Indian Players refused to sign ICC contract

Its getting intresting…

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow.asp?artid=19592579

LEEDS: Indian cricketers on Monday refused to sign the agreement for the Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka and accused the International Cricket Council of “boycotting” them.

The players sent a letter to the Indian Cricket Board explaining the reasons for their decision, which said, “We believe by signing the player contract, we are caught totally in the middle”.

“On the one hand, we suffer exposure from the ICC/BCCI when they could allege non-compliance with our obligations. On the other hand, we could face exposure from our competitive sponsors who have paid us for the right to exploit our brand and image commercially,” the players said in a press release.

Re: Indian Players refused to sign ICC contract

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by andha_qanoon: *
**Its getting intresting....
*

Really? How so?

[/quote]

Re: Re: Indian Players refused to sign ICC contract

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Pakistani Tiger: *

[/QUOTE]

Because now Its gonne be ICC vs BCCI.Or may be someother Players association form NZL,AUS,ENG,SA wil join.Its just a developing story so keep fingers crossed.

Re: Re: Re: Indian Players refused to sign ICC contract

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by andha_qanoon: *

*Its just a developing story so keep fingers crossed. *

Looking farward for that ;)

[/QUOTE]

**We’ll miss even World Cup but will not sign ICC contracts: Indian team **

By Tapan Joshi

Mumbai, August 19, 2002

United we stand. That was the message the Indian cricket team sent out to the BCCI today. Every member of the squad right now in England has refused to sign the individual contracts that the Indian cricket Board had sent them on behalf of the International Cricket Council.

A senior member of the Indian squad told CricketNext.com, “We have decided to fight for our rights, and we will fight till the end. Forget the Champions Trophy, all of us have decided to boycott even the World Cup if it comes to that.”

This move by the Indian team is a clear slap on the face of Jagmohan Dalmiya, the Indian cricket Board chief who had given an ultimatum to the players to sign the contracts or face the axe.

The Indian squad also distributed press releases in England, informing one and all about the stand they have taken. One of the senior-most player in the team confided to CricketNext.com, “All those who are questioning our patriotism are merely trying to blackmail us. We are not going to fall into the trap.”

The Indian Board has a real problem on its hands as the entire team has reportedly refused to sign the contract. The team manager, Ranga Reddy, has faxed the Indian team’s letter refusing to sign the contract to Dalmiya and the secretary, Niranjan Shah.

So shaken are both Dalmiya and Shah that they have at the time of writing shunned the media completely. The players meanwhile, egged on by former cricketers like Ravi Shastri, are determined to take the fight to the ICC.

The players were also encouraged by the decision of the Australian cricketers, who refused to sign even though their commercial interests are not clashing with the Sri Lanka tourney. “It would be an act of real cowardice had we not supported the Aussies. After all, they have refused as they want to protect the interests of the players world-wide. All of us are united on this issue,” said an Indian player.

http://www.cricketnext.com/news1/next/joshi/tap536.htm

Way to Go guys - Teach BCCI and ICC a lesson. Let them send our ‘A’ team to Sri Lanka. (Mazaa to tab aayega jab ‘A’ team bhi contract sign karne se mana kar degi). These Organizations are good for nothing.

A team or first 11, your rarely seriously contenders for anything.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mo_best: *
A team or first 11, your rarely seriously contenders for anything.
[/QUOTE]

Worry about Your team. Our past records show that we have always done betterin ICC tournament(at least better than you).

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Asif_k: *

Worry about Your team. Our past records show that we have always done betterin ICC tournament(at least better than you).
[/QUOTE]

Does that even matter?
Are NZ the favirotes to win the tourney because they won the last one.
Definately not.

Only the best teams at the moment are favirtoes.

Pak, Aus, RSA.
And SL because of home advantaged.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Xpress: *

Does that even matter?
Are NZ the favirotes to win the tourney because they won the last one.
Definately not.

Only the best teams at the moment are favirtoes.

Pak, Aus, RSA.
And SL because of home advantaged.
[/QUOTE]

really..make sure you beat sri lanks to move to next round!!!! ICC might be 2 match visit for pakistan.
Huh... abhi 3 match buri tarah hare hai lekin nakhre kam nahi huye... !!!!
Chaddi utar gayi lekin shahi nahi gayee...huh

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by andha_qanoon: *

really..make sure you beat sri lanks to move to next round!!!! ICC might be 2 match visit for pakistan.
Huh... abhi 3 match buri tarah hare hai lekin nakhre kam nahi huye... !!!!
Chaddi utar gayi lekin shahi nahi gayee...huh
[/QUOTE]

Put some sense into your post before replying.
How were we beaten badly.
We lost 3 close matches.
Look who is talking.
The team that is getting beating from 2nd string of English players.
Just imagine how badly you would have lost if Gough, Caddick, trescthick and Tudor were playing.
Atleast we lost to a full strength team.

Can we get back to the thread instead of the usual my team is better than yours. I think the issue is an important one and will have far reaching impact on cricket as a whole. So lets discuss the issue. I read that players from other countries are also objecting to signing the ICC contract. So what impact will that have on the overall game? That is what we should be concentrating on and not which team is better. I personally think that ICC is wrong on the issue and the players should have the choice of sponsorship. On the one hand they are trying to wipe out match betting and on the other hand they are denying the players sponsorship which will only lead to them looking possibly to bookies again. What does the ICC want?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ehsan: *
Can we get back to the thread instead of the usual my team is better than yours. I think the issue is an important one and will have far reaching impact on cricket as a whole. So lets discuss the issue. I read that players from other countries are also objecting to signing the ICC contract. So what impact will that have on the overall game? That is what we should be concentrating on and not which team is better. I personally think that ICC is wrong on the issue and the players should have the choice of sponsorship. On the one hand they are trying to wipe out match betting and on the other hand they are denying the players sponsorship which will only lead to them looking possibly to bookies again. What does the ICC want?
[/QUOTE]

Thanks Ehsaan bhai for bringing this thread back to origional issue.

Anyway,ICC is confused body and a toothless tiger.By adding this stupid clause so late they havenot only jeopardised success of ICC trophy but also are putting WC'03 under threat.

Yeah whats so important about sposorship why can't anyone have their own deals.
Does it really matter?

If ICC likes Pepsi but Tendulkur like Coca Cola.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Xpress: *
Yeah whats so important about sposorship why can't anyone have their own deals.
Does it really matter?

If ICC likes Pepsi but Tendulkur like Coca Cola.
[/QUOTE]

see now you are making sense.Der aaayad durust aayad.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Indian Players refused to sign ICC contract

Players’ group calls for ICC Champions Trophy talks
Reuters - 19 August 2002

Cricket’s world governing body should negotiate directly with players in a bid to defuse a simmering sponsorship row, a leading players’ representative has said.

“I call upon the ICC (International Cricket Council) to meet with FICA (Federation of International Cricketers’ Association) and player representatives urgently, in order to end this stand-off,” Australian Cricketers’ Association (ACA) chief executive and FICA joint chief executive Tim May said in a statement.

Australia are among several squads yet to sign contracts to play in next month’s ICC Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka. The ICC, seeking to protect its tournament sponsors, has banned players from endorsing products of rival companies.

FICA, though, has advised its members, including the ACA, not to sign the contracts in their current form, arguing they infringe the players’ personal image and sponsorship rights.

The ICC, however, says players should seek redress from their own national boards, who have endorsed the world governing body’s sponsorship agreements.

May, though, said the ACA had held positive talks with the Australian Cricket Board (ACB) last week but guidelines provided by the ICC to the ACB governing the use of player images had worsened the situation.

He also complained that players were expected to put tournament sponsors ahead of their own sponsors "not only the period of the event, but for a further period of six months.

“In some cases these companies are competitors of players’ personal sponsors. The ICC has not only failed to consult players when giving away their rights but has also failed to communicate such restrictions and obligations,” he said. “It is their responsibility to negotiate a solution for a problem they have created.”

The issue could spill over into the World Cup, scheduled to start in February in South Africa. ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed said last week the players had been forewarned about the stance of the sport’s governing body on “ambush marketing”. The ICC sponsorship deal dated back to 2000, Speed said.

May, though, argued: “The ICC did not even attempt to convey such restrictions to players until August 2002.”

http://www-aus.cricket.org/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2002/AUG/049960_REUTERS_19AUG2002.html

It all started in the 1996 world Cup when Coke won the race to sponsor the World Cup and Pepsi came up with and ad 'Nothing Official about it' With Azhar, Kambli, Jadeja etc..Which became a real hit :)

About Indian players’ reaction - Ravi Shastri is representing them and talking to Indian board . Speed is also in India.

We need to have clarity on what we are expected to do: players
The transcript of the letter that the Indian team sent to the BCCI president Jagmohan Dalmiya.

Dear Mr. Dalmiya,

We reiterate that we, the players, want to represent India in the ICC Champions Trophy and all other ICC tournaments. However, the ICC will not allow us to participate without signing a contract we find unacceptable.

Regarding the ICC player contract, we have expressed the following concerns to the Board:

The Board did not consult us when it signed an ICC events contract in 2000, encompassing the terms of the player contract. Even though it contains significant new clauses granting the ICC control over our commercial rights, the player contract was presented to us only very recently during the NatWest final, thereby not giving us enough time to review its contents.

We have preexisting sponsorship agreements made before we were aware of the player contract terms, and many of which were made before the Board signed the events contract.
The contract bars us from endorsing and appearing in advertisements for sponsors in competition with ICC sponsors. If we sign the contract, we leave ourselves open to the competing sponsors alleging a possible breach of our contract with them. If we do not sign the contract, the ICC will not allow us to represent India.

Our sponsors who are not official sponsors of the Champions Trophy do not have contracts with the ICC. If they decide to use advertisements that we have appeared in, we may not be able to stop them. In such a case, would the ICC contend that we are in breach of the player contract? The player contract does not make clear what responsibilities we have in such a circumstance.

The ICC restrictions are overly broad, covering not just the tournaments, but thirty days before and after. In the present case, therefore, by simply signing this contract the ICC could already allege breach. In addition, ICC sponsors can use our images for six months after the tournament subject to the terms of the player contract.

The ICC restrictions will not stop competitors of ICC sponsors from advertising during the Champions Trophy. The only restriction is with respect to using cricketers as models. This we believe is unfair, and the stranglehold on us appearing in advertisements or competitive sponsorships, therefore, does not appear rational.

The ICC contract is based on an advertisement agreement that extends through the 2007 World Cup, and therefore would not only affect current players, but those who have yet to represent India.

In your letter of August 17, 2002, you had requested us to sign the contract for the Champions Trophy, with only a possibility of the BCCI taking up the issue with the ICC for the upcoming 2003 World Cup. We believe we are unable to accede to the Board’s request for the following reasons:

The ICC restrictions are overly broad, covering not just the Champions Trophy but thirty days before and after. In the present case, therefore, by simply signing this contract the ICC could already allege breach. In addition, ICC sponsors can use our images for six months after the tournament subject to the terms of the player contract. Also this period of six months covers the World Cup in 2003.

We need to have clarity on exactly what we are expected to do. The player contract states in clause 15 that the player shall not “directly or indirectly allow his name, voice, image, likeness or other representation to be used either: (A) in any advertising or endorsement; or (b) for any commercial purpose”. You will appreciate that the competitive sponsor has no privity of contract with the BCCI or ICC, and while the player can certainly inform the competitive sponsor and tell it not to air any competitive advertisements, the player has no control if the competitive sponsor does not agree. In fact, in most instances, as is only normal, the competitive sponsors have made their own marketing programs and invested huge amounts in advertising time and newsprint ads, and it is not in the player’s power to simply have them terminate such campaigns. In such a situation what would the player be expected to do?

We believe by signing the player contract, we are caught totally in the middle. On the one hand, we suffer exposure from the ICC/BCCI when they could allege noncompliance with our obligations. On the other hand, we could face exposure from our competitive sponsors who have paid us for the right to exploit our brand and image commercially. Would the board be willing to compensate us not only for the loss of money we have received for endorsing the competitive products but also against any action that may be brought against us by the competitive sponsors? Until the situation is clarified, we believe that by signing the player contract, we would be put in a position where we would lose the most, and all this because we are now being told of a contract we knew nothing about and impacts us personally and the future of young, forthcoming cricketers in a critically significant way.

Board has given us no clear assurance that the terms of the player contract would be renegotiated to our satisfaction before the World Cup. In fact, we would expect the Board to confirm that unless the terms of the player contract are to mutual satisfaction, the players should not be asked to sign any such contract in the future.

The player contract binds us to provisions contained in the events contract (“Participating Nation Agreement”) that the BCCI signed in 2000. To date, we have not even been provided with a copy of that agreement. By signing the player contract we may be exposed to further liabilities and restrictions that we are now unaware of and which may impact adversely our future careers in a manner that is unacceptable.
We do hope you appreciate the predicament that we are being put in. We believe that the correct solution would be for the ICC to go back to the sponsors and explain the situation.

We wish to also inform you that as we are approaching a very important Test match, we would like to concentrate on our cricket and would like to nominate Mr.Ravi Shastri as our spokesperson for the players in this squad to handle issues regarding the above matter.

Yours sincerely,

The crisis is spreading as players from Pakistan, West Indies, South Africa and England are refusing to sign the ICC contract.

**
Crisis Resolved.ICC backed down.
Kudos to Indian players and those who supported them.
**

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow.asp?artid=19764130

LONDON: The International Cricket Council on Wednesday admitted it had backed down on the controversial agreement that is at the centre of a storm between the Indian players and administrators and confirmed that it would be valid only for the Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka next month.

An ICC spokesman said the game’s governing body had agreed to the Indian Cricket Board’s proposal to limit the agreement only for next month’s tournament instead of all ICC events till 2007 as envisaged originally. “Yes, this agreement is valid only for the Champions Trophy,” the spokesman said here. “ICC will draw up a fresh agreement for the World Cup in South Africa next year.”

BCCI President Jagmohan Dalmiya had on Tuesday said in Bangalore that the ICC had given such an assurance in writing to the BCCI in a bid to resolve the crisis.

The Indian players have refused to sign the agreement, a clause of which requires them to forego their individual endorsements for a period of one month before and after an ICC tournament in favour of the official sponsors in case of a clash of interest.

Hmmmmmmmmm!!!!!

According to the news on TV today the crisis is very much alive and England players are refusing to sign the agreement.

I dont know whether the crisis have been resolved or whether the times of India has jumped the gun.

Probably the situation will become clearer later on.