Cricket stuff that doesn't deserve its own thread

[StephenZA]

Shashank Manohar elected unopposed as independent ICC chairman | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

Couple of days after this,

Shashank Manohar shoots down premise that he quit BCCI role just to contest ICC chairman election | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

Does this not just undermine the idea of having an independent chairman straight away....

I`m not saying he is a bad choice, just the look of the thing seems dodgy.

 

[G.I.Joe]

It is dodgy, but not for the reason you're suggesting.
He didn't quit the BCCI role so that he could take up the ICC chairmanship. He took up the ICC chairmanship because he was going to be barred from the BCCI role by the Supreme Court.

 

[andruid]

It is dodgy, but not for the reason you're suggesting.
He didn't quit the BCCI role so that he could take up the ICC chairmanship. He took up the ICC chairmanship because he was going to be barred from the BCCI role by the Supreme Court.

The the ICC is being headed by a man that a supreme court found unfit to run the BCCI?

 

[G.I.Joe]

The the ICC is being headed by a man that a supreme court found unfit to run the BCCI?

Ineligible, not unfit.

He's also the latter, but unfortunately that's not what the court observed.

Supposing Obama declared tomorrow that he's giving up the US Presidency (a powerful office) to go head the United Nations (a weaker office).
That makes no sense. It isn't dodgy behaviour to take on a smaller office by giving up a bigger one.

What is shady about it is that he realises that the laws of the land do not permit him to hold onto the US Presidency beyond November this year, so might as well grab the consolation prize instead.

That's exactly why Manohar is doing here. The ICC Chairmanship isn't a grand prize he's coveting. It's a consolation prize borne of being found ineligible to stay on as BCCI chief.

Besides, one can create conditions that make the ICC chairmanship an independent office, but we all know that doesn't mean we're going to have former cricketers occupy it. It was always going to be a retirement ticket for cricket administrators past their sell-by date at their home associations.

 

[G.I.Joe]

P.S: Agree with your sig. #allfontsmatter

 

[honestbharani]

Ineligible, not unfit.

He's also the latter, but unfortunately that's not what the court observed.

Supposing Obama declared tomorrow that he's giving up the US Presidency (a powerful office) to go head the United Nations (a weaker office).
That makes no sense. It isn't dodgy behaviour to take on a smaller office by giving up a bigger one.

What is shady about it is that he realises that the laws of the land do not permit him to hold onto the US Presidency beyond November this year, so might as well grab the consolation prize instead.

That's exactly why Manohar is doing here. The ICC Chairmanship isn't a grand prize he's coveting. It's a consolation prize borne of being found ineligible to stay on as BCCI chief.

Besides, one can create conditions that make the ICC chairmanship an independent office, but we all know that doesn't mean we're going to have former cricketers occupy it. It was always going to be a retirement ticket for cricket administrators past their sell-by date at their home associations.

Did you read the crap info story on it though? They kept saying that he had delivered on his promises. My ass. If his promise was that Srini mama and Chennai will be punished with a vengence, then he did. Else, he did crap all.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Did you read the crap info story on it though? They kept saying that he had delivered on his promises. My ass. If his promise was that Srini mama and Chennai will be punished with a vengence, then he did. Else, he did crap all.

Yeah I did. I'd call Manohar the most devious and political person to head the BCCI, but then I remember Pawar headed it too.

I vomited into my mouth when I read the part about "his conscience not allowing him to stay on as BCCI chief"

If "my conscience" is what we're calling the Supreme Court nowadays, then yeah, he's spot on.

 

[StephenZA]

What worries me more is that considering everything you have said regarding the man (did not know much about him tbh), it does not bode well for improvements within the ICC structure...

 

[StephenZA]

Dont mind the font but the colour makes my eyes water...

 

[Grumpy]

Is this the same guy who said he would look in to the Big 3 fissco?

 

[Daemon]

Yes.

 

[G.I.Joe]

What worries me more is that considering everything you have said regarding the man (did not know much about him tbh), it does not bode well for improvements within the ICC structure...

He's a dove in ICC circles and a hawk in BCCI circles. I don't like him, but I'd rather he was at the ICC than at the BCCI from an international cricket fan point of view.

 

[Pratters]

The spell checker on my phone keeps correcting Binny to bunny. Feels wrong recorrecting it.

 

[Howe_zat]

ICC appoints Shashank Manohar as independent chairman - BBC Sport

The ICC just has a different definition to 'independent' from the rest of us.

 

[Pratters]

Haha, yeah.

 

[honestbharani]

That idiot is gonna Dalmiya his way into getting things done. Instead of the Big 3 it will now be India and the small 7...

 

[Pratters]

Erm, how is a switch from the big 3 an issue hb?

 

[honestbharani]

Coz it will be nothing but the same crap of BCCI pushing its agenda through. This time we will split the rest of the money for the small 6 or whatever instead of Australia and England. Issue is that it will be the same crap as it is today.

 

[Pratters]

But it's better than a big 3 monopoly (even if not ideal), no?

 

[honestbharani]

It was, is and will always be a BCCI monopoly. The Big 3 was more pragmatic because Australia and England, while not as strong as BCCI, will still try and work out things at times to push their agendas and given they are both countries where cricket has to compete to be a top sport, it might have helped the game. With the small 6, the deal will always be about "hey we will give you a series here, a tri series there, and more players in the IPL from your boards" and it will just be BCCI pushing its own agenda just about all the time. Neither is good. Both equally bad but IMO, there was at least a chance that on the odd occasion decisions will be made with the game's interests in mind, but now that hope is at zilch.