New Delhi: The Committee of Administrators (CoA) on Thursday decided to change the age-old rule of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) Secretary convening the selection committee meeting of the Indian team by handing the responsibility to the chief selector — currently MSK Prasad. And that has seen the selection meeting to pick the team for the West Indies tour get postponed to Sunday. Sources in the know of developments said that the directive of the CoA has led to a complete change of plan and that had led to a delay in the process. Also Read – Andy Murray to make Grand Slam return at Australian Open”The change in the rule announced by the CoA means that the Secretary will not convene the meeting and that is behind the delay as that has leads to some complexities which need to be addressed,” the source explained. The CoA has decided that neither any officer bearer nor the CEO shall attend any Cricket Committee meetings henceforth. In fact, as of now, the Selection Committee had to keep the Secretary in the loop for any replacement sought or for posting of selectors to watch any game. The CoA has made it clear that the Selection Committee doesn’t need to do so anymore. Also Read – Fast bowler Behrendorff to undergo spinal surgery”The Committee of Administrators have been informed that the practice of the Secretary convening and attending Selection Committee meetings has continued even after the new BCCI constitution has become effective. Further, it is learnt that the Selection Committees continue to address emails to Secretary to seek his approval in relation to any change or replacement in the team(s). “Similarly, the Selection Committees continue to address e-mails to the Secretary seeking his approval on travel arrangements and posting for selectors to watch and attend cricket matches. The Selection Committee does not need any approval either from the Secretary or the CEO in relation to any selection made or change or replacement in the team,” the CoA declared. A senior BCCI official asked if the CoA wasn’t aware of the constitution till now and if it took them a year to realise the rules and regulations of the constitution that was registered by the committee itself. “The new Constitution of the BCCI has been mandated by the Supreme Court and in that regard it is correct that it must be followed. Why did it dawn on the CoA now after nearly about a year since it was registered? What triggered this awakening? Do they not know what is happening in the Board,” the official enquired. The official went on to add that if the constitution was indeed being followed, then the office bearers should also be allowed to work as per the new rules and regulations. “Do they also plan to allow the office bearers to work as per the new constitution or do they only wish to restrict? As per the new constitution, the office bearers are ex-officio members of the Apex Council and if the CoA think of themselves as the Apex Council, then in that role the office bearers who are also in a manner, court appointed, must also be part of the meetings with their votes on these issues. “It is clear that the office bearers are not being allowed to function even as per the new constitution. So, it is basically the adoption of an arbitrary pick and choose policy by the CoA,” he rued.
by Caroline Spiezio And Pan Pylas, The Associated Press Posted Jun 23, 2017 1:04 am MDT Last Updated Jun 23, 2017 at 6:40 am MDT AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to RedditRedditShare to 電子郵件Email LONDON – Few events outside of war can have quite as much potential impact on the economy of a country as Britain’s decision a year ago to leave the European Union.The momentous vote on June 23, 2016 has the potential to sever Britain’s ties to its main trading partner, a grouping it has spent more than four decades building ever-closer ties to. From subsidies for farmers to standards on consumer products and banishing all types of impediments to trade, the British economy is deeply enmeshed in the workings of the EU.Since the vote, the British economy defied the gloomy recession predictions of many, including the British Treasury and the International Monetary Fund. Other forecasts like an immediate house price crash didn’t materialize either.But other predicted events did occur, such as a sharp fall in the pound and rising inflation. And now that the official two-year Brexit process has begun, there are renewed signs of economic pain.So where is the British economy, one year later? Here’s a brief guide.___STILL GROWING, JUSTThe British economy did not contract in the wake of the Brexit vote as many had warned. In fact, for much of the time since, it’s grown faster than many of its peers in Europe, largely because of a sharp fall in the value of the pound. The 15 per cent decline made exports cheaper, a boon to growth. However, the economy is now weakening amid the Brexit uncertainty and the pound’s drop makes imports more expensive. The British economy is even trailing the likes of Greece — Britain grew by a quarterly rate of 0.2 per cent in the first three months of the year, lower than any economy in the Group of Seven industrialized nations. At the same time, previously struggling continental economies like France have gained momentum, potentially affecting the dynamics of the Brexit talks, which started this week.___RECESSION AHEAD?The worry is that the pre-Brexit doom-mongers may be proved right should Britain crash out of the EU without a comprehensive trade deal — the so-called “hard” Brexit scenario. Ratings agency Standard & Poor’s says Britain has the most to lose economically as it exports more to the EU, when calculated as a proportion of the economy, than any other country. The risk, it says, is magnified by the fact that the services sector, such as banking, accounts for a significant chunk of those exports. And services are less likely to be covered in any immediate trade deal to retain privileged access to the massive EU market. Any early post-Brexit arrangements may just be confined to goods.___LONDON AT RISKGiven its central role in the European financial sector, London’s fate is uncertain. When Britain leaves the EU, British financial services companies would lose the automatic right to operate in all the other 27 EU states, a big handicap. A recent survey from consultancy EY found that the capital was losing ground as one of the three most attractive cities in Europe for business. The city’s global status, including its deep pool of skilled professionals like lawyers and accountants, will help cushion the blow, as will something as basic as the English language. “London is still top dog but it’s clearly losing ground,” said Moritz Kraemer, S&P’s chief rating officer.___COST OF LIVINGThe pound suffered the first and biggest hit from the Brexit vote, dropping nearly 20 cents from its pre-vote level of around $1.50 the day after the referendum. “You could have bought any major currency — even the Turkish lira — against the pound that day and be significantly in the money today,” quipped Kit Juckes, a strategist at French bank Societe Generale. In the year since the vote, it’s fallen further to 31-year lows before making a modest recovery to trade at $1.27 a year on. While that helped exporters, it’s proved costly to others by making imports, such as energy and food, more expensive. In the year to May, inflation rose to a four-year high of 2.9 per cent, way up on the 0.3 per cent it was when Britain voted for Brexit. The pinch was felt immediately by British holidaymakers, many of whom will have done a double take upon seeing their credit card statements on their return home. Now the costs are being felt at home, too, and retail sales are faltering as wages fail to keep up with prices.___STOCKS ENERGIZEDIt may seem counter-intuitive but Britain’s main stock index, the FTSE 100, has actually hit a series of all-time highs, spiking by around a quarter following an initial drop — not a bad return for any investment. That’s partly due to the export-boosting impact of the pound’s drop. Many international companies, like Burberry, are listed on the FTSE 100, meaning that their earnings in dollars and other non-British currencies are worth more when translated back into pounds. Other international companies like miners Glencore and Antofagasta have also benefited from commodity price rises. Laith Khalaf, a senior analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, noted that “all of the top 10 performing stocks have significant international earnings” while more domestic-geared stocks, particularly those in retail, like Next, have suffered. The share price of Dixons Carphone fell so much, largely because of Brexit-related uncertainties and the fall in the pound, that the electronics retailer dropped out of the FTSE 100 index. The pain and gain of Brexit vote: British economy a year on