On January 30, the Supreme Court, by its order, named two BCCI office-bearers, Amitabh Chaudhary (Jt. Secretary), Anirudh Chaudhry (Treasurer) and Vikram Limaye (MD & CEO IDFC Ltd and one among the four in the Committee of Administrators) to attend the ICC meetings in Dubai "so that there will be objectivity and transparency."
On February 1, the CoA, at its first meeting, nominated Limaye to the ICC Board and Rahul Johri for the ICC Chief Executives Committee (CEC) meeting.
Thereafter, following a mention in the apex court on behalf of some State associations and the TNCA, the bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra, A. M. Khanwilkar and D. Y. Chandachud said all three (Amitabh, Anirudh and Limaye) enjoy same status and can attend the ICC meetings.
After this clarity was obtained, Amitabh attended the ICC CEC meeting that began on Thursday because he was named by the apex court, and not Johri. With one of the office-bearers having attended the CEC meeting, it’s possible that Limaye (member of CoA) will attend the ICC Board meeting on Saturday, unless a 11th hour development makes way for Anirudh's entry into the ICC Board.
The ICC Board will sit to consider the Working Group’s proposal on two significant aspects; one about a new governance model of the ICC and the second about the revenue-sharing model. The Working Group has important members in Shashank Manohar (independent chairman), Giles Clarke (ECB), David Peever (Cricket Australia), Nazmul Hassan (BCB) and Imran Khawaja (Singapore).
Some BCCI members have openly sided with former ICC Chairman N. Srinivasan who gave shape to a revenue-sharing model with the ECB and CA representatives; the big three of the ICC who had a big say in the commercial and financial matters of the ICC, allotted the BCCI Rs. 3250 crore (approximately 22% of the ICC revenue) over an eight-year cycle (2016-2023) and Bangladesh a mere Rs. 32 crore.
Manohar, after being elected the BCCI President for the second time, told the BCCI members at a special general meeting in Mumbai on Feb. 19, 2016, that the formula followed to distribute the ICC revenue was unethical. He is believed to have told the SGM that he will not bring the BCCI share below 15%; it was not recorded in the minutes, though.
Cricket administrators have picked up hints that the new revenue-sharing model has been devised after paying off its vendors for expenditure incurred and then share the money on a particular percentage ratio. The matter was referred to the Working Group after a few members expressed unhappiness with the way they were forced to agree to the previous revenue-sharing model.
It’s speculated that the BCCI may ask the ICC to put off taking decisions on the revenue-sharing model.
Comments
SHARE