John Howard - future ICC president?

[barto123]

I dont see anything wrong with howard being part of the icc.... he was a cricket nut after all, and it was him who basically singlehandedly kept the PM's XI cricket games alive and kicking when it was suggested they be scrapped. I was never a fan of him as prime minister, but he has the passion and the ability to be a great president.

 

[Cricketman]

Give it to Lalit Modi.

 

[rahuldravidfan]

I don't think he can manage the ICC. He'll have frequent run-ins with boards and will be sent on "vacation" before his term ends, like it happened with Malcomn Speed.

If he can tone down his aggression and dominating attitude, he'll be the perfect candidate. However, I'd like to see a Kiwi at Prez

 

[TumTum]

If he can tone down his aggression and dominating attitude, he'll be the perfect candidate. However, I'd like to see a Kiwi at Prez

Stereotyping at its best

 

[rahuldravidfan]

Its called an OPINION. You might like to read how fellow Australian's "stereotype" him - ABC Fora- John Howard On Why He Was Right

 

[blake]

RDF, an opinion is not where you judge a decision by the country that they come from. I am fairly sure that is actually called a STEREOTYPE.

 

[iridescentt]

Gilly for President!

 

[drainpipe32]

Stereotyping is gay

 

[rahuldravidfan]

It is seen as a bit of an early April Fool's joke over here ... Next we will nominate [former New Zealand Prime Minister] Helen Clark to take over world rugby league

- New Zealand journalist Richard Boock on former Australian Prime Minister John Howard being a candidate for the ICC's top job :sarcasm

 

[sohum]

Stereotyping at its best

RDF, an opinion is not where you judge a decision by the country that they come from. I am fairly sure that is actually called a STEREOTYPE.

You're both trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

I've only ever heard of Howard when he was in the news for making a particularly insolent comment about cricket during a series. Like the examples that Dean brought up in the opening post.

If you're going to be the president of ICC, the way to keep the BCCI down is not going to be by straight-talking, since they're powerful enough to create a revolt. If Howard becomes the ICC president, his past comments, at least about cricket, strongly suggest that he's going to cause a bit of trouble.

 

[smssia0112]

You're both trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

I've only ever heard of Howard when he was in the news for making a particularly insolent comment about cricket during a series. Like the examples that Dean brought up in the opening post.

If you're going to be the president of ICC, the way to keep the BCCI down is not going to be by straight-talking, since they're powerful enough to create a revolt. If Howard becomes the ICC president, his past comments, at least about cricket, strongly suggest that he's going to cause a bit of trouble.

Frankly I think a split is exactly what cricket needs. And I'd be very intrigued to see who backs the BCCI. I doubt the PCB would at the moment.

 

[rahuldravidfan]

You're both trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

I've only ever heard of Howard when he was in the news for making a particularly insolent comment about cricket during a series. Like the examples that Dean brought up in the opening post.

If you're going to be the president of ICC, the way to keep the BCCI down is not going to be by straight-talking, since they're powerful enough to create a revolt. If Howard becomes the ICC president, his past comments, at least about cricket, strongly suggest that he's going to cause a bit of trouble.

Exactly what I said. You don't need someone who can outtalk the BCCI. You need someone who can shrewdly manipulate them.

 

[sohum]

Frankly I think a split is exactly what cricket needs. And I'd be very intrigued to see who backs the BCCI. I doubt the PCB would at the moment.

I think a split would be an extremely poor result for international cricket, especially since we are at at time where Test cricket is most wide open. By forcing a split, you are asking the ICC to do exactly what you have presumably accused the BCCI of doing--killing Test cricket. Test cricket is only going to thrive if there is competition and right now the top 4 in the world could make a strong claim for #1.

And as for your query, India would be backed by the BCB and SLC at the very least. The BCCI helps out a lot of boards financially, both directly and indirectly. I think the PCB would be turned as well, given the money to be made from potential India-Pakistan encounters. In fact, I think you'd only be looking at Australia, South Africa, England and New Zealand sticking together, and even then I'm not sure those nations would back a split. Cricket Australia, in particular, has pushed for the 7-match ODI series agreement with India, which shows how much they value the match-up, financially.

 

[rahuldravidfan]

In fact, I think you'd only be looking at Australia, South Africa, England and New Zealand sticking together, and even then I'm not sure those nations would back a split. Cricket Australia, in particular, has pushed for the 7-match ODI series agreement with India, which shows how much they value the match-up, financially.

I think CSA is going to back BCCI too, given the awesome relations between CSA & BCCI post the IPL-2, which made millions in the coffers for CSA. CA is quite neutral & along with PCB, it may swing any way. The only countries going to oppose BCCI are England & New Zealand (they still hate us for the ICL bans and the IPL scheduling).

West Indies' "resentment" might have diminished a bit after T&T were invited to play in the CLT20 and the backroom diplomacy between them & BCCI touching new highs.

Zimbabwe, who people seem to have forgotten, are out and out India supporters after BCCI, PCB, CSL, BCB among other countries backed them during the infamous auditing crisis.

So it would be-
BCCI, CSL, BCB, CZ, CSA, WICB, CA/PCB vs ECB, PCB/CA, NZC.

 

[sohum]

Australia, RSA, England and NZL traditionally form the opposing bloc to anything brought up from the subcontinent bloc, and I don't see that changing.

Besides, I really hope that we don't get to the situation where we are talking about a split in international cricket. It would be quite a silly decision at a time when cricket is reaching its peak both from a financial and competitive perspective.