The ongoing tussle between the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and International Cricket Council (ICC) refuses to end despite the latter ready to increase Indian cricket board’s revenue pool, reported The Times of India.
Matters escalated on Tuesday as BCCI roped in a leading law firm in the United Kingdom and has drafted a notice citing violation of a contract, which is the Members Participation Agreement (MPA). The BCCI also held two conference calls, one between state units and another with its legal team with regards to the notice being drafted.
Problems between both the parties began when the ICC Council approved of the new financial model. According to the new revenue distribution, the BCCI will receive 293 million dollars from 2016 to 2023. It is a huge pay cut considering the fact that it was drawing an amount of 570 million dollars.
However, ICC chairman Shashank Manohar offered to give the Indian Board another 100 million dollars. But, the board dismissed the offer. During the five-day ICC meet in Dubai, India board officials felt that they would accept an offer of 450 million dollars and end the tussle. But, Manohar refused to revise the amount.
The prospect of India not featuring in the 2017 Champions Trophy is a possibility at this point. It is expected that out of 30 voting members of the BCCI, at its upcoming Special General Meeting on May 7, a majority are in favour of pulling out from the Champions Trophy.
On Tuesday, acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary and treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary held conference calls between 13 state units to figure out the numbers that are in favour of an eventual pullout.
What next?
The ICC Board Members’ decision to dishonour the MPA by allowing policy changes in the revenue and governance model without the consent of the Indian cricket board, hasn’t gone down well with the BCCI. Hence, settling the issue inside a court room seems to be the plan of action.
BCCI lost the vote on ‘governance and constitutional changes’ by a margin of 1-9, while the revenue model saw India getting walloped by a margin of 2-8. The only country that voted alongside BCCI was Sri Lanka.
While N Srinivasan’s advice was asked for, BCCI is clear that he shouldn’t be a part of the decision making process. “The question here is not about whether BCCI should be sending the notice or not. A notice will be sent as per the legal norms, because it is certainly a violation of an existing contract. The question is, are we prepared for the repercussions post sending the notice,” said a senior cricket administrator.
The MPA, signed back in 2014 when Srinivasan was the chairman of the ICC, is registered in the UK courts of law and hence needs to be fought under the country’s laws. Furthermore, the MPA stated that the BCCI needs to send a notice to the ICC and give them a window of 30 days to seek a reply.
However, a legal expert familiar with cricket affairs said “the time frame can be a shorter one in cases like this one” where the tournament is starting before the deadline and therefore a shorter window can be sought for a reply.
However, another interesting aspect is the way the central government looks at the issue. The government has three votes in the BCCI as well.
Sources advising BCCI on this matter said, “This issue is now serious because it’s not just a question of money. It’s now a question of whether India can stand up for what is its right or let it be given away and lose its authority and respect.”
The Board has no objection to the national selection committee picking up a team for the Champions Trophy, however, the stance with ICC is what is affecting the selectors to get a go ahead. “The notice has been prepared on these lines. It’s not a confrontational one... by way of being a global superpower in the game, India needs to have a say,” say the functionaries.