John Howard to head ICC?

[TumTum]

Exactly. The people who are making the argument that his tenure as the president of Australia gives him enough experience to lead the ICC are being dishonest and they know it. If running a country apparently gives someone enough experience to lead the ICC then why not appoint George W as the head or Margaret Thatcher or any ex head of state who has no experience in cricket administration?

No one is addressing the elephant in the room here. Howard has been a right-wing politician for his entire life. How are his politics going to affect the ICC? Considering his politics I find it hard to believe that he has any interest in strengthening the ICC. He is just going to become the puppet of BCCI or whichever board happens to have the most money. For him cricket is just another business, a money making proposition and CA and all other boards are just corporations. Mark my words if he wins stuff like the IPL which makes money will take over all real cricket, there will be a huge reduction in the non profitable test cricket. I know this is the kind of stuff that is usually not considered but it must be payed close attention to when a character like John Howard is trying to become the head of ICC. And lastly what kind of message does it send around the world? Atleast 50% of the people disagree with his right-wing politics, do we really want offend half the cricketing audience by doing this? Doesn't seem worth it to me. Why not just nominate an experienced non political person like Anderson and end all this drama?

Why are you bringing politics into this? He was a liberal in the Parliament of Australia and that is the end of it.

I didn't like Howard as prime-minister, but that has nothing to do with running the ICC.

 

[silentstriker]

PCB to seek government advice on Howard | Pakistan Cricket News | Cricinfo.com

 

[sirdj]

I think that he should get the post. At least then people wont be able to blame the BCCI for everything that is wrong in the cricket world.

 

[GraemeSmith]

Why are you bringing politics into this? He was a liberal in the Parliament of Australia and that is the end of it.

I didn't like Howard as prime-minister, but that has nothing to do with running the ICC.

It's not about politics. It's about his lack of experience, it must be considered how his politcs may affect the way he runs the ICC but the main issue is experience. These days you need experience to get a job at even lame restaurants like Applebees or something, I find it bizarre that anyone with zero cricket administrative experience can just walk in and become the head at a body like the ICC.

 

[TumTum]

It's not about politics.

Then why say this: "Howard has been a right-wing politician for his entire life. How are his politics going to affect the ICC? Considering his politics I find it hard to believe that he has any interest in strengthening the ICC."

 

[benchmark00]

It's not about politics. It's about his lack of experience, it must be considered how his politcs may affect the way he runs the ICC but the main issue is experience. These days you need experience to get a job at even lame restaurants like Applebees or something, I find it bizarre that anyone with zero cricket administrative experience can just walk in and become the head at a body like the ICC.

Using a domestic example for a moment, John O'Neill was head of the NSW State Bank and was then appointed head of the Australian Rugby Union and did a brilliant job in organising the game in Australia, and culminated in a very successful 2004 world cup. He was then appointed head of Australian soccer and from all reports (not being a massive soccer fan) did a brilliant job of that too... Now he's back at the ARU and doing some more good things.

He, having no previous experience in sports administration, is widely regarded as the best sports administrator in the country.

He's just one example of someone who has been successful outside sport who's come into an administrative role and excelled. Howard, I believe, will be similar.

 

[pasag]

Yeah, also it's important to note President =/ CEO.

CEO is the admin role, president more of a figurehead and that's why so many successful businessmen and politicians have easily been able to move into president roles in, say the AFL here as one example.

 

[GotSpin]

Exactly. The people who are making the argument that his tenure as the president of Australia gives him enough experience to lead the ICC are being dishonest and they know it. If running a country apparently gives someone enough experience to lead the ICC then why not appoint George W as the head or Margaret Thatcher or any ex head of state who has no experience in cricket administration?

No one is addressing the elephant in the room here. Howard has been a right-wing politician for his entire life. How are his politics going to affect the ICC? Considering his politics I find it hard to believe that he has any interest in strengthening the ICC. He is just going to become the puppet of BCCI or whichever board happens to have the most money. For him cricket is just another business, a money making proposition and CA and all other boards are just corporations. Mark my words if he wins stuff like the IPL which makes money will take over all real cricket, there will be a huge reduction in the non profitable test cricket. I know this is the kind of stuff that is usually not considered but it must be payed close attention to when a character like John Howard is trying to become the head of ICC. And lastly what kind of message does it send around the world? Atleast 50% of the people disagree with his right-wing politics, do we really want offend half the cricketing audience by doing this? Doesn't seem worth it to me. Why not just nominate an experienced non political person like Anderson and end all this drama?

Honest to god this post is horse manure.

How do you know Howard values money in the game over anything else. How do you know he will be bad for test cricket? If anything, Howard would be pro-test cricket. He's a cricket tragic and has followed Test (and all) cricket for many many years. The man has watched Bradman play for ffs. Why would he treat this like a business or a corporation. He wasn't a bloody CEO. I'm not a massive fan of Howard (His work choices cost me thousands of dollars) but ****, where do you get these ideas from?

 

[social]

It's not about politics. It's about his lack of experience, it must be considered how his politcs may affect the way he runs the ICC but the main issue is experience. These days you need experience to get a job at even lame restaurants like Applebees or something, I find it bizarre that anyone with zero cricket administrative experience can just walk in and become the head at a body like the ICC.

Absolute nonsense

Howard is ridiculously OVER-QUALIFIED for this job

The guy is a former head of a country FFS (btw, it's "Prime Minister" not "Premier" or "President" - shows how much you guys know about him ) not the secretary of your local club

The very fact that he has thrown his hat into the ring for such a ****ty, low paying role is ample evidence of how much he loves the game when anyone else in his position would be on the talk circuit or acting as a consultant and earning millions

The ICC should be proud to have him and not some dog's body looking to earn the only buck of his career

AND, like every other Aussie who has posted in this thread, I cant stand the guy!

 

[BoyBrumby]

Using a domestic example for a moment, John O'Neill was head of the NSW State Bank and was then appointed head of the Australian Rugby Union and did a brilliant job in organising the game in Australia, and culminated in a very successful 2004 world cup. He was then appointed head of Australian soccer and from all reports (not being a massive soccer fan) did a brilliant job of that too... Now he's back at the ARU and doing some more good things.

He, having no previous experience in sports administration, is widely regarded as the best sports administrator in the country.

He's just one example of someone who has been successful outside sport who's come into an administrative role and excelled. Howard, I believe, will be similar.

2003.

Bang up tournament tho and not just saying it cos we won either.

 

[Streetwise]

If he had enough sense as a diplomat and knowledge as a cricket fan, he'd have steered himself clear of any controvery regardin Murali. Instead, he decided to offer his stupid comments, stirring the rotten broth again, and all this gratuitously.

.

I can`think of a few administrators that had public opinions about certain umpires

But of course they are not Australians so thats OK.

 

[Quaggas]

2003.

Bang up tournament tho and not just saying it cos we won either.

Nah, seem to remember it was a poor tournament, just like other one.

In all seriousness, I'd love to see Uncle Bob's dossier on SA's political "elite." Otherwise, I stumped as to how he's been able play them like a harp from hell for the last 10 years.

 

[Smudge]

Think I said it before earlier in this thread, I hope Howard doesn't end up in the role. I'm not sure why NZ rolled over and allowed him to be nominated over their candidate.

Just think he's a pretty poor human being and not necessarily the best man for the job.

Could we stop this rubbish about NZ "rolling over" and allowing him to be nominated? It went to mediation, FFS.

 

[NZTailender]

Think I said it before earlier in this thread, I hope Howard doesn't end up in the role. I'm not sure why NZ rolled over and allowed him to be nominated over their candidate.

Just think he's a pretty poor human being and not necessarily the best man for the job.

Seriously how spineless is the New Zealand Cricket Board that they just bent over backwards and let Howard be nominated? The fact that australia was trying to nominate such a controversial figure should have made their job of getting their candidate through so much easier. Howard becoming the head is like the worst idea ever. Why not pull George Bush out of retirement and make him the head? At the very least he is funny. Bravo to SA, Zim, SL for trying to block him (eventhough Zim's reason for blocking him are incorrect and misguided, but the fact that they are blocking him is all that matters). Hopefully sanity will prevail, it's all up to Bangladesh & WI, I don't think Pak is going to vote against him as CA & BCCI will just bribe them to buy their vote. BCCI again shows how cynical it is by going after profits rather than doing the right thing. Once again I hope sanity prevails, otherwise this will probably be one of the worst things to happen to cricket

Could we stop this rubbish about NZ "rolling over" and allowing him to be nominated? It went to mediation, FFS.

Agree with Voltman here. It's not like we were able to veto Australia's selection, so laying the blame with NZ over 'rolling over' and letting Howard be the candidate is a ****ing pile of steaming, runny bull****.

 

[sirdj]

Also, it's the BCCI's fault that CSA and Zimbabwe oppose Howard.

Are you serious about that??

Currently the situation is this

- SA+Zim+SL are against him

- Pak & India are undecided.

- Aus+NZ+Eng are for him and nobody knows which way WI & Bang are going but its assumed that they are for Howard.

and he needs the approval of 7 out of 10 members boards.

So either Pak or India could trip him up.

But I don't see how people like Roebuck can accuse India of leading this move to block him?? What is it based on?

 

[Son Of Coco]

Agree with Voltman here. It's not like we were able to veto Australia's selection, so laying the blame with NZ over 'rolling over' and letting Howard be the candidate is a ****ing pile of steaming, runny bull****.

Was a poor choice of words on my part!

 

[Jono]

Are you serious about that??

Currently the situation is this

- SA+Zim+SL are against him

- Pak & India are undecided.

- Aus+NZ+Eng are for him and nobody knows which way WI & Bang are going but its assumed that they are for Howard.

and he needs the approval of 7 out of 10 members boards.

So either Pak or India could trip him up.

But I don't see how people like Roebuck can accuse India of leading this move to block him?? What is it based on?

SS was being sarcastic

 

[honestbharani]

Using a domestic example for a moment, John O'Neill was head of the NSW State Bank and was then appointed head of the Australian Rugby Union and did a brilliant job in organising the game in Australia, and culminated in a very successful 2004 world cup. He was then appointed head of Australian soccer and from all reports (not being a massive soccer fan) did a brilliant job of that too... Now he's back at the ARU and doing some more good things.

He, having no previous experience in sports administration, is widely regarded as the best sports administrator in the country.

He's just one example of someone who has been successful outside sport who's come into an administrative role and excelled. Howard, I believe, will be similar.

Do you honestly think there is any real scope to "excel" in the position of ICC President?


You still end up being a puppet at the hand of the member boards and their votes, right?

 

[honestbharani]

Absolute nonsense

Howard is ridiculously OVER-QUALIFIED for this job

The guy is a former head of a country FFS (btw, it's "Prime Minister" not "Premier" or "President" - shows how much you guys know about him ) not the secretary of your local club

The very fact that he has thrown his hat into the ring for such a ****ty, low paying role is ample evidence of how much he loves the game when anyone else in his position would be on the talk circuit or acting as a consultant and earning millions

The ICC should be proud to have him and not some dog's body looking to earn the only buck of his career

AND, like every other Aussie who has posted in this thread, I cant stand the guy!

yeah.. its not like Dalmiya could earn money outside.. The ICC job is his only pay packet.. Same for Pawar..

 

[GotSpin]

yeah.. its not like Dalmiya could earn money outside.. The ICC job is his only pay packet.. Same for Pawar..

Lets be honest. If he wanted too, Howard wouldn't need to work another day in his life