Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[pipsqueak]

BCCI wants Lloyd to be removed from ICC Cricket     
Anand Vasu

The board of Control for Cricket in India has asked the International Cricket Council to remove Clive Lloyd, the former West Indian captain, from his post as chairman of the ICC's Cricket Committee following some remarks Lloyd made at a public function in Mumbai recently.

Lloyd had expressed hope that the Indian Premier League and the Indian Cricket League could co-exist, saying, "There's nothing like having a discussion to break the ice. Just like the United States president Barack Obama said 'you have to speak to people'. They [IPL and ICL] both need to understand their agendas and work accordingly."

The former West Indian great, who has replaced Sunil Gavaskar as the head of the ICC's cricket committee, added, "Leagues similar to the IPL and ICL will not only bring young talented players in the national team but will also make their basics clear."

In doing so he has incurred the BCCI's wrath. "When Mr Gavaskar was chairman of the cricket committee, he was told he had to choose between making certain comments, as a television commentator and as a journalist and holding an important ICC post. Why should it be any different with Mr Lloyd," a source in the Indian board observed.

When Gavaskar headed the ICC's cricket committee his trenchant columns attracted severe criticism from Australia and England, who were often the target of Gavaskar's blunt opinions. At the time David Morgan, ICC president, said: "There is a concern that he (Gavaskar) is chairman of the cricket committee and a journalist who has expressed some fairly outspoken comments." With the cries of a conflict of interest growing louder every day, Gavaskar finally had to choose between his ICC post and the freedom to express his views as he pleased. He chose the latter, and now the BCCI is demanding that Lloyd do the same.

The BCCI contends that the issue of the ICL and whether it should be given authorized unofficial cricket is still being discussed by the ICC and its members. Therefore Lloyd really had no right to comment one way or the other on its status. The BCCI will also say that Lloyd, by going public with his statements, is showing a lack of respect to the ICC and to member boards who are working on the issue on an ongoing basis. The other aspect that will have the BCCI up in arms is that the ICL is, essentially, a domestic issue and the ICC has thus far left it to the Indian board to handle. The ICC's cricket committee has no jurisdiction over this and Lloyd making these statements could be construed as interference.

A source confirmed that the BCCI had already made its stand clear, in writing to the ICC.

Haroon Lorgat, the ICC chief executive, and David Morgan, were unavailable for comment on the issue.

1&MatchID1=4857&TeamID1=1&TeamID2=5&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1224&PrimaryID=4857&IsCricket=true&Headline=BCCI+wants+Lloyd+removed+from+committee

[gouravk]

b*stards ! lloyd shud be removed because he of his bias against asian players, not becoz he spoke of the icl

[WicketView]

Obviously this ICL thing is terrible ... and I don't understand how the BCCI is managing to get away with this.

On the other hand, I think the formal objection brought out sounds logical ... if SMG could not speak why should Llyod, thereby conveniently pushing under the rug that they did not mind him talking if he could keep off the ICL subject.

[RicePlateReddy]

b*stards ! lloyd shud be removed because he of his bias against asian players, not becoz he spoke of the icl

I don't know about Asian players in particular, but I do agree with you, he should be removed because he is a poor sportsman. One instance:

http://www.cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php/topic,5845.0.html

And we just spoke about how he instructed his pacers to break the Indians' bones in '76.

[WicketView]

b*stards ! lloyd shud be removed because he of his bias against asian players, not becoz he spoke of the icl

I don't know about Asian players in particular, but I do agree with you, he should be removed because he is a poor sportsman. One instance:

http://www.cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php/topic,5845.0.html

And we just spoke about how he instructed his pacers to break the Indians' bones in '76.

The story against India was familiar to me ... this one is new to me. This is seriously terrible ... I was not aware that Croft was like that.

[dextrous]

eh, so what he did as captain should affect whether or not he can hold a post?!

sorry to say, but short of him match-fixing, theres nothing that prevents him from holding a post given that he's one of the greatest captains of the modern era.

and smg made a lot of comments about a lot of things...in this case, lloyd dared to talk of ICL...oh, the audacity!!!

[WicketView]

eh, so what he did as captain should affect whether or not he can hold a post?!

sorry to say, but short of him match-fixing, theres nothing that prevents him from holding a post given that he's one of the greatest captains of the modern era.

and smg made a lot of comments about a lot of things...in this case, lloyd dared to talk of ICL...oh, the audacity!!!

The match referee will not be captaining. I think it is reasonable to question whether a person, who has violated some of the ideas he will try to enforce as match referee during his own career, is fit to do the job. I know I would not want a Symonds to be match referee.

Naturally, this was certainly not the real reason why BCCI wants to remove him ...neither is it the fairness of the SMG vs Llyod issue as they claim, very clearly that has to do with ICL.

[dextrous]

who outside of this dg questions lloyd the captain?

[RicePlateReddy]

eh, so what he did as captain should affect whether or not he can hold a post?!

sorry to say, but short of him match-fixing, theres nothing that prevents him from holding a post given that he's one of the greatest captains of the modern era.

You can't have it both ways. You mention that what he did as a captain should not affect whether he can hold the post; but then the fact that he was a captain of an outrageously successful team shouldn't matter either.

My point was that he seemed a spoiled sport: hence the comment that he may not be a good match referee. It seems very ironic to me that this fellow slaps fines for minor infractions when he did not show restraint, on multiple occasions, when he was playing.

Do you think Ricky Ponting would be a good choice as a match referee 20 years from now (granted Lloyd was better!)?

[dextrous]

eh, so what he did as captain should affect whether or not he can hold a post?!

sorry to say, but short of him match-fixing, theres nothing that prevents him from holding a post given that he's one of the greatest captains of the modern era.

You can't have it both ways. You mention that what he did as a captain should not affect whether he can hold the post; but then the fact that he was a captain of an outrageously successful team shouldn't matter either.

My point was that he seemed a spoiled sport: hence the comment that he may not be a good match referee. It seems very ironic to me that this fellow slaps fines for minor infractions when he did not show restraint, on multiple occasions, when he was playing.

Do you think Ricky Ponting would be a good choice as a match referee 20 years from now (granted Lloyd was better!)?

I can have it both ways bc in this case Lloyd is a respected captain (and I'm sure with the passage of time, the same would be said about Ponting). Does that mean he will/made a good match referee/Cricket committee person? No. But does that bolster his claim? Absolutely!

Anyway, in this case, the BCCI allegations are of a different nature

[WicketView]

who outside of this dg questions lloyd the captain?

I am not sure if this was meant to be an answer to the previous post. In that case, I am lost.