Published: Feb 11, 2017, 12:47 PM (IST)
Edited: Feb 11, 2017, 12:47 PM (IST)
Shashank Manohar-led International Cricket Council (ICC) has denied Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) their rights from revenue and governance perspective. This has led to a tug of war between ICC and BCCI. As reported by Times of India, one of the paragraphs from the ICC proposal to board members during the meeting states, “There is no scientific formula or technical analysis behind the % distribution allocations that are being proposed. Instead, it is a good faith attempt by the working group to try and allocate in a simple manner what it considers to be a reasonable and fair % distribution of ICC’s surplus.”
In reply, BCCI answered, stating, “There was a scientific formula to the 2014 model. It stated that India, England and Australia would earn maximum revenue based on the logic that they brought maximum revenue to the ICC.”
The ICC once again made their stand by replying back to BCCI, “This model is not intended to represent an indefinite model and is rather only to be viewed as a temporary solution until the end of the 2015-23 rights cycle.”
“What is the hurry and logic in stating that Zimbabwe or Afghanistan should earn the same as India? The ICC itself is admitting that there’s no scientific formula to this,” a BCCI official said.
[read-also]574558[/read-also]
According to the 2014 model, the eight-year projection from 2015-23 says that the expected revenue is US$2.5b; $80m would be used as contribution costs while $550m for event expenses; $250m for central expenses and $70m for cricket fund. And from the total surplus of $830, the constitutional share of $623 will be given to full members and $208m to associate members.
Though, the 2017 meeting held by ICC says that projects total revenue of $2.7b for the same cycle has been done with respect to contribution costs. On the other hand, US$600m is reserved for event costs, $300m for central expenses, $40m as contingency funds, and $25m have gone towards reserves. The ICC has also proposed to do away with the cricket fund.
This is because the governing body have been able to show the net surplus of $US1.735b, which is quite higher than the 2014 model, in which full members were gaining $US1.535b and the associates $200m.
It is a very simple calculation of math, which clearly states that previously the % distribution of ICC was made on revenue. It, however, is now made on surplus. That means, if ICC earns 100 as per the 2014 model, then BCCI would earn 20.3 on revenue (but it goes to 33.5 if it is calculates on surplus).
Going by the current model, the BCCI will only earn 15.3 on surplus, that means they earn will around 10 on the revenue. “That is why, when the Court-appointed administrators say `let’s not have a confrontational approach’, the old guard thinks otherwise,“ an ex-administrator said.
