Mani says, Next ICC chairman unlikely to come from Big Three

LONDON: Chairman of Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), Ehsan Mani doesn’t think that the new ICC chairman should be from any of the ‘Big Three’ boards, the global governing body is yet to agree on a process to choose Shashank Manohar’s replacement.

It would be ‘healthier’ for someone from another board to lead the ICC now because of the “politics introduced” by Cricket Australia, BCCI and ECB previously said Mani.

As Manohar Requested more than two months ago but the ICC Board have still not agreed on whether the process to choose the new chairman should be based on a two-thirds mainstream vote or a simple mainstream. Mani told Forbes about the delay, “It’s unfortunate it has taken so long.”

Imran Khwaja is serving as the interim chairman. “The politics introduced by Australia, England and India in 2014 to protect their positions, now they are struggling to unwind it because it doesn’t suit them anymore,” said by Mani.

Mani had ruled himself out as a contender for serving the ICC as a chairman from the year 2003 to 2006 said, “It would be healthier to have someone [the chairperson] not from the ‘big three’.

Colin Graves, whose term as ECB chairman ended on Aug 31, has been advertised as a contender, as has the BCCI president Sourav Ganguly, whose future is convinced in the Indian board with a hearing pending in the country’s Supreme Court. NZC chairman Greg Barclay and former Cricket West Indies head Dave Cameron have also exploded up as names in the running.

Mani said, “There is a huge problem of conflict of interest on the board.”

He also says, “I’ve never seen that before, not in 17 years. This sort of conflict of interest is not transparent. The ICC is crying out for more independent directors.”

The ICC Board in 2017 had approved a new finance model that replaced the controversial “Big Three” preparation wrote out by ECB, BCCI and Cricket Australia in 2014. The BCCI under the new agreement was to receive US$ 405 million out of the ICC’s estimated earnings of $2.7 billion for the 2016-23 rights cycle period.

Graves sponsored by Mani said in a recent statement on reworking that “finance model in which the BCCI and ECB (US$ 139 million) get more than the other boards, most of whom like CA, PCB, CSA, NZC, SLC, CWI and BCB, are set to receive $128 million each (all revenue distributions which are projections — have been scaled down, however in recent time).”

Mani said, “It’s not only the funding model that is wrong and skewered to India and also to some degree England.” He also added, “They allocated ICC events to themselves, gave themselves generous hosting fees and the benefits from gate money and hospitality.”

World Cup hosts, England in 2019 would have made what Pakistan, West Indies or South Africa do over an eight-year period. That’s what’s wrong with the system. There are some countries that won’t be able to survive if this funding model continues.

“We survived without playing India who refused to play bilateral series against their arch-nemesis. Can you imagine if that happened to Cricket Australia if India didn’t come?”

It was Mani’s hoped that the PCB would get to host a World Cup in the next coming years from 2023 to 2031.

Mani said, “We want to host a World Cup during this cycle.”

“There are three-four events we have expressed interest, including some to host jointly with the UAE,” Mani added it.

About admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WANT MORE NEWS LIKE THIS? GET THE BEST STORIES INTO YOUR INBOX!

Subscriber US

    Translate »