The ICC’s rotation policy of appointing president will see a combined turn of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) and the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) to nominate a candidate for the ICC vice-presidency for 2012-14, who, after completing a two-year term, will take over as president in 2015.
According to details, while both neighbouring boards are mulling over candidates, Bangladesh, who are yet to have a taste at the top ICC post, are desperate to name their candidate. Details emerging from the PCB suggest the board is yet to decide whether to nominate its own candidate or let the BCB hold the proceeding position.
Amid the situation, Mani, who availed Pakistan’s turn of ICC presidency in 2003-2006, has advised the PCB to allow Bangladesh to name their candidate.
“Bangladesh should get the chance,” Mani told The Express Tribune. “The rotational policy is about giving all full member boards a chance to lead the ICC.
“We had our turn and there is no issue in allowing Bangladesh to have a go this time.”
The former ICC president revealed that the BCB discussed its list of candidates with him.
“The BCB is interested in nominating its candidate to the position and consulted me on the issue.”
‘PCB must take assurances before giving go-ahead’
Meanwhile, Mani said the PCB should take assurances on certain issues before letting Bangladesh go for the position.
“There are certain things in which the PCB will need assurance. It will have to ensure that the official does not bow before Indian influence.
“It will be crucial assessment because the Indian board is active against sidelining the PCB,” claimed Mani.
‘Pakistani candidate would have to be outstanding’
However, the former ICC chief also said that if Pakistan wanted their candidate then the choice must be ‘outstanding’.
“An official without proper credentials will be rejected by the ICC and that will be shameful,” said Mani.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 12th, 2011.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ