Saturday, Feb 08, 2003
Saturday, Feb 08, 2003 |
| Sport | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Sport
-
World Cup
By G. Viswanath
It was a significant decision the ICC was asked upon to make on Thursday night by the ECB and Mr. Speed gave an impression that his six-member Technical Committee had handled the vexing issue hands-on and deftly, too. But even after a respected Appeal Commissioner gives his verdict, there is no guarantee that England will go to Harare. It might just refuse to play Zimbabwe and forfeit four points. The ICC has been having its hands full these days, first dealing India's cricketers on the most arguable Players' Contract case before the ICC Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka and now with the security and safety related problems in Zimbabwe. The task has been upon Mr. Speed, not his Australian boss in Mr. Malcolm Gray, to hold the fort and it must be said here that all his experience with the Australian Cricket Board (ACB) where he supervised the famous MoU with the Australian Cricketers Association (ACA) has stood him in good stead. The unfortunate part has been that the ICC's glossary has changed from the Language of Cricketer to Language of the Lawyer. As if the Players Contract related issue with the Indian players was not enough for the ICC to talk of arbitration and penalties, it had to deal with a battery of legal people presenting the ECB and the Zimbabwe Cricket Union (ZCU), hear evidences and submissions, cross-examinations, take legal counsel from its own lawyers and refer the complicated issue to its Technical Committee for decision making. After going through the protracted process, the ICC, at the instance of the ECB referred the matter to one of its three Appeals Commissioner in Justice Albie Sachs who is a Constitutional expert. Justice Sachs is a man with an African National Congress background. On Thurday it took nearly five hours for the different parties, mainly the ECB and ZCU to put make their presentations through documentary evidences and submissions. They were also cross-examined. It was at 9. 30 p.m. that Mr. Speed, Dr. Bacher and Mr. Sunil Gavaskar took their positions at the head table at the Pavilion Hall, Table Bay hotel. Mr. Speed narrated the sequence of events and took questions. Dr. Bacher was also asked a couple of questions. The Technical Committee took place a Waterfront Hotel at the base of the Table Mountain and though a decision was to be arrived initially after two hours, it took another two hours for ECB to provide evidences and make submissions through a 150-page spiral bound book. The ZCU also made its submissions. After which the Technical Committee met for an hour to reject ECB's request to move its match from Harare. Clearly the ICC's intention was to provide fair opportunities for the concerned parties and create a system whereby a process would lead to natural justice. The ICC would have been a happy organisation if matters related to cricket not cropped up suddenly and appear as major obstacles. It agreed for temporary truce with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) with regard to the players contract which the Indians had put their signature removing certain clauses.
Reasons cited by ECB
The ECB first agreed to travel to Harare, but subsequently considered it risky to go there citing seven reasons. They were 1. Death in the past few days of a Zimbabwe man allegedly tortured last November for opposing world Cup fixtures, 2. Warnings by the US Embassy and the Australian High Commission for its citizens, 3. Concerns regarding possible excessive use of force in controlling disturbances, 4. A Media report of a statement by a South African player that he would decline to visit Zimbabwe, 5. Correspondence received by the ECB, 6. A radio interview with Zimbabwe's opposition party spokesman and 7. The general economic condition in Zimbabwe. The ICC regarded some material as "being unclear and with uncertain reliability.'' Mr. Speed said: ''The Committee respects the ECB's duty to its own players and the responsible nature of its submissions. The Committee has sought to weigh the ECB's concerns in the light of the best available information and evidence concerning safety and security in Zimbabwe. In all the circumstances considered during this lengthy and detailed process, the unanimous view of the Committee was that the request by the ECB must be declined." More significant was another statement made by Mr. Speed. "We are Happy to have the processes tested. It happened first in 1996, but procedures were not in place then. There will be significant amount of security around the players and officials. There's a comprehensive security plan for all the players and officials in Zimbabw." Things have not been easy for the ICC. Headquartered in London, the ICC, not long ago familiar to the cricket world as a somewhat autocratic-sounding name, Imperial Cricket Council (ICC), is a far cry from the days of the post office it was referred to by at one time the chief of the erstwhile Test and County Cricket Board. In olden days decisions were founded on the whims and fancies of a handful of people vested with sweeping powers. They dictated in the teak-panelled Council rooms at Lord's and controlled every aspect of the game played then by eight Test playing nations.
Dramatic changes
The first members of the ICC — England and Australia — enjoyed supremacy before ambitious individuals from the Asian continent with support from the like-minded and Associate members, put their heads together with the sole purpose of institutionalising a democratic system and stake their claims for share in power. In less than a decade's time things have changed dramatically in the ICC. Jagmohan Dalmiya who led the way in the power-sharing campaign went as far up to become the ICC President. His business acumen filled the coffers of the ICC from a couple of million pounds to close to 70 million pounds and relinquished office leaving the ICC an affluent body. In a short span of time the ICC metamorphosed from a `post-office' to a most professional body with qualified people running its affairs from the Clock Tower building at Lord's Cricket Ground. It has managed to rope in sponsors upto 2007 for $ 550 million. At the end of it all Mr. Speed said issues could become complicated because there are contractual obligations. England could lose money. It has decided to withhold a sum of US $ 9 million payable to the Indian Board as participation money. The ICC is passing through a crisis of sorts situation. England may have a change of heart, but the ICC's troubles will not end there.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
