General Cricket Discussion
- Thread starter aussie1st
- Start date
A.P Haux
The Meowest Avenger
Why exactly should one have to comply with the idiosyncracies/habits of other opposition players in international level? Nothing Moin did was against the rules of cricket as far as I can see. I think that the core spirit of the game also lies on these mind games where the opponent forces you to consider and overcome different scenario's you never thought about before. I would have said it different if it was not just a running technique from Sachin and a genuine problem he could never overcome physically or mentally. Then exploiting that would be against the spirit of cricket. But it's not. Which Imo makes the game more entertaining and unpredictable.
Paranoid Kendroid
Alive In The Superunknown
- Joined
- May 19, 2022
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
Cover of Wisden Cricket Monthly #69
wasteyouryouth
Verified
GuyIncognito
ICC Board Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2014
- Location
- Melbourne
- Profile Flag
- Australia
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
And the responses are the same
Also, West Indies have won a women's ICC tournament.
I dunno, India could do with that extra 4.58% of financing.
Till Valhalla
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2011
- Profile Flag
- Papua New Guinea
I didn't know your name is Vikrant Gupta.
Pinch hitter
Smash… Smash… Smash!
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
Find the chart which shows India's contribution to ICC and world cricket's Finance...
And also, West Indies will earn more money from India's tour than ICC share...
Greetings all:
I have another Laws of Cricket question to which I've not be able to find the answer.
If the fielding team attempts a run out via a direct-hit, dislodges the bails, but the runner is not out, and then the runners attempt to score another run, is the fielding team only able to attempt a subsequent run out at the opposite wicket?
Thank you.
I have another Laws of Cricket question to which I've not be able to find the answer.
If the fielding team attempts a run out via a direct-hit, dislodges the bails, but the runner is not out, and then the runners attempt to score another run, is the fielding team only able to attempt a subsequent run out at the opposite wicket?
Thank you.
pillowprocter
Panel of Selectors
No, this is a kind of weird process. If the fielding team wants to attempt to run out a batsman again at the same end (same wicket), on the same delivery then:
A player has to take a stump out of the ground while having the ball in his hand.
Bevab
Staff Member
There is a huge problem with this viewpoint that I see ignored badly on social media where it is argued in… let’s say more aggressive language.
The BCCI isn’t competing against other cricket boards in the long run, it’ll be competing against other sports and entertainment for interest and funds. Sure, the BCCI can pretend to be benevolent by claiming that they don’t take any revenue their presence generates in the Asian Cricket Council or by giving back more than they create technically but in the long run it doesn’t matter if the sport as a whole isn’t attractive enough to new audiences globally or if it is overshadowed by other forms of entertainment which has been happening steadily.
The other argument is that the BCCI needs a big share of the pie they’re responsible for in the first place because it is necessary for their own domestic cricket system and grassroots cricket… now this is an argument that is very compelling. India isn’t a first world country that can get the type of funding for sports possible in other first world countries and the onus is partly also on said countries to generate sustainable interest in the sport in the first place. The counter to this is that some of the countries that are struggling like the Carribean ones are much poorer and others like South Africa, Sri Lanka and Pakistan are/were in economic and/or political turmoil. There is also the issue of just how much money is truly reinvested into the lower levels of the game in India, the scene is a lot better compared to the past for sure but you also have corruption and nepotism rampant just like in the past, it’s just shinier with more money and legalised now.
If the BCCI does want to take an overwhelming portion of the funding because they feel it belongs to them by virtue of being the primary generator of said funds then they have to be custodians of the game by nature. I’m struggling to see them actually fulfil that role or show much interest in it unless it benefits their overlord’s political and economic goals (marquee ICC events for publicity, the support of Afghanistan to become a full member).
They’re also entirely unsure of how to grow the game in reality or what their vision for the future of the sport is…
- They’re unhappy with the private franchise owners branching out in other countries with replica T20 teams which means they’d rather have it all locked in the Indian market without necessarily globalising the game, something that is proven by their reluctance to let their players participate in any form of overseas T20 leagues.
- They want to make their cash-cow and child in the IPL something akin to a marquee event in the cricket calendar with how they’ve pushed for it being given a FTP free window to attract the cream of overseas pros, all of the investment plus focus provided and even not worrying about the national side failing to perform or win games in ICC events.
- Yet, they’re also disinterested in other country leagues being good enough to supply them with said players. One of the reasons they don’t want their players playing in other leagues is because of wanting them to play domestic cricket in a format that is the antithesis of what the IPL stands for. It’s also a format they want to protect to an extent and give importance to whilst caring about? Oh and to top it all off as pointed earlier they don’t mind the side then failing to perform due to a lack of prep time in said format as a result of the IPL. What is the real focus of the BCCI?
- As already pointed out they want the money to reinvest in their own systems. Despite that, IPL pros are quite underpaid in comparison to the revenue they generate (and compared to other sports) while the auction system and it’s way of handing out one way contracts isn’t player friendly at all no matter how much they try to pretend that one new player getting a couple of arrogant rich people to blow cash on them is proof of the system working.
To me it seems like the BCCI has no real plan for the sport in the future other than raking in as much money as possible in the short term whilst acting as the benevolent ruler for the political influence and power trip. They’re brashly confident that they have enough of a significant following in India and her overseas expats to sustain them in the future without any planning and who knows, they may be right unless other sports gain a renewed interest or the AIFF steps their game up. It’s a shame because you gotta walk the talk IMO if you’re intent on taking the money and the decision making power with you. Quite simply put, the BCCI has to do better.
wasteyouryouth
Verified
10/10. No notes.There is a huge problem with this viewpoint that I see ignored badly on social media where it is argued in… let’s say more aggressive language.
The BCCI isn’t competing against other cricket boards in the long run, it’ll be competing against other sports and entertainment for interest and funds. Sure, the BCCI can pretend to be benevolent by claiming that they don’t take any revenue their presence generates in the Asian Cricket Council or by giving back more than they create technically but in the long run it doesn’t matter if the sport as a whole isn’t attractive enough to new audiences globally or if it is overshadowed by other forms of entertainment which has been happening steadily.
The other argument is that the BCCI needs a big share of the pie they’re responsible for in the first place because it is necessary for their own domestic cricket system and grassroots cricket… now this is an argument that is very compelling. India isn’t a first world country that can get the type of funding for sports possible in other first world countries and the onus is partly also on said countries to generate sustainable interest in the sport in the first place. The counter to this is that some of the countries that are struggling like the Carribean ones are much poorer and others like South Africa, Sri Lanka and Pakistan are/were in economic and/or political turmoil. There is also the issue of just how much money is truly reinvested into the lower levels of the game in India, the scene is a lot better compared to the past for sure but you also have corruption and nepotism rampant just like in the past, it’s just shinier with more money and legalised now.
If the BCCI does want to take an overwhelming portion of the funding because they feel it belongs to them by virtue of being the primary generator of said funds then they have to be custodians of the game by nature. I’m struggling to see them actually fulfil that role or show much interest in it unless it benefits their overlord’s political and economic goals (marquee ICC events for publicity, the support of Afghanistan to become a full member).
They’re also entirely unsure of how to grow the game in reality or what their vision for the future of the sport is…
- They’re unhappy with the private franchise owners branching out in other countries with replica T20 teams which means they’d rather have it all locked in the Indian market without necessarily globalising the game, something that is proven by their reluctance to let their players participate in any form of overseas T20 leagues.
- They want to make their cash-cow and child in the IPL something akin to a marquee event in the cricket calendar with how they’ve pushed for it being given a FTP free window to attract the cream of overseas pros, all of the investment plus focus provided and even not worrying about the national side failing to perform or win games in ICC events.
- Yet, they’re also disinterested in other country leagues being good enough to supply them with said players. One of the reasons they don’t want their players playing in other leagues is because of wanting them to play domestic cricket in a format that is the antithesis of what the IPL stands for. It’s also a format they want to protect to an extent and give importance to whilst caring about? Oh and to top it all off as pointed earlier they don’t mind the side then failing to perform due to a lack of prep time in said format as a result of the IPL. What is the real focus of the BCCI?
- As already pointed out they want the money to reinvest in their own systems. Despite that, IPL pros are quite underpaid in comparison to the revenue they generate (and compared to other sports) while the auction system and it’s way of handing out one way contracts isn’t player friendly at all no matter how much they try to pretend that one new player getting a couple of arrogant rich people to blow cash on them is proof of the system working.
To me it seems like the BCCI has no real plan for the sport in the future other than raking in as much money as possible in the short term whilst acting as the benevolent ruler for the political influence and power trip. They’re brashly confident that they have enough of a significant following in India and her overseas expats to sustain them in the future without any planning and who knows, they may be right unless other sports gain a renewed interest or the AIFF steps their game up. It’s a shame because you gotta walk the talk IMO if you’re intent on taking the money and the decision making power with you. Quite simply put, the BCCI has to do better.
CerealKiller
Staff Member
But India doesn’t generate that money by having India A play India B, it’s because other nations play them and play a role in that too.
Similarly, an IPL without international players would essentially be a franchise version of the Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy, and wouldn’t be worth nearly as much.
So it’s not just India that generates the revenue, and I think it’s fair that it’s more evenly shared.
pillowprocter
Panel of Selectors
@USA33 this video shows an example of what you're asking
Thank you, sir.
