Everyone Has A Price

The ICC revamp: everyone knows that it's all about the Benjamins. Much more money for the BCCI specifically. The BCCI have stated that they're totally ok with getting more money. Well thank goodness then, happy days.

The original idea seems to have been to get the three biggest kids in the playground to work out some rules for everyone. But that worked out about as well as throwing a dead cow to three sharks and asking them to arrange servings for all the other fish in the sea. Before long it became all about how the biggest shark could get the biggest chunk of meat.

To do that the BCCI needed CA and the ECB to cooperate. Their prices were easy to settle on - deep down both England and Australia feel entitled to more money and the power to arrange their own itinerary (i.e. avoid pesky tours against anyone they don't want to play). England got the extra promise of (maybe) hosting the ICC office instead of Dubai. And so then there were three.

To achieve this goal - loads more cash for the BCCI, and some more it's co-conspirators - a plan was created. No other sane Full Member board would vote for such a proposal, but the Big Three knew that each in turn would have it's price. The draft that they came up with contained carefully planned clauses aimed in specific directions. Along with some hard negotiating, each Full Member would fall.

For good measure the BCCI went all in and put their participation in ICC events on the table, conditional to the draft being approved. Nobody has yet dared to call their bluff.

Zimbabwe needed little more than a vague promise some money and the even vaguer carrot of bilateral tour agreements. They were never really in the game.

The price for West Indies and New Zealand were a series against India each (as an added bonus for the BCCI those matches came at South Africa's expense) and the promise of bilateral tour agreements. These boards folded on the blind, without even waiting to see how serious the bilateral promises were.

Bangladesh got the stick. The threat of a two-tier Test system which would inevitably set them up as the first Full Member relegated out of Tests was a gun to their heads. In due course this clause was dropped and the BCB came on board without much more fight.

That's where we stand today. South Africa, Sri Lanka and Pakistan are holding out for "more time" to "consult their boards". This can probably be read as "more time to negotiate for more concessions".

Cricket South Africa's price may well turn out to be eligibility for payouts from the new Test Cricket slush fund and a seat on the all-powerful ExCo. The slush fund is a monetary pittance compared to what's moving around in the Big Three's orbit, but the ExCo seat is a big one. Our bureaucrats have small minds and large egos, so I expect little argument.

I'm not certain of Sri Lanka's position. Like CSA, I think they will be bought by a little bit of money and a seemingly significant slice of political power. Maybe the promise of more games against opposition other than India. Perhaps the power to decide not to play Test cricket if they don't feel like it.

That leaves Pakistan. The PCB has little love for the BCCI and seem to be playing the hardest to get. But if the others fall into line the BCCI doesn't need them, and that's what I think will happen. An organised and united Pakistan would be the nearest rival to India in terms of population and potential cricket revenue so the BCCI will have no problem with shafting them however possible.

This hand of cards has just about wrapped up. No doubt the phone lines are alive to the sound of concessions, and bilateral tour agreements are being bought and sold like packets of crack on a street corner in downtown Baltimore. Once the dust settles the little people will all feel like they've protected their own interests, and the BCCI will get the fat paycheck that it feels that it deserves.