Monopoly in world cricket

The PCB now needs to put its own house in order, especially after the events of February 10.


Editorial February 10, 2014
A surety of regular series taking place with England and Australia, and other concessions to the benefit of the PCB, could have still salvaged the situation. PHOTO: FILE

The International Cricket Council (ICC) has passed the highly controversial position paper, which will see a complete overhaul of its governance, leaving the Indian, English and Australian cricket boards in charge. Despite having faced opposition from the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), and the Sri Lankan and South African cricket boards, when it came to crunch, the latter ended up voting for the contentious reforms, while the former two boards, finding themselves completely isolated, chose to abstain from voting. When the reform agenda was first presented, it rightly faced severe criticism from several quarters as it advocated the Big Three boards raking up most of the revenue generated by the ICC, as well as the smaller nations facing the strong possibility of rarely having the opportunity of playing against the top nations, something that caused huge concern at the PCB, as Pakistan is already unable to host matches in the country.

Given this, the PCB’s opposition to the reforms was justified. However, it went into the ICC meeting without a back-up plan, depending only on its alliance with the Sri Lankan and South African boards to counter the Big Three’s proposal. There were voices pushing the PCB to ask the Indian board to enter into an agreement that would see the two countries play each other on a regular basis in exchange for Pakistan’s support for the reforms. As has been pointed out, the Indian board failed to give any guarantees in this regard. However, one fails to understand why the PCB could not have pursued such agreements with the other two boards that make up the Big Three? A surety of regular series taking place with England and Australia, and other concessions to the benefit of the PCB, could have still salvaged the situation. The PCB now needs to put its own house in order, especially after the events of February 10. The uncertainty regarding the chairman’s slot needs to be cleared up, our domestic structure strengthened and alliances formed with other boards to ensure that we are not left completely isolated.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 11th,  2014.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

COMMENTS (10)

gp65 | 10 years ago | Reply "something that caused huge concern at the PCB, as Pakistan is already unable to host matches in the country." The fact that Pakistan is unable to host matches in the country has little to do with the reforms proposed by the Big 3 and everything to do with the attack on Sri Lankan cricketers. "However, it went into the ICC meeting without a back-up plan, depending only on its alliance with the Sri Lankan and South African boards to counter the Big Three’s proposal. " And what exactly could be the back up plan when everyone else is willing to vote for the eminently reasonable proposal of the Big 3 that revenues should be distributed proportionally to where they are generated? "There were voices pushing the PCB to ask the Indian board to enter into an agreement that would see the two countries play each other on a regular basis in exchange for Pakistan’s support for the reforms. As has been pointed out, the Indian board failed to give any guarantees in this regard." In other words, India did not succumb to the blackmailing. " However, one fails to understand why the PCB could not have pursued such agreements with the other two boards that make up the Big Three? A surety of regular series taking place with England and Australia, and other concessions to the benefit of the PCB, could have still salvaged the situation." What makes you think that the other 2 boards would have been any more willing than India to make such a concession to Pakistan?
Rashid | 10 years ago | Reply @Jahangir Agree 100 percent. We should concentrate only on Islamic games.
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ