THE International Cricket Council (ICC) have been criticised for putting the interests of their full members first and for treating the development of the global game as a “secondary” aim. The criticism was made in a report by Lord Woolf into the governance of the ICC, which the sport’s world governing body commissioned.
The report makes a total of 65 recommendations for change at the ICC, including greater representation on the board for non-Test-playing nations, the appointment of independent directors and changing the constitution to prevent anyone serving on a national board to also sit on the ICC board.
A section of the report reads: “Currently the ICC reacts as though it is primarily a members club; its interest in enhancing the global development of the game is secondary. In today’s environment this is not an acceptable situation. Cricket is a global game and there is a need for global governance.
“If the ICC is prevented from developing, promoting and protecting world cricket, public opinion will be increasingly critical of the members of the ICC board who are responsible for this …. To avoid this requires the existing members to be open and to put the interests of the global game ahead of their own short-term parochial interests.
“This may be seen as involving the surrender of what are perceived to be long established privileges of members to the ICC. Whether they are perceived or real they should be given up.”
The report recommends nations be split into two categories – those with full membership and those with associate membership – rather than the current three, which also includes a group of nations classed at affiliate level.
The ICC have already agreed to adopt a proposal by Lord Woolf to have a board chairman and a separate president from 2014 onwards, splitting the role currently filled by the president alone.
A chairman will lead the board, while the president’s function will become an ambassadorial one. However, there will be no decisions on the key recommendations of the independent governance review until at least the next board meeting in April.