The Telegraph
Wednesday , January 29 , 2014
CIMA Gallary

CSA sours the mood somewhat

Calcutta: The upbeat mood among the Big Three was soured somewhat after Cricket South Africa (CSA) clarified that it will wait for the nod of its Board members before giving the final approval to the proposals.

“The support is subject to the approval of the respective Boards of the member countries after which a final decision will be taken at a follow-up ICC Board meeting on February 8,” CSA said in a media release.

“We will be convening a joint session of our CSA Board and certain key stakeholders as soon as is practically possible to consider the principles,” said CSA president and chairman of the Board, Chris Nenzani.

“One of the hallmarks of our new administration has been an absolute adherence to the principles of good corporate governance and we do not intend to deviate from this. Our position will be subject to full consideration by our Board and other stakeholders.”

CSA has become the first national board to call for the ICC to withdraw the draft proposals that would put power in international cricket in the hands of India, England and Australia.

CSA had gone to the extent of calling the proposals “unconstitutional” and “flawed”.

“Without addressing the merits of the proposal in so far as it concerns constitutional amendments and changes to ICC competitions, these proposals should first be referred to the relevant ICC committees or sub-committees for proper consideration and to make recommendations to the ICC Board,” Nenzani had said.

“Although there is nothing to prevent a review of the ICC funding model or finances, the proposal self-evidently is inextricably tied up with a fundamental restructuring of the ICC, which has far-reaching constitutional implications,” Nenzani said.

“The draft proposal is, therefore, fundamentally flawed as regards the process and, therefore, in breach of the ICC constitution.

“In the circumstances we propose that the draft proposal be withdrawn immediately, given that the proper procedures have not been followed.

“In our respectful opinion, a more considered, inclusive/consultative, and properly constitutionally ordained approach is required.”