Yes. So technically money made by targetting India audience. Willow.tv had the 2007 world cup for like 249$. The moment India exited it was reduced to 49$. BCCI I am sure is very well aware of their worth and how much ICC makes because of them. ICC makes money in these events and gives every nation participation fee. The rest is used for development and operating expenses. If ICC is going to pay for this technology one of these fees is going to reduce. I don't think it is worth it. BCCI and every other board is unlikely to accept a reduced participation fee. The other option if for ICC to reduce the amount for associates which will be even more bad for the game. Cricinfo has more valid questions here
Decision Review System: Why there is a need to discuss DRS in its present form | Cricket Features | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo
That will happen if SL, WI, BCB, ZIM and NZ start making money.
Yes that was an excellent article & the questions raised are extremely valid. Especially the one about how the system will be payed for.
But the recent ridiculous ICC decision the make DRS mandatory without hawk-eye just because the BCCI does not trust it, has taken the potential sane discussion of the future of DRS 10 steps back-wards.
Trust me some boards , especially PCB likes this since they want to use this as a bargaining chip. ICC has some other changes to be discussed and PCB + some other boards are going to bargain with BCCI to stop them. I am pretty sure Ijazz Butt knows nothing about how it works.
Just look at how Pak fans accuse India of manipulating technology to win world cup
Was Hawk Eye Tampered with? - PakPassion - Pakistan Cricket Forum
Ajmal still baffled by Tendulkar lbw reversal - PakPassion - Pakistan Cricket Forum
Hawk-Eye dismisses doubts over Tendulkar lbw - PakPassion - Pakistan Cricket Forum.
Lets not drift too far into hypotheticals on what you think PAK cricket officials intentions may be in siding on the DRS issue.
As i mentioned in that portion of post. A strong sporting governing body is suppose to have the authority to make a decision & implement it across the board without fuss.
You said an Independent and strong ICC will make sure there is no govt. involvement in PCB and PCB will flourish. You also pointed out FIFA an example. The last time I checked countries like Libya, Saudi all had football teams affiliated with FIFA. I can tell with 100% confidence these countries control every bit of their football leagues. Same with olympic association. A strong ICC is not an answer to PCBs problems. A strong democratic govt is the soln.
When i say no government involvement i mean, when the team actually plays on the pitch or team is selected the government cannot interfere.
Perfect examples of this would be the 2010 world cup with the Nigeria & French governments.
I dont know if you follow football my friend but after both those nations crashed out of the world cup in the 1st round their government made strong proposals to get involve in the revamping of the team.
Then FIFA came out & said if those governments got involved those nations would be banned from international football. All football matters should be left to the countries sporting governing body. The countries immediately backed down & let their football federations deal with the team problems.
Plus although government may indeed play its role in some influencing in the football federations of Libya & S Arabia. If they even have a situation like one described above on world stage, FIFA will ban them. Thats how a strong sporting governing body suppose to act.
You miss the bigger picture here. Based on the argument, since only White players like cricket ICC should have never banned any team from visiting them during the appartheid era. It sucks but this has resulted in some talented guys like Nitni and Tshobe (need spell check
). India has insane quota's for people from lower castes in education and govt jobs. They have done great many wonders. Have you seen a cricket match in SA? Blacks/whites/Indians all go and support South Africa with pride. This has definitely had an impact. Some white players do not get oppurtinity, so did many blacks during the appartheied era. All this does is try to integrate people. Sacrifices need to be made for the greater good.
The situations back in the appartheid era was totally different to now.
Back then the world was very racial. People of colour up until the 1980s in most parts of the world were still fighting for their rights.
They few black/coloured players between 1890-1970 who may have been good enough to play for them is hardly relevant, given back then given how S Africa was structured coloures hardly knew about cricket, so technically S Africa didnt really miss out on a massive talent pool of playing coloured players in those 80 years.
Fast forward now to the post apparthied era of 1992 to today. In a general post racial cricket world. S Africa decision to force coloured players into their team who aren't talented enough is an appalling decision, many S African fans complain about it regularly.
S Africa have been lucky that they are generally strong enough to carry that passenger quota player in their squads/playing XI. But every now & then it hurts them.
Under a strong ICC structure S Africa could never had implemented quotas on a international level.
Did you even read it fully? What is the relevent section which says it is an international tournament? All its says they want an International feel. What does BCCI bullying have to do? If BCCI wants to start an Domestic tournament called "BCCI rocks" it is their right. ECB did not get our permission to organise county cricket. AUS did not ask permissing for Big bash. There was once a time when every India cricketer wanted to play County cricket for better pay. I dont remember anyone having problem then. 99% of IPL market is India. 7 players in each team is India. Highest paid cricketers are Indians.
That is what champions league is for. If IPL was to do an EPL type tournament then BCCI would have share more profits with other boards even though 80% of money would stil come from Indian. BCCI should be crazy to do that.
The champions league is whole different topic. Cricket cant have the IPL & C League in a yearly cricket calendar, thats T20 overkill especially when you have a T20 W Cup every two years. One of them has to go & its ridiculous that both have been given windows in the ICC FTP programme until 2020.
If the IPL was the EPL like T20 league in which is did not have the international player rule restriction & teams were picked on merit.I dont see how it would have to share profits with other boards at all. It would still be all India.
For the nth time it is an Indian tournament that BCCI wants to have absolute control. The quality of cricket may not be the greatest (compared to an EPL type tournament) but it has given the oppurtunity for numerous young Indian players to step up. I hope this will be benefinical financially and experience wise. CSK and MI are strong because they had brains not to throw away 900k on some Christian.
All that talk that they want to have an "international feel" is utter codswallop, they aint fooling nobody.
As i said before. We understand the ICC is ████ duck organistion & the BCCI is basically the bosses of cricket due to the money power it has in the game.
My point is simply that if the ICC was strong organisation, their is no way if the BCCI at the end of 2007, if they had brought up the proposal that they want to form an IPL that:
- would run annually from Apr-May
- have a international player restriction of just 4 players
Their is no way a strong ICC would have agreed to that. Some compromise would have been made. But none needed to be made since the BCCI being the defacto heads of the game, just got everything they wanted, which is the ludicrous part to entire cricket world.
Yes because no one knew him. At the end of the day the best players do not get to play for the country. The captain should know them,...there are some zonal requirements in BCCI as well. IPL has give a stage for the to perform and get noticed more easily.
How could no one know of him, if he was toping the Ranji trophy batting averages for the majority of the last 5 seasons?.
No. Indian selection process in itself is a huge mystery. Venugopal Rao , R. Satish comes to mind. They are never going to play for India.
I understand that. But i find it hard to believe that Ashwin would not have risen to the top had IPL not been around.
I still don't get it. IPL is SIX weeks long. How on earth can it destroy international cricket. COnsider that SIX weeks as vacation time for cricketers. IPL audience is 99% India. The rest of the world is interested only in bashing it. Cricketers deserve to earn some money as well. If NZ board does not have money to pay, they should be happy somone else is paying them. NZ board also gets a 10% cut.
Because quite obviously if players realize they can make millions play a diluted form of cricket for 6 weeks in year. It drastically changes what they see as important, thus the club vs country argument which threatens the future of international cricket.
Cricketers especially from the weak nations such as NZ, WI, SRI, PAK were not poor before the IPL. All their star players were well payed & were among st the riches people in their native countries. Its just that compared to other sports notably football & basketball - cricketers never got that kind of money.
Irony eh?? IPL players CHOSE to play in IPL. BCCI is definitely forcing Indian players to play. Probably they are forcing other boards to allow players to play. But they are NOT FORCING the foriegn players to be part of auction. The are there because they want money and THEY CHOSE to play. Reg. English cricket it is a pity that England has no home grown talent who is as good as these imports. That is why imports get selected.
I'm not too sure how you have managed to derived at a comparison with you ludicrous insulting comment on why foreign players play for England. Then drawing a link with foreign players in the IPL. The only irony here is your imagination here.
With regards to the IPL point. WELL OF COURSE players would go to the auction, their is no way you can expect players especially from those weak financial nations to get that money offered to them & they not take the opportunity. That the erudite "carrot & stick" policy the IPL has thrown at the cricket world.
The carrot = the big money, so as the attract the big players. So as the give the IPL an "international feel", since the IPL would be a even bigger joke without those stars.
The stick = the international player restriction. The dumb rule in which the BCCI managed to bully the the ████ duck ICC into accepting as a precondition in commencing the IPL.
You also should check your facts, England home grown talent is quite fine. Its just Trott, KP, Morgan in the team thats foreign. No one else & their is no young talented important on the county circut either, all local upcoming talent.
Yeah they come there since they know getting selected there is easy. Also there are so many loop holes exist for EU players with dual passports. What does first world have to do with this.These players are not from 3rd world countries anyway.
No their is no easy selection for foreigners. Unless they are super talented like a KP or Morgan (Tony Greig, Allan Lamb, Robin Smith, Andy Caddick before them) which ANY team in world would take with open arms if they wanted to play for another nations.
Players like Trott has to qualify & fight hard to eventually get a chance to play for ENG.
Although i agree that many loopholes exists in EU passports. Thats one area ICC should work on closing like FIFA has done, since in cricket players can change nations way too fast.
Isn't the west indies & certain African countries 3rd world???
This is not BCCI's problem. That is how everything works in the world.
Spoken like a true BCCI official.
How does that make it corrupt ?? It is done since other boards complained they are not getting anything from IPL. I see that as a operating expense for the no objection certificates.
AKA they giving the boards nice money for their players service, so they can turn a blind eye to wrong that is the IPL.
Check the WI records before and after the law was passed.
I know their record & i saying the law had nothing to do with their decline. It was just a simple reduction of the production of quality players, after they did so steadily for 20 years.
For DRS. I was replying to a quote on DRS.
Well as i said above, thats a question that the latest BCCI manipulated ICC decisions has further confused an already complicated issue.
If you see my quotes you will notice English fans had immense confidence that ECB will want and force DRS for home series. They were confident that BCCI cannot bully them
. Look what happened
Similarly the English team wins ashes once in 2-4 years and think they are no. 1.
I was justoking fun of the English team as well
I am a bit disturbed that you saw the issue of England (and world cricket fans mind you) hoping that the ECB would be able to stand firm against the BCCI nonsense & allow the DRS in the hawk-eye format to be used. As a Joke, instead of not being troubled at how one cricket board has become so powerful, that we have to hope a fellow board can persuade it to do something that its in a minority opposition against instead of the games supposed governing body - the ICC.
Where do you think their development money coming from? Indian audiences and Indian team. ICC makes big bucks because of the Indian market and then distribute the money to associates . Indian market by large margin cares about Team India. No one in India thinks Swan is a better bowler than Bhajji even though the English media keeps saying that and some recent records prove that.
Even if developmental money comes from funds gained from Indian series cash revenue. That doesn't mean that they were the driving force behind those associate nations playing cricket.
All of those associates were involved in cricket long before India began to rise as global power-house due to TV revenue they bring since that start of this decade. So quite clearly something else got those associating liking a playing cricket, instead of IND funds from the ICC.
BCCI is "Board of Control For Cricket in India". They make money and this trickles down to state boards and other development activites. BCCIs mandate is not to make money for ICC and run other boards just because other boards are incapable of doing it.
No im not saying that.
I mean given in cricket we have the unusual & unique situation were the BCCI thanks to its cricket man audience, which treats cricketers like actors in hollywood. Have this massive money advantage in this small cricket community over every other nation.
When it comes to decision that will affect the global game, the BCCI needs to act with interest of the global game instead of being bullies and looking out for themselves, which is what they have been doing.
BCCI wants ICC HQ moved to Mumbai: report - Rediff.com Sports
If we bring in more money and if we are the single most passionate country following cricket madly I see no problem with the HQ being in Mumbai. This guy wants to control ICC and make sure England tours Aus every 2 years !! But if BCCI tries to do the same it we are evil. This guy is an ex ECB chairman. These old guys just cannot accept India leading ICC. They speak as if they are saints but down at heart they want to exactly the same thing
Given how selfish the BCCI is, i certainly dont want the ICC headquarters their anytime in the near future. So in that way i agree with him.
But if the BCCI is put to its place and the ICC is revamped to proper strong governing body. Then as you said, given India's passion for the game, Mumbai would be the a very good place to have the ICC headquarters.
As an average India let me explain why this makes us angry. We were an English colony for so long and England did not care about us till 1990 (politially and in ICC as well). They ruled and bossed us. No one in England had any problems. Same with every other international organisation. IMF always has an European head. World bank always has a American head. These countries have veto in UN (For heaven sake how did France get that
). They have been misusing it so often. And then India opens the market, grows and we expect respect and power like these countries and that is wrong. ECB never had problem misusing power, ECB supporters had no problem with that. ECB did not care about developing cricket outside the tradional borders. No one had problems. But when India gets more control. Hell breaks lose. Everyone from Jack to Joe in these countries complain. Every day some fool has to write a book or give an interview of how we are bullying them. Aussies became no.1 due to 70% skill and 30% irritating people with sledge. The big ACB made sure it was "part" of the game. If BCCI tries to do the same with something....ah hah...how dare we do it...hell breaks lose again. This is what infuriates us. It is not going to change unless the world becomes a better place. Better learn to live with the big boss called BCCI
I said how an average fan and BCCI views things. We are the cricketing super powers and everyone who needs money needs to fall in. It is our time (for sure times will change, when we will start complaining with you
) There is always an option to take a strong stand and refuse BCCI money...that is hard is it not? I wonder how ECB got the courage to ask for equal profit sharing in Champions league when most is going to be made in the Indian market. India needs a new Modi
Listen to me two wrongs dont make a right. Just because ECB (MCC) was the lone bosses for a long-time means that the structure of the ICC wasn't always wrong & thus you have to defend the BCCI terrible behaviour since they rose up as the new pwerhouse by saying its "our turn to shine". Thats is foolishness. Plus you cannot compare cricket back in the days when ECB (MCC) was the heads to what the BCCI are doing now.
If you are au fait with you cricket history. You will know that cricket was posh sport that was created with just England & AUS at the start. They then gradually brought in teams & the game slowly spread.
England (MCC) were quiet bosses. Their is no example since the ICC was formed in 1909 that you can give of the MCC bullying any little nation to get their way with anything. Absolutely none.
The problem with the ICC strucute dates back to the Kerry Packer saga when the MCC & crickets poor governing structure was exposed as faulty. Since then 30 years ago, the MCC and all members should have sat down a made the ICC a more efficient governing body to try a prevent a Kerry Packer 2.0.
But they didn't and probably thought that was on one-off event in the games history & now Indian's rise in power via the IPL is 10 times worse than Kerry Packet & their big influence is BAD for the game. If you dont see that & continue to maintain the stance that world cricket "has to respect the big boss BCCI", then my friend you are delusional.
They were following the lead of ECB and AUS who banned Packer series. Nothing new here...just following.
. My goodness gracious shows how much you know about cricket history.
The ECB & ACB never banned the Packer series sir. When the parties went to court Packer won the case in 1977 and that how WSC went on for 2 years and at the time everyone felt that cricket was doomed at the international.
Packer ended when Packer himself & the ACB came to a decision at the end of the second season to trash out their differences (along with other factors i cant remember right now) & WSC ended. Then slowly put surely all players world wide were gradually integrated back into their national sides
ICL was formed with one motive. Make money for zee tv, since ZEE had lost a BCCI contract.
Indian Cricket League - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ICL cared 0% about world cricket and poached many young players. People joined ICL because they wanted more money and were sure they cannot get selected in the India side....ICL was corrupt to the core. The standard of cricket was medicore. It had all problems that you have with IPL (player restriction etc.). Unlike ICC where member boards from time to time speak agains BCCI and is fairly still independent, ICL was fully dominated by one Indian. He controlled every aspect of the game from rules to selection to telecasting.
So this brings us to the question on why I am talking about ICL here
and why Tony Greig is not part of " IPL & BCCI cronies"...
You might have guessed it. The great Tony was part of ICL serving in its board
Zee Sports denies signing of stars | India Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo 
If ICL was authorized I am sure he would have had no problems counting the dollars. Cricket be damned..... BCCI >>>>>>> TOny ....
I dont believe that he would. Since even at the time of the ICL formation after the end of 2007 T20 W Cup. The whole cricket world was no gravitating to this entire T20 league concept, it was mad confusion.
Which is why players like Bond & Yousuf signed to the ICL before the IPL thinking tit was legit, only for the ICL to get banned and causing NZ & PAK losing two of their key players for no fault of their own.
The ICL being being formed also was another example of the weak ICC structure. Since that tournament should have never been able to be formed also.
IPL is just as corrupt as the ICL. The IPL is just doing its corruption on a more subtle basis, dont fool yourself.
