LAHORE, Oct 20: Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) chief Ijaz Butt has said that though he is not satisfied with the performance of Pakistan coach Geoff Lawson, he will not terminate his contract because it will cost the board heavily.

“When I was working as member PCB’s Governing Board, I had given my views to then chairman Dr Nasim Ashraf over the poor performance of the coach, but his termination at this stage will dent the PCB in financial terms. However, I will not extend his contract for even a single day after it expires in July 2009,” Ijaz said in his maiden press conference here on Monday.

It is interesting to note that Lawson, despite being in Lahore, did not meet the PCB chairman who took charge on Oct 7.

About the fate of Pakistan captain Shoaib Malik, Ijaz said he would not make any comment on his performance at this juncture but the PCB would analyze it after completion of his term on Dec 31, 2008.

Sharing the details of the first ICC meeting in Dubai on Oct 14-15, attended by him, Ijaz disclosed that an ICC sub-committee had asked to float a new tender for the Champions Trophy hosts and wanted to replace Pakistan. “But I opposed the recommendation of the sub-committee on grounds that as stakeholders, Pakistan was not consulted on this unilateral decision. So it is double standard of the ICC.

“Zimbabwe, India, West Indies and England supported the PCB’s stance while surprisingly Sri Lanka and Bangladesh did not take part in the discussion. However, after lengthy debate, the ICC reverted to its earlier decision of allowing Pakistan to host the high-profile event in September-October next year,” he said.

Ijaz further disclosed that the ICC would monitor the security situation in Pakistan during the forthcoming tour of India here in January-February, 2009 and will send its own security team after the tour.

Expressing satisfaction at the BCCI’s approach, Ijaz said the Indian cricket board had no objection over their team’s next year’s tour to Pakistan and it was definitely on. “I met BCCI President Shashank Manohar in Dubai and both the boards have agreed to work with mutual coordination to safeguard each other’s interests. Manohar confirmed India’s forthcoming tour of Pakistan and even authorised the PCB to make any changes in match venues as and when suitable,” he said.

Both the boards have already agreed to the tour itinerary which will see India playing three Tests, five ODIs and one Twenty20 match.

He said in order to create more playing opportunities for the national team, the PCB and the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) were in negotiation to hold series in England in 2010 and 2011, besides their scheduled tour of 2012. “It was proposed that Pakistan and England play seven Tests and ten ODIs besides Twenty20 matches in the coming years,” he added.

“ECB head Giles Clarke also suggested that Pakistan could play their home series in England if any of the teams refused to play here due to security concerns.

“The PCB loves to play its home series here in Pakistan before the local crowds but if the things are not in our control due to security concern of the other countries, we can consider the ECB option to consolidate our financial resources,” he said.

He further said that the previous PCB management had wrongly claimed that it had signed an agreement with the Dubai Sports City authorities for three years for approximately Rs750 million.

“I met the authorities in Dubai and they reminded me about the contract signed by the previous management. But when I asked them to show me the written agreement they could not and it was, apparently, done verbally which is no good,” Ijaz pointed out.

“The PCB and the BCCI have also agreed to ask the Sports City authorities in Dubai to double the amount if India and Pakistan feature in the contest in any of three years,” he revealed.

On the ICL issue, the chairman said hopefully the BCCI and ICL would reach a consensus as the former had to report back to the ICC on the issue in 21-days.

Ijaz said everyone should consider the interest of the cricketers and it was also unfair to ban the players of one league while allowing the other to thrive.