India to back New Zealander for ICC role
By AFP, 1 Aug 2010 AFP is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- alan isaac, bcci, Cricket, ICC
India’s cricket chiefs on Saturday endorsed New Zealand’s Alan Isaac as the next vice-president of the world governing body after former Australian Prime Minister John Howard was snubbed for the job.
Isaac, who heads New Zealand Cricket, was on Friday nominated by Australia and New Zealand for VP, a post that will see him take over as president of the International Cricket Council in mid-2012.
The working committee of the Indian cricket board (BCCI), which met in Mumbai on Saturday, decided to back Isaac for the post that is rotated among the ICC’s Test-playing nations.
“The committee approved the candidature of Alan Isaac, Chairman, New Zealand Cricket, for the post of ICC vice-president,” the BCCI said in a one-line statement.
Isaac, whose nomination is expected to be rubber-stamped by the ICC’s executive board soon, will serve as vice-president for two years before taking over from current president Sharad Pawar of India.
Isaac, a chartered accountant by profession, has been on the board of New Zealand Cricket for 20 years and became its chairman in 2008.
The ICC had on July 1 rejected the candidature of Howard — following a reported revolt by the Afro-Asian bloc in the ICC — and asked Australia and New Zealand to nominate a new man by August 31.
ICC chief executive Haroon Lorgat had declined to disclose why Howard’s bid had failed, but reports suggested the former PM enjoyed the support of only Australia, New Zealand and England.
Howard’s candidature was reportedly not backed by the ICC’s seven other full members — India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, South Africa, Zimbabwe and the West Indies.
The rejection of Howard, who was Australian Prime Minister from 1996 to 2007, was believed to stem from his zealous opposition to Robert Mugabe’s government in Zimbabwe.
He also incurred the wrath of the powerful Asian cricket bloc in 2004 by labelling Sri Lankan legend Muttiah Muralitharan a “chucker,” or someone with an illegal bowling action.
In 2006, Howard strongly supported Australian umpire Darrell Hair, who outraged Pakistan by halting a Test match and awarding victory to England during a protest over ball-tampering allegations.
Several Test nations also objected to Howard’s appointment because he had no experience of cricket administration.
Cricket Australia on Friday declined to name another candidate after Howard was rejected, and instead decided to support Isaac.
© AAP 2012Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
The Crowd Says (6) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- What we do and don’t know about our Baggy Greens (112)
- Success of Twenty20 spells trouble for ODI cricket (106)
- Channel 9 commentators an annoyance this summer (102)
- One Day Cricket is suffering from Middle Child Syndrome (89)
- Cricket Australia must take a stand against racist spectators (89)
- Dave’s Warner-ful switch-hit panned by precious critics (84)
- Khawaja shouldn’t have been Shaun from the Test side (71)
- Clarke stars as Australia beat Sri Lanka
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Hall of Fame for Indian legend Gavaskar
- Sri Lanka to target ‘weak’ Aussie bowlers
- India backing Rohit Sharma to find form
- Game-by-game preview of round 19
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (6)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (6)
- Pakistan’s win over England a triumph of character (21)
- Steve Waugh is right about cricket’s succession plan (5)
- India vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (180)
- Let’s talk about selection, Test fans (28)
- Pakistan win shows what’s beautiful about the game (13)
- Explore:
- alan isaac, bcci, Cricket, ICC
Brett McKay said | August 2nd 2010 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
of course they do…..
Vinay Verma said | August 2nd 2010 @ 3:46pm | Report comment
Brett,what does this say about the quality of Aussie administrators or lack of that they have no one except John Howard. You would have to ask the question why they did not nominate Jack Clarke or Wally Edwards?
Brett McKay said | August 2nd 2010 @ 3:58pm | Report comment
Vinay I’m not sure if you saw the same media release I did, but in CA’s statement they stood by their reasoning, justification, and indeed motivation for nominating Howard. They went onto say that they still maintained Howard was the best man for the job, and a consequence, would not be nominating a replacement.
Hence the CA support for Alan Isaac, and with some defiance, it must be said, India have shown they’ll cop anyone but John Howard. Which kind of vindicates CA statement to stand by their decision in some ways..
Vinay Verma said | August 2nd 2010 @ 4:14pm | Report comment
Brett,media releases are more important for what they do not say. CA read the mood wrong. They have a partnership with the BCCI and CSA in the Champions League and as partners should have been closer to the prevailing mood. There is a stubborness in this current attitude which seems more ego driven than what is right for Australia.
I am still surprised why there is no other suitable candidate apart from Howard. The message I am getting is that they refuse to accept they misread the mood of the other members.I am totally against the Zimbabwe representatives,Chingoka and his sidekick(I forget the name) and the embarassing thing was that Howard went cap in hand trying to get their support.
I also suspect that credible alternatives like Mark Taylor would not be wanting to associate with the grubbiness of the Zimbabwean reps. If you remember both England and Australia refused Chingoka a visa that is why the ICC held its meetings in Dubai and Singapore. Considering all this what did Howard expect by going to Zimbabwe?
Brett McKay said | August 2nd 2010 @ 4:19pm | Report comment
Vinay, you’re quite right, and it would be just as easy to draw the opposite conclusion too, that CA so steadfastly believe that Howard is the best man that they dare not entertain the thought of finding an alternate. If that is the case, and I don’t have the foggiest idea if it is, then I somewhat admire them for standing up for what they believe in.
That said, what you say is equally true…
Vinay Verma said | August 2nd 2010 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
Brett,whichever way we look at it the conclusion is that in the end it became a face saving excercise for both CA and Howard. Seeing as CA approached Howard they have been reluctant to cast him overboard(and I am alluding to the Tampa). I would have thought even politicians would be used to karma.