[Neel Here]

Originally Posted by Baundule
The focus was on the BCCI. Lalit Modi is just a part of it.

not sure what you mean by this, the point was whether bcci men are at the top of ICC.
the above sentence is a non sequitur.

There is actually some regulations on that. Each full member must fulfill its mandatory requirement of playing at least two tests and 3 ODIs with each full member. The ftp also schedules who is going to host what. There can be some exceptions based on security issues or something like that. My focus is, the BCCI, with all its money, is not even hosting BD. So, they are not actually contributing to spread cricket. Since they provide the money, ICC can not do anything against them.

are you sure about that ? mind if I ask for the quote from the ICC rulebook, no offence(I really mean it !) I really didn't know that.

but as I mentioned bcci not hosting BD is a bad job, sure. but spreading cricket is NOT their job, it's the ICC's job. secondly, hosting BD doesn't count as spreading cricket, cricket is already well spread in BD !!
blaming them for something which is not their responsibility is ridiculous.

taking the example of football, please show me one instance where the national boards have taken initiatives to spread or popularize football. it's ALWAYS the FIFA who does it.

The responsibility lies on both sides - the home boards and the ICC. For example, if ICC recognizes the ICL, the home boards can not ban the ICL players.
On paper, the home boards are banning their players and BCCI has nothing to do with it. But the fact is, BCCI is indirectly bullying to compel the home boards taking such decisions. You can take the Ranatunga example, how the BCCI reacted when Ranatunga wanted the ICL players to participate in home competitions. Monopoly of the BCCI does not help cricket.

monopoly of BCCI in what ? cricket in India ?

of course they would defend their turf, are you telling me any other board would have done something else ? try forming a league in BD with big players independent of BCB and then come back and tell us how BCB treats you !
ICC listens to it(as does the other boards) because it is in THEIR interest in the longer term.

understand that ICL is not under the ICC, the money it makes is entirely its own and the ICC doesn't get a penny. and if such a challenger to ICC rises at the international level it would mean utter chaos for the small world of cricket.

to get an idea of what happens when there are competing world bodies look at chess. they had two world bodies FIDE and PCA vying for the top spot. they had two diferent world champions and similar hair-brained results.
you want the same in cricket ?

Calling white as white is not a negative attitude. If monopoly were good for cricket, then Hitler were ruling the world to make it prosperous.

sorry sonny, you need to re-read your history books, hitler wasn't a businessman, may be you are talking of bill gates !