formidable challenge to the wicb he has managed to have his way thanks to support from 14 excricketers of the region but primarily due to his financial power7 sponsorsthe allegation is yet to gather conclusive proof in the indian context but it is true that the sponsor has had the last word elsewhere many agree with him the most recent of numerous instances wherein governments have decided where cricket teams wont play was in may 2007 when the australian government barred the national team from touring zimbabwe for a series in september6 in november 2001 the indian and south african boards rejected the authority of the icc by dispensing with mike denness the official match referee and playing an unofficial test at centurion right under the nose of the iccin the event of a team pulling out of a series citing security reasons as south africa most recently did by not participating in the odi triseries in sri lanka in august 2006 much to disappointment of the then icc president percy sonn the icc is practically powerless to initiate action or impose sanctions subsequently it looked on helplessly as another pcb tribunal overturned the bans and the pcb had its way3 national governmentssport and politics do mix the judiciaryfrom ruling that the live feed of what was supposed to be exclusive coverage for a particular tv company must be shared with the national broadcaster to deciding on the purview of the cricket board of that country the judiciary has often had a say in cricket in 1989 after the bcci banned six indian cricketers for ignoring its warning and playing friendly matches in the us and canada instead of returning home the players took the board to court and won the battle based on the ruling that the bccis ban was virtually a violation of a citizens right to freedom of action4 owing to the then whiteruled republics apartheid laws cape town bornbasil doliveiras inclusion in the england team to south africa in 1968 led to the tour being cancelled