Are the ICC awards fair?

adnanulhaq97

First Class Captain
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Runs
5,198
The ICC awards are totally biased

1. Ajmal snub in Test Cricketer of the year:ajmal
2. Aleem Dar not Umpire of year, instead some sri lankan who has only umpired 7 tests and 16 odis, billy bowden and simon deserve more than that guy
3. junaid deserved to make shortlist on emerging player
4. No Pakistani in people chice award
5. Voting process in wrong, there are like 4 english, 4 aussies, 4 sqfricans but only 2 pak, 2 ind
6. How is sangakara cricketer of year??? He only performed in tests but failed in odi and t20
Icc awards are biased
:ajmal:ajmal he desrves it the most:ajmal:ajmal
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I thought icc would change when there new pres came, but looks like there still under control by. Bcci
 
biases against muslims perhaps? :13:

sakib, ajmal and amla all muslims :|
 
Sigh, another victim mentality thread.

Is it just me or have we had a recent influx of ridicilously low-quality posters due to the advent of T20 WC? I think a clean-up is needed
 
Haters gonna hate.. These ICC awards don't even matter..

The whole world knows who the best bowler across all formats is, he does not need the ICC's endorsement to confirm that..

Besides, Aleem Dar, Asad Rauf, Simon Taufel and Billy Bowden were all better than that Sri Lankan bloke..
 
I smell conspiracy. As usual pakistan is victim. What's wrong with the world!
 
True, i think shakib, musfiq also desrve somethings as well as nasir hossien

Mushfiq? this guy is a rubbish cricketer and in the batting department he is no better than afridi

Shakib shouldve at least be shortlisted in the cricketer of the year or ODI player of the year. Nasir couldve easily have been in the Emerging player category
 
Mushfiq? this guy is a rubbish cricketer and in the batting department he is no better than afridi

Shakib shouldve at least be shortlisted in the cricketer of the year or ODI player of the year. Nasir couldve easily have been in the Emerging player category

Mushi is my fav bang player
 
what nonsense thread, only bias was against Ajmal for his non inclusion.He would not have won it anyway,Herath also took 70 test wickets during the same period but he also was not even in ballot .

Sanga deserves it , he was highest scorer in tests in qualifying period and second highest odi scorer and Amla is nowhere in list because he has not played enough matches to lead. so where the bias.
 
Really? I'm sure Sri Lanka, the richest board in the world, bought the awards!
 
Guys, stop chatting. I had to remove as many as 100 posts that had nothing to do with the topic. Consider this the last warning.
 
Last edited:
What the douche -_- !? People are behaving like the ICC here :p .

It's ICC's opinion for whom they think is better , I don't think it's bias . On the unfairly treated players part , they should perform well enough to remind them of their mistakes .
 
Last edited:
YUP

biased against :amla and :ajmal

is it because both of their last name starts with an a or or what? :ibutt
 
Legitimate thread i guess but i do not agree with many of the reasons given in OP. Ajmal has been the player of the year and Dharamasena didn't deserve to be even nominated for the umpiring award.

Remarks against BCCI are also understandable as it has been quite influential. Can't really argue against the critics hence,
 
why sunil narine ...just because he did well in some domestic T20 tournament.

The guy got spanked in England
 
Barring Ajmal, whose snub WAS biased, the ICC awards are just based on poor criteria.

Batsmen from Sri Lanka and India will have piled up mountains of runs in the qualification period because they play more matches than anyone else. The ICC voting panel needs to make sure that they somehow balance this out by placing more emphasis on averages and the quality of runs. The best thing would be to give each country a similar quota of matches that they can play during the qualification period.
 
If players like Ajmal and Amla, and an umpire like Aleem Dar miss out, then the awards are anything but fair.
 
If players like Ajmal and Amla, and an umpire like Aleem Dar miss out, then the awards are anything but fair.

Dar's been winning for 3 years. Did the ICC become biased this year, or Dar's 3 years continous wins were just coincidences?
 
Kanye West doesn't think so:

nnqulv.jpg
 
WTH! Just saw the awards list, Amla didn't win even a single award!!! :O

Even the best umpire went to Dharmasena this time. How did Sanga win Peoples choice award :O

Kohli got his award, that's the only plus point for we Indians in these awards :)
 
Amla and/or Plilander probably deserved one or more awards, but Sanga got to it as Srilankans played more than SA. It was one of those quantity over quality decisions, but Sanga is not unworthy of the award.
 
I suppose if anything then the ICC are biased towards Sri Lankans, or Buddhist people. OMG ICC is a secret buddhist cult!
 
Sigh, another victim mentality thread.

Is it just me or have we had a recent influx of ridicilously low-quality posters due to the advent of T20 WC? I think a clean-up is needed

They're letting in Imran Farhat fans thesedays.

The end is nigh.
 
I guess reading ur comments above That the ICC awards were not fair, involving Ajmal snub and umpire choice
 
This year again, shaheen is not even nominated who was the second highest wixket taker.

Ashwin and jamieson got nominated but not shaheen who did better than jamieson and his avg was near to ashwin.

At this rate, i wouldnt be surprised if rizwans name is overlooked in t20 format
 
This year again, shaheen is not even nominated who was the second highest wixket taker.

Ashwin and jamieson got nominated but not shaheen who did better than jamieson and his avg was near to ashwin.

At this rate, i wouldnt be surprised if rizwans name is overlooked in t20 format

Shaheen performed against weaker South Africa, Windies and Bangladesh, whereas Jamieson was man of the match in finals of WTC.
Though i agree ICC awards are controversial and nonsense some times.
 
This year again, shaheen is not even nominated who was the second highest wixket taker.

Ashwin and jamieson got nominated but not shaheen who did better than jamieson and his avg was near to ashwin.

At this rate, i wouldnt be surprised if rizwans name is overlooked in t20 format
Can you present some arguments on how Shaheen was better than Jamieson or anywhere close to Ashwin.
There's a difference between performing against Bangladesh, Wi and performing against Nz, Aus, Ind, Eng.
 
This year again, shaheen is not even nominated who was the second highest wixket taker.

Ashwin and jamieson got nominated but not shaheen who did better than jamieson and his avg was near to ashwin.

At this rate, i wouldnt be surprised if rizwans name is overlooked in t20 format

Dont worry Rizwan is going to win T20 award for sure.
 
Shaheen performed against weaker South Africa, Windies and Bangladesh, whereas Jamieson was man of the match in finals of WTC.
Though i agree ICC awards are controversial and nonsense some times.

Who is to judge who is weak here? Sa was a strong team. Shaheens job was to perform which he did.

Doesnt matter what jamieson did in wtc finals when shaheen has taken more wickets.

Now if icc is claiming that wickets against wi, sa qnd bangla dont count than that again shows the unfairness of icc that they value their test members that little.
 
Can you present some arguments on how Shaheen was better than Jamieson or anywhere close to Ashwin.
There's a difference between performing against Bangladesh, Wi and performing against Nz, Aus, Ind, Eng.

There is no diffenrence in performing against bangladesh and performing against india on an english wicket..

If you want to dig deep on conditions and team strengths than in the wtc final india was like bangladesh.
 
There is no diffenrence in performing against bangladesh and performing against india on an english wicket..

If you want to dig deep on conditions and team strengths than in the wtc final india was like bangladesh.

Shaheen Shah Afridi took 47 wickets this year. He was the second-highest wicket-taker this year with an average of 17.06.

dbcc7718-8eb8-491e-9b0f-9f6bb39f753c.jpg
 
Last edited:
Shaheen Shah Afridi took 47 wickets this year. He was the second-highest wicket-taker this year with an average of 17.06.

View attachment 113928

And these are the nominees

1. J Root – 1708 runs,15 matches, 6x100s

2. R Ashwin – 52 wickets, 8 matches avg 16.23, 337 runs, 1x100

3. K Jamieson - 27 wickets, 5 matches avg 17.51, 105 runs


4. D Karunaratne – 902 runs in 7 matches, avg 69.38, 4x100s
 
Like every year, do not expect much reason from ICC.

You can expect t20i award for Rizwan. ICC have changed name of T20 performance of the year award as T20 Player of the year award. This means player will get award on the basis of whole year, not by virtue of only one innings.
Rizwan is surely going to win this award as he was by far the best T20I player.
Wade, Marsh, Mitchell are unlucky to miss out award.
 
You can expect t20i award for Rizwan. ICC have changed name of T20 performance of the year award as T20 Player of the year award. This means player will get award on the basis of whole year, not by virtue of only one innings.
Rizwan is surely going to win this award as he was by far the best T20I player.
Wade, Marsh, Mitchell are unlucky to miss out award.

Its not about the award, its about the nominations.

If shaheen lost to ashwin, that was never an issue. But the fact that shaheen didnt get nominated while two others did is the main issue here
 
Its not about the award, its about the nominations.

If shaheen lost to ashwin, that was never an issue. But the fact that shaheen didnt get nominated while two others did is the main issue here

Ashwin performed against stronger oppositions but still he has more wickets at better average than Shaheen.
Kyle Jamieson and Dimuth's nominations are arguable.
 
Ashwin performed against stronger oppositions but still he has more wickets at better average than Shaheen.
Kyle Jamieson and Dimuth's nominations are arguable.

Ashwin bowled less overs compared to Shaheen. Look at the strike rate.
 
Indians who keep giving the argument of opponent seem to forget what happened in 2016

In 2016, the test player of the year award was given to Ashwin. Infact, Herath picked wickets against Australia, England, Zimbabwe, and South Africa.

South Africa and England were away series

Ashwin took wickets against NZ, Westindie and England.

Herat had a better bowling avg, strike rate that year. Even though Ashwin played all his games at home except for West Indies series (which are a weak opponent according to Indians)
 
If rizwan don’t get t20 award then you could have some merit to this threa, in my opinion shaheen was good but I don’t think he should have got the test award
 
I do not think ICC awards are fair (just like their ranking systems).
 
Last edited:
If top teams play among each other only often and give lower ranked teams few opportunities to play against them then holding it against players from those countries in such awards is ridiculous.

Shaheen can only play against sides that are playing against Pakistan. It is not like he is picking and choosing weaker opponents.

Also these awards are supposed to be performance in certain period and not performance against certain oppositions.

ICC awards are useless for this very reason, back then it used to meant something to win it. Now it's just another sham.
 
Indians who keep giving the argument of opponent seem to forget what happened in 2016

In 2016, the test player of the year award was given to Ashwin. Infact, Herath picked wickets against Australia, England, Zimbabwe, and South Africa.

South Africa and England were away series

Ashwin took wickets against NZ, Westindie and England.

Herat had a better bowling avg, strike rate that year. Even though Ashwin played all his games at home except for West Indies series (which are a weak opponent according to Indians)

Actually you are wrong here.

Ashwin also scored 600+ runs at an avg of 43 with 2 centuries and 4 50s.

That's why he got the test player of the year award
 
What an absolute joke. Jamieson getting nominated over Shaheen (who should be a shoe-in for Cricketer of the Year too) shows how little these awards mean.

I guess we just have to come to the conclusion that all awards are meaningless. Whether its the Oscars, the Grammys or the ICC Awards.

I thought that awards that reward quantifiable sporting performances as opposed to a person's subjective tastes towards a film or a piece of music, would have been more fair. But I guess I was wrong.
 
The idea that Jamieson's performance in the WTC final got him nominated is even more laughable. The award is called Test Cricketer of the Year, not Test Cricketer of one match.

Shaheen had almost twice as many wickets as Jamieson...better average, better strike-rate. Eventhough he played twice as many matches.
 
I'll go out on a limb and say both Root and Karunaratne deserved to be nominees. However, no way is Kyle Jamieson in that list as Shaheen was the second highest wicket taker of the year. Just goes to show how much of bias organisation ICC is.
 
Actually you are wrong here.

Ashwin also scored 600+ runs at an avg of 43 with 2 centuries and 4 50s.

That's why he got the test player of the year award

According to your own logic and other Indians online he did this against weak opponents so should not be considered.

ICC awards have never been fair. They are dominated hy the big three. Everyone knows this. They are heavily biased against Pakistan
Due to the influence racist Indians have in that org. I really don't care anymore..what matters to me is Pakistan winning and beating these teams..I used to care in the start but not anymore..

The indianization of cricket is the worst thing to happen to the game
 
Shaheen performed against weaker South Africa, Windies and Bangladesh, whereas Jamieson was man of the match in finals of WTC.
Though i agree ICC awards are controversial and nonsense some times.

So it's shaheens fault he's playing against weeker teams ?
 
Obviously none of the records are ever fair totally. In ICC, there has been blatant bias for years against some nations.

But pretty sure M Rizwan is walking away with t20 cricketer of the year.
 
If top teams play among each other only often and give lower ranked teams few opportunities to play against them then holding it against players from those countries in such awards is ridiculous.

Shaheen can only play against sides that are playing against Pakistan. It is not like he is picking and choosing weaker opponents.

Also these awards are supposed to be performance in certain period and not performance against certain oppositions.

ICC awards are useless for this very reason, back then it used to meant something to win it. Now it's just another sham.

He did play in SENA and failed if he succeeds next time he should win it for now our players don’t deserve any award low ranked team and minnow bashers.

Whenever we face better opponents the same players go missing time and time again same thing will happen with Rizwan in the next T20 World Cup slow selfish runs will be scored fast bowlers will struggle again against better teams.

If anything Hasan Ali has a better average than Shaheen surprised no one mentions him seems Shaheen is the new fan favourite.
 
No.1 t20 batsmen, the higestest scorer in world t20. The second highest scorer of t20 this year, babar azam has not been nominated for an icc t20 player of the year.

Again pathetic stuff from icc
 
England and New Zealand aren't weak opponents.
Ashwin definitely deserved that award.

New Zealand has never been strong. Just because they destroyed India many times in ICC tournaments doesn't make them strong. Westindies has way more ICC trophies than New Zealand and have generally been stronger.

Here is Pakistan- Newzealand head to head

Tests 25-14 in favor of Pakistan
Odis 55-48 in favor of Pakistan
T20s 14-10 in favor of Pakistan

Except for one champions trophy loss I don't remember New Zealand beating Pakistan in ICC events too. Perfectly average team they are. They would not have won WTC also had opponent been any other team than India.
 
Awards can never be fair. They are always subjective. Unless it is a 99% obvious situation, it will always be debatable.
 
Back
Top