BCCI loses vote in ICC revenue and constitutional changes

[Junaids]

I find it strange.

I'm English, but I'm pleased that my Board has renounced the disgusting Big Three model.

The ECB was a disgrace in supporting it in the first place.

Why don't any Indians on this forum join me in condemning our own Boards, and in celebrating their defeat?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Boycott India as in boycott the Indian cricket team. Same thing India has been doing with Pakistan, where they play every other sport but not mens' cricket. How many players will the BCCI offer multi-million dollar contract, especially after they themselves have to live off peanuts because there is no international cricket going on and the Indian public is losing interest?

Sporting boycott of Pakistan is official policy of govt of India.Are you telling me that SL/BCB/CSA/CArribean countries or even NZ/Aus/ENg govt will officially boycott India?LOL.Sporting boycott of any country has very wide diplomatic and political ramifications.No country is going to do so againist India.

Yes BCCI will be able to offer multi million dollar contracts to wean away the cricketers from their country boards. Channel 9 did it in the past. BCCI and its partners are far more wealthier.

Problem is how long will the small boards survive with the drastically reduced ICC income and no India tour?

The BCCI can do whatever the hell it wants. The fact of the matter is that the ICC still has 9, potentially 11 markets to rely on while the BCCI only has one and that market will get fed up of watching Indians play against Indians real quick. How popular is the Ranji season there? That's the level of popularity you can expect for any competitions, leagues or tournament that the BCCI tries to put together once they are booted out of the ICC.

The big markets like AUS and UK has many other sports to divide the revenue.Even in NZ and SA cricket isnt the most popular sport.The economies of Pakistan and BD are very small.

Where ever the Indian stars will play the Indian public will watch.Most Indian stars dont play Ranji because of international commitments.

If ICC bans India, then it wont be BCCI vs ICC.It would be Indian Nation vs ICC. IF ICC is banned in India,which sponsor will risk its Indian market to sponsor ICC?

Will Indians rather watch a bunch of trundlers bowl at domestic batsmen or will they tune in to watch the Ashes or Boult bowl to AB or Starc bowl to Amla? Will they rather watch a domestic competition of the World Cup? I think they'll choose international cricket over domestic cricket.

None of this is going to happen though because the BCCI is much smarter than you. They know pulling off a move like this will destroy them and they are all about self-preservation.

The BCCI is smart and thats why they will pull out.If they dont they will be destroyed anyway by the White Boards.If they do, they have a good chance of survival.

 

[Bengaluru]

I find it strange.

I'm English, but I'm pleased that my Board has renounced the disgusting Big Three model.

The ECB was a disgrace in supporting it in the first place.

Why don't any Indians on this forum join me in condemning our own Boards, and in celebrating their defeat?

ECB has not renounced anything. They were getting 143 million before, they are getting 143 million now. No difference. The only change from the big 3 model is how much BCCI was getting then and now. If the ECB were given a lesser cut in the latest proposal, even they would have voted against it. This is the whole point that has been going over the heads of a lot of people on this board including you.

 

[Junaids]

ECB has not renounced anything. They were getting 143 million before, they are getting 143 million now. No difference. The only change from the big 3 model is how much BCCI was getting then and now. If the ECB were given a lesser cut in the latest proposal, even they would have voted against it. This is the whole point that has been going over the heads of a lot of people on this board including you.

It's not just about money.

The constitution allowed the Big Three to control every ICC committee, which is why every single ICC tournament takes place in our countries. Which is also the reason for bilateralism in scheduling and unilateralism in contracting: that's how the BCCI wanted it so that other countries were unable to negotiate collectively and had to accept what the BCCI gave them.

Good riddance to the Big Three.

And I say that as an Englishman living in Australia.

It was a disgusting form of exploitation.

 

[Ph_11]

It's not just about money.

The constitution allowed the Big Three to control every ICC committee, which is why every single ICC tournament takes place in our countries. Which is also the reason for bilateralism in scheduling and unilateralism in contracting: that's how the BCCI wanted it so that other countries were unable to negotiate collectively and had to accept what the BCCI gave them.

Good riddance to the Big Three.

And I say that as an Englishman living in Australia.

It was a disgusting form of exploitation.

Big three was wrong.

Current exploitation of India is worst.

Are you also uncomfortable with UKs position as one of the five permanent member of UN?

 

[Specialisttailender]

Yeah I don't agree with the $293 mil but $400 mil I think is a fair offer. Demanding $570 mil is just flat out ridiculous.

How much was associates getting under big 3 model ? If we are given $400 Million instead of $293 where is that cut coming from ?

 

[SL_Fan]

Don't know couldn't find any thing on that. Since BCCI turned that offer down they had voted on the original financial model. Most likely tho that $100 mil would be coming out of the funds set aside for the associates but that still leaves them with $180 mil which is a decent amount to work with I would reckon. Certainly better than nothing at all which is what BCCI had proposed in their model.

Btw it appears that BCCI could have most likely walked away with $445 mil but they went for $570 mil and messed that up. Greed knows no bounds I guess.

It is understood that before the Dubai meeting, the Test-playing nations had agreed on a figure of $445 million as BCCI's share after Rai met almost all the ICC board members. This figure was calculated after deducting the money BCCI would be spending on the conduct of matches - $125 million - after getting a share of $570. But BCCI office-bearers were adamant on seeking $570 as gross amount, which wasn't acceptable to any of the full members, sources told TOI.

 

[SL_Fan]

Sorry missed the bit about what the associates were set aside under the big three. Pretty much nothing.

 

[Specialisttailender]

Sorry missed the bit about what the associates were set aside under the big three. Pretty much nothing.

Wow that is very bad bro. Not sure why my fellow country men what the Big 3 rule. Small man syndrome I guess. How do you feel about Sri Lanka getting the same amount as Australia ? Is SLCB still paying the $400 million debt ? What is sri lankan players salaries are like ? Is the board that corrupted ? SOme insight would be nice.

 

[SL_Fan]

Well next up I’m hoping ICC cracks down on corruption. Without any proper conditions most of this money would be squandered otherwise by a number of boards I’m sure. SLC is definitely one of them. They have been hiding behind BCCI all this time and gotten away with it. An ICC crackdown is probably the only way SL cricket can get back on track. Fingers crossed.

 

[Napa]

I'm saying that Ireland and NZ should get more than the rest since they'd require more money to purchase the same things as everyone else as they're so expensive. If 1 dollar in India buys 4 of one item and the same dollar buys only one of that same item in NZ then why wouldn't they need more

It isn't just Ireland and NZ that are out of whack, but even consider the other South Asian countries. If we go with ICC's higher offer of $400 million to India (while Pak, Bang and SL each get $132 million), this is what others would get more than India on a per capita basis:

Pakistan: 2X
Bangladesh: 2X
SL: 20X

Why exactly should Indians be getting less per capita when they are also the ones producing the money?

 

[Ph_11]

It isn't just Ireland and NZ that are out of whack, but even consider the other South Asian countries. If we go with ICC's higher offer of $400 million to India (while Pak, Bang and SL each get $132 million), this is what others would get more than India on a per capita basis:

Pakistan: 2X
Bangladesh: 2X
SL: 20X

Why exactly should Indians be getting less per capita when they are also the ones producing the money?

This is called theft.

Let us all vote that people in England make more money tey need to share wit us.

Junaids should not object to it.

 

[Napa]

This is called theft.

Let us all vote that people in England make more money tey need to share wit us.

Junaids should not object to it.

Basically ICC under Manohar seems to believe that its role is to suck out TV advertising money out of India and distribute it to the rest of the world. Let's see if the Indians go along with this plan.

 

[Junaids]

This is called theft.

Let us all vote that people in England make more money tey need to share wit us.

Junaids should not object to it.

I don't really think that any board should get any money out of the ICC without a business plan and a receipt. It should function as expenses reimbursement, not handouts.

Let the ICC run the international game like any other sporting body with only 10 teams under its umbrella.

Schedule the series, pay the players, accommodate and fly the players, pay for DRS, pay for the grounds. But also take all the TV revenue.

Then the boards can live off the gate receipts and apply for reimbursement of whatever activities require subsidisation.

No more money for nothing. No more ICC money paying for state cricket association votes.

 

[Napa]

I don't really think that any board should get any money out of the ICC without a business plan and a receipt. It should function as expenses reimbursement, not handouts.

Let the ICC run the international game like any other sporting body with only 10 teams under its umbrella.

Schedule the series, pay the players, accommodate and fly the players, pay for DRS, pay for the grounds. But also take all the TV revenue.

Then the boards can live off the gate receipts and apply for reimbursement of whatever activities require subsidisation.

No more money for nothing. No more ICC money paying for state cricket association votes.

Your plan is good with one feature that needs to be added. TV advertising revenues should remain in the country it was produced rather than being given to ICC.

 

[Junaids]

Your plan is good with one feature that needs to be added. TV advertising revenues should remain in the country it was produced rather than being given to ICC.

But it will.

Star Sports get the advertising revenue and keep whatever profits there are after they pay the ICC for the TV rights.

I'm not seeking to tax their profits, if there are any. They can stay in India.

But equally, the BCCI cannot expect the ICC to give it part of what Star Sports paid it.

Just as the English FA cannot expect FIFA to give it part of what the BBC and ITV paid it.

It's exactly the same.

 

[Napa]

But it will.

Star Sports get the advertising revenue and keep whatever profits there are after they pay the ICC for the TV rights.

I'm not seeking to tax their profits, if there are any. They can stay in India.

But equally, the BCCI cannot expect the ICC to give it part of what Star Sports paid it.

Just as the English FA cannot expect FIFA to give it part of what the BBC and ITV paid it.

It's exactly the same.

My point is that TV rights money should go to the country boards rather than ICC.

FIFA is always a bad role model. It is a terribly corrupt organization. That is what happens when an organization gets a load of money for doing practically nothing. ICC should not be like FIFA.

 

[HitWicket]

My point is that TV rights money should go to the country boards rather than ICC.

FIFA is always a bad role model. It is a terribly corrupt organization. That is what happens when an organization gets a load of money for doing practically nothing. ICC should not be like FIFA.

But the broadcaster is paying to broadcast an event organised by the ICC? When the BCCI organide the event (bilaterals) the money does go to them.

 

[MenInG]

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is working on idea of sending the International Cricket Council (ICC) a show cause notice. The decision to send a show cause notice will be taken after Special General Meeting (SGM) to be held on June 7. The Committee of Administrators (CoA) and the BCCI office-bearers so far have refrained from taking any call on why the naming of the squad for ICC Champions Trophy 2017 has been delayed. It is also being speculated that the BCC might pull India out of the Champions Trophy. BCCI denies reports of non-payments of Indian players

According Times of India, the BCCI will sent a notice 200 per cent in the coming days. The notice will be sent in regards to the BCCI asking ICC why they [India] should not exercise its rights and privileges under the Members Participation Agreement (MPA). This notice is sure to stir up a uproar in the cricketing circles namely the stakeholders of the game. Once the notice is served it is compulsory for the ICC to forward BCCI’s grievance to its dispute committee.

“If BCCI does not send the notice, then it’s either agreeing to what is being offered by ICC and its chairman ShashankManohar or it’s mea culpa (acknowledgement that they’re wrong),” an official was quoted as saying.

Earlier in the week, BCCI functionary Rajiv Shukla asserted that it would not be right for India to pull out of the Champions Trophy in its act of defiance over the ICC’s revised financial model, saying such a move could see them isolated in world cricket. “Whatever has happened in Dubai is unfortunate. Whatever share we were demanding, we did not get that,” Shukla told ANI.

http://www.cricketcountry.com/news/bcci-to-send-icc-show-cause-notice-601297

 

[big_gamer007]

Have been saying since the start a compromise would be worked out soon enough..

My problem with handing out BCCI's money to associate nations is that the administrators in those nations don't use that money for personal use/corruption like WICB, ZC or PCB.. As long as all the money given to them is accounted for and used for development of game I am ok with it..

 

[Junaids]

Have been saying since the start a compromise would be worked out soon enough..

My problem with handing out BCCI's money to associate nations is that the administrators in those nations don't use that money for personal use/corruption like WICB, ZC or PCB.. As long as all the money given to them is accounted for and used for development of game I am ok with it..

Is the BCCI proposing to give its money to the Associates? I haven't seen that anywhere!

All I have seen is that they want the ICC to take away the Associates' subsidies (which come from the ICC surplus, not the BCCI) and redirect the ICC's money to themselves.

 

[big_gamer007]

Is the BCCI proposing to give its money to the Associates? I haven't seen that anywhere!

All I have seen is that they want the ICC to take away the Associates' subsidies (which come from the ICC surplus, not the BCCI) and redirect the ICC's money to themselves.

BCCI is not in favour of giving money to associates they want their full share as it was during big 3, I was giving my point of view not BCCI's.

Also you can throw whatever arguments and numbers you want but end of the day everyone knows in cricket Indians bring the most money and we have BCCI representing us administratively.. Now ICC/BCCI needs to come to a number which does not kill the golden goose if Money is not there to spend in maintaining cricket in India/exploring new areas for growth Indian team might decline in next 20 odd years if that happens it means death of cricket. (Unless of course some other country comes up as an alternate market).

End of the day both ICC and BCCI know they need each other and they would come up with a compromise you can put up as many theories as you want but both ICC and BCCI know each other's value..

 

[Ph_11]

Is the BCCI proposing to give its money to the Associates? I haven't seen that anywhere!

All I have seen is that they want the ICC to take away the Associates' subsidies (which come from the ICC surplus, not the BCCI) and redirect the ICC's money to themselves.

This is enough. You are getting away with a lot.

It was ICC in collusion with the well known trick of empire called divide and rule came up with that. They said that if India wants more money it will come from Afghanistan. That nonsense had emire written all over it. Go get informed and then put it down.

Calling your dad and getting some numbers are not facts just like you did. You have very little credibilty with some of us.

 

[Specialisttailender]

Well next up I’m hoping ICC cracks down on corruption. Without any proper conditions most of this money would be squandered otherwise by a number of boards I’m sure. SLC is definitely one of them. They have been hiding behind BCCI all this time and gotten away with it. An ICC crackdown is probably the only way SL cricket can get back on track. Fingers crossed.

Bro if you dont quote me, I wony know you replied. Can yoi answer to rest of my question ? Thanks

 

[CricketAnalyst]

The Battle Begins!: India ready to pull out of MPA

http://indianexpress.com/article/sp...alate-may-pull-out-of-all-icc-events-4636230/

BCCI has voted to pull out of the MPA and all ICC events.

We are now going to test how strong the IPL is and whether cricket can survive without us.

 

[Flat_Track_Bully]

Goodbye.

 

[Napa]

India provides 70% of revenues and has 70% of the population but is offered 12% of the revenues distributed. A request for 22% is denied.

Only logical step is to pull out.

 

[Donal Cozzie]

http://indianexpress.com/article/sp...alate-may-pull-out-of-all-icc-events-4636230/

BCCI has voted to pull out of the MPA and all ICC events.

We are now going to test how strong the IPL is and whether cricket can survive without us.

According to the article they havent decided that. The letter will be a threat to do so unless I'm mistaken. The official quoted himself said pulling out would be pointless, all BCCI needs to do is play 3 bilateral games to make the money they want.

On the plus side with WI and AFG already having scheduled a series with each other and ECB refusing to play Zimbabwe maybe Ireland will qualify

 

[CricketAnalyst]

According to the article they havent decided that. The letter will be a threat to do so unless I'm mistaken. The official quoted himself said pulling out would be pointless, all BCCI needs to do is play 3 bilateral games to make the money they want.

On the plus side with WI and AFG already having scheduled a series with each other and ECB refusing to play Zimbabwe maybe Ireland will qualify

I said they are ready to pull out. Not that formal action has been taken.

 

[phoenix363]

India provides 70% of revenues and has 70% of the population but is offered 12% of the revenues distributed. A request for 22% is denied.

Only logical step is to pull out.

Yes but India only earns that much revenue because it has competitive teams to play against. Offering money in the proportion its earned is a great way to kill the game and isolate it to even fewer elite countries than currently exist.

It is no secret that the quality of cricket has declined over the past decade and teams like Windies, Sri Lanka and even Pakistan are shadows of what they once were.

This has finally been recognised by the ICC and they at least are starting to takes some steps to address this.

 

[Napa]

Yes but India only earns that much revenue because it has competitive teams to play against. Offering money in the proportion its earned is a great way to kill the game and isolate it to even fewer elite countries than currently exist.

It is no secret that the quality of cricket has declined over the past decade and teams like Windies, Sri Lanka and even Pakistan are shadows of what they once were.

This has finally been recognised by the ICC and they at least are starting to takes some steps to address this.

Even if I agree that India needs quality teams to play against to generate the revenues, it should still get at least half of what it produces, which would be 35%.

Instead of 35%, it asked for 22% and was offered 12%. So bye, bye...

 

[Zak_Fan]

Do it .. Do it.. .Do it...

 

[Amirforpresident]

Even if I agree that India needs quality teams to play against to generate the revenues, it should still get at least half of what it produces, which would be 35%.

Instead of 35%, it asked for 22% and was offered 12%. So bye, bye...

Maybe a stupid question, but does this mean that we might see a 8 month IPL?

 

[Napa]

Maybe a stupid question, but does this mean that we might see a 8 month IPL?

With time, yes. I think there is also an opportunity for a One Day league that plays on weekends.

Test cricket could still be played after a few years. Why should WI or SA refuse a tour when their boards will make more money playing India than they would doing anything else?

 

[Zak_Fan]

Just out of curiosity, if India pull out, what are likely to be the revised revenues for all those greedy little boards?

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

Maybe a stupid question, but does this mean that we might see a 8 month IPL?

no

if it goes ahead it means

1. BCCI won't play any tournaments till further notice
2. Teams in response may then not choose to play India. That's the test, lot of money involved here on both sides
3. Other nations may not give NOCs to their top players for IPL, will there be a mutiny?


Personally, i don't think any of this will happen. In this game of brinkmanship, no body wins. Most likely the extra 100 million offer will be increased by few millon

 

[Anwar_194]

Dont let the door hit you on your way out. This will be the biggest mistake India will ever make, mark my words!

 

[bleaf27]

no

if it goes ahead it means

1. BCCI won't play any tournaments till further notice
2. Teams in response may then not choose to play India. That's the test, lot of money involved here on both sides
3. Other nations may not give NOCs to their top players for IPL, will there be a mutiny?


Personally, i don't think any of this will happen. In this game of brinkmanship, no body wins. Most likely the extra 100 million offer will be increased by few millon

Many possibilities
Quite possibly other nationas whosoever chooses may choose to play with India .
Quite reckon that an alternate cricketing board be created. I'd love to see that !

 

[aniket1911]

I am very indifferent to either scenerio, If India plays, I will cheer my heart out for them, but if they don't, it won't matter much.

 

[SL_Fan]

India provides 70% of revenues and has 70% of the population but is offered 12% of the revenues distributed. A request for 22% is denied.

Only logical step is to pull out.

Where are you pulling all these percentages from?

According to what I can see this is the percentage breakdown with the $400 mil offer which is still on the table.

Not to mention BCCI could have most likely walked away with $445 mil in the first place if they weren't so damn greedy which btw would have taken their share to 26%.

It is understood that before the Dubai meeting, the Test-playing nations had agreed on a figure of $445 million as BCCI's share after Rai met almost all the ICC board members. This figure was calculated after deducting the money BCCI would be spending on the conduct of matches - $125 million - after getting a share of $570. But BCCI office-bearers were adamant on seeking $570 as gross amount, which wasn't acceptable to any of the full members, sources told TOI.

 

[Napa]

no

if it goes ahead it means

1. BCCI won't play any tournaments till further notice
2. Teams in response may then not choose to play India. That's the test, lot of money involved here on both sides
3. Other nations may not give NOCs to their top players for IPL, will there be a mutiny?


Personally, i don't think any of this will happen. <b>In this game of brinkmanship, no body wins. Most likely the extra 100 million offer will be increased by few millon.</b>

It's like the bargaining that goes on with a shawl-walla. You like the shawl, the shawl-walla wants to sell at a price less than the maximum price you wish to offer, you bargain but sometimes the deal just doesn't happen.

ICC and BCCI are just haggling over the share of revenues, and though it is negative for both if a deal does not happen, sometimes a deal still won't happen.

I do believe that BCCI will be better off dumping ICC and keeping Indian money within India.

 

[Gubol123]

If they pull out it will be a very short sighted decision. The amount BCCI is losing is very small compared to their overall revenue. It has become more of an ego issue than anything else. Best thing BCCI can do is take whatever comes their way (probably 400$ million) and then grow game in India. Build couple of independent brands apart from IPL so that there are alternative revenue streams. How about a 50 over tournament, or, as it was planned earlier, a mini IPL. How about three day test matches involving franchise teams? There are lots of things they can do internally as there is demand and a willing domestic audience. It makes no sense to pull out at this junction.

 

[Napa]

Where are you pulling all these percentages from?

According to what I can see this is the percentage breakdown with the $400 mil offer which is still on the table.

Not to mention BCCI could have most likely walked away with $445 mil in the first place if they weren't so damn greedy which btw would have taken their share to 26%.

BCCI's Chaudhury has recently gone on record saying that India produces 70% of cricketing revenues. $570 million is about 22% of $2,700 million. The reason you have a higher percentage of 33% could be that some distribution has been omitted from the pie chart, like ICC's cut.

 

[ethan hunt]

I hope thats not true .India has its own charm .
International cricket will certainly miss exotic fast bowlers like ashoke dinda and vinay kumar and billions of cricket crazy supporters cheering these bowlers on .
What they lack in quality they make up with the craziest fan base
Hope they find a solution .

 

[Amirforpresident]

With time, yes. I think there is also an opportunity for a One Day league that plays on weekends.

Test cricket could still be played after a few years. Why should WI or SA refuse a tour when their boards will make more money playing India than they would doing anything else?

But the foreign players will also have to play for their own country. Wouldn't this mean that the quality of the IPL would go down because of only local players participating in it.
And how do you think the Indian players like Kohli, Dhoni and Rahane or Rohit would react.

 

[SL_Fan]

Where are you pulling all these percentages from?

According to what I can see this is the percentage breakdown with the $400 mil offer which is still on the table.

Not to mention BCCI could have most likely walked away with $445 mil in the first place if they weren't so damn greedy which btw would have taken their share to 26%.

Just in cases the uploaded image is taking awhile to show up.

 

[SL_Fan]

BCCI's Chaudhury has recently gone on record saying that India produces 70% of cricketing revenues. $570 million is about 22% of $2,700 million. The reason you have a higher percentage of 33% could be that some distribution has been omitted from the pie chart, like ICC's cut.

So you are going by some imaginary figures? ICC's costs shouldn't come into it anyways.

 

[Napa]

I hope thats not true .India has its own charm .
International cricket will certainly miss exotic fast bowlers like ashoke dinda and vinay kumar and billions of cricket crazy supporters cheering these bowlers on .
<b>What they lack in quality</b> they make up with the craziest fan base
Hope they find a solution .

Lack in quality... for example being ranked #1 in Tests, way ahead of #2... and ranked #3 in ODIs, just 7 points behind #1.

 

[Napa]

So you are going by some imaginary figures? ICC's costs shouldn't come into it anyways.

Your post doesn't make sense, my numbers are from reliable sources like Chaudhury. And ICC's expenses certainly is relevant, India thinks it is too high and should be cut.

 

[Donal Cozzie]

Just in cases the uploaded image is taking awhile to show up.

Mate you're wasting your time. BCCI is pretty greedy but at the end of the day they're good business men and the insane nationalism of India aside they'll eventually see sense and take a compromise. To do otherwise would cost them more money than it'd earn and based off of all the news reports I've read everyone in India (Court, Officals) except for the high ranking BCCI officials are perfectly fine with the 400 million compromise.

The jingoistic posters here on the other hand have low self esteem which they've bizarrely tied to a cricket board that wouldn't think twice to beat them up if it earned them a dollar while also bizarrely thinking that cricket is linked to a nations power on a geopolitical stage. No use debating with those. Focus on the Indians on here (majority thankfully) who actually can debate and listen to opposing views instead of either a) lying B) repeating the same thing endlessly and c) bringing totally irrelevant things into the discussion

 

[Zak_Fan]

I hope thats not true .India has its own charm .
International cricket will certainly miss exotic fast bowlers like ashoke dinda and vinay kumar and billions of cricket crazy supporters cheering these bowlers on .
What they lack in quality they make up with the craziest fan base
Hope they find a solution .

Since we don't use them at all... why don't you keep them? Could help with World Cup qualification.

 

[SL_Fan]

Your post doesn't make sense, my numbers are from reliable sources like Chaudhury. And ICC's expenses certainly is relevant, India thinks it is too high and should be cut.

These are the numbers posted everywhere. These are the numbers agreed to by the boards. Whereas you are taking imaginary numbers from the BCCI propaganda machine. So it's you who makes no sense and pulling numbers out of thin air. Absolutely ridiculous to factor in ICC's costs into working out the percentages. Do you expect them to grow money to pay for their expenses or something?

 

[Napa]

Mate you're wasting your time. BCCI is pretty greedy but at the end of the day they're good business men and the insane nationalism of India aside <b>they'll eventually see sense and take a compromise.</b>

Not necessarily. As any game theorist would tell you, the best strategic option for India in the long term may be to take actions that lose some money in the short term.

 

[Itachi]

I think it's time India should pull out.

It is about reputation more than money. And if BCCI agrees to the offer, I'll be disappointed.

It has a chance of back fire. But with billion of people following cricket, we can take that risk.

 

[Napa]

I think it's time India should pull out.

It is about reputation more than money. And if BCCI agrees to the offer, I'll be disappointed.

It has a chance of back fire. But with billion of people following cricket, we can take that risk.

Quite right! Long term plan should be to keep the 70% that we produce, instead of accepting the 12%, 22%, 33% or whatever ICC offers us.

Our money, we keep!

 

[Syed1]

Since we don't use them at all... why don't you keep them? Could help with World Cup qualification.

We will automatically qualify now that you have opened up a spot



Thank you India

 

[Tusker]

I think it's time India should pull out.

It is about reputation more than money. And if BCCI agrees to the offer, I'll be disappointed.

It has a chance of back fire. But with billion of people following cricket, we can take that risk.

Quite right! Long term plan should be to keep the 70% that we produce, instead of accepting the 12%, 22%, 33% or whatever ICC offers us.

Our money, we keep!

I agree ... time to call the bluff.

 

[SL_Fan]

Mate you're wasting your time. BCCI is pretty greedy but at the end of the day they're good business men and the insane nationalism of India aside they'll eventually see sense and take a compromise. To do otherwise would cost them more money than it'd earn and based off of all the news reports I've read everyone in India (Court, Officals) except for the high ranking BCCI officials are perfectly fine with the 400 million compromise.

The jingoistic posters here on the other hand have low self esteem which they've bizarrely tied to a cricket board that wouldn't think twice to beat them up if it earned them a dollar while also bizarrely thinking that cricket is linked to a nations power on a geopolitical stage. No use debating with those. Focus on the Indians on here (majority thankfully) who actually can debate and listen to opposing views instead of either a) lying B) repeating the same thing endlessly and c) bringing totally irrelevant things into the discussion

Not sure about the good business men bit. If they were they would have taken the $445 mil in the first place dontcha think donnie. Certainly are stingy tho first with DRS costs and all that bs and now trying to push the associates out of the equation who obviously need these funds more than anyone else given they hardly get to play any bilateral series against the top teams. Greed knows no bounds 23-26% of the pie is more than a fair share.

 

[Donal Cozzie]

Not sure about the good business men bit. If they were they would have taken the $445 mil in the first place dontcha think donnie. Certainly are stingy tho first with DRS costs and all that bs and now trying to push the associates out of the equation who obviously need these funds more than anyone else given they hardly get to play any bilateral series against the top teams. Greed knows no bounds 23-26% of the pie is more than a fair share.

Worst thing is Indians here seem to think the extra money is gonna go on development lol. 99% certainty the BCCI fat cats will use any increase on bonuses and pay increases and then bribing regional associations who in turn will get some nice pay boosts.

 

[Napa]

But the foreign players will also have to play for their own country. Wouldn't this mean that the quality of the IPL would go down because of only local players participating in it.
<b>And how do you think the Indian players like Kohli, Dhoni and Rahane or Rohit would react.</b>

You are asking the wrong question. You should be asking how will Smith and ABD react to losing 60% and Gayle and Pollard react to losing 100% of their income?

 

[Tusker]

Worst thing is Indians here seem to think the extra money is gonna go on development lol. 99% certainty the BCCI fat cats will use any increase on bonuses and pay increases and then bribing regional associations who in turn will get some nice pay boosts.

Allow me to introduce some stubborn facts here .... The BCCI right now is run directly by the SC of India ... INB4 we get told they are just like anyone else ...

 

[Zak_Fan]

Not sure about the good business men bit. If they were they would have taken the $445 mil in the first place dontcha think donnie. Certainly are stingy tho first with DRS costs and all that bs and now trying to push the associates out of the equation who obviously need these funds more than anyone else given they hardly get to play any bilateral series against the top teams. Greed knows no bounds 23-26% of the pie is more than a fair share.

Agreed. Do you believe that a totally new distribution model keeping associates involved, while reducing the share to dysfunctional boards or saturated markets be a good idea? That way, Cricket gets newer nations, rewards Indian Cricket's amazing growth.. and makes useless boards like PCB more accountable with respect to their spending.

 

[Napa]

Worst thing is Indians here seem to think the extra money is gonna go on development lol. 99% certainty the BCCI fat cats will use any increase on bonuses and pay increases and then bribing regional associations who in turn will get some nice pay boosts.

Even assuming that all the money is spent on bribes, it is still better that the bribe money be spent in India providing a stimulus to the Indian economy, rather than being spent as bribes in Ireland or Afghanistan. This is simple Macroeconomics 101.

 

[SL_Fan]

Worst thing is Indians here seem to think the extra money is gonna go on development lol. 99% certainty the BCCI fat cats will use any increase on bonuses and pay increases and then bribing regional associations who in turn will get some nice pay boosts.

At least BCCI's propaganda machine is working well eh

 

[Amirforpresident]

You are asking the wrong question. You should be asking how will Smith and ABD react to losing 60% and Gayle and Pollard react to losing 100% of their income?

Guys like Gayle Pollard Bravo Sangakarra Jayawardane might play for 8 months, but dont think Smith, AB, Starc, Rabada, Cummins will play more than 2 months.

 

[Napa]

dont think Smith, AB, Starc, Rabada, Cummins will play more than 2 months.

They are getting 60% of their income playing 2 months. Imagine what their incomes would be if they played 6 months!

 

[Zak_Fan]

Worst thing is Indians here seem to think the extra money is gonna go on development lol. 99% certainty the BCCI fat cats will use any increase on bonuses and pay increases and then bribing regional associations who in turn will get some nice pay boosts.

Something which was always going to be the case with Indian system and politics. It should be the same with boards like PCB or BCB (maybe even worse). Call it corruption or whatever, this amount helps run BCCI smoothly with minimal friction.. and that in turn fuels the growth of entire Cricket world.

Like India found out with recent currency ban... the realities in the subcontinent are such that corruption at times ends up helping the cause.

 

[SL_Fan]

Agreed. Do you believe that a totally new distribution model keeping associates involved, while reducing the share to dysfunctional boards or saturated markets be a good idea? That way, Cricket gets newer nations, rewards Indian Cricket's amazing growth.. and makes useless boards like PCB more accountable with respect to their spending.

Assuming BCCI gets $400-450 mil I think they have come come with a fair model. That way associates will be left with 7.5% of the share as well which is a decent amount to work with.

 

[TalhaSyed]

I've said it before and I'll it again - the BCCI having nothing to gain by pulling out of ICC events and starting a war with the ICC, other than a short term ego boost.

All this money which BCCI and their fans are boasting about, will rapidly start dwindling away if the BCCI does not have support from the ICC and consequently the ICC members.

If the ICC start putting restrictions on players playing in the IPL and countries touring India, the BCCI will have to bend over backwards and hand out huge amounts of money to even have a chance of seeing the top players from countries like South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and England play in India and oppose the ICC.

India vs Pakistan is already not happening, so that leaves us with Sri Lanka, West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. From those teams, the BCCI will have to pay the boards more than what they currently get from the ICC (at the very least) to convince them to tour India and isolate themselves from the ICC and ICC events.

Rather than getting themselves into a position where BCCI is losing tons of money due to rubbish players playing in the IPL, India not taking part in ICC events and BCCI having to pay countries sizeable amounts of money to tour India and participate in bilateral series's, it is absolutely evident that 'going to war with the ICC' is nothing other than a silly knee jerk reaction, just to get an ego boost for the BCCI.

Would you rather be in a position where you are by far the strongest cricket board, making huge amounts of money and can play whomever you want, whenever you want - or would you rather be in a position where you have isolated yourself from the rest and therefore everyone else has all the negotiating power and can demand pretty much whatever they want to play against you and your hands will be tied since you dont have any other choice other than giving them what they want?

Now before all the BCCI fans come rushing to point out the damage that will be caused to the ICC by the BCCI pulling out - yes - the ICC will also be hit hard. However, they are not the ones who are threatening to leave the BCCI behind. It is the BCCI that is threatening to leave the ICC, so lets stick to the discussion at hand. Also, the ICC existed and operated (more effectively some would argue) before India became such a cricketing power house - so it is safe to say that they will continue to operate if the BCCI decides to effectively leave the ICC. However, what chance does the BCCI have without the support of the ICC and consequently its members?

Another fact which many BCCI fans on here are failing to acknowledge in all their chest thumping with regards to all the money they have, is that without the ICC and support from the ICC members they would not have any of it. The IPL is a money making machine due to to the international players making it a high profile event. The television rights sell for high amounts of money due to large audiences being interested in seeing India play against other international teams and participate in high profile events. How many millions and thousands of rupees do the Rajni Trophy, Duleep Trophy etc. generate?

The BCCI fans fail to recognise that the BCCI is able to generate such huge sums of money only because they have a huge population who are cricket crazy - in other words a ready made market in which they would have to do a hell of a lot wrong NOT to make huge sums of money. Boycotting the ICC and the ICC members IMO will very well be one of those huge mistakes

The money generated by the game of cricket should be used to promote the game of cricket around the world. It should not be used to make the strong teams strong and isolate the rest of the world further.

 

[ethan hunt]

Since we don't use them at all... why don't you keep them? Could help with World Cup qualification.

Watching them bowl would be more painful than not qualifying tbh.
I think they deserve a lot of respect for being the pioneers of medium fast bowling in india . So what if they dont have the swagger of their international counterparts .
Its important that india remains a part of the ICC . Cricket wont be the same.

 

[Itachi]

I've said it before and I'll it again - the BCCI having nothing to gain by pulling out of ICC events and starting a war with the ICC, other than a short term ego boost.

All this money which BCCI and their fans are boasting about, will rapidly start dwindling away if the BCCI does not have support from the ICC and consequently the ICC members.

If the ICC start putting restrictions on players playing in the IPL and countries touring India, the BCCI will have to bend over backwards and hand out huge amounts of money to even have a chance of seeing the top players from countries like South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and England play in India and oppose the ICC.

India vs Pakistan is already not happening, so that leaves us with Sri Lanka, West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. From those teams, the BCCI will have to pay the boards more than what they currently get from the ICC (at the very least) to convince them to tour India and isolate themselves from the ICC and ICC events.

Rather than getting themselves into a position where BCCI is losing tons of money due to rubbish players playing in the IPL, India not taking part in ICC events and BCCI having to pay countries sizeable amounts of money to tour India and participate in bilateral series's, it is absolutely evident that 'going to war with the ICC' is nothing other than a silly knee jerk reaction, just to get an ego boost for the BCCI.

Would you rather be in a position where you are by far the strongest cricket board, making huge amounts of money and can play whomever you want, whenever you want - or would you rather be in a position where you have isolated yourself from the rest and therefore everyone else has all the negotiating power and can demand pretty much whatever they want to play against you and your hands will be tied since you dont have any other choice other than giving them what they want?

Now before all the BCCI fans come rushing to point out the damage that will be caused to the ICC by the BCCI pulling out - yes - the ICC will also be hit hard. However, they are not the ones who are threatening to leave the BCCI behind. It is the BCCI that is threatening to leave the ICC, so lets stick to the discussion at hand. Also, the ICC existed and operated (more effectively some would argue) before India became such a cricketing power house - so it is safe to say that they will continue to operate if the BCCI decides to effectively leave the ICC. However, what chance does the BCCI have without the support of the ICC and consequently its members?

Another fact which many BCCI fans on here are failing to acknowledge in all their chest thumping with regards to all the money they have, is that without the ICC and support from the ICC members they would not have any of it. The IPL is a money making machine due to to the international players making it a high profile event. The television rights sell for high amounts of money due to large audiences being interested in seeing India play against other international teams and participate in high profile events. How many millions and thousands of rupees do the Rajni Trophy, Duleep Trophy etc. generate?

The BCCI fans fail to recognise that the BCCI is able to generate such huge sums of money only because they have a huge population who are cricket crazy - in other words a ready made market in which they would have to do a hell of a lot wrong NOT to make huge sums of money. Boycotting the ICC and the ICC members IMO will very well be one of those huge mistakes

The money generated by the game of cricket should be used to promote the game of cricket around the world. It should not be used to make the strong teams strong and isolate the rest of the world further.

It's not about money at this point of time. But it's about reputation now.

Ego is bad. But it is also a necessary evil. If BCCI bows down to ICC, it'll question the leadership of BCCI inside the system. To save reputation, BCCI must pull out.

Some aspects goes more than money. BCCI will be hit hard. Even BCCI can break itself. But it is time to test how BCCI does influence the world of cricket.

If ICC survives, it'll simply mean BCCI was in delusion all along and should be shown the door.

But on the other hand, it's the only way BCCI can mark it's authority.

Even if it means losing revenues, I'll hope that BCCI goes ahead with pulling out. Nothing comes greater than reputation.

Not even money.

 

[Manager101]

I think majority of the Indian people are very enthusiastic regarding their national team, if they pull out of all international cricket, then the interest will fall, as the main purpose of IPL was to develop better players for Indian team so that the public can watch new national cricketing heroes just like Sachin Tendulkar and Kohli in international tournaments competing against other nations.

Or am I missing something ?

 

[cricketjoshila]

It's not about money at this point of time. But it's about reputation now.

Ego is bad. But it is also a necessary evil. If BCCI bows down to ICC, it'll question the leadership of BCCI inside the system. To save reputation, BCCI must pull out.

Some aspects goes more than money. BCCI will be hit hard. Even BCCI can break itself. But it is time to test how BCCI does influence the world of cricket.

If ICC survives, it'll simply mean BCCI was in delusion all along and should be shown the door.

But on the other hand, it's the only way BCCI can mark it's authority.

Even if it means losing revenues, I'll hope that BCCI goes ahead with pulling out. Nothing comes greater than reputation.

Not even money.

The point is will the boards boycott India?Is it even possible economically and politically?

1.Boards will lose a lot of revenue share from ICC as BCCI withdrawl will cause huge revenue loss for ICC.Will the boards then refuse to play with India and lose their most lucrative home tour and take a double whammy?Then you expect them to match the increase contracts that BCCI will hand over to Players in IPL and the boards will take a triple whammy?

2.Secondly sporting boycott of a country is not a small issue.It will cause huge diplomatic turmoils.Dont see how SL/BD/ZIM/CSA or Carribem countries will support this?Not to mention that people are looking for trade deals with the 5th/6th largest economy in the world,not ban them.

So all this boycott wont happen. no matter how much [MENTION=3474]TalhaSyed[/MENTION] thinks it will.

 

[JibranAnsari]

You know a sport is already losing when it all boils down to money , sad state of affairs

 

[TalhaSyed]

It's not about money at this point of time. But it's about reputation now.

Ego is bad. But it is also a necessary evil. If BCCI bows down to ICC, it'll question the leadership of BCCI inside the system. To save reputation, BCCI must pull out.

Some aspects goes more than money. BCCI will be hit hard. Even BCCI can break itself. But it is time to test how BCCI does influence the world of cricket.

If ICC survives, it'll simply mean BCCI was in delusion all along and should be shown the door.

But on the other hand, it's the only way BCCI can mark it's authority.

Even if it means losing revenues, I'll hope that BCCI goes ahead with pulling out. Nothing comes greater than reputation.

Not even money.

It's good to see that at least you acknowledge that the only reason BCCI is even thrathening to boycott the ICC is because of their ego

The point is will the boards boycott India?Is it even possible economically and politically?

1.Boards will lose a lot of revenue share from ICC as BCCI withdrawl will cause huge revenue loss for ICC.Will the boards then refuse to play with India and lose their most lucrative home tour and take a double whammy?Then you expect them to match the increase contracts that BCCI will hand over to Players in IPL and the boards will take a triple whammy?

2.Secondly sporting boycott of a country is not a small issue.It will cause huge diplomatic turmoils.Dont see how SL/BD/ZIM/CSA or Carribem countries will support this?Not to mention that people are looking for trade deals with the 5th/6th largest economy in the world,not ban them.

So all this boycott wont happen. no matter how much [MENTION=3474]TalhaSyed[/MENTION] thinks it will.

And you think a BCCI boycott of the ICC will happen?

Do you also think that if the BCCI boycotts ICC, the ICC will just roll over and not retaliate in any way?

Do you also think that if the other boards need to pick sides between the ICC and the BCCI, the BCCI can offer enough (in terms of money and oppertunitues to play in competitions like the World Cup) to win the other boards over?

Or maybe - just maybe - do you think the BCCI is full of empty threats and once the ICC throws a couple more million their way (or even if they don't), sooner or later the BCCI will stop barking and get on with business as usual?

 

[coy0607]

You know a sport is already losing when it all boils down to money , sad state of affairs

everything in this world boils down to money!

 

[SL_Fan]

Well there you go so much for all that whining and carry on.


CoA stops BCCI from serving notice to ICC

On a day of dramatic developments, the Committee of Administrators (CoA) put a stop to a BCCI plan that could have led to a damaging stand-off with the International Cricket Council (ICC).

The Indian Board wanted to ascertain the views of its members on serving a notice on the ICC. This was in response to the decisions taken at the ICC Board meeting in Dubai, where, in effect, the Big Three model was cast aside and India’s influence on the world game reduced.

The BCCI plan, had it gone ahead, could have culminated in India’s absence from all ICC events between 2017 and 2023.

The original Members Participation Agreement (MPA) came into existence in 2014 when former BCCI president N. Srinivasan was at the helm of affairs in the ICC.

Two years later, the ICC under its first independent chairman, Shashank Manohar, opted for a model based on equity, which appears to have rankled Srinivasan and those loyal to him.

 

[cricketjoshila]

It's good to see that at least you acknowledge that the only reason BCCI is even thrathening to boycott the ICC is because of their ego



And you think a BCCI boycott of the ICC will happen?

Do you also think that if the BCCI boycotts ICC, the ICC will just roll over and not retaliate in any way?

Do you also think that if the other boards need to pick sides between the ICC and the BCCI, the BCCI can offer enough (in terms of money and oppertunitues to play in competitions like the World Cup) to win the other boards over?

Or maybe - just maybe - do you think the BCCI is full of empty threats and once the ICC throws a couple more million their way (or even if they don't), sooner or later the BCCI will stop barking and get on with business as usual?

1.The BCCI has legal rights to withdraw from ICC events and face no repurrcussions.Thats not boycotting ICC.They will still play bilaterals.

2.If ICC in anyway bans BCCI, BCCI will move court because they are legally allowed to withdraw from ICC events.Secondly the GOI will likely to get involve and slap a ban on ICC in India.what will happen then?

3.The boards can play their World Cups or whatever events.They will continue to play bilateral series with India. Ban on India is not feasible politically and economically. India has enough political and economic clout to ensure that.

4.BCCI will demand its fair share and will take it.Else ICC can go take a hike.If it wasnot for the senile cowardly Bureaucrat or the unknown cricketer or the nehruvian historian that have been thrust upon BCCI by the supreme court,ICC would have already received the notice.

 

[Hasan123]

So is India definitely not playing in the CT?

 

[CricketAnalyst]

I think majority of the Indian people are very enthusiastic regarding their national team, if they pull out of all international cricket, then the interest will fall, as the main purpose of IPL was to develop better players for Indian team so that the public can watch new national cricketing heroes just like Sachin Tendulkar and Kohli in international tournaments competing against other nations.

Or am I missing something ?

What you are missing is that maybe Indian fans aren't interested only in national team and it's just you. Earlier national team was the ONLY thing available to watch, so people who liked cricket watched it. Now IPL is there and viewership data tells you people wish to watch it.