The furore over World Cup contracts intensified on Friday after the Indian government announced that it would support its cricketing establishment as they tussle with the International Cricket Council (ICC), the game's governing body. Vikram Verma, India's Minister of Sport, urged the ICC to adopt "a practical approach" while trying to resolve the differences with India. "As long as the stand is in the interest of the game and country, the government is with the players and will extend all possible help in the matter," said Verma. There is now the very real possibility of India boycotting the event unless the ICC make further alterations to the ambush marketing clauses in the players' contracts. "No one wants to stay away from the World Cup, but we have already said the current set of contracts are not acceptable to us or the players," said a BCCI official. "It's for the ICC and the tournament's sponsors to decide. The ball is in their court." On Wednesday, the BCCI had announced their support for the players, a decision which makes a direct clash with the International Cricket Council (ICC) almost inevitable.

"We've decided to stand by our players on the ICC World Cup contracts issue," Jagmohan Dalmiya, BCCI president, announced after an emergency board meeting in Kolkata. "Certain restrictive clauses in the proposed ICC contracts are unjustified and the Indian board will not be a party in an attempt to induce the players to break existing contracts."

The proposed ICC contracts bar players from advertising products that conflict with those of the official tournament sponsors, even if they have existing deals, a situation almost identical to the one which threatened to derail the ICC Champions Trophy in September. The BCCI did make one concession though, agreeing to abide by the December 31 deadline for naming the 15-man squad to the World Cup.

"We are not on a warpath with ICC and want an amicable solution," said Dalmiya. "The Indian sponsors and Indian partners of global concerns should grant dispensation to players and help pave the way for them to participate in the World Cup. We are hopeful that sponsors will act in the larger interests of the country and its players. Otherwise, we will be forced to review commercial relations with them."

ICC welcomed the Indian board's decision to honour the December 31 deadline, even as official sponsors of the World Cup rejected BCCI's appeal to make concessions in their sponsorship rights to allow India's top players to participate.

Malcolm Gray, president of ICC, said that they had been seeking nothing more than what the Indian board had agreed to when it signed the Participating Nations Agreement (PNA) in March.

"The critical issue is to ensure that the best team represents India at the ICC World Cup 2003. That is what the players want. This is what the people of India want and this is what the rest of the cricketing world wants.

"It is up to the BCCI to make sure that this happens. It has the right and responsibility to select its team and to ensure that its players play under the terms that the BCCI first agreed with ICC in March 2002 and which ICC has subsequently negotiated a number of concessions to."

Meanwhile, the official sponsors asked the BCCI to direct their appeal at the competing companies. Ganesh Mahalingam, general manager (marketing) of LG Electronics - one of the official sponsors - ruled out the possibility of making further allowances, unless offered adequate compensation.

"We will be ready to dilute our rights if Mr. Dalmiya ensures that we are offered $15 million as compensation - 50 percent of the money we have invested into the World Cup. We haven't pumped in so much money to forego our rights."

Last week, ICC made a final offer after the Indian board refused to agree to the original terms. The compromise deal would have reduced the post-tournament ban on ads for rival sponsors to just five days, except for those teams that reach the finals, who would have faced a restriction of 20 days or until their next one-day international or Test match, whichever came sooner. ICC originally sought to impose a 30-day ban before, after and during the World Cup.

India's players, who had said they would forego rival deals for the length of the tournament, later wanted to alter the restriction to just the days on which they played in televised matches. They also expressed concern about their tournament image rights, only wanting ICC to use them for two months after the event. ICC have since offered a three-month period as opposed to the original six.

© Wisden CricInfo Ltd