Sunil Gavaskar Calls for Forensic Audit of Cricket Boards..
Sunil Gavaskar Calls for Forensic Audit of cricket Boards..
The international cricket Council (ICC) is considering establishing a dedicated fund to support Test cricket, particularly to assist boards outside the ‘Big Three’ (India, Australia, and England). Proposed by cricket Australia and supported by the bcci and ECB, this fund aims to ensure a minimum match fee for players—around USD 10,000—and could be implemented by 2025. The initiative addresses the financial challenges data-faced by boards not among the ‘Big Three,’ who often struggle with the costs of hosting Test matches and find t20 leagues more financially appealing.
Sunil Gavaskar has endorsed this proposal, suggesting that it would be beneficial if the home team covered the hotel and travel expenses for the visiting team. In his column for Sportstar, Gavaskar stated, “It is a good idea for the ICC to suggest that the home team should bear the hotel and internal travel costs of the visiting team. This could significantly ease financial burdens and help balance budgets.”
Gavaskar also emphadata-sized the need for setting a minimum standard for accommodations and travel. “Clearly, there should be a minimum standard for hotels and travel; otherwise, some boards might end up accommodating visiting teams in subpar conditions,” he noted.
However, Gavaskar believes that the determination of player fees should be left to individual boards, as living standards vary by country. “Determining uniform playing fees might not be ideal,” he said.
Earlier this year, the ICC’s financial distribution model for 2024-27 was finalized, with the bcci receiving 38.5% of the revenue share—significantly more than the ECB (6.89%) and cricket Australia (6.25%). This allocation has led to dissatisfaction among some boards, who feel that India’s share is disproportionately large.
Gavaskar has called for a forensic audit of how ICC revenue is utilized by various boards. “It would be worthwhile to conduct a forensic audit to track the ICC’s revenue distribution. This could reveal whether the funds are being used effectively and address complaints from boards about revenue distribution,” Gavaskar wrote.
He further added, “The share each board receives is more than sufficient to run cricket in their countries and still leave some surplus. Relying on increasing ICC revenue shares fosters complacency and prevents boards from focusing on strengthening their cricketing infrastructure.”
The international cricket Council (ICC) is considering establishing a dedicated fund to support Test cricket, particularly to assist boards outside the ‘Big Three’ (India, Australia, and England). Proposed by cricket Australia and supported by the bcci and ECB, this fund aims to ensure a minimum match fee for players—around USD 10,000—and could be implemented by 2025. The initiative addresses the financial challenges data-faced by boards not among the ‘Big Three,’ who often struggle with the costs of hosting Test matches and find t20 leagues more financially appealing.
Sunil Gavaskar has endorsed this proposal, suggesting that it would be beneficial if the home team covered the hotel and travel expenses for the visiting team. In his column for Sportstar, Gavaskar stated, “It is a good idea for the ICC to suggest that the home team should bear the hotel and internal travel costs of the visiting team. This could significantly ease financial burdens and help balance budgets.”
Gavaskar also emphadata-sized the need for setting a minimum standard for accommodations and travel. “Clearly, there should be a minimum standard for hotels and travel; otherwise, some boards might end up accommodating visiting teams in subpar conditions,” he noted.
However, Gavaskar believes that the determination of player fees should be left to individual boards, as living standards vary by country. “Determining uniform playing fees might not be ideal,” he said.
Earlier this year, the ICC’s financial distribution model for 2024-27 was finalized, with the bcci receiving 38.5% of the revenue share—significantly more than the ECB (6.89%) and cricket Australia (6.25%). This allocation has led to dissatisfaction among some boards, who feel that India’s share is disproportionately large.
Gavaskar has called for a forensic audit of how ICC revenue is utilized by various boards. “It would be worthwhile to conduct a forensic audit to track the ICC’s revenue distribution. This could reveal whether the funds are being used effectively and address complaints from boards about revenue distribution,” Gavaskar wrote.
He further added, “The share each board receives is more than sufficient to run cricket in their countries and still leave some surplus. Relying on increasing ICC revenue shares fosters complacency and prevents boards from focusing on strengthening their cricketing infrastructure.”