ICC Board Meet: India to get maximum share; only 4 overseas players allowed in new T20 leagues
New Delhi (PTI): The BCCI reaffirmed its status as the financial powerhouse of world cricket as the ICC unanimously passed the revenue distribution model at its all-powerful board meeting in Durban on Thursday.
In another important development, the ICC has put a cap on overseas cricketers plying their trade for teams in various leagues, keeping it to four players per playing XI in new events. This is primarily meant for T20 leagues starting in every nook and corner, which is posing a threat to the international version of the game.
While the ICC media release didn't state the quantum of revenue that the BCCI will generate from the new distribution model, it is expected that the Indian board will annually earn USD 230 million from the USD 600 million pot for the next four years.
It is around 38.4 percent approximately and at least six times more than England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), who are set to receive approximately USD 41 million at 6.89 percent and Cricket Australia (CA) who will get 37.53 million (around 6.25 percent). They are distant second and third in the list.
"The ICC Board also confirmed the largest ever investment into the sport after the distribution model for the next four years was agreed," the ICC release stated.
"Every ICC Member will receive significantly enhanced funding with a strategic investment fund ring-fenced to drive global growth initiatives in line with the ICC Global Growth Strategy," it further stated.
While the numbers were not there in the release, an ICC board member confirmed that the BCCI got its rightful share for its contribution to the growth of the sport and in this cycle each member would earn significantly more.
"All members will receive a base distribution and then additional revenue will be in relation to contribution to the global game both on and off the field," ICC chairman Greg Barclay said.
"This is by far the largest level of investment ever to go into cricket and it's a once in a generation opportunity for our members to accelerate growth and engage more players and fans and drive competitiveness," he added.
Cap on players' participation in new events
The ICC has decided that all new events (read various T20 leagues) will have to at least include seven home grown players or players from associate member in their playing XIs, in order to prevent en masse retirement of T20 specialists from top countries.
With the Major League Cricket (MLC) starting in the USA and Saudi Arabia also planning an ambitious T20 project in future, the stakeholders want to protect international cricket.
The host T20 board will also have to pay a "solidarity fee", which, in simple words, is a commission to the home board of an overseas player.
"Moving forwards, new events requiring a sanction will need to ensure the playing XI of each team will include a minimum of seven local or associate member players to support the development of the game.
"Additionally, a solidarity fee will be payable from the organising member to the home board of a player to reflect the role the member played in developing and promoting the sport globally."
Over-rate sanctions
The Chief Executives' Committee approved changes to over-rate sanctions in Test cricket to balance the need for over-rates to be maintained and ensure players are appropriately remunerated.
Such players will be fined 5% of their match fee for each over short up to a maximum of 50%.
If a team is bowled out before the new ball is due at 80 overs, there will be no over-rate penalty applied even if there is a slow over-rate. This replaces the current 60 over threshold.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
