I was well and truly appalled to see a move being made by the so-called ‘Big Three’ to effectively take over the ICC and thus run world cricket as it suits their fancy, without any effective checks or balances.

Firstly, this sort of a set up now being proposed is so grossly contradictory to the ideals of democracy and equality that we are repeatedly told are values now that the entire world believes in.

There is nothing even remotely democratic about three countries arrogating to themselves the positions of an elite group who, for all time to come, can never be shaken from their self-appointed lofty perch.

As a sportsman, I would have thought that the term ‘elite’ referred to sporting prowess, and could not be applied to the likes of England who have had their pants taken off in the recent Ashes series, or to India which is in the process of getting a pasting from New Zealand, not ranked higher than seventh by the ICC itself in any format of the game.

But I would be grossly mistaken. It turns out that now the term ‘elite’ applies to those who have money and that therefore India, England and Australia can be described as ‘elite’ because they make the biggest contributions monetarily to the ICC’s coffers, never mind the standard of cricket.

If that were applied to the political world, Germany and Japan would have the power of veto in the UN, not the UK and France; and people who pay tax at the higher rate would have twice as many votes as those who pay tax at the normal rate while those who do not earn enough to pay any tax would stand disenfranchised altogether.

The full absurdity of the ICC’s proposals has to be expressed in those terms to understand just how retrogressive and anachronistic they are.

You cannot bring back the bad old colonial days through the back door, when England and Australia as the ‘imperial’ powers exercised veto rights on all cricketing matters.

Indeed, it is more than just a little ironic that the person who fought against that system with the greatest determination was Jagmohan Dalmiya of India.

We are told that some concessions have been made by the ‘big three’ but that would still mean that they hold the chairmanship of the ICC and the all important Executive and Financial and Commercial Affairs Committees for the next two years.

There would be two more members in these committees apart from the big three and the next chairman would be chosen from among the existing members, weighing the dice heavily in favour of the big three.

There is also nothing to suggest that the shameless bribery that has been used to win the support of other boards and especially to break the opposition of Bangladesh, would not be employed again.

Bangladesh was in too vulnerable a position to stand against the might of India and the collapse of their opposition is therefore not surprising.

Their poor performance on the field of play means that the sword of having Test status withdrawn is one that is constantly hanging over their heads.

They also have two big tournaments coming up in their country - the Asia Cup and the T20 World Cup - and India’s involvement in these tournaments is an issue of financial life or death for them.

Pakistan, too, is in a very difficult position given that the security situation does not allow fixtures on home soil to be played and as such, Pakistan has to play all its international matches at venues abroad for which the goodwill of foreign countries is required.

The absence of foreign countries in Pakistan also has a heavy financial component to it which cannot be ignored. Yet, I think the PCB has done a creditable job in resisting the financial bribes being thrown its way, especially since no immediate improvement in the security situation is in sight.

Promises coming from India may or may not mean very much as the Indian Board could always take the plea that it cannot overrule the Indian government which does allow cricketing ties with Pakistan.

The constant wrangle over the position of the Chairman of the PCB also does not help Pakistan’s case.

Apparently, a reference to this has been made by the ICC too, though now with the courts having given the patron-in-chief the authority to appoint whosoever he pleases as the chairman of the board, this should be done immediately so that at least this uncertainty is finished.

In the meanwhile it is sad to read reports that the current chairman had been seeking a meeting with the patron-in-chief before the all important ICC meeting on February 8 but was not granted one.

One understands fully the fact that given the delicate political situation in Pakistan, there must be many demands on the Prime Minister’s time but this is a matter which will affect Pakistan’s interests in its most popular sport for a long time to come. You do not cut your nose to spite your face.

Of course, Pakistan’s position will depend entirely on the course of action that South Africa and Sri Lanka decide to take. As per media reports, these are the three countries which, greatly to the credit of their boards, have thus far withstood the diabolical and immoral move made by India, England and Australia for what in effect is a ‘qabza’ of the ICC, not very different in form or spirit from the way land grabber groups operate in Pakistan, where might is the only thing that counts.

Indeed, if any one of the three now left resisting were to buckle down, it would be pointless for the remaining two to hold on to their objections for the matter would be carried through with the eight votes that the big three would have.

In that eventuality, the last two dissenters would only leave themselves open to retributive punishment by the big three – for people who can come up with ideas as totally immoral as this cannot by any means be deemed to be beyond vindictiveness.

Pakistan, therefore, has to watch its step closely and to keep in close contact with the South African and Sri Lankan authorities to make sure that the three stand firmly together – and also that on Feb 8 a final decision is taken, allowing no more postponements giving time for horse trading and bribery.

It is deeply saddening that cricket of all sports, whose name is used as a by word for fair play and sportsmanship, should have come up with a scheme as unfair, undemocratic and immoral as this and that to get it approved, the most unashamed forms of bribery and financial coercion should be employed.

It would be even more sad if such a grossly reprehensible system is thrust upon the cricketing world, which deserves infinitely better.

The writer is a former Pakistan captain