After announcing the first stage of the “election process” in the second week of October, the ICC had given less than a week’s time for potential candidates to submit their respective nominations – by October 18 – and added that the process was “expected” to be concluded by December.
Between October second week and now, the ICC made no further announcement on the process for elections – by way of an official statement or a website listing – even as media reports suggested on Monday that three rounds of voting would be held between now and December 2 to conclude the voting process.
Those in the know said the first round took place on Tuesday and it is not known if the ICC is going to announce the results now or all results at the end of the entire process. Sources said the first round had ended without either candidate – Greg Barclay from New Zealand and Imran Khwaja (according to ICC, he doesn’t represent any country) – getting a two-third of the votes.
“How does one know if a second-round ballot will be held? Media reports said ‘if there is no clear two-third majority, another round of voting will take place. Again, in the second round, if there is no two-third majority, a third round of voting will take place. Again, if there is no two-third majority, then the present interim chairman will continue for a stipulated period’. Now, how does one figure if Round Two will be held or not? Is the voting alone a secret ballot process or is the entire election a secret process?” say those tracking developments.
There are a total of 16 votes in the ICC board – 12 full members, one female independent member, and three associate members. The three associate members are 1) Scotland, 2) Malaysia, 3) Singapore. Tony Brian represents Scotland, Mahinda Vallipuram represents Malaysia but it is not known who represents Singapore at the ICC.
“Even the Singapore Cricket Association doesn’t know who represents them at the ICC Board,” say those in the know.
For all its lack of communication, the ICC has not even shared the “stipulated time” for which the interim chairman will continue if there is no clear winner – based on two-third majority – by the end of the three rounds of voting.
“Why couldn’t the global governing body of an international sport send out a statement listing out how the election process will work? Isn’t the onus on them to be transparent?” they add.
Here’s how the FIFA election process worked when Gianni Infantino was re-elected president in 2019 for a four-year term:
* Each federation gets a single vote, to be cast in a secret ballot, and a candidate must secure two-thirds of the overall vote in the first round to be declared as the winner.
* If a two-thirds majority is not achieved in round one, a second round of voting will begin where a simple majority is needed to win.
* Should this prove elusive, the candidate with the fewest votes will drop out before a third round, with the process continuing in this fashion until one man has a simple majority.
A total of 207 countries vote in a FIFA election. A total of 12 countries, one independent director and three Associate Member directors are voting in the ICC election. “It can’t be that complicated, right?” say those in the cricket fraternity, while trying to figure out this election process.
What’s further bewildering is that, unlike FIFA, the process of deciding the vote by a two-third majority doesn’t change in Round two and Three. “Where’s the logic in that? If the board members have voted in a certain pattern in Round One, and there has been no result, the ICC thinks the same board members will vote differently in Round Two or Round Three?” say those tracking developments.
What’s all the more puzzling is ICC’s election rule that says, if two-thirds is not achieved, the interim chairman (Imran Khwaja) will continue for a ‘stipulated period’. “So, basically, if there’s no result, the candidate with less votes will continue”.