India must pay $70m if they don’t play us, says Sethi
Claims MoU signed between the two boards is legally binding according to legal experts
BIG LOSS FOR CRICKET: The stopping of Pakistan-India clashes has deprived cricket of its most anticipated bilateral series. PHOTO: AFP
KARACHI:
Clashes between Pakistan and India are the most watched games in cricket by a margin but political tension between the two neighbouring countries has meant matches between the two come few and far between.
The lack of bilateral series between the two countries not only frustrates cricketing fans of the two countries but also the millions of neutrals who are missing out on a spectacle filled with passion, talent and pressure.
While both boards have expressed eagerness to play against each other, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) keep insisting they are yet to receive the go-ahead from their government.
The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), however, is running out of patience and feels the BCCI is going back on an MoU signed by the two boards that stated Pakistan will host India in a bilateral series next.
And PCB Executive Committee head Najam Sethi insists that the MoU, contrary to popular opinon, is legally binding. “We have discussed this with some of the leading legal minds around, both in Pakistan and abroad, and all of them agree we are in a position to take legal action against the BCCI if they do not play us in a series hosted by us,” said Sethi.
However, the board will not be taking legal action immediately. “We have had two meetings with the BCCI. We will have a third meeting in which the International Cricket Council (ICC) will be involved,” he said. “If they agree to play us then that is great, otherwise we will be taking action against them.”
And Sethi believes the PCB will be heavily compensated by the BCCI if they do go back on their agreement. “They will have to pay us to the tune of $70 million for the first home and away series.”
The big three issue
Sethi is expected to take over as PCB chairman once current head Shaharyar Khan steps down, and the 69-year-old insists the PCB’s stance of opposing the big three will not change.
“This is the stance of not only the chairman but of all of the PCB,” he said. “And this will not change once the current PCB chairman’s tenure ends.”
The big three is almost certain to end, with nine votes against it and only one — of India — in its favour. “It’s interesting that it was former BCCI chairman Shashank Manohar that got the ball rolling for this movement against the big three, and now both Cricket Australia and the England Cricket Board are at the forefront of it,” said Sethi. “So in a way, the boards that made the big three played the biggest part in it its dismantling.”
However, despite the big three ending, the issue of setting up a new revenue sharing system is yet to be resolved. “India are holding out for a bigger share of the revenue,” he said. “The other members agree that India should get the lion’s share since they bring in the most revenue, we are yet to come to an agreement on what that share should be.”
Even if India’s demands are to be met, the PCB are to gain handsomely from the ending of the big three, with optimistic estimates going as high as $100 million for an eight-year period, depending on the ICC’s revenue.
If both of Sethi’s claim turn out to be true, then the PCB’s coffers will be greatly filled at the BCCI’s expense.
Clashes between Pakistan and India are the most watched games in cricket by a margin but political tension between the two neighbouring countries has meant matches between the two come few and far between.
The lack of bilateral series between the two countries not only frustrates cricketing fans of the two countries but also the millions of neutrals who are missing out on a spectacle filled with passion, talent and pressure.
‘Appoint Sethi as next PCB chairman’
While both boards have expressed eagerness to play against each other, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) keep insisting they are yet to receive the go-ahead from their government.
The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), however, is running out of patience and feels the BCCI is going back on an MoU signed by the two boards that stated Pakistan will host India in a bilateral series next.
And PCB Executive Committee head Najam Sethi insists that the MoU, contrary to popular opinon, is legally binding. “We have discussed this with some of the leading legal minds around, both in Pakistan and abroad, and all of them agree we are in a position to take legal action against the BCCI if they do not play us in a series hosted by us,” said Sethi.
Won’t play India in India until they play Pakistan home series first: Sethi
However, the board will not be taking legal action immediately. “We have had two meetings with the BCCI. We will have a third meeting in which the International Cricket Council (ICC) will be involved,” he said. “If they agree to play us then that is great, otherwise we will be taking action against them.”
And Sethi believes the PCB will be heavily compensated by the BCCI if they do go back on their agreement. “They will have to pay us to the tune of $70 million for the first home and away series.”
The big three issue
Sethi is expected to take over as PCB chairman once current head Shaharyar Khan steps down, and the 69-year-old insists the PCB’s stance of opposing the big three will not change.
Sethi reveals three primary objectives as PCB chairman
“This is the stance of not only the chairman but of all of the PCB,” he said. “And this will not change once the current PCB chairman’s tenure ends.”
The big three is almost certain to end, with nine votes against it and only one — of India — in its favour. “It’s interesting that it was former BCCI chairman Shashank Manohar that got the ball rolling for this movement against the big three, and now both Cricket Australia and the England Cricket Board are at the forefront of it,” said Sethi. “So in a way, the boards that made the big three played the biggest part in it its dismantling.”
Four PSL3 matches apiece in Karachi and Lahore, vows Sethi
However, despite the big three ending, the issue of setting up a new revenue sharing system is yet to be resolved. “India are holding out for a bigger share of the revenue,” he said. “The other members agree that India should get the lion’s share since they bring in the most revenue, we are yet to come to an agreement on what that share should be.”
Even if India’s demands are to be met, the PCB are to gain handsomely from the ending of the big three, with optimistic estimates going as high as $100 million for an eight-year period, depending on the ICC’s revenue.
If both of Sethi’s claim turn out to be true, then the PCB’s coffers will be greatly filled at the BCCI’s expense.