The BCCI-PCB MoU Battle : Pakistan’s case is strong but the ICC is unlikely to rule in their favour

[MenInG]

The BCCI-PCB MoU Battle : Pakistan’s case is strong but the ICC is unlikely to rule in their favour

The ICC’s Dispute Resolution Committee recently held a 3-day hearing in Dubai in connection with the BCCI-PCB MoU case where the PCB is asking for compensation from the BCCI for the violation of the terms of the agreement between both sides. BCCI for their part have denied that any such formal agreement existed and have also indicated that they were powerless to honour any commitment for bilateral series due to the absence of Government permission.

At the end of the proceedings where oral arguments were offered, both parties via unofficial channels, expressed their satisfaction and confidence in the manner in which their respective representatives presented their sides of the case.

However, based on information received from sources, PakPassion.net can reveal that the facts represented during the proceedings have put the Pakistan Cricket Board in a very strong position as far as the outcome of the case is concerned.

To start with, the PCB’s witnesses consisted of the former Chairman, Najam Sethi and the COO Subhan Ahmad, both of whom had first-hand knowledge of the deliberations during the time when the agreement was first agreed upon and signed. From the Indian side, Mr. N. Srinivasan who had been the driving force behind the Big 3 initiative did not attend as didn’t Anurag Thakur who was Secretary for BCCI during the time this agreement was discussed.

Incidentally, Anurag Thakur had used the word ‘agreement’ in a statement to the press in December 2015 and also mentioned the permission of the Indian Government in this matter as below.



https://indianexpress.com/article/s...p-without-govts-clearance-on-indo-pak-series/

December 10, 2015

The following excerpt which has quotes from Anurag Thakur as reported by Indian Express:

“I must set the record straight for everyone’s benefit that in April 2014 BCCI’s ex-boss had signed an agreement with the Pakistan Cricket Board while bringing a few changes to the constitution of ICC. According to which if resolutions take place in the ICC constitution then India will play against Pakistan in this period for the next eight years.

“And according to that agreement, the PCB was supposed to host India at a neutral venue in the month of December 2015. PCB chairman and the BCCI President met in Dubai and decided that we will play a series in Sri Lanka and both the Cricket Board’s will seek permission from their respective Governments for political clearance.


This was a significant fact that was picked up by the PCB as it was now clear that this was more than a mere understanding between the boards but had a firmer and more formal basis. If one glances at the ‘agreement’ floating around in the media at the moment it also does not mention ‘Government approval’ as a pre-requisite. Further, any objective assessment of the situation would show that Government approvals were only needed when there were security issues at stake and obviously there were none in UAE.

Regardless of whether it was part of the agreement or not, it has also allegedly come to light that the BCCI never formally asked for approval from the Government of India. This is probably the reason that Salman Khurshid, India’s former External Affairs Minister was brought in to the hearings on behalf of the BCCI and one does wonder what he could have said to substantiate the matter when no formal request was received. However, given the nature of India Pakistan relations, it is possible that no amounts of contracts/agreements can be of any use and if that is the India defence, it would be a poor one.

From the PCB’s side, it appears that the deal with the devil as it were was simple. Pakistan and India would play cricket, but in return PCB would provide its vote for the Big 3 proposal as is mentioned in the agreement. If the Big 3 resolution did not pass, then the agreement was meaningless and if they did, the commitments would become binding which happened to be the case.

The document widely available known as the ‘BCCI Letter’, lays out the terms and conditions of the engagement. It is known by many as the MoU or agreement. It does not mention the word MoU but it is from the BCCI secretary to the Chairman of the PCB. Regardless of what it is called, the conditions laid out in it were met by Pakistan and the ball was in India’s court. It has also been revealed by PCB sources that BCCI did not respond to numerous reminders by PCB to formalise the agreement with a follow-up document which would have listed the details of future series.

The other important question that has been asked by many centres around the jurisdiction of the ICC’s Dispute Resolution Committee to decide on such matters but according to ICC’s constitution the decision by this committee is binding.

With the oral submissions phase now over, written statements will be given and then the committee will go away for what could be a long period to decide on the outcome.

The possible outcomes are as follows:

1. Pakistan’s position on this matter is rejected – in which case, things remain as they were between the boards - status quo prevails and Pakistan can claim that they did not let the matter rest; BCCI may look to change the way it handles such affairs in the future.

2. Pakistan’s position is recognised as correct and then the matter enters into a phase where there would be negotiations on the actual compensation payout to Pakistan. Whilst it is possible that India may give a fraction of what is asked by Pakistan, the ‘bragging’ rights could hand Pakistan a moral victory of sorts which could come handy in future.

Whilst ostensibly, the PCB’s case is a very strong one, one does wonder if the ICC for all its protestations of neutrality has the courage to stand-up against India and deliver a verdict that could put them at loggerheads with the BCCI. It is an open secret that most members of ICC will side with the BCCI due to their immense clout in financial terms so a verdict on behalf of Pakistan will be tantamount to a betrayal of BCCI, which is an outcome that the Indian board will simply not accept.

So, in summary, whilst PCB may feel that they have provided enough evidence to the committee to make a robust representation of their case, the reality is that the World's Cricket governing body may have little stomach to rule in their favour and take on India, and such an outcome should open the eyes of many to the sad reality of how cricket is run today.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Indian govt's permission is required to play with Pakistan. Its not merely for a security point of view. These are policy decisions

Secondly in 2015 dec and in 2017 bcci wrote to the govt regarding playing pakistan.

https://www.abplive.in/sports/no-decision-on-india-pakistan-series-mea-251339/amp

https://tribune.com.pk/story/136828...nt-permission-host-pakistan-later-year/?amp=1

Here is the link from 2015 and 2017.

If pcb had doubts over ICC's neutrality, why did they approach them? Secondly the members of the DRC are not ICC employees. Is this an attempt by pcb to pre empt a loss of face if they lose, by raising questions on ICC DRC's neutrality?

 

[MenInG]

Indian govt's permission is required to play with Pakistan. Its not merely for a security point of view. These are policy decisions

Secondly in 2015 dec and in 2017 bcci wrote to the govt regarding playing pakistan.

https://www.abplive.in/sports/no-decision-on-india-pakistan-series-mea-251339/amp

https://tribune.com.pk/story/136828...nt-permission-host-pakistan-later-year/?amp=1

Here is the link from 2015 and 2017.

If pcb had doubts over ICC's neutrality, why did they approach them? Secondly the members of the DRC are not ICC employees. Is this an attempt by pcb to pre empt a loss of face if they lose, by raising questions on ICC DRC's neutrality?

You can make what you wish of it but the fact is that BCCI's panic in the proceedings shows they are worried. However, the reality of the matter is that PCB cannot compete with BCCI in terms of financial clout.

Those are just facts.

 

[cricketjoshila]

You can make what you wish of it but the fact is that BCCI's panic in the proceedings shows they are worried. However, the reality of the matter is that PCB cannot compete with BCCI in terms of financial clout.

Those are just facts.

Panic? How did you make out panic?

Financial clout would come into play if there was a vote and members were voting. Here its 3 member panel of non icc related people with credible legal background judging a matter. This has nothing to do with clout.

 

[MenInG]

Panic? How did you make out panic?

Financial clout would come into play if there was a vote and members were voting. Here its 3 member panel of non icc related people with credible legal background judging a matter. This has nothing to do with clout.

I think your inability to understand how ICC works is a little naive but given your knowledge of all matters, I would say it is deliberate.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I think your inability to understand how ICC works is a little naive but given your knowledge of all matters, I would say it is deliberate.

I think you are confusing between the icc board and the DRC. What you say is true regarding the icc board.

But the DRC panel are not icc employees.

The 3 members are

One nominated by ICC
One nominated by Bcci
One nominated by PCB

These are very reputed people. If they suddenly were to be amenable to financial clout then it harms there reputation and work outside icc.This is not the beginning and end of their careers.

Whatever may be the decision,it will be widely discussed in legal circles. So the judges cannot simply give a decision that Icc dictates them.

 

[MenInG]

I think you are confusing between the icc board and the DRC. What you say is true regarding the icc board.

But the DRC panel are not icc employees.

The 3 members are

One nominated by ICC
One nominated by Bcci
One nominated by PCB

These are very reputed people. If they suddenly were to be amenable to financial clout then it harms there reputation and work outside icc.This is not the beginning and end of their careers.

Whatever may be the decision,it will be widely discussed in legal circles. So the judges cannot simply give a decision that Icc dictates them.

I am quite aware of the workings of the DRC however, there is a practical aspect to it. At the end of the day, it will be Pakistan's word vs India's word and our issue is with that Pakistan is not fighting on a level field.

But that is the reality. Of course, it would be great if we are proved wrong but its unlikely that BCCI will allow such a huge loss of face.

 

[Itachi]

I don't think an independent committee has interest in either party. I've experienced such conflicts in work place but haven't seen circumstances where the judgement was based upon the influence of the party inside the system.

None the less, if you are implying if there could be a deal underwater between all the three parties, ICC, BCCI and PCB, then it will be a different ball game.

 

[MenInG]

I don't think an independent committee has interest in either party. I've experienced such conflicts in work place but haven't seen circumstances where the judgement was based upon the influence of the party inside the system.

None the less, if you are implying if there could be a deal underwater between all the three parties, ICC, BCCI and PCB, then it will be a different ball game.

Look I am talking from a Pakistan pov - whether it is the case or not, is not something I am aware or party to.

 

[Angrez Pakistani]

The debate is futile. The fact is that we cannot force anyone to play with us. It is also the fact the PCB and BCCI shouldn’t have signed the agreement because, with the advantage of the hindsight, the agreement in itself was oxymoronic. The only thing standing between the bilateral series was the refusal of GOI to allow BCCI for the resumption of bilateral ties and that fact didn’t change either before or after the signing.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I am quite aware of the workings of the DRC however, there is a practical aspect to it. At the end of the day, it will be Pakistan's word vs India's word and our issue is with that Pakistan is not fighting on a level field.

But that is the reality. Of course, it would be great if we are proved wrong but its unlikely that BCCI will allow such a huge loss of face.

Bcci may approach a different legal forum should it lose the case. The decision made by DRC if its implemented under Arbitration act of 1996 has to pass the scrutiny of civil procedure code of India. It is here where the bcci will claim relief.

If the 3 judges are impartial then both parties have a level field. Ofcourse a lot depends on the witnesses and their testimonies and how the lawyers argued their points.

Was any icc official apart from Manohar called as witness?

 

[MenInG]

Bcci may approach a different legal forum should it lose the case. The decision made by DRC if its implemented under Arbitration act of 1996 has to pass the scrutiny of civil procedure code of India. It is here where the bcci will claim relief.

If the 3 judges are impartial then both parties have a level field. Ofcourse a lot depends on the witnesses and their testimonies and how the lawyers argued their points.

Was any icc official apart from Manohar called as witness?

My understanding is that Salman Khurshid was the only other witness (to explain Gov of India's pov)

 

[cricketjoshila]

My understanding is that Salman Khurshid was the only other witness (to explain Gov of India's pov)

Sundar Raman was there and so were Sanjay Patel and Ratnakar Shetty from Bcci side.

From PCB it was Subhan Ahmed and Najam Sethi.

Are we missing someone here?

 

[MenInG]

Sundar Raman was there and so were Sanjay Patel and Ratnakar Shetty from Bcci side.

From PCB it was Subhan Ahmed and Najam Sethi.

Are we missing someone here?

I believe the people who were actually involved in the original mou/agreement were not there from BCCI side

 

[cricketjoshila]

I believe the people who were actually involved in the original mou/agreement were not there from BCCI side

Sanjay Patel signed that letter and he was there. Sundar Raman the then COO and Shetty the then GM were also there.

The man missing was N Srinivasan. Then bcci president and icc chairman. I wonder if he submitted a written account..This man is slippery.

 

[MenInG]

Sanjay Patel signed that letter and he was there. Sundar Raman the then COO and Shetty the then GM were also there.

The man missing was N Srinivasan. Then bcci president and icc chairman. I wonder if he submitted a written account..This man is slippery.

From what I understand (and this cannot be confirmed), N Srinivasan and also Anurag Thakur - they did not come due to some issues with CoA?

 

[cricketjoshila]

From what I understand (and this cannot be confirmed), N Srinivasan and also Anurag Thakur - they did not come due to some issues with CoA?

This letter is before Thakur's time. But yes they have issues with the present bcci management, effectively the CoA and hence refused to play ball.

 

[iniqbal223]

Did not PCB know this earlier. No matter how strong their case is, its very unlikely ICC can act against BCCI.

Even Shashank Manohar warned them earlier about this indirectly. Wait and watch, back door or political negotiations could have saved PCB lots of $$$. But they chose to go ahead with the case, they knew the outcome of it. Anyway , its not about the cricket alone, even in world football and world politics its same. Whoever has $$$ rules it. If PCB really wants to become a stronger board they have to get their act right, can't rely on players and management to always give them best results on the field.

 

[Gotham Cronie]

Regardless of whether it was part of the agreement or not, it has also allegedly come to light that the BCCI never formally asked for approval from the Government of India. This is probably the reason that Salman Khurshid, India’s former External Affairs Minister was brought in to the hearings on behalf of the BCCI and one does wonder what he could have said to substantiate the matter when no formal request was received.

They didnt go to the government until non-stop topi drama of:

1) We can't play you because of the prestige of our nation and the sentiments of soldiers dying on the border and the Mumbai victims

2) Ok, we'll play you, but you come to us even though it's your turn to host

3) No, we're too scared that our innocent angel players will be corrupted by breathing the same air as these boogiemen bookies in the UAE so let's play in Sri Lanka

After all this, the BCCI finally deemed it appropriate to go to the GOI at which point even if they had approved, there was no time for the proper tour that the PCB was promised.

 

[AMSS]

I am quite aware of the workings of the DRC however, there is a practical aspect to it. At the end of the day, it will be Pakistan's word vs India's word and our issue is with that Pakistan is not fighting on a level field.

But that is the reality. Of course, it would be great if we are proved wrong but its unlikely that BCCI will allow such a huge loss of face.

The arbitration history is littered with examples of davids getting the better of goliaths. US regularly gets owned at WTO trade disputes settlement bodies in cases against tiny, inconsequential countries. And US has a far better institutional support at WTO than BCCI has at ICC.

If PCB loses the case, it'd be because they didn't have a legal leg to stand on. Simple.

 

[Tusker]

I am quite aware of the workings of the DRC however, there is a practical aspect to it. At the end of the day, it will be Pakistan's word vs India's word and our issue is with that Pakistan is not fighting on a level field.

But that is the reality. Of course, it would be great if we are proved wrong but its unlikely that BCCI will allow such a huge loss of face.

So if its all rigged and a sham why is PCB wasting millions on lawyers ? its not like they are awash with extra cash lying around.

 

[cricketindiafan]

So PCB's defence is based on Anurag Thakur using the word 'agreement' while talking to the press.

Nice. I hope BCCI was mature enough not to use such puerile arguments like using ex-PCB Chairman Zaka Ashraf's statements in media

Zaka said the PCB’s MoU with India wasn’t a properly drafted agreement and it didn’t have clause to ensure compensation.

The MoU was not legally protected as I don’t see any clause, which may allow Pakistan to claim compensation or to go to any court of arbitration against the BCCI for not honouring the commitment.

 

[Bangalorean]

All these are just speculations, let the final verdict come folks first !

 

[iniqbal223]

the way BCCI says they need govt. approval

PCB can pull out from world cup next year, it must be clear to ICC that there wont be tolerance for unfair stuff. Repercussion of this verdict is , BCCI becomes more manipulative which is not good for world cricket

 

[KevinFern]

the way BCCI says they need govt. approval

PCB can pull out from world cup next year, it must be clear to ICC that there wont be tolerance for unfair stuff. Repercussion of this verdict is , BCCI becomes more manipulative which is not good for world cricket

Olympics have been boycotted on government orders by various countries. What's a cricket WC in front of that?

 

[iniqbal223]

Obviously not!

1) BCCI wanted support for Big 3 in return of bilateral series
2) BCCI got big 3 going, and PCB got this document/assurance
3) fast forward October 2015: PCB contacted BCCI about the bilateral series to be held in UAE/SL
4) BCCI invited SM Khan to discuss about the series details
5) BCCI became manipulative , asked PCB that they can consider series if that is played in India
6) PCB stated that its Pak turn to host
7) Just to make sure PCB beg to them about the series, BCCI came up with new reason, that govt. is not allowing bilateral series [biggest joke, they are happy to invite Pak in India to play bilateral series, but can't have bilateral series because there is govt. intervention]
8) Sensing BCCI would eat the whole pie of this series, PCB rejected the idea of BCCI hosting the series.
9) Next 5 months : Nothing happend
10) Come June 2016 : PCB sent reminders about bilateral series
11) Till Nov 2016 : PCB sent multiple reminders
12) Someone from BCCI said, we did never signed any document : wow!
13) PCB released the document
14) BCCI : there is no official seal on the document
15) Entire mail trail released by PCB
16) BCCI : that is only LoI
17) PCB : Where it is written that BCCI needed GoI permission??? Document accurately mentioned [Pak and India WILL play series] Had it been LoI/MoU, wordings would have been like ... PCB and BCCI would make efforts to play bi lateral series. From legal point of view, this is more than enough.
18) PCB : we will file a case
19) BCCI last attempt through ICC : Shashank Manohar warned them of consequences
20) Case Filed
21) BCCI played the same tune : we don't have govt. permission
22) Hearing : BCCI presented SM Quereshi
Well, he was not even in the power, when this letter was signed. UPA govt. left the office in May 2014. How can he testify and explain the process of BCCI approaching them for the series.


Conclusion : Well this does not look good for cricket in long run. Simply shows , it is hard to trust and deal with BCCI and its cronies. Best way, is if PCB can take much harder stance and boycott next year world cup. ICC needs Pak cricket, at the same time its office is run by certain goons from BCCI who are overly represented in form of ICC also.

 

[Bangalorean]

Conclusion : Well this does not look good for cricket in long run. Simply shows , it is hard to trust and deal with BCCI and its cronies. Best way, is if PCB can take much harder stance and boycott next year world cup. ICC needs Pak cricket, at the same time its office is run by certain goons from BCCI who are overly represented in form of ICC also.

Last time when ICC vs BCCI face-off happened Manohar was key person; who openly supported other boards. Your statement doesn't make sense

 

[Usman]

Indian govt's permission is required to play with Pakistan. Its not merely for a security point of view. These are policy decisions

Secondly in 2015 dec and in 2017 bcci wrote to the govt regarding playing pakistan.

https://www.abplive.in/sports/no-decision-on-india-pakistan-series-mea-251339/amp

https://tribune.com.pk/story/136828...nt-permission-host-pakistan-later-year/?amp=1

Here is the link from 2015 and 2017.

If pcb had doubts over ICC's neutrality, why did they approach them? Secondly the members of the DRC are not ICC employees. Is this an attempt by pcb to pre empt a loss of face if they lose, by raising questions on ICC DRC's neutrality?

I think the issue about government permission not being given is side point. The question is, if the Indian government doesn't give permission, is the PCB entitled to compensation? As a lawyer, I find that letter agreed between the boards to be a poor one - it should have not left open this type of uncertainty.

 

[Junaids]

The BCCI might well win, but the “government approval” justification has always been a fake excuse.

It all comes down to money and power.

The senior executives of the BCCI realised quite late that the BCCI is not intrinsically rich: it’s money comes from private Indian TV stations buying the rights to show India’s home international matches.

And every other country has a big payday from the same source when it hosts an India tour every 4-6 years.

The problem is, this MoU meant that Pakistan would host India twice as often as any other country.

Which meant that the PCB would get a huge payday from private Indian TV channels every second year, and become richer and more powerful than Cricket Australia, and replace it in the Big Three.

In other words, regular series would transform the PCB into the third richest and most powerful Board in the world.

And so the BCCI chose simply not to even ask for government approval until after the first series was due.

 

[Tusker]

The BCCI might well win, but the “government approval” justification has always been a fake excuse.

It all comes down to money and power.

The senior executives of the BCCI realised quite late that the BCCI is not intrinsically rich: it’s money comes from private Indian TV stations buying the rights to show India’s home international matches.

Do yo realize that BCCI stands to make more money if they played Pakistan (Especially if it was in-lieu of playing the likes of WI/AFG/SL ?

 

[iniqbal223]

Last time when ICC vs BCCI face-off happened Manohar was key person; who openly supported other boards. Your statement doesn't make sense

A tactic to just show that ICC is neutral. Then why ICC rep is ex BCCI office bearer??

 

[Napa]

When you sign a contract, you should never promise to deliver something you actually do not have.

BCCI does not have the ability to play Pakistan. What it does have is the ability to play Pakistan provided the Indian Govt gives permission.

Any agreement BCCI may have signed should have had the clarification "we will play provided Indian Govt gives permission."

If BCCI signed an agreement saying "we will play" without the clarification, then they are in trouble and have only themselves to blame.

 

[iniqbal223]

I think boycotting next year world cup is the best PCB can do now.

ICC is overly represented by BCCI's manipulative office bearers, and lacks neutrality. The last man[Haroon Lorgat], who wanted to be fair was severely dealt with. Point of contention is, if BCCI was unsure that govt. would intervene then why did they signed it at the first place, and secondly, why they were ready to host the series in India when it was PCB's turn[where the govt. approval was??]

By boycotting ICC world cup , PCB can send a very strong indication of intolerance about unfair business which is ICC. Anyway, all the Pak tickets have been sold for wc, and tv rights for India-Pak match has also been sold @ higher price. Taking a harder instance would be appropriate. After all, ICC also makes a lot of $$$ from India-Pak ICC matches. So hit ICC/BCCI.

 

[iniqbal223]

When you sign a contract, you should never promise to deliver something you actually do not have.

BCCI does not have the ability to play Pakistan. What it does have is the ability to play Pakistan provided the Indian Govt gives permission.

Any agreement BCCI may have signed should have had the clarification "we will play provided Indian Govt gives permission."

If BCCI signed an agreement saying "we will play" without the clarification, then they are in trouble and have only themselves to blame.

But but, they were ready to host Pakistan in 2015. Did n't they need govt. approval for that.
Fact is, BCCI wanted to take the entire revenue share from this bi lateral series.

 

[Napa]

But but, they were ready to host Pakistan in 2015. Did n't they need govt. approval for that.
Fact is, BCCI wanted to take the entire revenue share from this bi lateral series.

I still do not think it is possible for BCCI to play Pakistan without the Indian Govt's permission.

I do not think BCCI didn't play due to disagreement over revenue sharing. A half share of the revenue is better than no revenue at all.

 

[Napa]

I think boycotting next year world cup is the best PCB can do now.

ICC is overly represented by BCCI's manipulative office bearers, and lacks neutrality. The last man[Haroon Lorgat], who wanted to be fair was severely dealt with. Point of contention is, if BCCI was unsure that govt. would intervene then why did they signed it at the first place, and secondly, why they were ready to host the series in India when it was PCB's turn[where the govt. approval was??]

By boycotting ICC world cup , PCB can send a very strong indication of intolerance about unfair business which is ICC. Anyway, all the Pak tickets have been sold for wc, and tv rights for India-Pak match has also been sold @ higher price. Taking a harder instance would be appropriate. <b>After all, ICC also makes a lot of $$$ from India-Pak ICC matches. So hit ICC/BCCI.</b>

The phrase "cutting the nose to spite the face" comes to mind.

 

[cricketindiafan]

The BCCI might well win, but the “government approval” justification has always been a fake excuse.

It all comes down to money and power.

The senior executives of the BCCI realised quite late that the BCCI is not intrinsically rich: it’s money comes from private Indian TV stations buying the rights to show India’s home international matches.

And every other country has a big payday from the same source when it hosts an India tour every 4-6 years.

The problem is, this MoU meant that Pakistan would host India twice as often as any other country.

Which meant that the PCB would get a huge payday from private Indian TV channels every second year, and become richer and more powerful than Cricket Australia, and replace it in the Big Three.

In other words, regular series would transform the PCB into the third richest and most powerful Board in the world.

And so the BCCI chose simply not to even ask for government approval until after the first series was due.

Haha!

From "BCCI needs ICC handouts to survive"
To " A couple of tours by India will make PCB richer than Cricket Australia due to Indian TV money"

This happens when you make things up and difficult to say what you have said sometime back.

 

[MenInG]

A few people are going on about the contracts. As per our sources (and this could have changed since the Pakistan issue), BCCI NEVER signs any specific contracts; All their tours are arranged via the above letter.

This was common practice with BCCI and maybe PCB were naive in thinking that their Indian counterparts had some integrity else they would have insisted on a legal contract with 80 pages of legalese before promising their votes in the Big 3 affair.

Guess live and learn.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I think boycotting next year world cup is the best PCB can do now.

ICC is overly represented by BCCI's manipulative office bearers, and lacks neutrality. The last man[Haroon Lorgat], who wanted to be fair was severely dealt with. Point of contention is, if BCCI was unsure that govt. would intervene then why did they signed it at the first place, and secondly, why they were ready to host the series in India when it was PCB's turn[where the govt. approval was??]

By boycotting ICC world cup , PCB can send a very strong indication of intolerance about unfair business which is ICC. Anyway, all the Pak tickets have been sold for wc, and tv rights for India-Pak match has also been sold @ higher price. Taking a harder instance would be appropriate. After all, ICC also makes a lot of $$$ from India-Pak ICC matches. So hit ICC/BCCI.

Pcb also makes $$$ from ICC so they will get hit too.

Bcci can take hit with its huge revenues.

But can pcb take it. Remember they are already hit by no India series.

 

[cricketjoshila]

But but, they were ready to host Pakistan in 2015. Did n't they need govt. approval for that.
Fact is, BCCI wanted to take the entire revenue share from this bi lateral series.

Bcci didnt even get govt approval to host pakistan in Asia cup let alone a bilateral tour.

 

[Hitman]

A tactic to just show that ICC is neutral. Then why ICC rep is ex BCCI office bearer??

So who exactly is the current PCB Chairman Ehsan Mani, and what post did he previously occupy in the ICC?

 

[happydavy]

Assuming there is a contract in place, the arbitrator or the 3 member ICC legal wing can decide the compensation based upon the indemnity value mentioned in the agreement. My understanding is that this 2 pager has absolutely no clause for break fee or indemnity and hence no judge or arbitrator can force bcci to pay any compensation.

Don't get me wrong, I hate bcci and most things that they do but I am talking purely in terms of legality.

To force any kind of compensation, there has to be some signed clause which says if one party doesn't honor he agreement then the non-defaulting party will be indemnified for the notional losses incurred. In absence of any indemnity clause, no arbitrator can force any party to pay compensation, that's how the law works.

 

[iniqbal223]

Bcci didnt even get govt approval to host pakistan in Asia cup let alone a bilateral tour.

For Asia cup 2018, not anything in 2015..Event time is important in legal arguments.
We are talking about bi-lateral series in 2015.

The only thing that makes PCB case weak is, if they are going by the letter as everything, then no where it is written BCCI has to compensate, unless they have signed some other document/some ICC policy that one board has to compensate the other board in case they can not play the planned series.

 

[iniqbal223]

So who exactly is the current PCB Chairman Ehsan Mani, and what post did he previously occupy in the ICC?

Until 2006, when ICC was fair. everyone knows man, how ICC is arm twisted in last few years. Thanks to puppet called as Dave Richardson.

 

[iniqbal223]

Pcb also makes $$$ from ICC so they will get hit too.

Bcci can take hit with its huge revenues.

But can pcb take it. Remember they are already hit by no India series.

Context here is to protest the biased ICC. Some one has to take that step. PCB orchestrated Big 3 dissolution, and they succeeded in that. Other boards are weak. For these boards BCCI is a kind of employer who gives employment to Aus/Eng/SL/WI/Ban/SA/etc. boards, and financial onus does not come with that individual board. So these boards wont say anything against BCCI. But PCB can do, they are anyway not gaining anything by remaining a good humble boy. They need to be aggressive in raising their concerns.

 

[giri26]

Want BCCI to win arbitration vs Pakistan: Salman Khurshid

It is being widely thought that Salman Khurshid could be the gamechanger in the fiercely-fought and acrimonious BCCI-PCB arbitration. The external affairs minister in the previous UPA government agreed to side with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) saying that as a citizen of India he wanted to make his small contribution.

“As an Indian citizen least I can do is to hope that the BCCI succeeds as I always hoped for India to succeed in the cricket matches (against Pakistan),” Khurshid told Mirror yesterday. He was recently in Dubai to depose on behalf of the BCCI in the case in which the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) is seeking $ 70 million damages from India for reneging on playing Pakistan.

“As an expert witness, all you can do is to give your understanding of situation in terms of your experience. So, that’s what I did. Hope it helps the country. In matters relating to sports, particularly where there is an environment of a country like Pakistan I explained how a government functions,” the Congress leader said.

The PCB case hinges on two points – one, government permission was never sought by the BCCI and two, former board secretary Sanjay Patel had written to them that India would play six series if the PCB backed the BCCIchampioned Big 3 motion in the ICC.

The second point has no relevance for Khurshid but on the first issue, the former minister had this to say, “These matters are confidential. Ultimately the evidence I have given and the facts that I have stated, the arbitrators will decide (on them). You can’t have a parallel discussion. Matches happened in my time, the clearances were obviously given earlier. This issue relates to later series of 2015.”

So is he convinced that the current government is right in not allowing the Indian team to play bilateral cricket against Pakistan? Khurshid’s reply was diplomatic but he did not contradict the BJP-led NDA government’s position. “I won’t say why the current government did not. This is a professional issue. It should not be turned into politics. I was requested by the BCCI and I accepted that request. As a politician I have different considerations at different times. The government of the day makes the policy. It is easy for the opposition to say anything. Ultimately it is for the government of the day to decide. There are many factors that you have to consider. It is not fair for me to answer a hypothetical question. The actual ground situation must be considered,” he explained.

So is he comfortable that India is not playing Pakistan? Khurshid was again diplomatic. “It is not my job to be comfortable or not. My job was only as an expert witness which I did,” he signed off. The hearing concluded on October 3 but the judgment is expected to take some time.

https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com...tion-vs-pak-khurshid/articleshow/66111709.cms

 

[MenInG]

It is being widely thought that Salman Khurshid could be the gamechanger in the fiercely-fought and acrimonious BCCI-PCB arbitration. The external affairs minister in the previous UPA government agreed to side with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) saying that as a citizen of India he wanted to make his small contribution.

“As an Indian citizen least I can do is to hope that the BCCI succeeds as I always hoped for India to succeed in the cricket matches (against Pakistan),” Khurshid told Mirror yesterday. He was recently in Dubai to depose on behalf of the BCCI in the case in which the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) is seeking $ 70 million damages from India for reneging on playing Pakistan.

“As an expert witness, all you can do is to give your understanding of situation in terms of your experience. So, that’s what I did. Hope it helps the country. In matters relating to sports, particularly where there is an environment of a country like Pakistan I explained how a government functions,” the Congress leader said.

The PCB case hinges on two points – one, government permission was never sought by the BCCI and two, former board secretary Sanjay Patel had written to them that India would play six series if the PCB backed the BCCIchampioned Big 3 motion in the ICC.

The second point has no relevance for Khurshid but on the first issue, the former minister had this to say, “These matters are confidential. Ultimately the evidence I have given and the facts that I have stated, the arbitrators will decide (on them). You can’t have a parallel discussion. Matches happened in my time, the clearances were obviously given earlier. This issue relates to later series of 2015.”

So is he convinced that the current government is right in not allowing the Indian team to play bilateral cricket against Pakistan? Khurshid’s reply was diplomatic but he did not contradict the BJP-led NDA government’s position. “I won’t say why the current government did not. This is a professional issue. It should not be turned into politics. I was requested by the BCCI and I accepted that request. As a politician I have different considerations at different times. The government of the day makes the policy. It is easy for the opposition to say anything. Ultimately it is for the government of the day to decide. There are many factors that you have to consider. It is not fair for me to answer a hypothetical question. The actual ground situation must be considered,” he explained.

So is he comfortable that India is not playing Pakistan? Khurshid was again diplomatic. “It is not my job to be comfortable or not. My job was only as an expert witness which I did,” he signed off. The hearing concluded on October 3 but the judgment is expected to take some time.

https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com...tion-vs-pak-khurshid/articleshow/66111709.cms

Very responsible and respectful of Khurshid Sahib to talk about his testimony, when clearly all participants are requested not to discuss this in public.

Proves my point about what India really thinks of rest of the ICC.

No other participant has spoken about this ( to my knowledge)

 

[Bangalorean]

Very responsible and respectful of Khurshid Sahib to talk about his testimony, when clearly all participants are requested not to discuss this in public.

Proves my point about what India really thinks of rest of the ICC.

No other participant has spoken about this ( to my knowledge)

What else you can expect from this guy, Khurshid is proven joker in Indian politics

 

[cricketindiafan]

Very responsible and respectful of Khurshid Sahib to talk about his testimony, when clearly all participants are requested not to discuss this in public.

Proves my point about what India really thinks of rest of the ICC.

No other participant has spoken about this ( to my knowledge)

And who put in this request?

Also, why should the details of the testimony not be made public? If PCB has such a strong case as the thread title suggests, details of the weaker Indian case coming out will only help PCB.

 

[MenInG]

And who put in this request?

Also, why should the details of the testimony not be made public? If PCB has such a strong case as the thread title suggests, details of the weaker Indian case coming out will only help PCB.

The understanding between all parties is no disclosure of what happened in the hearings

Basic adherence to some norms would be good.

But good to see India flexing its muscles

 

[prorish]

It’s obvious that the BCCI does not wish to see Pakistan prosper financially and economically in addition to improving its standard of international cricket. This however is the bitter truth. The BCCI does not need the revenue from playing Pakistan in a bilateral series, however the PCB desperately do. They agree to playing each other at ICC events because the money is earned directly by the ICC, whereas in the case of a bilateral series, the PCB get a big chunk of it.

 

[Hitman]

Leaving all the ego issues aside, I'd loveeeeeeeeee to see both the teams play each other frequently in Tests and ODI's. Don't care for the soap opera called T20 cricket.

 

[cricketjoshila]

For Asia cup 2018, not anything in 2015..Event time is important in legal arguments.
We are talking about bi-lateral series in 2015.

The only thing that makes PCB case weak is, if they are going by the letter as everything, then no where it is written BCCI has to compensate, unless they have signed some other document/some ICC policy that one board has to compensate the other board in case they can not play the planned series.

Even in 2015 bcci sent a letter asking for permission. The then MEA spokesperson is on record saying the same.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Context here is to protest the biased ICC. Some one has to take that step. PCB orchestrated Big 3 dissolution, and they succeeded in that. Other boards are weak. For these boards BCCI is a kind of employer who gives employment to Aus/Eng/SL/WI/Ban/SA/etc. boards, and financial onus does not come with that individual board. So these boards wont say anything against BCCI. But PCB can do, they are anyway not gaining anything by remaining a good humble boy. They need to be aggressive in raising their concerns.

Pcb orchestrated big 3 dissolution? Lol. It was Shashank Manohar who orchestrated it.

What will they get? Nothing.

But what happens if other teams boycott pcb?

 

[cricketjoshila]

What else you can expect from this guy, Khurshid is proven joker in Indian politics

I am no fan of Congress politicians but Salman Khurshid is a top lawyer as well and he knows what he is doing.

 

[Zahid87]

Sorry MiG, but the whole article reeks of the PCB trying to claim the narrative. Our case was strong, but the ICC will not rule against BCCI.

Apart from winning the claim outright, this is the best case solution for the PCB, as it absolves them from any blame in taking up a case which both Zaka Ashraf and Shahryar Khan described as weak from the outset. Not our fault...ICC is inept.

You yourself pointed out that the details of case was supposed to stay behind closed doors...but "sources" can come out and give their opinion?

 

[USofA]

It’s obvious that the BCCI does not wish to see Pakistan prosper financially and economically in addition to improving its standard of international cricket. This however is the bitter truth. The BCCI does not need the revenue from playing Pakistan in a bilateral series, however the PCB desperately do. They agree to playing each other at ICC events because the money is earned directly by the ICC, whereas in the case of a bilateral series, the PCB get a big chunk of it.

Why is the PCB still reliant on BCCI for it revenues? Why is the PCB not relying on the Pakistan fan base to generate revenues? Take a leaf out of BCCI's books, who have done exactly that.

There is a large cricket crazy fan base in Pakistan, UK, US, Canada. Why hasn't the PCB tapped these resources to generate revenue? Looks like the PCB has just not learnt anything during this whole saga.

 

[Bhoot_Pret]

Oh come on PCB hates BCCI and It doesnt need revenue else it would have tapped different resources to generate revenue other than fighting this rubbish lost case as it has been declared by Shehrayar Khan and Zaka Ashraf. Its only agend is to bring down BCCI at any cost and satisfy its ego. This very attitdue of PCB has made Pakistan Cricket experience its worst days. Even Bangladesh and Afghanistan are ditching them down. PCB has got a lot of revenue from PSL which they r using to fight this case. PCB is financially sound enough as it seems so they dont care regarding exploring other options. PCB is way more financially stronger than SENA countries thats why it doesnt care if millions of dollars gets wasted in this case. So its all ******** that PCB needs revenue otherwise who wastes that sum of money in fighting a lost case to just satisfy their ego. Bahut Paisa hai bahane ko.

 

[iniqbal223]

Even in 2015 bcci sent a letter asking for permission. The then MEA spokesperson is on record saying the same.

This is what the contention is, they have not asked for permission.

 

[iniqbal223]

Why is the PCB still reliant on BCCI for it revenues? Why is the PCB not relying on the Pakistan fan base to generate revenues? Take a leaf out of BCCI's books, who have done exactly that.

There is a large cricket crazy fan base in Pakistan, UK, US, Canada. Why hasn't the PCB tapped these resources to generate revenue? Looks like the PCB has just not learnt anything during this whole saga.

There is a difference ma, fan base in all countries except India and Bangladesh are sensible.
In India, you can expect full house during consecutive 10000th match vs 2nd tier WI or SL... this is this stupidness of Indian fans, that everything has come wild for BCCI

 

[MenInG]

Oh come on PCB hates BCCI and It doesnt need revenue else it would have tapped different resources to generate revenue other than fighting this rubbish lost case as it has been declared by Shehrayar Khan and Zaka Ashraf. Its only agend is to bring down BCCI at any cost and satisfy its ego. This very attitdue of PCB has made Pakistan Cricket experience its worst days. Even Bangladesh and Afghanistan are ditching them down. PCB has got a lot of revenue from PSL which they r using to fight this case. PCB is financially sound enough as it seems so they dont care regarding exploring other options. PCB is way more financially stronger than SENA countries thats why it doesnt care if millions of dollars gets wasted in this case. So its all ******** that PCB needs revenue otherwise who wastes that sum of money in fighting a lost case to just satisfy their ego. Bahut Paisa hai bahane ko.

So its an elaborate scam by PCB to

1. Try and play cricket with India knowing fully well that India will renege on its agreement
2. Then try and get bankrupt BCCI via some bogus case

 

[Bangalorean]

There is a difference ma, fan base in all countries except India and Bangladesh are sensible.
In India, you can expect full house during consecutive 10000th match vs 2nd tier WI or SL... this is this stupidness of Indian fans, that everything has come wild for BCCI

Sour grapes, why blame BCCI, Indian fans for the incompetence of failed organization PCB.

With arguably second largest fan base could not tap and become richer by now

 

[cricketjoshila]

This is what the contention is, they have not asked for permission.

The Indian ministry of external affairs is on record saying that bcci asked for permission.

 

[iniqbal223]

Sour grapes, why blame BCCI, Indian fans for the incompetence of failed organization PCB.

With arguably second largest fan base could not tap and become richer by now

Your point is valid, PCB is incompetent. But you can force or trap the people to only some extent to watch the redundant games between India vs WI or SL. I really commend BCCI for fooling people into believing that those are great matches and they can go in numbers in stadium to support the team.

PCB failed miserably, and can not even convince people to watch any good game in stadium. But how? No cricket happening, that also did not help PCB.

 

[iniqbal223]

The Indian ministry of external affairs is on record saying that bcci asked for permission.

They did not have, and that's what PCB has been screaming for a while, that if there is no government clearance then they can exchange that information with PCB. In this case timings are very important:

1) When PCB had to host 2015 dec series, BCCI wanted the entire share from the series, so they did not approach the govt. about bi lateral series, instead they made media talks etc. so that PCB fool around and agree to go to India.
2) Same Thing happened in 2012-13 series, PCB was promised of return series in UAE/mutually agreed venue, but then nothing happened. Thats why during Big 3 vote, PCB asked for written assurance.
3) Whatever we think about patriotism or sports, organizing series, is like a deal between 2 parties.
4) Only fault of PCB was they were naive enough to trust BCCI. Its not a surprise why PCB is called the most unprofessional and incompetent board. They could have wauted for long 20-60 pages of written document. Instead they trusted.

 

[Itachi]

They did not have, and that's what PCB has been screaming for a while, that if there is no government clearance then they can exchange that information with PCB. In this case timings are very important:

1) When PCB had to host 2015 dec series, BCCI wanted the entire share from the series, so they did not approach the govt. about bi lateral series, instead they made media talks etc. so that PCB fool around and agree to go to India.
2) Same Thing happened in 2012-13 series, PCB was promised of return series in UAE/mutually agreed venue, but then nothing happened. Thats why during Big 3 vote, PCB asked for written assurance.
3) Whatever we think about patriotism or sports, organizing series, is like a deal between 2 parties.
4) Only fault of PCB was they were naive enough to trust BCCI. Its not a surprise why PCB is called the most unprofessional and incompetent board. They could have wauted for long 20-60 pages of written document. Instead they trusted.

Are you saying GOI has lied?

 

[pratiktc]

Lol, dunno about PCB but BCCI is a vastly corrupt organisation that would like nothing better than to flog Indo-Pak ODIs and T20I series for all the moolah they are worth.

The reason they can't do it is cause GoI (read BJP) has taken a silly 'will not play cricket stance' to underline some stupid notion of hyper nationalism.

If BJP gets voted out in 2019 (unlikely), can certainly expect a faux 'aman ki asha' redux themed series to be announced within a year's time.

 

[iniqbal223]

Are you saying GOI has lied?

BCCI has lied

 

[cricketjoshila]

BCCI has lied

But the statement came from Govt of India,Ministry of External affairs that they have received bcci's request for permission to play pakistan.

The official spokesperson of the ministry made that statement.

 

[happydavy]

They did not have, and that's what PCB has been screaming for a while, that if there is no government clearance then they can exchange that information with PCB. In this case timings are very important:

1) When PCB had to host 2015 dec series, BCCI wanted the entire share from the series, so they did not approach the govt. about bi lateral series, instead they made media talks etc. so that PCB fool around and agree to go to India.
2) Same Thing happened in 2012-13 series, PCB was promised of return series in UAE/mutually agreed venue, but then nothing happened. Thats why during Big 3 vote, PCB asked for written assurance.
3) Whatever we think about patriotism or sports, organizing series, is like a deal between 2 parties.
4) Only fault of PCB was they were naive enough to trust BCCI. Its not a surprise why PCB is called the most unprofessional and incompetent board. They could have wauted for long 20-60 pages of written document. Instead they trusted.

Even if BCCI and PCB had signed an agreement there's no way BCCI would have been stupid enough to include an indemnity clause. BCCI is run by lawyers whose day job is risk mitigat. In a game like cricket, where there are so many cases of countries calling off tours because of security or political or racial reasons, there's no precedent of one board compensating another for not honoring tour commitments. If there's any lawyer on this forum, he/she would completely understand that this is just not a winnable case for PCB. Any contract or legally forceable agreement at the bare minimum needs to include country of jurisdiction, this is basic stuff. So if tomorrow one party breaches the agreement which court do you approach depends upon the country of jurisdiction mentioned in the agreement.

PCB is going to ICC, even if ICC passes a judgement directing BCCI to compensate PCB, a half decent lawyer will get that judgement quashed in one day in the court of country where ICC is registered. The lawyer argument will be very simple, who's ICC to decide a financial penalty based upon an unregistered agreement.

 

[MenInG]

Even if BCCI and PCB had signed an agreement there's no way BCCI would have been stupid enough to include an indemnity clause. BCCI is run by lawyers whose day job is risk mitigat. In a game like cricket, where there are so many cases of countries calling off tours because of security or political or racial reasons, there's no precedent of one board compensating another for not honoring tour commitments. If there's any lawyer on this forum, he/she would completely understand that this is just not a winnable case for PCB. Any contract or legally forceable agreement at the bare minimum needs to include country of jurisdiction, this is basic stuff. So if tomorrow one party breaches the agreement which court do you approach depends upon the country of jurisdiction mentioned in the agreement.

PCB is going to ICC, even if ICC passes a judgement directing BCCI to compensate PCB, a half decent lawyer will get that judgement quashed in one day in the court of country where ICC is registered. The lawyer argument will be very simple, who's ICC to decide a financial penalty based upon an unregistered agreement.

If BCCI was run by lawyers, they would have never signed any letter like the one above with lots of legal safeguards.

I understand that there are 2 povs on this but lets not make one side some intellectual supermen!

 

[Kaka_Hathrasi]

BCCI is not run by lawyers but they r well nd fully protected by lawyers who r given heavy paychecks. DEPOSITION given for BCCI in this case r lawyers too whether its Shashank Manohar or Salman Khurshid. [MENTION=147130]happydavy[/MENTION] has hit the bulls eye with his post.

 

[MenInG]

BCCI is not run by lawyers but they r well nd fully protected by lawyers who r given heavy paychecks. DEPOSITION given for BCCI in this case r lawyers too whether its Shashank Manohar or Salman Khurshid. [MENTION=147130]happydavy[/MENTION] has hit the bulls eye with his post.

Depositions aren't a thing of beauty. They need to make sense also! Not sure if you have ever heard Sethi speak but he is equally competent.

 

[happydavy]

If BCCI was run by lawyers, they would have never signed any letter like the one above with lots of legal safeguards.

I understand that there are 2 povs on this but lets not make one side some intellectual supermen!

Dost, it's not abt intellectual supremacy, its about domain knowledge. Anyway, i don't think we fans need to fight over boards' issues, not that they care for fans anyway..

 

[MenInG]

Dost, it's not abt intellectual supremacy, its about domain knowledge. Anyway, i don't think we fans need to fight over boards' issues, not that they care for fans anyway..

Bro - Najam Sethi has good domain knowledge also of this issue.

I will agree to disagree on this.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

All this will prove is that the ICC is powerless to impose any penalties on BCCI due to being beholden to Indian cricket financially. That's fair enough, no point in twisting the arm of the call girl when the pimp holds all the power, just need to acknowledge that these agreements are not worth the paper they are written on. Pakistan needs to recognise ICC is relatively impotent these days, and they must learn to deal directly with BCCI who are the real authority in world cricket.

 

[jadaja]

PCB has a no case and it should not be given any compensation at all.Why should PCB get rewarded for not doing anything, relationship between countries come first and unless they are settled there is no point in bilateral series.

PCB is free to boycott any matches against India in multi nation tournaments if it feels it has been wronged but India will continue to play Pakistan only in multinational tournament until Border situation improves.

 

[Angrez Pakistani]

At some point in time PCB will have to learn to stand on its own feet. I don’t see any change in status quo. Might as well give up on BCCI and develop domestic cricket and make it a sellable product. PCB needs to develop alternative revenue sources. Otherwise, PCB is doomed.

 

[PakLFC]

That is the way of the world. The ICC needs the BCCI much more then the PCB. Pak has o look at itself and see why the PCB is not the second strongest board in Cricket.

 

[Bewal Express]

The basic problem is that no Ind organisation whether govt or non governmental can bare the thought of any PK entity making money. With this in mind, why do we trade with them?