Howard's nomination was withdrawn Wednesday at an ICC executive board meeting in Singapore, where up to six of the 10 full members of the sport's world governing body signed a letter opposing him as the next ICC vice-president.Becoming vice-president would have given Howard an unopposed path to the ICC presidency in 2012, but his nomination ran into opposition from Zimbabwe and South Africa over his past criticism of the Robert Mugabe regime and from Sri Lanka, which opposes his nomination because he's has no experience in cricket administration.Howard said he hadn't been given a reason for the decision, but suspected it was because of his political past."That's not been said although it's been widely speculated," Howard told Sky News in Australia late Wednesday. "Even in private discussions they are very reluctant to give a particular reason. It's a very unusual situation." Cricket Australia and New Zealand officials said they were frustrated and disappointed that Howard's nomination had not received more support. Only England joined Australia and New Zealand in supporting the nomination among the 10 board members, far short of the seven votes needed for approval.The two governing bodies continued to argue that Howard was the best man for the job since he was an international statesman with significant leadership and administrative skills.Cricket Australia chairman Jack Clarke said there had been no vote but that the nomination was pulled following a letter submitted Tuesday by several cricketing boards opposing Howard. He said no reason was given publicly for the rejection, which left both boards upset."We're pretty gutted here, I've got to say," Clarke told reporters. "We're incredibly disappointed that a man of John Howard's stature was knocked off from his job. He's such an eminent person who has been through the most exhausted process ever to get this job." Clarke said he and his counterpart in New Zealand, Alan Isaac, would go back to their respective boards to consider the next move. They did not say whether they would resubmit Howard's nomination or propose a new candidate. Nor did they discuss a possible replacement for Howard.Howard said he had no political agenda, but it would be a "badge of honor" if Zimbabwe and South Africa had rejected him because of his hard-line opposition while in office to Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe.Howard's nomination, by the Australian and New Zealand cricket boards, was originally supposed to be rubber-stamped in April.Now the ICC has asked Australia and New Zealand to submit a new candidate by the end of August. The ICC declined further comment until an official news conference Thursday.Wednesday's development, though, appears to end Howard's bid to lead world cricket's governing body.A brusque conservative, he was Australian Prime Minister for 11 years before his Coalition government was swept from power in 2007.And while he has been a regular attendee at test matches and describes himself as a "cricket tragic," he doesn't have experience as a cricket administrator.His name should have been submitted in January but even Australia and New Zealand initially were divided over his selection.Australia strongly supported Howard while New Zealand backed its former chairman and ICC representative Sir John Anderson.The countries finally settled on Howard and the ICC executive board was supposed to accept the nomination in April — but officials claimed travel disruptions due to the volcanic ash cloud in Europe made that impossible. But sources close to the ICC said it was delayed over the growing opposition on the board to Howard's nomination.Zimbabwe, which in the past has labeled Howard racist and was angered at his successful efforts to keep it out of the Commonwealth, has spearheaded the opposition.Pakistan and Sri Lankan officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue ahead of Wednesday's meeting, said their boards had been leaning against the nomination.That left the nomination hinging on India, which is the financial powerbase of the sport and carries enormous weight at the administrative level. If India backed the Asian bloc, as reports of the letter suggest, Howard's nomination became untenable.
