WCA concerned for vulnerable teams at upcoming World Cup

Around 90 players, mostly from some of the more vulnerable teams, could end up having their rights and protections "eroded" during the T20 World Cup. It could range from being made to participate in an "unlimited" number of content or media collection sessions to the players potentially having no say on licensing agreements, with their respective national boards left with complete authority over signing them on their behalf.

These concerns are part of a memo sent by the World Cricketers Association (WCA) to at least half-a-dozen of their signatories who are alleged to have received a set of non-approved "squad terms" from the ICC in the lead-up to the 20-team tournament that kicks off in February. The memo, which has been accessed by Cricbuzz, details the discrepancies between the terms laid out in the "ICC version" that were sent to teams including the USA, Zimbabwe and Namibia among others according to the global cricket union.

"The circulation of the non-approved version of the Squad Terms appears to be an attempt by the ICC and certain National Governing Bodies to exploit the most vulnerable, and worst paid player groups at this World Cup, some of whom are amateur (and) 'Own' players, including your data, and your name, image, likeness (NIL), and claim an almost unlimited ability to use and commercialise it with third parties without your consent, with the only recourse to an in-house dispute resolution process run by the ICC itself," the memo reads.

"Squad terms" in this context are defined as the legal contract signed by each player outlining the terms and conditions which apply to the player in every ICC Event. And the WCA's fears stem also from how the ICC's version as it stands "deliberately" removes all checks and balances on the dispute resolution processes that the players might otherwise have recourse to by signing the legitimate WCA-approved squad terms. With the late inclusion of Scotland, there will now be 14 WCA affiliated countries participating in the T20 World Cup. And the biggest worry for the association is that the safeguard measures that they've put in place based on their negotiation with the ICC shouldn't get compromised.

"The WCA supports the growth of the game and ICC events, but these objectives should be pursued in partnership with players, not at their expense," Tom Moffat, the WCA chief executive, tells Cricbuzz.

"For many players affected, participation in ICC Events represents a primary source of income and career progression," he adds. The WCA memo states that some of the teams that received the ICC version of squad terms were asked to sign with immediate effect. The cricketers' body though have now resolved the issue from their end and are expecting their representatives at the T20 World Cup to continue having a bigger say over their rights over everything, including the commercial use of their image.

"The agreed Squad Terms have now been signed by impacted WCA players, and our expectation is for these terms to be honoured by the ICC for the T20 World Cup," Moffat explains.

The WCA memo also hints that it's the non-WCA approved squad terms that are sent to teams that don't come under the WCA's remit like India and Pakistan. There is also a suggestion that while the longstanding members of the WCA like Australia, England, New Zealand and the likes have received the correct version, it's more those who are newer signees that may have been compromised.

"It is especially concerning that it is the most vulnerable playing groups who appear to have been targeted and expected to compete under different terms and conditions to other playing groups participating in the same Men's T20 World Cup," it says.

While the incongruities between the two versions of squad terms are more holistic, there are some specific points that stand out starkly.

Take the one that involves the access the ICC will have to record content with the teams. While in the WCA-approved model, the access to shoot content in changing rooms will be given only for winning teams and that too subject the captain approving a time, the ICC get "reasonable access" to all changing rooms after a match and all it'll require is an approval from the team manager.

Meanwhile, when it comes to behind the scenes content, the ICC model allows for them to use all team activity content on a "broader basis" when it comes to potential event documentaries. Whereas the WCA version would require the players' agreement for any kind of documentary and also for it to include payment since this will be a licensed product.

Another glaring difference between the two squad terms has to do with ownership of a player's data. The WCA-approved model of course allows for the player to own his data, with his consent required for it to be used in any way. The ICC version gives complete ownership of a player's data to the governing body, and they'll have the right to commercialise it with an agreement with the said player's national board. And then there's the abiding nature of the ICC version, which ensures that once a player has been part of an ICC event, he or she is deemed to have accepted the squad terms in its entirety, regardless of whether they sign the terms or not. The WCA version insists that every player has to sign a contract for each ICC event.

Or as Moffat sums it up, "The WCA version is a more balanced process where players have more say and the process is independent."