ICC does not accede to BCCI request

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) approached the International Cricket Council (ICC) to serve it a caveat that it would take action should there be any government interference in the administration.

The BCCI believes that the nomination of Comptroller and Auditor General of India councillor, and a representative of the State Accountant General’s office in the Apex Council is tantamount to government interference.   -  Vivek Bendre

At its wits' end following the Supreme Court order of July 18 that validated virtually all of the Justice Lodha Committee recommendations to bring about radical reforms in Indian cricket, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) approached the International Cricket Council (ICC) to serve it a caveat that it would take action should there be any government interference in the administration. The BCCI wanted to incorporate and highlight the potential ICC action in the review petition it filed in the Supreme Court on August 16.

The BCCI believes that the nomination of Comptroller and Auditor General of India councillor, and a representative of the State Accountant General’s office in the Apex Council as a member is tantamount to government interference.

Five months ago, the ICC suspended the Cricket Association of Nepal (CAN) for breach of Article 2.9 of the ICC’s Articles of Association that prohibits government interference and requires free and fair elections. Last year, the ICC warned Sri Lanka Cricket when the government there appointed an interim committee to run the sport in the Emerald Isle.

ICC’s article 2.9 says: "Where a government interferes in the administration of cricket by a Member, including but not limited to interference in operational matters, the selection and management of teams, the appointment of coaches or support personnel, the Executive Board shall have the power to suspend or refuse to recognise that Member."

ICC officials close to this development said the BCCI was told in no uncertain terms that it would not do anything on its own volition and that the ICC would respond only if it receives a complaint from any of its 105 full, associate or affiliate members or a member unit of the BCCI.

The BCCI felt that a letter from the ICC citing article 2.9 would have helped it, but the ICC did not accede to the BCCI’s request. Once suspended from membership, the particular country does not receive any funding from the ICC.