is as good a way as any to start. ------------------------------- If tests are reduced to just one or two series with the same opponent and mostly league T20s and ODIs, cricket will be over for me. I'm glad Sachin, Dravid, Kumble etc retired before this happened!

[Scarves]

The more I read these articles from both sides, the more I know that cricket is ****ed. CA is run by a dumbass, England is England and the BCCI is as corrupt as Blatter. At least other countries have different sports. NZ and RSA can survive on rugby, Sri Lanka play the same sport, Australia and England got a lot of sport, the Caribbean got basketball. Pakistan is err well they are stuffed anyway but what does India have? Nothing, they got literally banned by the IOC.

[G_B_]

The more I read these articles from both sides, the more I know that cricket is ****ed. CA is run by a dumbass, England is England and the BCCI is as corrupt as Blatter. At least other countries have different sports. NZ and RSA can survive on rugby, Sri Lanka play the same sport, Australia and England got a lot of sport, the Caribbean got basketball. Pakistan is err well they are stuffed anyway but what does India have? Nothing, they got literally banned by the IOC.

you do realise that even the Boks are fighting for more money in the 4 nations from the All Blacks and Pumas..... As the marathi saying goes, dooroon dongar sajare, translated as the grass is always greener on the other side. One just has to look at the choas with the Heiniken cup. Rugby union is facing the same pressue whereby Franch clubs contibute disproportionately while the likes of Wales and Scotland give another and get everything in return. Plus come on, hardly anybody in the world plays American football. Yet that does not bother the Americans. American Football is still the number 1 sport of america. Dont tell me Australia will give up on the "footy" cause nobody else plays it.

[bangladeshifan]

I would be very sad if WI were relegated into tier 2 which on current [and prolonged] form is possible. WI v England has tradition, history, gravitas and depth to it beyond the field. As it stands, WI and NZL will probably be the last 2 top 8 sides for a long time, and so they alone would face genuine fears of losing their place. Cant accept that. Just get rid of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe who dont enrich the game (nod to past Zim players of class).

get rid of everyone and play IPL all the year round. sala ahammok

[bangladeshifan]

BCCI puts ICC events on the line http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/current/story/712253.html

[BeautifulGame]

The BCCI today virtually served notice on any ICC Full Members opposed to a makeover of the ruling body, indicating that India's participation in ICC events was subject to the radical draft proposal being approved by the ICC's executive board. The proposal recommends a structural overhaul of the ICC and proposes bigger revenues and more executive decision-making powers to the BCCI, Cricket Australia and the ECB. The BCCI, in a three-point release following an emergent working committee meeting in Chennai, said the committee had formally approved the proposal, terming it as being "in the interests of cricket at large". The message as regards ICC events was then sent out to the other members, stating that the committee has "authorised the office bearers to enter into agreements with the ICC for participating in the ICC events and hosting ICC events, subject to the proposal being approved by the ICC board." It termed the proposal as "in the interest of cricket at large". Poll The proposed revamp of the ICC is, Good for cricket Not good for cricket Dont care, as long as the sport is played fairly See results » The BCCI's working committee also cleared the way for its leading officer bearers to sign bilateral agreements with all other Full Member boards, including Pakistan. The draft proposal contained commitments from the ECB and Cricket Australia over legally-binding bilateral agreements with eight Full Members. The absence of such a guarantee from the BCCI in the draft document had raised apprehensions among smaller boards who subsist on tours from India. It is understood that such a commitment could not have been made without approval of the BCCI's working committee. While the ECB and CA have committed to undertake tours to the top eight countries, in principle, BCCI's proposal covers all ten nations. "We have never said that it [the draft proposal] was set in stone or a 'take-it-or-leave it' proposition," a BCCI official said. "It is clear that it is a draft and members can discuss it with their respective boards and it can be discussed in the ICC board meeting." It is also understood that the draft proposal, put together by a working group of the ICC's Finance & Commercial Affairs committee was open to discussing amendments as long as the BCCI's central plank - redistribution of the ICC central revenue being proportionate to the income generated through each member board - was not diluted. The BCCI working committee was insistent on not yielding ground on the matter revenue distribution. The proposal recommends a maximum allotment 21% of the ICC's revenues to the BCCI on the grounds that Indian cricket helps generate 80% of ICC's global revenues. The draft proposal when handed out to the Full Member nations at a specially called board meeting in Dubai on January 9, did not contain any supporting documentation for its revenue distribution percentages or future estimates. The ICC's current broadcast deal expires after the 2015 World Cup in Australia and New Zealand but the new tender documents cannot be floated with the all the member boards signing the Members Participating Agreement, with the making its signature conditional to the re-organisation of the ICC, no progress on the broadcast deal will be possible till this proposal is cleared. Cricket South Africa is the only board to have publicly opposed the proposal, and Pakistan Cricket Board have made their opposition privately known. The West Indies Cricket Board is yet to make a statement, was engaged in a teleconference over the week, and has stated that it has "taken a position in the best interests of West Indies cricket." It is understood to be negotiating a deal with the Big Three. The BCCI working committee meeting, which took place in Chennai, was chaired by one of the board's vice-presidents Shivlal Yadav, in the absence of BCCI president N Srinivasan, who could not attend due to the death of his mother early on Thursday morning. It was not Yadav who did the talking, though. Sundar Raman, the IPL chief executive, explained the details of the 'position paper,' outlining the revamp of the ICC and why it was necessary. The proposed revenue model, according to which India stood to earn a bigger percentage of the ICC earnings, was also explained to the members. The other big advantage, Raman highlighted, was that India was now more free to negotiate bilateral series with another Full Member instead of being obliged to follow the FTP. The members were also made aware that under the new structure India would host at least one ICC tournament almost every two years, further enhancing its financial strength. Most BCCI members were happy to hear about the move to deal directly with other countries' boards, which would result in India hosting more international cricket. It was explained to the committee that with this move the BCCI can take Test cricket to the plush stadiums that have come up across the country. The draft proposal will be presented to the ICC Executive Board during its quarterly meeting in Dubai on January 28 and 29. The document, drafted by a "working group" of the ICC's Finance & Commercial Affairs (F&CA) committee - in which the BCCI, CA and ECB are key members - recommended wide-ranging changes in the ICC's revenue distribution model, administrative structures and the Future Tours Programme (FTP), questioned the relevance of Test rankings and suggested the reinstatement of the Champions Trophy over the World Test Championship. Almost every recommendation of the proposal gave a larger share of control over world cricket to the Australian, English and Indian cricket boards - both in the boardroom and on the field. It also gave them a larger share of revenues, in a ratio that is linked to the ICC's revenue growth. Boards of ICC members other than India, Australia and England expressed differing views on the proposal. Cricket South Africa argued the idea was "fundamentally flawed" and "in breach of the ICC constitution", while New Zealand Cricket said it was wrong to jump to the conclusion that the proposal would be bad for cricket. FICA, which represents player associations in seven of the ICC's ten Full Member countries, declared itself "extremely concerned" with the proposal.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/story/712253.html BCCI

[Scarves]

you do realise that even the Boks are fighting for more money in the 4 nations from the All Blacks and Pumas..... As the marathi saying goes, dooroon dongar sajare, translated as the grass is always greener on the other side. One just has to look at the choas with the Heiniken cup. Rugby union is facing the same pressue whereby Franch clubs contibute disproportionately while the likes of Wales and Scotland give another and get everything in return. Plus come on, hardly anybody in the world plays American football. Yet that does not bother the Americans. American Football is still the number 1 sport of america. Dont tell me Australia will give up on the "footy" cause nobody else plays it.

Yet their sports manage to not cause this much issue including a 'Position Paper' where if India doesn't get their way they won't play any ICC event? As much as a crook Goodall is, everything works out there because no team is bigger than the sport and ditto AFL/NRL where no team is bigger than the sport and the governing body makes sure that the poorer teams are helped rather than the bigger teams getting more slices. I'm sorry but in what other sport can one country demand to have an event every 3 years, where three countries can form a club and try to take control of a sport. This is about more than money and revenue sharing.

[bangladeshifan]

We are not cricket fans any more. we are consumers

[BeautifulGame]

Really no country is bigger than the game in Baseball or Basketball?So how much revenue do US share with other countries like India are forced to? Same for AFL Even UEFA has agreed to give England Germany and the like karger share in the new proposed TV deal in proposition to the revenue they generate.Yet when India asks for a fair share equal to their contribution in cricket its killing the sport.

[BeautifulGame]

We are not cricket fans any more. we are consumers

Thats the same for any sports fan .

[Debutant]

BCCI Looking forward to 6 months of IPL :aha: