In the proposed model, the BCCI is expected to receive 38.5% of an annual projected ICC earning of US$600 million, followed by the ECB with a 6.89% share, CA with 6.25% and the PCB with 5.75%. The remaining Full Member (FM) boards all receive an annual share of less than 5%. The shares for each board are the result of weightage given to four different criteria: an equal share for FM status, variable shares for cricket history and performance at ICC events for men and women, and a share for the commercial contribution each board makes to the game.

The commercial contribution weightage is what sets the BCCI apart from other boards and though Sethi agreed that India should receive a larger share, he said there needs to be more clarity where the figures are coming from.

"We are insisting that the ICC should tell us how these figures were arrived at," Sethi told Reuters. "We are not happy with the situation as it stands. Come June, when the board is expected to approve the financial model, unless these details are provided to us, we are not going to approve it."

This time round, the PCB apart, no board has publicly gone on record to say anything about the proposed model. Sethi said that two other Test-playing countries had also asked for more details on the workings of this model.

"In principle, India should get more, there is no doubt about that," Sethi said, "but… how is this table being developed?"

All FMs are due to receive considerably more income in this rights cycle than in the last, a result of the increased bounty for the ICC in this cycle. Part of that was down to how the ICC broke down and sold its broadcast rights; where the ICC historically sold broadcast rights to all its events as one property to one broadcaster globally, this time it broke up its rights across different territories, in four and eight-year packages as well as into linear TV rights or for digital streaming (or both). As a result, where the ICC received approximately USD$2.1 billion for eight years in the 2015-23 cycle, they will receive upwards of USD$3 billion for four years from the India market alone this time. That means that a number of boards could end up receiving more than double what they did in the previous cycle.