A quiet rumble is stirring within the corridors of the International Cricket Council (ICC) as a proposal to reshape the chairman’s tenure emerges. The proposed change seeks to offer longer terms and fewer re-elections, aiming for a more stable and policy-focused leadership.
Currently, the ICC chairman serves a two-year term with the chance of three consecutive re-elections. This new proposal, if accepted, would extend the term to three years but limit re-elections to just one, essentially allowing a maximum of six years in the role as per Cricbuzz.
Proponents argue that a longer tenure allows for sustained policy development and reduces the time spent campaigning for re-election. They believe a two-year term fosters short-termism and hinders long-term planning.
While the ICC has not officially commented, discussions among members are underway. If approved, the new rule could be implemented by mid-year. However, questions remain about its intentions. Is it simply a structural change, or does it benefit a specific individual?
BCCI influence on ICC Chairman post
Greg Barclay, the current ICC chairman, faces the end of his second term in November. It’s unclear if the new rule, if accepted, would apply to him or only affect future elections.
Established in 2016, the independent chairman role has seen Shashank Manohar and Barclay hold the position. Both received backing from the powerful BCCI secretary, Jay Shah, highlighting the influence India holds in ICC decisions.
With elections looming, predicting future contenders is difficult. However, a candidate backed by Jay Shah would likely be a frontrunner, considering his past impact.
This proposed change sparks debate. Will it empower long-term vision or simply shift control dynamics within the ICC? Only time will tell the impact of this potential amendment on the future of cricket governance.
Editors pick
