I'm still new to the opening studies so don't take my words too seriously, but the few games I've played with similar positions blunt the c4 bishop by 3...d6 after which they do a classic development with 4...Nc6 or go into a dragon-ish thing with 4...g6.
Again this is not set in stone so experiment with some friends what works out for you.
White hasn't done anything wrong, so ofcourse there is no refutation. Just develope your pieces and you should be fine. An e6/Be7/Nd7/a6/b5/Bb7 set-up would probably be ideal if you are a Najdorf/Schevinengin player, while a Nc6/g6/Bg7 set-up would probably be what a Dragon player is after. Just be careful of what you play on the next few moves though, as white can still play d4 transposing to an open sicilian, and you want to make sure you get into the right system when that happens, instead of being tricked by the move order into playing a line you know nothing about. Hope this helps.
you need help against the italian game in other words? What's wrong with continuing to develop like Nc6 Nf6...?
if you were planning on playing the classic najdorf, with e5 then yes you might find this annoying, but e6 works out fine and as a sicilian player you should feel comforable playing with this pawn structure
Thanks for the help! Personally, I'm a Dragon player, but an eventual transposition to the Scheveningen should do the trick as well. Now, I'm thinking, you rarely ever play e6 as Black in the Dragon, because of the weakness of the d6-pawn, but if White wants to transpose to the Yugoslav Attack (in which the d6-pawn really is a liability), then d3-d4 is not a good way to do it, I reckon (because of tempo losses), and if he doesn't play d4 in one move soon to achieve Be3, Qd2, 0-0-0 etc., then he probably won't opt for the Yugoslav, since he'll have to play non-Yugoslav moves in the meantime (excluding the pointlessly weakening h4, g4 etc.). So, as long as White doesn't open the position with d4, I can play a g6/Bg7/e6/a6/b5/Bg7/etc. setup, right?
Hmmm... I see a lot of confusion regarding the 3.Bc4 line. Well, I'm not one of those high rated players but I think it will be interesting for you to hear different opinion on this line.
As Black I will not play 3...e6, not that it is wrong, but with reasons I will explain later.
You will be confused if you think this is a Sicilian (Scheveningen/Sozin/Dragon). You have to see this as a King's Indian Attack or the positional Ruy Lopez, and have to understand the positional ideas behind those two openings.
Ruy Lopez is a strong opening, implementing strong positional ideas, but most players know the line by memorization so understanding is rarely needed, but here? I think that is why so many players now get busted by 3.Bc4.
If you look at it as a positional Ruy Lopez or the KIA, you will understand why this is not popular in GM level. It will hardly give them victories. GMs imo should have the required skill to benefit from the mainline of the open Sicilian.
There are some positional ideas in the Ruy Lopez and:
(1) Timing/tempo is the key to determine move order. For White, timing (based on position) is required to decide whether to go with d3 or d4. Most of the time it will be to d3 (because it is the closed positional intention from White) but at later stage White can still do the d3-d4 thrust so Black should be aware of it.
(2) Bc4 is the "Spanish bishop" that may become dangerous later on. Black's Nc6-Na5 is a threat to this bishop.
(3) Both players should be familiar with KIA ideas where White will quietly prepare for kingside attack
In the diagram position I will not play 3...e6 because I don't want to give White flexibility with his d-pawn (to win a tempo by doing d4 at once). I want White to commit 4.d3 by threatening his d4-pawn with 3...Nf6. If I delay this, White will have a tempo to defend his pawn with Re1. By not touching the e-pawn Black is trying to save a tempo because the bishop can still go to g7 (a-la Dragon).
If Black plays 3...e6, White will not turn this into the Scheveningen, but will keep the position closed (with d3 instead of d4). If the position is opened with d4-c5-pawns exchange, White's Bc4 will become misplaced and Black will win a tempo from the standard Scheveningen.
3...Nc6 is playable as long as Black is prepared with the Sozin Attack of the Classical Sicilian, that may come after 4.d4.
3...Nf6 is currently my option with the following "drawish?" endgame:
Thanks for the help! Personally, I'm a Dragon player, but an eventual transposition to the Scheveningen should do the trick as well. Now, I'm thinking, you rarely ever play e6 as Black in the Dragon, because of the weakness of the d6-pawn, but if White wants to transpose to the Yugoslav Attack (in which the d6-pawn really is a liability), then d3-d4 is not a good way to do it, I reckon (because of tempo losses), and if he doesn't play d4 in one move soon to achieve Be3, Qd2, 0-0-0 etc., then he probably won't opt for the Yugoslav, since he'll have to play non-Yugoslav moves in the meantime (excluding the pointlessly weakening h4, g4 etc.). So, as long as White doesn't open the position with d4, I can play a g6/Bg7/e6/a6/b5/Bg7/etc. setup, right?
Playing g6 as well as e6 can be a bit weakening. If you do so you must make sure that the d6 pawn does not become a problem if the d-file opens up.
Thanks a lot, yusuf_prasojo! However, there are two things you wrote that are somewhat confusing to me:
1. the Spanish Bishop should be Bb5, not Bc4; that's rather an Italian Bishop, or a Fischer Bishop in a Sicilian, if you prefer;
2. the above question regarding Bishop nomenclature I asked because White doesn't necessarily have to pursue the (after d3) c3/d4 plan which is employed in almost every line of the Ruy Lopez (although I don't know if it's his best try or not). If he wanted that, he could opt for the Delayed Alapin Variation as well. (But that's also covered by theory, so no worries here either.) Instead, White really could play Nc3. And then what? What should Black do shall he get into such position, like I did?
After 1.e4 d6 2.Nf3 c5 3.Bc4 all you do is continue to develop your pieces. I would play Nc6, or possibly Nf6 or g6 (planning Bg7), and at some point Bg4. I normally play the Dragon (accelerated) so I reach your position by 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 d6. I do not play e6 - the bishop is going to g7 so there is no need to open the f8-a3 diagonal.
Thanks a lot, yusuf_prasojo! However, there are two things you wrote that are somewhat confusing to me:
1. the Spanish Bishop should be Bb5, not Bc4; that's rather an Italian Bishop, or a Fischer Bishop in a Sicilian, if you prefer;
2. the above question regarding Bishop nomenclature I asked because White doesn't necessarily have to pursue the (after d3) c3/d4 plan which is employed in almost every line of the Ruy Lopez (although I don't know if it's his best try or not). If he wanted that, he could opt for the Delayed Alapin Variation as well. (But that's also covered by theory, so no worries here either.) Instead, White really could play Nc3. And then what? What should Black do shall he get into such position, like I did?
"Spanish Bishop" is the term usually ascociated with the bishop in the Spanish (Ruy Lopez) opening not in the Sicilian. But I call the bishop in this Sicilian line as "Spanish bishop" because they share the same positional ideas. It is not important whether the bishop goes to Bb5 or Bc4 first, it will eventually retreat to Bc2. Of course it doesn't have to go to Bc2, but that is the original intention, for reasons I will explain later.
In Ruy Lopez, White has a freedom/flexibility to play a sharp game with d4 or to play a closed positional line with d3. In this 3.Bc4 Sicilian, with "best" play from Black (i.e when Black doesn't want it), forcing an open Sicilian game (with d4) will only benefit Black. That's why White original intention with 3.Bc4 is to play a closed position (with d3), where one idea is to keep the "Spanish bishop" for later attack. This "forced" positional game is very similar with that positional game achievable from the Ruy Lopez. Only in the Ruy Lopez the position can be closed, not in Fischer Attack or Giuoco Pianno (Closed Italian has different ideas), so that's why it is more like a "Spanish bishop".
As for Nc3, like I said before, if White tries to force an open game, while he can't, just make sure to make his Bc4 misplaced (Don't make Bc4 become useful for White). This is a term to say that c4 is not a good square for the bishop, so he has to lose a tempo to "relocate" the bishop. Usually ...e6 is part of the plan (but more positional knowledge might be required).
OK, thanks once again! Gotta learn to neutralize that El Bishop! 
I would play 3. e6 because it blocks the bishop's diagonal. I have played 3. e6 all the time now when I see 3. Bc4 and I always get into a reasonable position. When I went over a game when my opponent played 3. Bc4 and I didn't respond 3. e6, a chess master recommended it to me. I don't mind if they play 4. d4 because I would get into a Sozin Najdorf (I'm a Najdorf player) after 4. cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Nc3 a6. I also agree with Big Try. Since I'm a Najdorf player, I usually go with the setup e6/a6/Nf6/Nbd7/Be7/0-0/b5/Bb7/Qc7/Rc8 and go for the d5 and e5 pawn breaks. I also usually try to harass the knight with b4 and win the e4 pawn. There is a ton of possibilities in this variation.
I HATE this variation, and I need help. It would be most appreciated. I'm only looking for a generally good way to play this line as Black (since I guess there's no clear refutation?), assuming White doesn't transpose to the Open Sicilian by playing d4, and most probably plays d3 instead at some point during the opening.