The news od BCCI-ICC rift and confusion of India’s Participation in Champions Trophy 2017 has been talk of the town. With BCCI missing the first deadline to decalre squad by 25th April, now all eyes are glued to AGM meeting on 7th may with ICC.
If the mood within the Board is to boycott the June 1-18 competition, in England, then captain Virat Kohli and head coach Anil Kumble would be “consulted” before such a drastic step is taken. That, of course, would set a precedent and breach the traditional boundary which puts players and administrators in different halves.
The Board is currently run by a four-member Committee of Administrators (CoA), headed by Vinod Rai, and the three office-bearers who have survived the Supreme Court’s wrath.
Acting president C.K. Khanna, acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary and treasurer Anirudh Chaudhry are the three lucky ones.
“Fact is that the players are the biggest stakeholders and the captain and head coach are their representatives…
“Once we acknowledge that the players are the No.1 stakeholders, we surely have to ascertain their views…
“Besides, having won the 2013 Champions Trophy, India are the defending champions,” a very well-placed source said on Thursday evening.
India, no doubt has a huge fan following and also are the favourites on most occasions in ICC tournaments. There, indeed, would be a massive letdown if India is not able to participate and that must not be dealt lightly.
Apparently, Narayanswami Srinivasan, who once headed both the ICC and the Board, sought to move a “resolution” at the April 9 SGM in New Delhi seeking to boycott the Champions Trophy if the 2014 revenue sharing model wasn’t adhered to by the world body.
In simple terms, that model looked at the distribution exercise without deducting the TV production costs and the ICC’s administrative expenses from the expected gross revenue of $2.7 billion spanning 2016-2023.
Present ICC chairman Shashank Manohar pushed for a change, deducting $900 million towards production costs and administrative expenses and setting aside $250 million in a contingency fund. Naturally, India’s share of the ICC’s pie had to come down. It’s interesting that the Board also follows the same revenue sharing model when it comes to distributing the moolah among its affiliates.
That Srinivasan-scripted “resolution” wasn’t even tabled after opposition from key players in the Board. The SGM itself had to be adjourned till April 18.By then, Srinivasan, who’d been hoping to be nominated as the Board’s man to the ICC’s board meeting, had been barred by the Supreme Court.But while Srinivasan couldn’t go and that “resolution” was quickly buried, top lieutenant Anirudh was very much in Dubai and sought to spread his mentor’s doctrine. Anirudh failed.
The Board, which was represented at the ICC’s board meeting by acting secretary Amitabh, too, met Anirudh’s fate.It’s perhaps because of the disquiet caused by Srinivasan’s influence that even Bangladesh didn’t support India.Till late, one wasn’t able to confirm whether the CoA had actually fully briefed Amitabh on the “dialogue” initiated with the nine remaining Test-playing nations.
The problem is that there’s just no leadership in the Board and the Supreme Court-appointed CoA hasn’t exactly helped matters.
“One cannot forecast what’s to happen, but an SGM would be called to get the views of all the Board members…
“It’s then only that there would be clarity on participating in the Champions Trophy,” another top source commented.
Further decisions would be taken after the meeting on May 7th .