The current ICC chairman and also BCCI president is against the “big three” policy, who are currently ruling ICC. He believes this system can create the imbalance in the cricket world.
As per “big three” policy, BCCI president would take ICC chairman while Cricket Australia’s (CA) chairman would head a five-member executive committee and England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) president would go on to head ICC’s Finance and Commercial Affairs committee.
“I don’t agree with the three major countries bullying the ICC,” Manohar told The Hindu. “That’s my personal view, because as I have always said, an institution is bigger than individuals. You cannot guarantee which individual will occupy the top position in either of these countries. And, the ICC constitution, as it stands today, says that in all the major committees of the ICC, these three countries will be automatically there.
“So all the financial and commercial aspects and the executive committee will be controlled by the representatives of these three countries, which according to me is wrong. You should have the best man whether he comes from Zimbabwe, or West Indies, or even from an associate or affiliate to work on a committee, who will promote the interests of the ICC.”
Manohar opposed the revenue distribution model which was submitted by Srinivasan, Giles Clarke and Wally Edwards. The ICC chairman commented that the three boards would gain a larger portion of ICC’s revenue than the others.
“I don’t agree with the revenue-sharing formula because it’s nice to say that India (BCCI) will get 22% of the total revenue of the ICC, but you cannot make the poor poorer and the rich richer, only because you have the clout. The ICC runs cricket throughout the world.
“Secondly there is another angle to it which nobody has thought of. India generates money because the other countries come and play in India. If you do not have a fierce competition, the broadcasters are not going to pay you and the sponsors are not going to sponsor your events. So whatever you generate through bilateral series is because there are good teams playing against you.
“If all teams are of the standards of the low placed ninth and tenth team and India is a good side, who is going to pay you; what interest would be left with the spectators to watch a game, if it’s a one-sided game always. So if you reduce their corpus, their development is going to be hampered and ICC has to think from that point of view,” Manohar said.
Manohar recognised that there were some faults in the working of the cricket body which he hoped to reform before his term as chairman ended in June 2016.