USA Cricket battles for its future amid power struggle with private consortium ACE

Kaumi GazetteCricket24 July, 20258.2K Views

In 2019, USA Cricket handed over the keys to its future. American Cricket Enterprise Inc. (ACE), a private consortium co-founded by Sameer Mehta, Satyan Gajwani, Vijay Srinivasan, and Vineet Jain, secured unique 50-year rights to run elite T20 cricket within the United States of America. According to the Term Sheet signed between each events, ACE promised to bankroll nationwide groups, construct six stadiums, and launch skilled leagues that may make cricket America’s subsequent main sport.

Also learn: U.S. is beginning to embrace cricket, says prime American diplomat

On the sphere, that dream appears inside attain. In 2024, the USA — an Associate Member of the International Cricket Council (ICC) — co-hosted the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup. The nationwide staff exceeded expectations by defeating Pakistan and advancing to the Super 8s. Recognising this achievement, USA Cricket was honoured with the ICC Associate Member Men’s Team Performance of the Year award on the just lately held ICC Annual Conference in Singapore.

USA Cricket battles for its future amid power struggle with private consortium ACE

But off the sphere, the story has been far much less harmonious. With the Olympics approaching and cricket newly added to the Los Angeles 2028 Summer Olympics (LA28) slate, that imaginative and prescient is fracturing.

A 12 months in the past, the ICC positioned USA Cricket “on notice”, and following the current AGM, the worldwide governing physique reiterated: “The organisation remains on notice (USAC). USAC is required to undertake comprehensive governance reforms, including but not limited to completing free and fair elections within a three-month period.”

A contractual dispute between ACE and USA Cricket threatens the board’s Olympic certification, its standing with the ICC, and its authority over the very recreation it’s meant to manipulate.

In a breach discover issued on June 23 this 12 months, USA Cricket said that ACE had violated main contractual phrases: delayed funds, missed infrastructure deadlines, governance interference, and worldwide overreach. ACE, in flip, denied wrongdoing, claiming that USA Cricket had mischaracterised the Term Sheet and had failed to fulfill its personal obligations.

Why this deal was at all times completely different

In most mature U.S. sports activities, nationwide staff governance is insulated from skilled league management. Take basketball, for instance. USA Basketball, a non-profit governing physique, runs the Olympic programme, whereas the NBA’s privately owned franchises handle the business league. The NBA doesn’t personal or fund USA Basketball; cooperation sometimes means participant launch and scheduling alignment, not a monetary lifeline.

But USA Cricket’s 2019 settlement flipped that script. ACE was granted sweeping management: full business rights, infrastructure obligations, and funding obligations for elite cricket — multi functional bundled deal. In return, USA Cricket would obtain a 5% share of all cricket revenues and assured minimal funds.

That dependency — uncommon in American sports activities — now sits on the coronary heart of a governance disaster.

A billion-dollar deal underneath overview

USA Cricket’s June breach discover charged ACE with a number of failures. A detailed examination of the Term Sheet, ACE’s July 8 rebuttal, and supporting authorized paperwork reveals the next:

Alleged breaches

Stadium supply failure: The contract required six ICC-standard stadiums by 2024 (later prolonged by a 12 months attributable to COVID-19). Only one (Grand Prairie, Texas) is full, and ACE has shifted the duty of constructing infrastructure to MLC franchises with out USA Cricket’s written consent. Section 24 of the Term Sheet states: “Except in the event of a transfer to an affiliate, the Agreement, including USA Cricket’s exclusive license for Major and Minor Leagues, is transferable or assignable to another party only with the written consent of USA Cricket.”

The Morrisville, Lauderhill, and Oakland stadiums will not be owned or solely operated by ACE, and it has pushed the completion timelines to 2028, effectively exterior the agreed timeline within the Term Sheet. The Term Sheet states in Section 5.1 that ACE should “make commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that the stadiums will be operational by no later than 2024” and that it should management “all stadium events and activities”.

Revenue share dilution: The Term Sheet entitles USA Cricket to five% of all gross cricket-related revenues. ACE’s plan to devolve native sponsorships and media offers to franchises (beginning 2027) dangers shrinking that pool — and with it, USA Cricket’s share.

Unapproved enlargement: ACE’s push for a Toronto-based franchise and a strategic tie-up with New Zealand Cricket was initiated with out USA Cricket’s sign-off. The March 2025 ICC sanctioning requirements require that when an occasion is staged in a single federation’s jurisdiction however performed (in complete or half) in one other’s territory, each nationwide our bodies should log off. USA Cricket says no such approval was sought for ACE’s plans exterior the U.S.

ACE’s response to that is that the occasions haven’t occurred but and that it’ll comply with the ICC guidelines, if and once they do.

Player/employees wage shortfall: USA Cricket cited a $606,189 (participant and employees fee for a interval of July 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024) and a $647,603 (January 1, 2025 to June 23, 2025) fee lapse. ACE responded with data exhibiting $1.43 million paid in 2024 to gamers, coaches, and employees eligible for U.S. nationwide groups.

ACE calculated the fee made based mostly on the MLC Draft wage paid by franchisees to U.S. home gamers in accordance with Term 3.3: “… The amounts, structure and format of the contracts for the players, coaches and support staff will be the sole discretion of ACE, or the JV, as applicable” and three.4 which states: “All contracts for professional players for the Major League will include the ability for the players to represent the USA National teams, subject to the players’ selection for such representation.”

But USA Cricket has objected to ACE’s place that “the entirety of a salary paid to an MLC player can or should be offset against ACE’s obligations under the Term Sheet” and has accused ACE of “essentially using USA Cricket to fund its MLC player salaries”.

Viewed from an Indian or IPL context, ACE’s argument would basically imply Indian Test captain Shubman Gill’s annual BCCI central contract of ₹5 crore and his match charges ought to be offset in opposition to his Gujarat Titans IPL wage of ₹16.5 crore.

No High-Performance Centre?: Though promised by 2020, ACE maintains that the Grand Prairie venue at present serves that position. However, sources inside USA Cricket say that the stadium doesn’t meet the definition or minimal infrastructure requirements of a totally operational High-Performance Centre, and that it was not developed in real session with USA Cricket, regardless of claims on the contrary.

No Minor League Cricket (MiLC) in 2025: The Term Sheet permits ACE to run Minor League Cricket however doesn’t mandate it yearly. So far, the League has seen 4 seasons since 2021. And whereas USA Cricket acknowledges that the Term Sheet contains the launch of MiLC, “it feels the spirit and intent of the agreement clearly require the sustainable and continuous operation of developmental competitions”. ACE is but to announce dates for the MiLC 2025 calendar.

While there isn’t a documentation accessible with this publication to help USA Cricket’s claims that ACE meddled in athlete elections or staff choice, USA Cricket insists that “the application of ACE’s ‘good faith discretion’ under the Term Sheet is being misused to influence national team selections, specifically by promoting the inclusion of MLC-contracted players who meet only the minimum ICC domicile criteria”.

USA Cricket’s personal funds: a home constructed on sand

The monetary squeeze behind the confrontation is seen on the steadiness sheet. USA Cricket ended 2023 with simply $52,533 in money in opposition to $615,110 in present liabilities. Receivables swelled to $505,689, and disclosures present $439,000 of that tied to ACE. When the governing physique’s short-term survival is determined by gathering from the identical private accomplice it accuses of breach, leverage runs a technique. The audit additionally studies persevering with destructive working money circulate, reinforcing how shortly funding gaps can develop into existential.

“… the organisation had a net asset deficiency, negative cash flows from operating activities, and total current liabilities exceeding total current assets. The ability… to continue as a going concern is dependent upon management’s plan,” the USA Cricket auditors famous.

The notice additional said that USA Cricket’s potential to function is determined by continued grants from the ICC and advances/contract income from ACE, exactly the entities whose funds and efficiency at the moment are in dispute. In the identical submitting, USA Cricket disclosed that 48% of its 2023 contributions got here from the ICC and 12% from ACE, underscoring how concentrated that lifeline is.

Conflict of curiosity

Internal emails additionally reveal that Paraag Marathe, the USA Cricket Chairman between 2018 and 2022, held a consulting settlement with Times Internet (UK) — a key ACE backer and Willow TV (the one 24×7 stay cricket channel within the USA and the official broadcaster for MLC) proprietor — whereas the Term Sheet was being finalised in 2019. He reportedly disclosed it solely in late 2021.

The letter from the USA Cricket counsel states: “Under this agreement, Mr. Marathe is to provide general consulting services to Times Internet (UK) Limited related to (1) sponsorship opportunities in the mainstream U.S. sports advertising space, (2) growing Times Internet (UK) Limited’s business, and (3) media rights and distribution opportunities for Willow TV. Although the financial terms of this agreement and the agreement with ACE are redacted, Mr. Marathe informs me that the financial payment from the Times Internet (UK) Limited agreement is approximately 5% of the payments owed under the ACE agreement.”

Marathe isn’t any minor participant within the U.S. sports activities world. He serves as President of 49ers Enterprises and Executive Vice-President of Football Operations for the San Francisco 49ers, and chairs Leeds United in England.

In a communication between USA Cricket and its lawyer, which this publication has seen, authorized counsel warned in 2021 that whereas the association may not technically breach USA Cricket coverage, it created a powerful notion drawback and urged Marathe to recuse himself from selections involving Times Internet (UK).

In a authorized advisory to USA Cricket, board counsel wrote: “Although I don’t believe that the agreement causes Mr. Marathe to have a direct conflict of interest under USA Cricket’s Conflict of Interest Policy, there is still a need under the policy to avoid the perception of, or potential for, a conflict.

“Therefore… my advice would be: Mr. Marathe should excuse himself from any formal or informal discussions related to the relationship between USA Cricket and Times Internet (UK) Limited and/or Willow TV, and should take no part in any discussion or vote… If there is any question or dispute… the CEO of USA Cricket should determine whether Mr. Marathe should be excused…”

The Term Sheet, drawn up when Marathe was Chairman of ACE, vests ACE with extraordinary power:

Section 13 (Audit rights): USAC can audit ACE solely as soon as yearly by way of a mutually agreed third social gathering — a clause so restrictive that significant monetary oversight turns into impractical.

Sections 3, 5, 24 (Infrastructure): ACE can assign infrastructure obligations to associates with out new consent.

Sections 4-9 (League selections): All business, format, and enlargement selections relaxation with ACE, not USAC.

Section 22 (Termination): ACE faces no penalty for withholding funds whereas disputes are unresolved. USAC’s termination rights require lengthy “cure” home windows, delaying enforcement.

This association flies within the face of normal U.S. sports activities governance, the place the National Governing Bodies (NGB), for instance, USA Basketball, preserve independence from league operators just like the NBA. It is a degree of authority hardly ever seen in U.S. sports activities partnerships. While this mannequin helped fast-track skilled cricket within the U.S., it additionally left USA Cricket closely reliant on one private accomplice, with restricted audit rights and few enforcement mechanisms if disputes come up.

That dependency has amplified the strain on USA Cricket to strengthen its governance framework. Under the revised structure, up to date in line with U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) tips, the board has expanded from 10 to 12 administrators, with two further seats allotted to participant representatives — growing their complete to 4.

The final elections had been held in a staggered method — impartial administrators in February 2024, participant administrators way back to August 2022, and membership administrators in July 2023.

As per the official USA Cricket web site, the board at present has 10 seats, with three vacant. Both participant administrators — Nadia T. Gruny and Srini Salver — have phrases that led to 2024, whereas Chairman Venu Pisike’s time period runs till December 31, 2025.

To be a part of the Olympic system, USA Cricket should additionally meet the USOPC requirements: impartial governance, enforceable battle of curiosity guidelines, monetary transparency, and a board during which “athlete representatives will equal at least 33.3% of all NGB boards of directors, executive boards, and other governing boards”.

Just earlier than the ICC AGM, an ESPNcricinfo report prompt that the ICC had proposed a full resignation of the USA Cricket board as a part of the street map for Olympic certification. However, the vast majority of board members have declined to resign, stating that it was solely one of many three choices prompt by the USOPC.

In March this 12 months, three former administrators — Patricia Whittaker, Kuljit Singh Nijjar, and Arjun Rao Gona — faraway from the board in December 2024, joined present director Atul Rai in suing the organisation and 6 sitting administrators individually, alleging wrongful termination, governance lapses, and retaliation.

Can USA Cricket nonetheless govern the game? Without impartial management, robust audit rights, or leverage over its personal revenues, USA Cricket dangers failing its core mandate. The penalties transcend league disputes — the board’s very legitimacy, and its Olympic future, could dangle within the steadiness.

Olympic stakes: USOPC certification danger

Cricket’s inclusion on the Los Angeles 2028 Olympics offers this dispute regulatory tooth. In 2023, cricket was amongst 5 new sports activities authorised for the LA28 programme by the International Olympic Committee (IOC), pushed partially by the huge viewers the sport instructions within the Indian subcontinent. As host, the United States is predicted to area each males’s and ladies’s groups in a six-team medal competitors.

The stakes had been underscored in June 2024 when the U.S. co-hosted the lads’s T20 World Cup, staging matches throughout three venues — high-visibility proof of market potential forward of LA28.

USA Cricket is an Associate Member of the ICC, not a Full Member — a standing that comes with restricted voting power and funding and that locations a premium on demonstrating strong governance and growth pathways to progress inside the ICC system.

Simply put, the construction of USA Cricket’s deal with ACE dangers placing it in violation of a number of governance requirements laid out by the USOPC, the ICC, and the Ted Stevens Act — the U.S. legislation that defines the framework for NGBs and their relationship with the USOPC.

Autonomy undermined

Section 220522.5 of the Ted Stevens Act calls for that an NGB “demonstrates that it is autonomous in the governance of its sport, except with respect to the oversight of the organisation, in that it — (A) independently decides and controls all matters central to governance; (B) does not delegate decision-making and control of matters central to governance; and (C) is free from outside restraint.”

But USA Cricket’s core operations — funding, league construction, infrastructure, scheduling — are managed by ACE as per the Term Sheet (Sections 3, 4, 5, 22). USA Cricket’s personal audited financials present dependency on ACE advances to remain afloat — a breach of each spirit and letter.

Code of conduct issues

Under 8.4.1 (a) (vi, vii) of the USOPC Bylaws, an NGB should “adopt and enforce a code of conduct for its employees, members, board of directors, and officers, including clear conflicts of interest principles, and adopt and enforce ethics policies and procedures”.

USA Cricket’s authorized counsel at the moment acknowledged that then-chair Marathe had a concurrent consulting contract with Times Internet (UK).

USA Cricket and Marathe’s failure to reveal the above truth or recuse Marathein the course of the 2019 deal-making section violates the “enforceability” requirement of the USOPC.

Lack of economic transparency

The USOPC Bylaw 8.4.1 (b), which lays down “Financial Standards and Reporting Practices” as a part of Certification Standards for National Governing Bodies, requires each NGB to “(i) demonstrate financial operational capability to administer its sport; (ii) be financially and operationally transparent and accountable to its members and to the corporation [the USOPC]; (iii) adopt a budget and maintain accurate accounting records in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP); (iv) submit its complete IRS Form 990 and audited financial statements, including management letter and budget, to the corporation annually; (v) post on its website its current bylaws and other organic documents, its IRS form 990 for the three most recent years, and its audited financial statements for the three most recent years; (vi) satisfy such other requirements as are set forth by the corporation”.

The Term Sheet’s Section 13 restricts USA Cricket’s audit rights. It says USA Cricket should negotiate and agree upon a mutually acceptable auditor, with rights restricted to at least one annual overview. Any dispute triggers a expensive arbitration mechanism, making full oversight impractical and opaque.

ICC’s ‘no government (or other public or quasi-public body) interference’ rule

According to article 2.4, clause D of the ICC Memorandum & Articles of Association, every member should always “manage its affairs autonomously and ensure that there is no government (or other public or quasi-public body) interference in its governance, regulation and/or administration of Cricket in its Cricket Playing Country (including in operational matters, in the selection and management of teams, and in the appointment of coaches or support personnel)“.

Given that ACE controls the MLC and MiLC structure, funds national team salaries and venues, owns revenue-generating rights, and can withhold payments based on its sole discretion, the ICC could classify ACE’s position as private interference, potentially triggering a review or suspension, especially with Olympic certification on the line.

How cricket boards are structured globally

Most national cricket bodies operate as independent member associations or non-profit federations that administer domestic competitions, select national teams, and interface with the ICC.

While governments may provide funding, security, or stadium support, the ICC requires that boards “manage their affairs autonomously” and guarantee “no government (or other public or quasi-public body) interference” in governance or administration.

Recent examples of ICC motion

The ICC sometimes penalises boards for governance failures tied to authorities interference. USA Cricket’s case is uncommon, stemming from private overreach, however the precept of autonomy stays the identical.

Sri Lanka (2023): Sri Lanka Cricket was suspended on November 10, 2023, for failing to “manage its affairs autonomously” and permitting authorities interference. The ICC lifted the ban in early 2024, saying it was happy SLC had restored compliance with membership obligations.

Zimbabwe (2019): ICC froze funding and barred the staff after a authorities fee took management of Zimbabwe Cricket. It was reinstated as soon as governance circumstances had been met.

Nepal (2016): The Cricket Association of Nepal was suspended following authorities involvement and disputed elections, and was readmitted on a conditional foundation after reforms had been effected and elections held in 2019.

These instances underline the chance for USA Cricket; whereas many international locations are penalised for state interference, the U.S. problem is sort of the mirror reverse — private overreach concentrated in a long-term business accomplice. If autonomy is the check, the type of management ought to matter much less to the ICC than the very fact of it.

The ICC has begun taking steps to “reset” and overhaul the management and governance constructions of USA Cricket, following issues raised by the USOPC about whether or not USA Cricket meets the independence and athlete-representation requirements required for Olympic recognition.

Is it conceivable {that a} sport is launched within the Olympics with out the host nation fielding a staff within the occasion? History’s reply is intriguing. Cricket debuted, as a one-off, within the Paris Summer Olympics in 1900. Great Britain, represented by the Devon and Somerset Wanderers, a membership facet, and a staff often known as All Paris, comprising largely British emigrants residing in France and probably together with a few French gamers, competed — and, unsurprisingly, Great Britain triumphed. The profitable staff was awarded silver medals and the loser bronze. The medals had been later transformed to gold and silver, respectively.

As host, the U.S. nationwide staff is assured a spot on the Games. But the actual query is: when cricket takes the stage underneath the Olympic flame, who might be calling the pictures — USA Cricket, or another person nominated by the USOPC? The sporting world might be watching.

Response from ACE

Sportstar reached out to ACE with a number of questions associated to the structural governance points, together with operational transparency within the USA Cricket-ACE partnership and battle of curiosity. In response, ACE said: “The questions you have raised reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of the Term Sheet and the relationship between USAC and ACE, and are both inaccurate and misleading.”

“We are unable to comment further, as the Term Sheet is confidential and both parties are bound by strict confidentiality obligations,” it added.

(With inputs from Santadeep Dey and Dhruva Prasad)

Advertisement

Previous Post

Next Post

Loading Next Post...
Loading

Signing-in 3 seconds...

Signing-up 3 seconds...