+- Sri Lankan Cricket Fans (https://www.slcricketfans.com)
+-- Forum: Cricket Talk (https://www.slcricketfans.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: General Cricket (https://www.slcricketfans.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: ICC News Thread (/showthread.php?tid=812)
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - pj57 - 12-16-2016
ICC wants 15-16 teams to play at top level says David Richardson
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/story/1072800.html
The ICC is keen to increase the number of teams playing cricket at the highest level to "15-16", and is working towards that under the leadership of Shashank Manohar, according to chief executive David Richardson.
"The ICC has a strategy to have more competitive teams playing at the highest level," Richardson said in Sri Lanka, where he was at the invitation of SLC and Asian Cricket Council (ACC) president Thilanga Sumathipala to discuss the global development of the game. "For too long we had 10 Full Members. If we are honest with ourselves, there are eight, probably nine, teams that can play cricket at the highest level.
"We like to increase that number to 15-16 countries [with] the likes of Afghanistan, Nepal, Malaysia and various other countries in the Asian region. It's very important that we can develop their cricket to a level where they can play against the big boys on an equal basis."
Richardson said the global governing body was on the verge of putting forward some proposals "that would do wonders for international cricket". "Those proposals would cover governance and a new revised financial model, which would hopefully provide all the Full Members with a bigger slice of the cake than what it is currently envisaged," he said.
In early 2014, a constitutional revamp of the ICC had given the boards of India, England and Australia greater authority and a larger share of the revenue, an episode dubbed the "Big Three" takeover by the media. Soon after he became ICC chairman in November 2015, Manohar had criticised the imbalance of power triggered by that revamp, and said he wanted to end the "bullying" in the game's administration.
Richardson said he was confident the game will not be affected by another such power war under the current administration. "The international game has gone through a period of turbulence, where the governance, the financial model, the playing [of the game] was in turmoil by the resolutions passed by the ICC in 2014. What happened in 2014 took place because unfortunately countries like South Africa, Sri Lanka and New Zealand were not able to stand up to the big boys. I don't think that will happen again."
He said the ICC also wanted the ACC to use its resources to develop the game, and the global governing body would provide it with "guidance" and "strategy". "Obviously we [the ICC] are responsible for global development, but our resources are limited. It's important that the ACC, with the resources they have both from a financial and a HR perspective, make best use of those. We want to provide the guidance, principles, overall strategy. [It is important that] the activities that we can carry out at global level are supplemented by what the ACC can afford to do on a regional basis."
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - Bada - 12-17-2016
Cricket South Africa (CSA) has taken strong exception to remarks attributed to ICC Chief Executive, David Richardson, during the course of a recent interview in Sri Lanka.
Richardson stated inter alia: “The international game has gone through a period of turbulence, where the governance, the financial model, the playing [of the game] was in turmoil by the resolutions passed by the ICC in 2014. What happened in 2014 took place because unfortunately countries like South Africa, Sri Lanka and New Zealand were not able to stand up to the big boys. I don't think that will happen again."
The above comments were reported in THIS article.
“If he is indeed correctly quoted, his remarks come as a complete shock to us,” commented CSA Chief Executive, Haroon Lorgat.
“For someone who was actually party to the 2014 resolutions to now make such a disparaging remark to CSA is frankly nonsense and insulting to us.
“The CSA Board had from the very outset realized how damaging the original proposals would have been to the global growth of the game and together with Pakistan and Sri Lanka had strongly opposed it. This included CSA making a significant written submission to the ICC Board which had resulted in a number of the original proposals being amended. That’s in fact the reason why we are where we are now.
“The CSA Board will always stand up for what it believes to be right for the game,” concluded Lorgat.
The CSA President will formally take up this matter with the ICC chairperson.
http://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/Proteas/csa-takes-exception-to-richardsons-comments-20161216
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - pj57 - 12-17-2016
CSA is correct....Richardson was very much part of the big 3 proposals at the time. He has completely changed his tune now.
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - Bada - 01-15-2017
The International Cricket Council (ICC) has announced new regulations for helmet safety during men's and women's international matches. The regulations - while not making it compulsory for batsmen to wear helmets - state that when a batsman does elect to do so, the helmet must be compliant with the new British Standard BS7928:2013.
The new regulations will be enforced in international cricket from February 1, 2017. Batsmen will receive official warnings after each of the first two instances that they breach the regulation, and will be suspended for one match should there be a third. The new regulations have been incorporated into the ICC Clothing and Equipment Regulations.
ICC's general manager, cricket, Geoff Allardice, said that the aim is to get all players to wear the safest helmets available.
"Our number one priority is to have all batsmen wearing the safest helmets available rather than to see players sanctioned," Allardice said. "It has been pleasing to see that the vast majority of international players have been wearing compliant helmets since January 1st, but some teams have requested more time to assist them in implementing the new regulation before the sanctioning process commences.
"As such, the extension was granted to enable all teams and players to comply, and after this time the regulations will be strictly enforced."
In June last year, the ICC's cricket committee had recommended that the British Safety Standard helmets be mandatory in international cricket. In November 2015, the ECB made it mandatory for all professional cricketers in England to wear helmets complying with British Standard BS7928:2013 while batting or fielding close to the wicket.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/story/1077774.html
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - pj57 - 02-03-2017
Latest proposals at ICC meeting........
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/story/1080769.html
Test cricket
Despite talk of a conference-style structure with 12 teams, the proposals call for a 9-3 league. That is, nine Full Members excluding Zimbabwe will play each other in Test series either home or away once over a two-year period, at the end of which there will be a play-off between the top two teams.
The duration of the series will be up to the members - even a one-off Test can be considered a series. The system of how points will be awarded, given that each series will not be of the same length, is yet to be worked out. The home and away stipulation is such that, if, for example, New Zealand tours Sri Lanka in the first two-year league cycle, then in the following one Sri Lanka will tour New Zealand. If one team refuses to play another - as has been the case with India playing Pakistan - they will forfeit points. Full Members will retain the power to schedule bilateral series should they wish outside of this league structure.
The details of how the bottom three teams operate within this league are still to be fully worked out. They will play against each other in what will be Test matches, but essentially outside of the league structure and with no points at stake. Administrators, however, are also working out a way for the nine Full Members play a series against at least one of the three in each cycle, to provide them with exposure and the opportunity to improve.
Part of the reason this is not yet finalised is because it is linked to the question of membership status for Associate sides, which is on the agenda of the ICC Board meeting on Saturday. There is talk of decoupling Test status from Full Membership, so that a side - such as Afghanistan or Ireland - can play Tests without being Full Members.
At the end of a four-year period - of two cycles - the performances of these three teams will be assessed and it is here, presumably, where the Test ambitions of other Associate sides come into play. Performances there will be part of a criteria for Test status; another criterion is for countries to have a domestic first-class competition. Ireland's domestic competition was approved last year; Afghanistan's came up at the CEC meeting and it is believed it will also be granted first-class status.
ODI cricket
A 13-team league will be played over three years, one series against each other on a home and away basis (because there are more teams involved, the cycle is longer). The 13 teams are likely to include the ten Full Members, Afghanistan and Ireland, and the winner of the World Cricket League. There will be a minimum of 12 ODIs in a year for every team (with no upper limit) and bilateral series can be of any number of matches.
At the end of the league period, the top-ranked side will be rewarded in some way. For the World Cup, the top seven sides plus the hosts will qualify automatically. The bottom five will play in a qualifying event along with an undecided number of Associate sides, from which two sides will go through to make up a ten-team World Cup.
Member nations can organise ODIs outside of this framework should they choose to and they will be given ODI status, but those matches will not carry points towards the league.
T20 cricket
In one sense, the most uncertainty remains over T20 international cricket, mostly because talks are still ongoing over whether two extra World T20s should be played in 2018 and 2022. That is what will determine the length of any cycle for the format.
As it stands, the proposal includes one regional qualification event - perhaps similar in style to the Asia Cup - in each of the five ICC regions. Teams enter that event on the basis of points they earn from the bilateral T20s they play in a cycle. Each member, when scheduling an ODI series, is allowed to also schedule a T20 series, with a maximum of three games.
Points in those games take you through to the regional event that will include Full Member sides and the top Associates, and from here sides will qualify for the World T20.
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - Bada - 02-04-2017
Talk talk talk
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - The One - 02-04-2017
So NOW we take BCCI's side when they are outnumbered?
LOL
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - nighthawk - 02-05-2017
(02-04-2017, 06:28 PM)The One Wrote: So NOW we take BCCI's side when they are outnumbered?
Yeah lol. We were the only ones to support india. So much ass licking.
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - pj57 - 02-05-2017
More a political decision than anything else imo......
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/story/1081081.html
SLC was compelled to vote against the ICC's proposed financial model because of procedural problems with how the new structure was presented to the ICC board, according to the Sri Lanka board's president, Thilanga Sumathipala.
The BCCI and SLC were the only boards to vote against the new draft constitution, which effectively represents a partial rollback of the Big Three's governance and financial policies ushered in in 2014. But where the BCCI stands to earn 34% less in ICC revenue under the proposed new model, SLC's objection is more surprising, as it - along with other smaller boards - is understood to have been offered a greater share of ICC funds than were due under the Big Three.
Sumathipala's official objections to the new model, however, are anchored in concerns about how and when the new structure was proposed, rather than specific opposition to the substance of the proposal. He said: "Sri Lanka has seen the document for discussion only on the 10th of January," adding that "we should give members more time - that includes India".
He also said that he was expecting the proposal to only be discussed at this round of meetings, and not to be "adopted by way of a resolution". Among other objections, Sumathipala said that governance matters and commercial concerns could not appropriately be dealt with in one document, and that there needed to be "much clearer comparison of the change".
There is a possibility that SLC's siding with the BCCI is also a reflection of its present financial position. India are scheduled to tour Sri Lanka later this year, bringing with them a much-needed financial windfall. Sumathipala has also publicly invited India to play an "Independence Trophy" in Sri Lanka around February next year, to coincide with Sri Lanka's 70th anniversary of freedom from British rule. In a previous stint as SLC president, Sumathipala oversaw the Nidahas Trophy in 1998 - when India and New Zealand played a tri-series in Sri Lanka coinciding with 50th Independence Day celebrations.
SLC was one of two boards to abstain from voting for the resolution that adopted the Big Three policies in the first place - with the board having the full support of the prevailing Sri Lanka government. However, the political landscape in Sri Lanka has now changed, and both the SLC board and its policy with it.
RE: ICC/MCC News Thread - cricketrulez - 02-06-2017
(02-05-2017, 02:21 PM)nuffa Wrote:(02-04-2017, 06:28 PM)The One Wrote: So NOW we take BCCI's side when they are outnumbered?
Yeah lol. We were the only ones to support india. So much ass licking.
Nope, it is not ass licking. They know that they will be first one to bear the brunt of BCCI's retaliation simply based on scheduling. that is BCCI's trump card.
any increase in revenue from this new deal will be more than by BCCI not cooperating in the future.
New rules indicate that even 1 test, 1 odi, 1 t20 is a tour. Imagine hat happens if BCCI does this to NZ, SL, WICB, Zim and Ban. Of the 5 they need 2 to roll over. smart money says they will.
Money talks. BS walks.