Cricket South Africa has become the first national governing body to speak out against a draft proposal being considered by the International Cricket Council (ICC) to give the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and Cricket Australia (CA) greater power in running the sport.
It emerged yesterday (Monday) that a working group of the ICC's Finance & Commercial Affairs Committee had put forward a plan for the ECB, BCCI and CA to become the central figures for major decision-making both on and off the field. UK news agency Press Association Sport said that a 21-page ‘position paper’ was issued to full ICC members earlier this month and the matter is set to be discussed at an ICC executive board meeting on January 28-29.
Cricket South Africa has hit out at the plans, calling them “in breach of the ICC constitution,” while the Pakistan Cricket Board is also understood to be vehemently opposed the proposal. The plans could be passed at the meeting later this month if it receives the backing of seven out of the 10 voters.
“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,” Cricket South Africa’s president and chairman of the board of directors, Chris Nenzani, said in an open 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,” Nenzani added. “The draft proposal is, therefore, fundamentally flawed as regards the process and, therefore, in breach of the ICC constitution. In the circumstances we propose that the draft proposal be withdrawn immediately, given that the proper procedures have not been followed. In our respectful opinion, a more considered, inclusive/consultative, and properly constitutionally ordained approach is required."