Abolish the ICC

[Slow Love™]

Ehsan Mani, chairman of the ICC, recently criticized Tony Blair for ""seeking to divert attention away from his own inaction in dealing with Zimbabwe by attempting to exert inappropriate pressure on an international sporting body to make a political decision".

Hey, chump, as soon as your organization decided to impose harsh penalties for any cricket board that refused to tour Zimbabwe, YOU made a political decision - don't act as if the British government had ANYTHING to do with that call.

The thing that infuriates me the most about this comment is that it operates within the very PREMISE that what is going on in Zimbabwe is unconscionable (by implying that action is "required" to "deal" with Zimbabwe), and yet, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, the ICC is happy with the meaningless reassurances that the ZCU dishes out on a seemingly daily basis that there isn't any basis to claims of racial bias in selection, and no taking over of the ZCU by political influences. Obviously Mani doesn't read the papers.

Then he has the nerve to attack the rebel South African players, suggesting that their protest is "ill-advised", and that they've left Tatenda Taibu and his group of inexperienced players in the lurch.

IMO, it's time we reverted to a situation of annual meetings between the country's boards, and ditched these ICC fools. And that's without even going into the whole chucking fiasco.

 

[Craig]

Ok you abolish the ICC, what do you replace it with?

Come on politics and sport seem to go hand in hand.

BTW it is Zimbabwean not South African.

 

[Mister Wright]

Here is a very, very good article on the subject.

Why will no-one follow MacGill's lead?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

1. You can't abolish the institution of world cricket and hope to still have cricket when it's done.

2. Money rules in all sports these days. Sports originated as entertainment, but now the players would rather get their paychecks and 'go with the flow' than stand up for something they believe and (God forbid) make a change in this world.

 

[Mister Wright]

I personally don't see how the players can even think about going. The Zimbabwe regime is restricting the best players on the basis of the colour of their skin. So if the Australian players were Zimbabwe players they would not be ineligible. Not because of performance, but on the colour of their skins.

 

[Loony BoB]

1. You can't abolish the institution of world cricket and hope to still have cricket when it's done.

Well, it's known to happen in various sports, at least on some level - sometimes you can end up with two different governing institutions. I know it's only entertainment, but wrestling does give a good example - WCW was created when a group of wrestlers decided that they wanted to have their own show, and they left and, for a long time, became the dominant force in wrestling entertainment. In F1GP, several manufacturers including Ferrari and Williams are threatening F1GP with the creation of a F1WC (or something like that), as they are (or were, I believe the situation is resolving itself) fed up with how things were being run by F1GP's big man, Mr. Ecclestone (forgive my spelling, I'm going by memory!).

I personally doubt that cricket will end up with a rival group, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone up top in the ICC was removed from their position soon. The narrow minded statement made by Mani really concerned me: "Asia represents 40% of the ICC. Virtually, Asia is the ICC."

It sounds like Mani doesn't really give a crap about non-Asian cricketing countries. While I doubt that is the case, that is what it sounds like. If the ICC's president can't come up with something better than that, I'm disgusted with his ignorance.

 

[Slow Love™]

Ok you abolish the ICC, what do you replace it with?

I kinda answered that. You can change the way the power balance is shared, and have some more "equal" representation on the part of the countries playing the game. At the very least, the current administrators could be removed, because IMO, they bring the game into disrepute.

Come on politics and sport seem to go hand in hand.

Are you arguing with me or agreeing with me here? Because I never said that they didn't. The ICC insists that they don't.

BTW it is Zimbabwean not South African.

Sorry, I flubbed that. But it's obvious through my numerous Zimbabwe references what I meant.

 

[Slow Love™]

Here is a very, very good article on the subject.

Why will no-one follow MacGill's lead?

I remember this one, it's not too bad, although the writer is a little confused as to the consistency of Howard's stance on Zimbabwe (but we won't go there).

The thing is though, that it's unfair that the players are being politicized in such a way. I remember an article in the guardian, where a journo hypothesized that Thorpe and Butcher and other players "who could find their way around a newspaper" were the ones most likely to boycott the Zimbabwe tour, and there's the problem. Most of these players are just sportsmen, and probably aren't incredibly educated or aware of the ethical principles at stake. The ICC is an international organization, and if their blase attitude earlier was hard to stomach, it's even harder now when cricket has become DIRECTLY affected by the politics of the Mugabe regime.

Even then, if they didn't want to make a call, fair enough, as long as they let the various national cricket boards make their own judgements. What's insulting is that, rather than "not taking a political decision" as Mani wants us to believe, the ICC is FORCING cricket boards to tour against their will, under threat of extremely severe financial penalties.

It's outrageous.

 

[Loony BoB]

I find it pathetic that the ICC are targetting the players, of all people. It's not their fault that they feel mistreated as players. They aren't responsible for the state of cricket in their country. They aren't being paid to not play cricket games. If your employer mistreats you, you work elsewhere. Simple facts of life. If 15 players choose not to be employed by the country becaus they feel mistreated, that is their choice. It's the responsibility of nobody else but the ZCU and the ICC to ensure that Zimbabwean cricket can provide a good side. If 15 players walked out in any other country, it would be the same situation. The players are very much in their rights to do what they want to do with their lives. They are employees and it is the responsiblity of their employers to satify their needs or find someone else for the job. If the employers are unable to find someone else for the job, then the employers need to make a better effort to satisfy the needs of their previous employees so that they will work. That's the same with any business anywhere in the world. How in the world can an international cricketer benefit, money-wise, from leaving a cricket team? Most of these guys don't have another team to go to! Selfish? Selfish my [buttocks].

 

[Slow Love™]

1. You can't abolish the institution of world cricket and hope to still have cricket when it's done.

Back when it was known as the International Cricket Conference, this body was mainly a discussion forum for teams to discuss where the sport was going, and implement changes that were agreed upon. Since '89, when they became the International Cricket Council, the decision was made to be more an organization of enforcement, and binding members to decisions they didn't necessarily agree with. Since then, we've seen them impose their own sponsorship deals to the (enforced) exclusion of those of individual boards (some of them who are financially struggling), the ridiculous political kowtowing over throwing (whichever angle you come from) and the current Zimbabwe fiasco. Personally, I would like to see a return to the former model (and additionally, half of these idiots thrown out). Cricket had been played internationally for around a century before the late 80's.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Rant on the way - give me a couple of hours whilst I write it (and do my laundry.. I've run out of socks..)

 

[Slow Love™]

I find it pathetic that the ICC are targetting the players, of all people. It's not their fault that they feel mistreated as players. They aren't responsible for the state of cricket in their country. They aren't being paid to not play cricket games. If your employer mistreats you, you work elsewhere. Simple facts of life. If 15 players choose not to be employed by the country becaus they feel mistreated, that is their choice. It's the responsibility of nobody else but the ZCU and the ICC to ensure that Zimbabwean cricket can provide a good side. If 15 players walked out in any other country, it would be the same situation. The players are very much in their rights to do what they want to do with their lives. They are employees and it is the responsiblity of their employers to satify their needs or find someone else for the job. If the employers are unable to find someone else for the job, then the employers need to make a better effort to satisfy the needs of their previous employees so that they will work. That's the same with any business anywhere in the world. How in the world can an international cricketer benefit, money-wise, from leaving a cricket team? Most of these guys don't have another team to go to! Selfish? Selfish my [buttocks].

For me, Mani's attitude towards the Zimbabwe players was what really got me frothing at the mouth (not that I haven't spent some months doing it) - it's like the last straw. It's like blaming employees of a third-world sweat shop for striking for better conditions, because the rest of the staff will have to work harder and in even worse conditions in their absence. Why the hell does the problem lie with the people trying to bring this situation to the attention of the rest of the world? No wonder people are so reluctant to be whistleblowers.

It's a ridiculous attitude on the part of the ICC. They've let the players down, and they've let the game down. The fact that they accept the word of a government that is openly recognized to be corrupt over those willing to speak out (including Flower and Olonga, whom, if I remember correctly, the ICC pressured to remove their black armbands during the WC) says it all, really.

 

[chris.hinton]

you cannot abolish the ICC? even though they are a dim whitted organization

 

[Sanz]

Yes, I think ICC should be abolished. This organization has failed in a big way.

 

[anzac]

yes this article got me very ****ed off ...........

IMO the 'political' options for the likes of the British & Australian Govts etc are tied to the decisions of the Commonwealth Heads of State meeting re Zimbabwe - as members of that body (The Commonwealth) they have to abide by their rulings or face expulsion themselves in a worst case scenario, or at least face taking a stand that will not be supported by anyone else!

Unfortunately I'm not up to date with the current state of play here so I can't make any further comment - my last understanding was that some of the leaders (Howard & Blair) were calling for Zimbabwe to be given an ultimatum to clean up or be expelled, but that some of the other leaders vetoed this and went with a censuring which was in effect toothless.........as a consequence Mani's arguement re Blair may be unfounded as the political leaders' hands may well be tied.....

Mani's attack on the rebel players is deplorable - esp in light of the comments from those rebels that the ICC had not contacted them for their side of the story!!!! For me it shows that the ICC (or at least Mani as it's head) has no real interest in the players or the credibility of the game (particularly so far as morality is concerned), and that their primary motivation is monetary - i.e. more teams in the comp at Test level = more matches = more revenue!

The question regarding banning the ICC is not practical - you can't ban your own governing body! The real options are to call for the ICC to get it's **** together so far as beig the international representative of all the national bodies (& get rid of the likes of Mani & Co), or to ask uncle Kerry (or similar)to come back & help set up a break away comp & body.

This latter option has already been debated on this forum in the lead up to the last WC (or was it the ICC Trophy), where it was intimated that Asia was the real control behind the ICC due to their numbers and revenue (Mani seems to confirm this) - and that any break away would not succeed without them as they more or less controlled the ICC. The result would be 2 comps, 1 representing Asia & the other the 'rebels' who left the ICC - the ICC / Asia comp would survive on it's own because of their numbers & revenue generation, but the 'rebels' would struggle without them & could lead to the ultimate decline of the sport in those 'rebel' nations.

AUST domestic comp is probably strong enough, as is RSA, but the likes of ENG would be hard hit with so many foreign players who may be inelligable if their national body remains with the ICC comp (let alone the legal ramifications re player contracts etc - see the latest developments re EU etc), and NZ would almost certainly collapse without outside assistance as Rugby League found out in the Super League wars! Furthermore there is no indication at this stage as to who would leave the ICC from any other the domestic bodies & it should not be assumed that it could be a white / European nations v ICC or whatever!

Bottom line IMO this situation is fast becoming about more than just the ZIM situation - and I don't mean to seem to be belittling than in any way - and I blame the ICC for this.

:****ed:

 

[Loony BoB]

There comes a point that you do have to start to threaten with coming up with a new organisation, although only in certain situations. For example, should they need seven votes by the test nations to get rid of Mani, and only six are gained, those six countries can threaten to leave. Usually this would result in the seventh vote being made, although sometimes it doesn't - and then action really does need to be taken. Hopefully it won't come to that.

 

[Langeveldt]

We will never get rid of the ICC's bungling spineless ways , but we can always hope... Maybe mass boycotting off ICC matches would do the trick...

Its ironic that a massive amount of the games advancement since it was first created came during the tiny period that was the Packer era... We would still be in the 1950's if the ICC werent shook up a little bit...

IMO, the ICC are far more at wrong than the ZCU and even Robert Mugabe's regime in a lot of the crisis in Zimbabwe cricket... At least the latter two have a direction, and a bit of spine and application... Ehsan Mani might learn something from the tyrant...

 

[anzac]

oh it appears he has learned a thing or two already.............

divide & conquor.........(sp) re his comments about Asia being the ICC........

trying to abdicate any & all responsibility for the world game by trying to force each board to become state puppets - thus becoming exactly what the ZCU represents - once this is achieved the problem wouldn't exist as it would be the pot calling the kettle black, and then he can really turn a sporting issue into a full blown political minefield.........

the reality is that the ICC have backed themselves into a corner by not addressing the issue when it forst raised it's head at the time of the WC.........they are now busy looking for somewhere to shift the responsibility & blame.............

 

[Langeveldt]

Isnt it weird how virtually all authority is essentialy corrupt at the core?? Must be a power thing...

 

[anzac]

Isnt it weird how virtually all authority is essentialy corrupt at the core?? Must be a power thing...

"absolute power corrupts absolutely"??????