World cricket’s governing body has insulted Australia by rejecting John Howard’s bid for vice presidency in move which has “gutted” Cricket Australia (CA).
African and Asian blocs within the International Cricket Council (ICC) on Wednesday dismissed Howard’s candidacy without a vote.
CA chairman Jack Clarke said no reason was given for the decision by the ICC’s executive board after it met in Singapore.
Clarke said Australia’s relationship with the ICC had suffered as a result of a decision which “was in the grand final” of ICC insults towards Australia.
Howard, who was Australian prime minister from March 1996 to December 2007, was “extremely disappointed and extremely upset” at the decision, Clarke said.
“What the genesis … was, we don’t know, that is one of the frustrating things apart from not having any reasons,” Clarke said from Singapore.
“You hope it doesn’t affect the relationship but it obviously puts a block there for a while and makes you wary.”
Clarke said he was “gutted” at the decision.
“Gutted and incredibly disappointed that a man of John Howard’s stature has been knocked off for this job,” he said.
“If you keep having processes that don’t work, or are not allowed to work, I am not too sure where they go from there.”
Australia and New Zealand had jointly nominated Howard for the ICC vice presidency, a candidacy normally rubber stamped by cricket’s governing body.
Under ICC rules, the vice president becomes president after two years.
The ICC have invited Australia and New Zealand to nominate a new candidate by the end of August.
New Zealand Cricket chairman Alan Isaac said he was angered at the ICC’s refusal to detail their reasons for the rejection.
“We have been unable to get a reason for the lack of support for our nomination and it’s just not acceptable,” Isaac said from Singapore.
His Australian counterpart, Clarke, agreed.
“When you go through a process like we have been through, the most rigorous process that two countries could go through to get the best candidate, John wasn’t putting his hand up for this job, he was asked by cricket,” Clarke said.
“When you put up someone … as eminent as John, I don’t think embarrassed is strong enough actually, I’m just gutted.
“I think the ICC has missed a golden opportunity.”
Under the ICC’s rotational five-region electoral process, Howard’s candidacy for vice president should have been ratified months ago.
But opposition to Howard delayed the decision.
The opposition was led by Zimbabwe and South Africa, who questioned Howard’s suitability given his hardline stance against Zimbabwe’s Mugabe regime when he was prime minister.
Howard also faced difficulties winning over the powerful Asian bloc after once labelling celebrated Sri Lankan bowler Muttiah Muralitharan a “chucker”.
When India threw their considerable muscle behind the Asian bloc, Howard’s bid was doomed.
Clarke said India’s influence within the ICC was not ideal.
“In any business model where a company has 75 per cent of the income, it’s not an ideal model,” he said.
“But that is not India’s fault they do that … it’s a powerful bloc but it’s a reality of life.”
Howard himself said he’s disappointed because he still hasn’t been told why he was rejected.
“Even in private discussions they are very reluctant to give a particular reason,” he told Sky News late on Wednesday night.
“It’s a very unusual situation.”
He said it was possible his political past could be the source of the controversy.
“It could. That’s not been said although it’s been widely speculated,” he said.
“If it was in some way based on past political positions well that’s a very bad precedent to be establishing.”
He said he’s now out of politics and didn’t have any political agenda in seeking the appointment.
But he would wear it as a `badge of honour’ if African members really did reject him because of his hardline stance against Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe while in office.
“I’m disappointed at the outcome. I wanted to do this job. I thought I could do it well and I would have devoted my full time to it.”
Cattledog
Guest
Mate, you might be at the right grid reference but you're definately on the wrong planet! Fact is the ICC (read puppet of India) doesn't want someone who'll ask the hard questions...simple!
Cattledog
Guest
Yep, and I would say they are about to rescind that decision!
dasilva
Guest
Personally, I would call the Asian and African countries preserving ethnic demographics as equally reprehensible. I met people from those countries who are confused why Australia doesn't have similar policy. I was never of the believe that racism is the preserve of the white race, and asians and africans are just as equally guilty of it if not more so. Nevertheless, I don't think that excuse howard though.
M Schwartz
Guest
***Survive what exactly??*** Survive in the sense of not becoming a third world country.
M Schwartz
Guest
***Mate Australia was not always a white country.*** No, but it is far better as a majority european country on almost any metric. My point is that there is a double standard in criticising Howard for simply doing what any Asian or non-european country would consider normal.
Apelu Tielu
Guest
FOS - it would be useful for you to take a few lessons in basic economics and economic history. Australia's economic success during Howard's time as PM was not of his making; even an idiot on the street would have done the same. The foundation for Australia's economy was laid down in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Howard was just harvesting the fruits of the labour of others, and he had no idea what to do with that wealth.
mintox
Guest
It's simple, regardless of whether Howard was good or bad as a politician, this is a Cricketing Administrators position and should be filled by someone with experience in the field. This is something Howard does not have and regardless of why he was not voted in, I think it's a great decision.
Photon
Guest
Lucy you cannot seperate Howard the politician from Howard the politician. The only basis which people have for deciding the kind of policies Howard will promote is to look at the type of Prime Minister he was. That Cricket Australia and Cricket New Zealand, could put forward someone like Howard as a candidate shows how out of touch with the rest of the world. The last thing cricket needs is divisive characters like Howard running the show
Photon
Guest
Preserve the demographic of your country. Mate Australia was not always a white country. To suggest there is some honour in Howards racist policies is insane.
lucyfanclub
Guest
Can we keep the discussion on the matter of sport, please? Everyone had their say on the Howard administration at the ballot box. I think this is the future of world cricket: Asian money, 20/20, gambling and as bent as boxing.
ilikedahoodoogurusingha
Guest
I agree Vinay, the choice of Howard, apparently forced on NZ, was the wrong one. No matter what our personal views of his politics are, it was not a good look. His stance against Zimbabwe contradicted his stance against SA in the 80's.....I doubt anyone in the SA government has forgotten that. This was always going to be a contentious choice, I for one cannot believe that CA thought they could get it through, unless they honestly believed that everyone would just follow protocol and rubber stamp their selection.
Art Sapphire
Guest
Survive what exactly?? Miscegenation, bit too late for that don't you think??
M Schwartz
Guest
***The bad – tampa, children in detention, pacific solution.*** Actually, I think you'll find that any country that seeks to survive will have to turn back asylum seekers.
M Schwartz
Guest
***Promote Xenophobia and r*cism to further your political career?*** Rabbitz, Spare us the Frankfurt School critique of anyone who seeks to preserve the demographics of their country - do you see any Asian or African countries welcoming an influx of people from different cultures? If they were european countries I imagine you would be calling them rednecks too & racially biased for blatantly voting as an ethnic bloc. Apparently one of Howard's sins was to take a 'hardline stance' against Mugabe. Rabbitz, if a european leader acted like Mugabe, torturing opponents, rigging elections & bulldozing slums, can you imagine other european countries lining up to defend them? The hypocrisy is appalling & you need to stop applying double standards.
Brett McKay
Guest
Vinay, no doubt at all that CA played its own power card on NZC here, but with reports today that Sir John Anderson might not necessarily have the time to take on the ICC VP anyway, it could be argued the right man was put forward either way. To some degree, yes, CA brought this on itself. But that still does not excuse the ICC delegates from being afraid of what fresh eyes and fresh ideas might bring to world cricket. Howard might have brought with him sound economic beliefs and values, which in turn might have made the ICC a bigger economic power in world sport that it already is. He might even have brought an ability or avenue to further the game in America too. But he also might have brought in a unprecedented level of accountability, and this is what the delegates are scared of. Howard might have asked the hard questions. Clearly, the ICC wanted no bar of that. Thankyou for the correction too, Vinay, the "explanation of the irregularities" is indeed what I meant. Hopefully the truth will come out in the end of this sordid mess - yet another sordid ICC mess, I should add - but it certainly appears as though ZC called in plenty of debts and favours for their previous voting with India. And as with most ICC decision in recent years, once India falls one way, very few go against them.....
Art Sapphire
Guest
The Karmic cycle of John Howard. The bad - tampa, children in detention, pacific solution. The payback - Lose election - Lose seat - Lose ICC bid Maybe someone should have told him that some of the people he locked up actually liked cricket. No sympathy here.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Brett,in the end I blame CA for nominating Howard and if the truth be known they did "bully" New Zealand and got them to drop Anderson. In my view Anderson was the right candidate. I agree with you on the Zimbabwe issue. A slight correction here. The ICC's independent auditors did examine Zimbabwe crickets's books and their comment was "..unexplained irregularities" The ICC has never made public the findings and that is an idictment. I will not argue the politcal merits or demerits of Howard as I am not qualified on political matters. On a personal level I find most politicians creatures of opportunity. As far as the ICC doing the bidding of India this is something that CA and CSAF have aided and abetted. Finally in political terms this is not an insult. It is a defeat and a politician,especially Howard,would know the fickleness of voters. The ICC is as democratic as the People's Republic of Congo!
Brett McKay
Guest
I got howled down last night for saying this but I'll happily say it again: Whatever our views of Howard the politcian, this just proves that the ICC is unwilling and incapable of embracing change however “proactive” it claims to be about it. The ICC is now entrenched in its proxy-approval of Zimbabwe, and is so addictively hooked on India that it dares not question anything other than the status quo. This was a real opportunity for the ICC to follow through with plans it has "intended" to so for some time, such as examining ZC's books, but instead they have once again buring their head in the sand, scared of what these investigations might unearth. The issue here is not with John Howard, it's with the ICC and it's constant propensity to reject change...
Rabbitz
Roar Guru
A little off topic but, it could be argued that he was only successful economically due to luck (resources boom etc) but his government and his policies have led many other nations regard Australia as a racist redneck backwater. Which I would suggest has culminated in his rejection in this matter. As for being a successful PM, I guess it depends on your definition of successful. Win at any cost? Yes. Promote Xenophobia and racism to further your political career? Sure very successful. However this is not the time nor place for a retrospective of the Howard Horrors (aka The Lies, Racism and Spin of Jackboot Johnny).
lemo
Guest
Couldn't agree more Rabbitz - with his history why did anyone think they would accept him - this must be a joke