Welcome to the time of Coronavirus, the enabler of a chain reaction that was unheard of and hopefully, the one-off halt to our great game of cricket. The way cricket came to a screeching halt, like everything around the world has, it was of little surprise that the politics took over the sphere inside the boardroom. Let’s consider the 2020 T20 World Cup in Australia for example. Although the country is one of the least-affected nations in terms of the impact of Coronavirus, they are still under lockdown and patience will lead them to a better position soon. 

And the answer lies in how the ICC politics shape up in the coming months, with Shashank Manohar, a big believer of having at least one ICC event every year to fill up the coffers, all set to bid goodbye to his position in August. For the BCCI, CA and ECB would never ever agree that the idea to protect their own TV revenue makes the situation pretty interesting, with coronavirus helping their case more than ever. 

It is a spell of higher pedigree and one unabashed mettle to focus on the tribe. Even during his playing days, Ganguly had the world at his bay - both as a cricketer and captain - and signed off as one of the unquestioned greats of the game. His tenure had seen a controversy, diatribe brewing now and then but he was credited for the change in mindset he brought to Indian cricket - not only by Indian fans but cricketers world over - and that is still widely hailed for his administrative nous. If Ganguly scions himself to the ICC role, he will have the required backing without any doubt. It will be heartbreak for Colin Graves, the outgoing ECB Chairman, who was openly supported by the BCCI big brass during their visit to Lord’s late last year as the obvious successor to Manohar.

The BCCI has been at loggerheads with the ICC since Srinivasan had to vacate his position, with Manohar taking a distinctive approach to his work. While it is easy to credit him for the abolishment of the Big Three Model, those in know would tell you that it was hogwash in the eyes of smaller nations. The BCCI received USD 405 million from ICC's estimated income of USD 2.7 billion from the rights cycle from 2016-2023, letting the bottom 92% of the ICC's members receiving a total of $160 million. The problem of the shares they distribute, they would hope, would come to a truce under Ganguly who, at his hearts, sees the sport’s long-term interests; a visionary in the truest sense.

Although it has been a common mocking trend across Twitter that ICC stands for "Indian Cricket Council", the real fact of the matter is anything beyond revenue has gone against BCCI in the last few years. When the board was under the control of the Supreme Court-appointed CoA, then it had found good enough objections within themselves and was left out of the most important Finance committee of the ICC despite contributing over 70% of the global cricketing revenue. The internal rift became so strong that the other boards found it easy to attack the BCCI with their clout, just as difficult as they are finding it now with the presence of a stable administration, under Ganguly. 

Now, as much as Cricket Australia is dependent on the broadcasting money to refill their accounts, the same will be the story for many others, like Cricket South Africa, who wishes to get the Indian team for a three-match series in August this year. With no more ICC revenue for the year, the BCCI will know that they are in a position of privilege where they control the world cricket dynamics and manage to have a better relationship with the ICC, something that has been stringent in the last six years. But one can only hope that the association takes the flag of World Cricket onward and upward and not the other way around with confusion and chaos.