The Board of Control for Cricket in India on Friday rejected the International Cricket Council's "final offer" on players' contracts and called a general body meeting on December 25, in Kolkata, to discuss the stand-off.

BCCI president Jagmohan Dalmiya told reporters in Kolkata that the board is "shocked" at the ICC's public disclosure of the on-going discussions on the contentious players' contracts for the World Cup.

"We are shocked that the ICC did not think it proper to even maintain some decorum in informing us that the issue was not confidential any more. We feel let down," Dalmiya rued.

He said BCCI officials held a meeting on Friday and could not agree with the "final offer" made by the ICC.

"First, we would like to clarify that it was not during my tenure as ICC president that these restrictive clauses were incorporated in the contract with sponsors. I can say that the contract was drawn up and signed on June 24, 2000, when I was the ICC president.

"But it did not have any restrictive clauses then. I laid down the ICC office in June, 2000 and till then there were so such clauses in the contract. So, we question the ICC when were these restrictive clauses incorporated in the contract and who authorised these contentious clauses and signed the contract?" a visibly upset Dalmiya,  flanked by board secretary S.K Nair, asked.

The board chief asked the ICC to clarify which meeting of its executive committee, or IDI board or cricket committee management, had the restrictive clauses adopted.

Dalmiya said the players (read Indian cricketers) could not be forced to break their pre-existing contracts and referred to the 1977 court case against ICC by players like Tony Greig, Mike Proctor and John Snow, who had challenged the international body for forcing them to ignore their pre-existing contracts with personal sponsors.

Referring to the ICC's "final offer", Dalmiya said while the former had offered to bring down the period of contract to 30 days before, during the tournament and five days after it (20 days in case of the finalists), the Indian board wants the contract to remain effective for only during the period of the tournament.

"The restrictive clauses should not be there for any duration before or after the tournament,  but only during it," Dalmiya said.

Asked if there could be two sets of rules governing players in the World Cup, Dalmiya quipped: "Why not? There can be two sets of rules -- one for the other players and the other for the Indian players. After all, 80 per cent of ICC's money comes because of India."

The BCCI wants the imaging rights to remain in force for two months and not three months as is being offered by the ICC. Originally, the ICC sponsors wanted the imaging rights of the players for six months.

Dalmiya also said all players who had conflicting sponsorship interest like Sachin Tendulkar and Virendra Sehwag should be spared from the imaging clause.

"This is a major issue and so we have called an emergent special general meeting on December 25 in Kolkata to take a final view on the issue," Dalmiya added. 

He informed that the BCCI would hold a tele-conference with the IDI board of directors on Monday next in which it will seek time to respond after its emergent general meeting.

Asked if the BCCI would be able to annouce the final 15-member team for the World Cup by the December 31 ICC deadline, he said: "January 14 is the last date for the players to sign the contract. So, we will see. Let's hope we can."

Dalmiya concluded by saying that the ICC is "pushing the Indian board to the point of impossibility".

"It is not an insurmountable problem. We are not saying we will not budge. BCCI too wants to send the best Indian team," he said.