Kamlesh Barjati
Banned
- Joined
- 26 May 2011
- Messages
- 1,087
- Reaction score
- 31
South Africa have confirmed that they are in favour of retaining the rotation system to decide the ICC presidency and want a nominations committee to be put in place for this task. That was the stance they presented at the annual conference in Hong Kong last week, where the decision was taken to defer a proposed amendment to the constitution regarding the appointment of the president.
India was among the countries pushing to replace the rotational system with open candidature and the deferring of the move was a rare public setback for the BCCI.
Bangladesh and Pakistan both opposed the suggested change, and on Sunday Mustafa Kamal, the Bangladesh Cricket Board president, said that support from South Africa at the ICC executive board meeting swung the issue in his country's favour and helped convince the board to delay the decision to replace the existing setup. Any amendment would have needed the backing of eight out of ten Full Members and South Africa's open opposition effectively meant a deferment.
"All the presidents had a discussion and expressed the views of their board. Our board felt that we should have a nominations committee in place, which I believe existed several years ago to deal with contentious issues," Mtutuzeli Nyoka, the Cricket South Africa president, told ESPNcricinfo.
The ICC used a nominations committee in the past but disbanded it in 2007. A CSA insider said that it was felt a nominations committee would be advantageous because "if a candidate that is not suitable is put forward, the board can ask for someone else." The source also said that CSA decided that the principle of rotation is a "good policy" and that Nyoka followed CSA's mandate by advocating it.
The issue has now been taken to a governance review committee which will look into this matter as well as related concerns such as the possibility of appointing independent directors and will report to the ICC before its executive board next meets in October. The appointment of the president will be discussed again there and will be taken for a vote to the full council if necessary.
It is understood that the BCCI is in favour of the matter going to a vote, because it would be able to rely on the support of Associate and Affiliate nations to push forward its preferred open candidature.
However, Nyoka said that the views of India were "not too different from ours." The way he understood it, India simply wanted a "fall-back position if there is a deadlock in choosing the ICC president, so the board will have a final say." Nyoka said he "did not get the feeling that anybody wanted the rotation policy to go." The proposal of a nominations committee could provide the checks and balances that India want.
This instance marks one of the few occasions that South Africa have gone in a different direction to India in matters of governance. The two countries have enjoyed strong relations over the years, with India the first country to welcome South Africa back into the international fold in 1991 and South Africa hosting the second edition of the IPL in 2009 at short notice. A senior CSA official said that the body is "not at all" concerned about a potential backlash from India, despite the difference of opinion on this matter.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/521962.html?CMP=OTC-RSS
India was among the countries pushing to replace the rotational system with open candidature and the deferring of the move was a rare public setback for the BCCI.
Bangladesh and Pakistan both opposed the suggested change, and on Sunday Mustafa Kamal, the Bangladesh Cricket Board president, said that support from South Africa at the ICC executive board meeting swung the issue in his country's favour and helped convince the board to delay the decision to replace the existing setup. Any amendment would have needed the backing of eight out of ten Full Members and South Africa's open opposition effectively meant a deferment.
"All the presidents had a discussion and expressed the views of their board. Our board felt that we should have a nominations committee in place, which I believe existed several years ago to deal with contentious issues," Mtutuzeli Nyoka, the Cricket South Africa president, told ESPNcricinfo.
The ICC used a nominations committee in the past but disbanded it in 2007. A CSA insider said that it was felt a nominations committee would be advantageous because "if a candidate that is not suitable is put forward, the board can ask for someone else." The source also said that CSA decided that the principle of rotation is a "good policy" and that Nyoka followed CSA's mandate by advocating it.
The issue has now been taken to a governance review committee which will look into this matter as well as related concerns such as the possibility of appointing independent directors and will report to the ICC before its executive board next meets in October. The appointment of the president will be discussed again there and will be taken for a vote to the full council if necessary.
It is understood that the BCCI is in favour of the matter going to a vote, because it would be able to rely on the support of Associate and Affiliate nations to push forward its preferred open candidature.
However, Nyoka said that the views of India were "not too different from ours." The way he understood it, India simply wanted a "fall-back position if there is a deadlock in choosing the ICC president, so the board will have a final say." Nyoka said he "did not get the feeling that anybody wanted the rotation policy to go." The proposal of a nominations committee could provide the checks and balances that India want.
This instance marks one of the few occasions that South Africa have gone in a different direction to India in matters of governance. The two countries have enjoyed strong relations over the years, with India the first country to welcome South Africa back into the international fold in 1991 and South Africa hosting the second edition of the IPL in 2009 at short notice. A senior CSA official said that the body is "not at all" concerned about a potential backlash from India, despite the difference of opinion on this matter.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/521962.html?CMP=OTC-RSS
