BCCI's last shot : Pull out of Champions Trophy

[MenInG]

MUMBAI: The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) - for the first time in more than 25 years - will remain a mute spectator to the goings on at the International Cricket Council (ICC) that is all set to bring about a deluge of policy changes this weekend.

The two-day board meeting of the ICC will get underway in Dubai on Friday. It will not matter who is representing India at the meeting - though for the record Supreme Court-appointed administrator and IDFC MD and CEO Vikram Limaye will attend along with BCCI secretary Amitabh Chaudhary and treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary.

It won't matter because the agenda for the meeting - that will have a major impact on all stakeholders in the game - was put in place long ago at the ICC's previous meetings in 2016 even as the Indian Cricket Board was busy fighting a never-ending battle for survival in the Supreme Court.

BCCI's only shot at stopping these policy changes from being ratified is if they pull out of an ICC tournament. "Should India decide to pull out of the 2017 ICC Champions Trophy in June - scheduled just before the ICC annual conference - the ICC will not survive the financial onslaught such a move will potentially unleash. That's the only way," says an ex-administrator.

For now, following are the policy changes that will be passed at the ICC Board meeting in the next two days and their repercussions:

A) Writing off the Big Three model that had initially allowed BCCI to rake in a 20.3% stake in ICC revenues, the newly done math is now likely to bring down BCCI's revenues from the ICC by half, if not more. Those in the know say 'expect worse damages'.

Repercussion: ICC's position paper for the 2015-23 financial cycle and one for the following seven years threatens India with a loss in excess of Rs 3000 cr.

B) Ireland and Afghanistan likely to be given Test status which in turn could make way for a new Test cricket structure. The structure may not be a two-tier but a baseball-styled conference structure as it happens in the MLB (US).

Repercussion: The BCCI's financial muscle has been such that member countries of the ICC depend on India's overseas tours to earn dividends from their respective rights holders. India, in turn, had been trying to use it to its advantage to create a viable home season - like the English summer and the Australian Boxing Day - which could now be made to wind up.

C) One ICC tournament mandatory every year alongside qualification tournaments for World T20.

Repercussion: India's biggest fear, and rightly so, will be that such a move could destabilise its IPL window, thereby hurting the interests of a well-oiled league that's easily world cricket's envy right now.

D) Pooling of overseas television rights - this is not on the ICC Board agenda but will be part of discussion among Member Boards.

Repercussion: From a section of broadcasters to ex-BCCI administrators, they've all never found logic in how rights - that do not sell individually - can sell in a bundle. But that aside, India's concern also stems from the fact host countries get to earn the most from India tours and therefore the BCCI should have a say in the decision.

The water has already flown from under the bridge and there's little the BCCI can do now except wait for the 2017 ICC Champions Trophy. Only if they threaten to pull out of it, they believe, will the wind begin to blow their way.

WILL THEY BE READY IN TIME?

Post the ICC Board meeting, these policy changes will come up for ratification at the annual conference of the governing body in June this year. To be specific, the annual conference will be held soon after the conclusion of the 2017 ICC Champions Trophy.

The question Indian cricket administrators need to ask themselves - and those governing them right now - is if they will be ready by June if they need to defy these "undesirable" policy changes.

Should the Supreme Court see reason and the Committee of Administrators play ball, India can well bring out the ace up its sleeve.

BCCI's Members Participation Agreement (MPA) with the ICC clearly states that should their interests not be upheld, they are free to walk away. India's pulling out is not something world cricket will merely sit and watch. Under former president Anurag Thakur, BCCI had already begun threatening the same until the SC order cracked a different whip altogether.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ions-trophy/articleshow/56946441.cms?from=mdr

 

[aniket1911]

All hail, holier than thou SC of India, in order to reform the BCCI, they just might have killed the only robust sports organization in India.

 

[R0H1T]

All hail, holier than thou SC of India, in order to reform the BCCI, they just might have killed the only robust sports organization in India.

Oh for pete's sake stop blaming the SC for everything, sure they might've taken the nuclear option but the sports administration in this country needs a serious overhaul. Maybe if we can pull bureaucrats & politicians out of sports bodies we could look to cleanse the polity as well sometime in the future, the change has to start somewhere. India is more important than the BCCI or ICC or whatever, if this step brings that change it'll benefit every Indian in the long run, everyone else on the BCCI gravy train can go take a hike!

 

[Zeshan547]

They won't boycott CT in million years, "only thing which matters for BCCI is 2nd"

 

[Madplayer]

I can't beeleeve this ( in vvs laxman's voice)

Won't happen though. India is too important for CT.

 

[JattMaula]

It's on like Donkey Kong!

Expect ICC to fall in line quickly.

 

[spade]

I hope all the proposals are implemented in letter and spirit, Mr Shashank Manohar is a man of true integrity, if he can nullify all the bullying tactics by the previous regime that empowered only a select coterie of countries while the rest are barely hanging by the thread, he would have done a great job. Also it would be a matter of great pride for Mr Manohar if he can provide a just playing field for all, despite being an indian, he can't get a better badge of honour.

As far as the BCCI's ploy of withdrawing from the champions trophy is concerned, it would be suicidal for BCCI, BCCI needs all the member nations not the other way round. We can keep playing ranji trophy, syed mushtaq ali, and IPL all year round, no body would care after a while, the interest can be garnered only if international teams play each other.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

There is no doubt that cricket following population of india, IPL and some power have made both the BCCI and some fans arrogant. Threatening to boycott, quit, doing dharnas is exactly what we are famous for if things don't go our way.

 

[speedking]

All hail, holier than thou SC of India, in order to reform the BCCI, they just might have killed the only robust sports organization in India.

ohh Goa!! so I am not the only goan here

 

[ExpressPacer]

Hope BCCI don't pull out. Was really looking forward to watch the India vs Pakistan match in the stadium.

 

[speedking]

as if this idiotic sc has no other serious matters in our country !!!! its killing only professional sport we have

 

[USofA]

A. The BCCI is not going to just sit and take a $450 million revenue cut. The ICC & BCCI should and will find some kind of middle ground for the sake of the game.

B. Two new teams and a tier system will inject some interest is the test format. Though it is still questionable if the test format is financial sustainable in the long run.

C. BCCI will protect IPL at all costs. They make more money there than international cricket. ICC needs the tournaments not just for revenue but also to stay relevant. India pulling out of Champions Trophy would mean financial disaster not just for the ICC, but also for many boards as they depend on handouts from ICC (BCCI) tournaments for their survival.

D. Pooling TV rights might see push back not just from BCCI but also from CA and ECB as these boards will stop controlling their own revenue stream and become dependent on the ICC. Also pooling would mean that Sky, Ch9 and others would become irrelevant or be at the mercy of Star for their cricket programming.

 

[MenInG]

As the ICC officials meet in Dubai for the meeting, the top agenda will be to abolish the much-talked Big Three Model that came into existence in 2014 after the proposal of former BCCI President N Srinivasan. However, if that happens it may not only be a blow to BCCI’s revenue but will also help the rivals Pakistan in generating more money.

Till 2014 all the Test cricket playing nations used to get US $67 million each from the International Cricket Council. However, the then BCCI President N Srinivasan proposed that the countries that bring in more revenue should get a bigger share in it allowing India, Australia, and England to cumulatively have a share of 27.4% in the 2015-2023 cycle, with India alone having a share of 20.3%.

Here is a look at ICC’s current revenue system:

So, while countries like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe were making US$ 5 million and US$ 3million respectively in the eight-year period, India would have gone on to make nearly US$ 507 million. On the other hand, Pakistan would have made just 42 million US dollars.

However, the new BCCI President Shashank Manohar wasn’ a big fan of this concept as he thought that this would bring an imbalance. He took over as the ICC Chairman in 2015 a proposed that more share should be given to smaller countries to promote


http://www.financialexpress.com/spo...-pain-for-india-but-gain-for-pakistan/536381/

 

[R0H1T]

I hope all the proposals are implemented in letter and spirit, Mr Shashank Manohar is a man of true integrity, if he can nullify all the bullying tactics by the previous regime that empowered only a select coterie of countries while the rest are barely hanging by the thread, he would have done a great job. Also it would be a matter of great pride for Mr Manohar if he can provide a just playing field for all, despite being an indian, he can't get a better badge of honour.

As far as the BCCI's ploy of withdrawing from the champions trophy is concerned, it would be suicidal for BCCI, BCCI needs all the member nations not the other way round. We can keep playing ranji trophy, syed mushtaq ali, and IPL all year round, no body would care after a while, the interest can be garnered only if international teams play each other.

Yeah except we don't since the IPL is a self sustaining monstrosity. The next set of rights might just make IPL>rest of the world so far as intl cricket is concerned.

The (intl) game at large needs BCCI more than any other singe entity or any number of other boards combined. However cricket also needs a better ICC & governing model, how come SLC always need BCCI to be in the black, I think it's the same for WI & a few other boards. There's no way a game can sustain it's global audience when 70~90% of the money comes from a single place, in terms of ad revenue & broadcast money the Indian market overshadows all of the rest of the world combined by a magnitude that'll make even the best of guesstimates so lopsided that it's ridiculous.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

I hope all the proposals are implemented in letter and spirit, Mr Shashank Manohar is a man of true integrity, if he can nullify all the bullying tactics by the previous regime that empowered only a select coterie of countries while the rest are barely hanging by the thread, he would have done a great job. Also it would be a matter of great pride for Mr Manohar if he can provide a just playing field for all, despite being an indian, he can't get a better badge of honour.

As far as the BCCI's ploy of withdrawing from the champions trophy is concerned, it would be suicidal for BCCI, BCCI needs all the member nations not the other way round. We can keep playing ranji trophy, syed mushtaq ali, and IPL all year round, no body would care after a while, the interest can be garnered only if international teams play each other.

I hope its sarcastic otherwise this post couldn't be further from the truth. BCCI's profits will be reduced a great deal if they part ways from ICC and world cricket, there is no doubt but due to IPL they will still comfortably remain a profitable body, something other boards are barely managing to do with BCCI in the mix atm.

I don't know if BCCI will play the 'I quit' card but if they do ICC will do everything in its grasp to keep BCCI on board. They wont let Manohar's ego clash with BCCI affect other member nations and their own pockets.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

To be honest all of those recommendation seem fair and BCCI should accept it.

As for the bundled package, if it is affecting BCCI's revenue then they have every right to question it because, sports is not social service. India has a huge country to look after and they are yet to put up world class facilities in all the regions, why should they part with a slice from their share to develop cricket in some other country while we still are behind.

The world envies India's dominance in cricket but frankly India is what is keeping this dying sport alive and kicking.

 

[Madplayer]

I hope its sarcastic otherwise this post couldn't be further from the truth. BCCI's profits will be reduced a great deal if they part ways from ICC and world cricket, there is no doubt but due to IPL they will still comfortably remain a profitable body, something other boards are barely managing to do with BCCI in the mix atm.

I don't know if BCCI will play the 'I quit' card but if they do ICC will do everything in its grasp to keep BCCI on board. They wont let Manohar's ego clash with BCCI affect other member nations and their own pockets.

Without international cricket, IPL's popularity will wither away with time. What makes you think ICC wont ban players from playing in IPL? also There would be tremendous pressure on BCCI from Indians to give in to the demands after they see that the suggestions being made aren't unjust.

 

[JaDed]

Take the 200 mil cut and give us an extended Ipl window, Shashank Manohar has trully ended biting his own country but except England and India no one is at a loss according to that article.
Atleast Shashank Manohar should give an explanation in giving up 200 m

 

[Cricfan4eva]

Without international cricket, IPL's popularity will wither away with time. What makes you think ICC wont ban players from playing in IPL? also There would be tremendous pressure on BCCI from Indians to give in to the demands after they see that the suggestions being made aren't unjust.

IPL doesn't need international cricket, IPL needs international players and good luck trying to stop players from playing IPL with the kind of money they make here.

 

[R0H1T]

Without international cricket, IPL's popularity will wither away with time. What makes you think ICC wont ban players from playing in IPL? also There would be tremendous pressure on BCCI from Indians to give in to the demands after they see that the suggestions being made aren't unjust.

Because they don't control these players? Not even the individual boards can do anything about it if players want to freelance, & there isn't international cricket that'll bind them to central contracts! Do you think the EPL, La liga or MLS would die off should Fifa be dissolved anytime in the future?

 

[JaDed]

Without international cricket, IPL's popularity will wither away with time. What makes you think ICC wont ban players from playing in IPL? also There would be tremendous pressure on BCCI from Indians to give in to the demands after they see that the suggestions being made aren't unjust.

How is taking a 200 m cut and not even giving an Ipl window just?? They are basically distributing money to boards that have had years of time to set up domestic leagues.The only one taking a cut is England and India and look at hoe we are being cut off.

 

[Markhor]

India for years threatened to walk away from ICC but their bluff was called. Same should happen with their threat to pull out of the Champions Trophy.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

I didn't agree with Big 3 power and reducing associate money but don't agree with pooling TV rights.

Are they not gonna give window for IPL?

Seriously?

If true, do those people even realize BCCI has Brahmastras (pertaining to IPL) that could change international cricket 180 degrees?

 

[JaDed]

Correction its 150 m cut* not 200 my bad

 

[Cricfan4eva]

India for years threatened to walk away from ICC but their bluff was called. Same should happen with their threat to pull out of the Champions Trophy.

How?

They wanted Big 3 - they got Big 3

They wanted window for IPL - they got an unofficial window for IPL

They didn't want DRS for years - They were allowed to have their way

They wanted ICC to recognize CLT20 - They got a window for that too and guess what? an official one


So how was the bluff called?

 

[R0H1T]

India for years threatened to walk away from ICC but their bluff was called. Same should happen with their threat to pull out of the Champions Trophy.

Yes because they (mostly) got their way, as for years really? What are you smoking?

 

[JaDed]

The worst thing is smaller countries that are being given extra money have some of the most inept boards,the money should had gone to Ireland,Nepal,Afghanistan. Why is Zim getting so much money makes no sense there.

 

[Markhor]

Yes because they (mostly) got their way, as for years really? What are you smoking?

You need to read up on the history of the ICC.

 

[R0H1T]

You need to read up on the history of the ICC.

You need to know what BCCI can & cannot do, the ICC is defunct without BCCI & Indian money, the same goes for intl cricket.
It's not in BCCI's interest to rid the nation of intl cricket, however that doesn't mean that the ICC cannot be replaced should BCCI insist on a nuclear option.

 

[Madplayer]

[MENTION=487]roh1t[/MENTION] and cricket fan

God, money has really messed up your thinking. It would really be an oversimplification if you think Young players would throw away their international careers to play in IPL. Even if i agree that money is all that matters to ALL young players of the world, What makes you think their boards cant make them sign a contract to not play in IPL? International cricket makes players popular and then IPL hires them. Would IPL hire players who come straight from domestic circuits all around the globe with no international popularity , who aren't international stars? Who would want to see such players?

In my opinion All IPL would get is past their prime and spent players or players from the Caribbean. You are overestimating IPL here.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

[MENTION=487]roh1t[/MENTION] and cricket fan

God, money has really messed up your thinking. It would really be an oversimplification if you think Young players would throw away their international careers to play in IPL. Even if i agree that money is all that matters to ALL young players of the world, What makes you think their boards cant make them sign a contract to not play in IPL? International cricket makes players popular and then IPL hires them. Would IPL hire players who come straight from domestic circuits all around the globe with no international popularity , who aren't international stars? Who would want to see such players?

In my opinion All IPL would get is past their prime and spent players or players from the Caribbean. You are overestimating IPL here.

Forget IPL.

You only need to read up about these 2 names - Rilee Rossouw and Kyle Abbott


While I agree with your premise that IPL wouldn't survive without international stars but I am questioning your premise itself. I would be surprised if boards are able to stop their stars from participating in IPL or if ICC is able to enforce a ban on IPL smoothly.

The kind of money IPL throws around, ICC and home boards will have to either match it or just give in to BCCI.

 

[Pollack]

Glad when supreme court started to put things into perspective but those policy changes are ridiculous. SC has been needlessly meddling into many things nowadays and posing to be only savior.

 

[Madplayer]

IPL doesn't need international cricket, IPL needs international players and good luck trying to stop players from playing IPL with the kind of money they make here.

Because they don't control these players? Not even the individual boards can do anything about it if players want to freelance, & there isn't international cricket that'll bind them to central contracts! Do you think the EPL, La liga or MLS would die off should Fifa be dissolved anytime in the future?

The above post is directed to you guys.

 

[Madplayer]

Forget IPL.

You only need to read up about these 2 names - Rilee Rossouw and Kyle Abbott

It was after they became internationally known players. Kyle abbot is already old for a pacer amyways.

 

[JaDed]

I think Icc is amazing the only organization that rewards sporting boards for being mediocre.

I wish we all had such bosses world would be a better place.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

It was after they became internationally known players. Kyle abbot is already old for a pacer amyways.

Thats not the point. The point is both were integral part of South African set up, one of the top teams in the world, the moment they saw a better financial future in county, they didn't wait. They just retired and left.

And then you have IPL, that offers much more money for just 2 months of slog-fest, you think players will choose nation over money then?

 

[JaDed]

IPl needs intl players and vice versa,lets not get carried away yet, its not Epl or La liga.

The issue here is not providing us an IPl window ,the cut is fine think the board can take it.Seems like only 6℅ for over 8 years.

 

[Madplayer]

Forget IPL.

You only need to read up about these 2 names - Rilee Rossouw and Kyle Abbott


While I agree with your premise that IPL wouldn't survive without international stars but I am questioning your premise itself. I would be surprised if boards are able to stop their stars from participating in IPL or if ICC is able to enforce a ban on IPL smoothly.

The kind of money IPL throws around, ICC and home boards will have to either match it or just give in to BCCI.

If BCCI goes all out against the world, thr world would go all out against it.

I dont understand why u think ICC cant ask all boards to make their players sign a contract that they won't play in IPL. Even if i concede ALL the current players would reject that contract and play for IPL, what next? The next crop of players coming in would have to sign it without any doubts. Or are you saying IPL would hire domestic players from other countries who arent sellable stars yet?

 

[Mamoon]

The game of cricket is nothing without India, ICC and the other boards will do well to remember that. What the fans think is obviously irrelevant.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

If BCCI goes all out against the world, thr world would go all out against it.

I dont understand why u think ICC cant ask all boards to make their players sign a contract that they won't play in IPL. Even if i concede ALL the current players would reject that contract and play for IPL, what next? The next crop of players coming in would have to sign it without any doubts. Or are you saying IPL would hire domestic players from other countries who arent sellable stars yet?

Let me ask you this, without BCCI which brings in 80% of the revenue, would the world cricket (most boards except Aus-Eng post losses every year) survive long enough for the next generation to take over?

Look it definitely wouldnt be the same for BCCI or IPL. Point is you could see IPL and BCCI survive albeit in a smaller scale than it is now if it parted ways with international cricket. We have a huge population that consumes cricket. I can't say the same for world cricket sans India though.

 

[R0H1T]

[MENTION=487]roh1t[/MENTION] and cricket fan

God, money has really messed up your thinking. It would really be an oversimplification if you think Young players would throw away their international careers to play in IPL. Even if i agree that money is all that matters to ALL young players of the world, What makes you think their boards cant make them sign a contract to not play in IPL? International cricket makes players popular and then IPL hires them. Would IPL hire players who come straight from domestic circuits all around the globe with no international popularity , who aren't international stars? Who would want to see such players?

In my opinion All IPL would get is past their prime and spent players or players from the Caribbean. You are overestimating IPL here.

You're overestimating the ICC, if anything massively. At this point in time intl cricket is just a bunch of bilateral series working around marquee events, like WT20 the CT & the WC.

In essence what this means is that the ICC is expendable, intl cricket wouldn't die an instantaneous death even if ICC were to disappear tomorrow. The ICC is like the governor (or President) of an Indian state, the other boards being CM & BCCI virtually being the PM. This is purely in terms of the power structure, the ICC's role is much more broad though.

This btw is not a slight on intl cricket, the reforms at BCCI is India & Indian SC's business whilst the reforms at ICC & of intl cricket is BCCI's business. They are independent of each other & one shouldn't be held hostage on the premise that the other would be carried out first.

 

[Madplayer]

Let me ask you this, without BCCI which brings in 80% of the revenue, would the world cricket (most boards except Aus-Eng post losses every year) survive long enough for the next generation to take over?

Look it definitely wouldnt be the same for BCCI or IPL. Point is you could see IPL and BCCI survive albeit in a smaller scale than it is now if it parted ways with international cricket. We have a huge population that consumes cricket. I can't say the same for world cricket sans India though.

No doubt that world cricket would be hit badly. Finances from India is what run the game. I never said ICC would bloom without India. Just that BCCI and IPL will also face a crisis if foreign players are forced to stop associating with them.

Having said that, when one option dies out, ICC can always look for alternatives and evolve. Maybe tap the potential of Bangladesh and Pakistan better than it has would still be hard first few years.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

No doubt that world cricket would be hit badly. Finances from India is what run the game. I never said ICC would bloom without India. Just that BCCI and IPL will also face a crisis if foreign players are forced to stop associating with them.

Having said that, when one option dies out, ICC can always look for alternatives and evolve. Maybe tap the potential of Bangladesh and Pakistan better than it has would still be hard first few decades.

Agree with your post but it needs a little fixing at the end.

Now that is why I feel ICC wouldn't want to mess with India. This is not to say India can have its way fully, they also will get a huge blow if they quit CT and part ways from international cricket. However they will not entertain ICC doing away with their IPL window or touching BCCI's telecast rights.

As for the distribution of revenue, I feel the new system is fair and also the control of game shouldn't be handled by just 3 boards.

 

[jagatk]

If BCCI goes all out against the world, thr world would go all out against it.

I dont understand why u think ICC cant ask all boards to make their players sign a contract that they won't play in IPL. Even if i concede ALL the current players would reject that contract and play for IPL, what next? The next crop of players coming in would have to sign it without any doubts. Or are you saying IPL would hire domestic players from other countries who arent sellable stars yet?

ICC knows it cannot survive without bcci, why do you think ecb and ca who are far worse than bcci accept it lording over them, ipl provides money not only to players taking part but also boards as bcci pays a fee to boards of nations whose players take part in ipl and ipl is just the tip of the ice berg my friend, except CA and ECB everyone else needs a indian team tour to their country to make money, i think all can remember not very long ago india played srilanka every six months, so much so that many of us used to make fun of the fact but that is what kept SLC from going bankrupt, also the near disaster that was the 2007 world cup because india and pakistan were eliminated early. BCCI needs the icc and other members but not as much as many members of the icc need bcci.

 

[jagatk]

Agree with your post but it needs a little fixing at the end.

Now that is why I feel ICC wouldn't want to mess with India. This is not to say India can have its way fully, they also will get a huge blow if they quit CT and part ways from international cricket. However they will not entertain ICC doing away with their IPL window or touching BCCI's telecast rights.

As for the distribution of revenue, I feel the new system is fair and also the control of game shouldn't be handled by just 3 boards.

I agree with you on icc control as everyone should have a say in how icc is run not just big 3 but is it wrong to ask for 20% of the total money when bcci brings 80% of the said money.

 

[R0H1T]

No doubt that world cricket would be hit badly. Finances from India is what run the game. I never said ICC would bloom without India. Just that BCCI and IPL will also face a crisis if foreign players are forced to stop associating with them.

Having said that, when one option dies out, ICC can always look for alternatives and evolve. Maybe tap the potential of Bangladesh and Pakistan better than it has would still be hard first few years.

Again you're overestimating the ICC. If 90% of their revenue goes kaput, including ad spending & broadcaster $ from India, then to fill that void they'll have to cut massively in every other field imaginable.

I'm willing to bet that the IPL would also get more valuable initially, since that money earmarked for intl games would simply be diverted to domestic games. There isn't any other nation, or two, that can replace India at any point in time in the cricketing world for the foreseeable future.

ICC at this point in time is just the opposite of what a well oiled, well run professional sports body should look like. That they haven't hedged their bets against the BCCI threat is just icing on the cake.

Look no Indian wants intl cricket to be over just because someone at the BCCI had a panic attack, due to SC or whatever, but other boards & especially ICC should be managing their affairs in a manner befitting the professional world of today. If they're not then eventually, as has been proven time & again, they go extinct one way or another. Survival of the fittest is a universal truth, it's not that cricket isn't competing against other sports for airtime is it?

 

[cricketjoshila]

I hope the SC and the COA see reason and let India walkout of the CT.If ICC believes BCCI shouldnot receive the money it is receiving,then they must also let BCCI restrict the appearance of Indian team in ICC events.This is only fair. Manohar started this believing that since SC is going to remove the old administrators no one will be able to stop the roll back.But one problem that many see is if BCCI loses this many under the watch of the SC administrators they will have hell to answer for that.

Lets see what transpires.

 

[cricketjoshila]

No doubt that world cricket would be hit badly. Finances from India is what run the game. I never said ICC would bloom without India. Just that BCCI and IPL will also face a crisis if foreign players are forced to stop associating with them.

Having said that, when one option dies out, ICC can always look for alternatives and evolve. Maybe tap the potential of Bangladesh and Pakistan better than it has would still be hard first few years.

If enough money is offered enough players will associate with IPL.WSC and ICL are proof of that.If IPL hadnot arrived ICL would have been booming.

Pakistan?Bangladesh? to replace India?You do realise that Indian economy is the biggest economy among all the cricket playing nation,with almost entirely focussed on Cricket.Good Luck replacing India with anyone.At Least look at the size of the economies before making such statements.

 

[Kashmiri_Pak_fan]

I agree with you on icc control as everyone should have a say in how icc is run not just big 3 but is it wrong to ask for 20% of the total money when bcci brings 80% of the said money.

Can you let me know pls How Indian board how bcci manages to generate much money for icc than other boards?
please explain.

 

[Kashmiri_Pak_fan]

I agree with you on icc control as everyone should have a say in how icc is run not just big 3 but is it wrong to ask for 20% of the total money when bcci brings 80% of the said money.

Can you let me know pls How bcci manages to generate much money for icc than other boards?
please explain.

 

[R0H1T]

I hope the SC and the COA see reason and let India walkout of the CT.If ICC believes BCCI shouldnot receive the money it is receiving,then they must also let BCCI restrict the appearance of Indian team in ICC events.This is only fair. Manohar started this believing that since SC is going to remove the old administrators no one will be able to stop the roll back.But one problem that many see is if BCCI loses this many under the watch of the SC administrators they will have hell to answer for that.

Lets see what transpires.

The ICC is party to the events such as CT, WT20 or the WC. If BCCI doesn't play ball then the financiers will go after ICC's head, & their body, but I doubt they'd have anywhere else to hide. The bilaterals are a different story, though as I've said before ~ the ICC going extinct doesn't mean intl cricket will die instantaneously. Hell even the BCCI can take hold of the reins of intl cricket, if ICC were to disappear tomorrow, but the administrative overhang is what they'd like to avoid.

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

If enough money is offered enough players will associate with IPL.WSC and ICL are proof of that.If IPL hadnot arrived ICL would have been booming.

Pakistan?Bangladesh? to replace India?You do realise that Indian economy is the biggest economy among all the cricket playing nation,with almost entirely focussed on Cricket.Good Luck replacing India with anyone.At Least look at the size of the economies before making such statements.

Just walk away yar...why threaten threaten threaten... India should just issue a statement saying that agree to all our demands or else.....

That would truly make is simple for everyone involved.

Wouldn't it ??

 

[Madplayer]

If enough money is offered enough players will associate with IPL.WSC and ICL are proof of that.If IPL hadnot arrived ICL would have been booming.

Pakistan?Bangladesh? to replace India?You do realise that Indian economy is the biggest economy among all the cricket playing nation,with almost entirely focussed on Cricket.Good Luck replacing India with anyone.At Least look at the size of the economies before making such statements.

Not talking about replacing India with some other country who can provide equal finances. Just talking about finding alternatives to keep the show going.

 

[Madplayer]

Again you're overestimating the ICC. If 90% of their revenue goes kaput, including ad spending & broadcaster $ from India, then to fill that void they'll have to cut massively in every other field imaginable.

I'm willing to bet that the IPL would also get more valuable initially, since that money earmarked for intl games would simply be diverted to domestic games. There isn't any other nation, or two, that can replace India at any point in time in the cricketing world for the foreseeable future.

ICC at this point in time is just the opposite of what a well oiled, well run professional sports body should look like. That they haven't hedged their bets against the BCCI threat is just icing on the cake.

Look no Indian wants intl cricket to be over just because someone at the BCCI had a panic attack, due to SC or whatever, but other boards & especially ICC should be managing their affairs in a manner befitting the professional world of today. If they're not then eventually, as has been proven time & again, they go extinct one way or another. Survival of the fittest is a universal truth, it's not that cricket isn't competing against other sports for airtime is it?

International cricket wont be over without India. You are making it look like people would stop watching cricket all of a sudden if Bcci opts out. All the parties would be hit badly in this case and all of them would try to evolve and look for an alternate system. To discard ICC or the other boards as incapable of coming up with alternatives to survive without BCCI is quite naive and simplistic. Also , Passion among fans for the game is what drives it. If fans want it to stay, it will stay one way or the other.

I agree with survival of the fittest part. But only time can tell who will prove to be the fittest.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Just walk away yar...why threaten threaten threaten... India should just issue a statement saying that agree to all our demands or else.....

That would truly make is simple for everyone involved.

Wouldn't it ??

India would have walked away if the SC wouldnot have interfered with BCCI's functioning.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Can you let me know pls How bcci manages to generate much money for icc than other boards?
please explain.

Because Indian Economy is larger than all other ICC members and its almost entirely focussed on one sport.

 

[JaDed]

Manohar has made Bcci look so foolish its not even a joke and we used to curse

 

[Cricfan4eva]

I agree with you on icc control as everyone should have a say in how icc is run not just big 3 but is it wrong to ask for 20% of the total money when bcci brings 80% of the said money.

BCCI brings 80%, why stop at 20? Ask for 25 or 30. Idk how they have come up with those numbers but with the current proposed numbers, India still get 16-17% which is more than some of the countries get combined.

So I feel we shouldn't complain on that front, its not like we're the only ones getting a cut.

 

[jagatk]

BCCI brings 80%, why stop at 20? Ask for 25 or 30. Idk how they have come up with those numbers but with the current proposed numbers, India still get 16-17% which is more than some of the countries get combined.

So I feel we shouldn't complain on that front, its not like we're the only ones getting a cut.

actually we are 1 of the only 2 who get their money cut, other being ecb who lose 25 mn while we end up 150 mn less,

 

[Cricfan4eva]

Can you let me know pls How Indian board how bcci manages to generate much money for icc than other boards?
please explain.

ICC earns through telecast rights and sponsorship of its global events. Now India being in it or not makes for a big difference because India brings in massive viewership thereby driving up the telecast rights price a great deal and also sponsors throwing in all the more money to be party to those events.

Lets say India opt out, basically 70-80% of the viewership will fall down and as a result what do you think will happen with those rights and sponsorship?

Why do you think ECB and CA host India for 4/5 tests while Sri Lanka, West Indies get 2-3 tests?

 

[jagatk]

Can you let me know pls How bcci manages to generate much money for icc than other boards?
please explain.

Those are not my numbers but icc's

The "value contribution" of India is listed as "over 80%" with the other Full Members' contribution ranging between "0.1% to 5%." The proposal says: "If ICC funds were entirely allocated on the basis of where they came from, all Members bar two would suffer a seriously damaging reduction in their funding," a position "not favoured by BCCI, the ECB or CA."

Taken from icc's position paper which is what led to big 3.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

actually we are 1 of the only 2 who get their money cut, other being ecb who lose 25 mn while we end up 150 mn less,

Obviously we'll have to part with largest cut if this restructure happens because the whole purpose is to give other boards more money, so all can't have a cut right?

 

[jagatk]

Obviously we'll have to part with largest cut if this restructure happens because the whole purpose is to give other boards more money, so all can't have a cut right?

just pointing out that you said we weren't only board mate, I don't think it will be that big as nos suggest, bcci will never agree to that big a cut, it will be a matter of negotiation, especially given the sc appointed guys are not exactly mugs not to mention taking a bad deal will have ramifications with media and perception issues, it will be a big test for them.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

just pointing out that you said we weren't only board mate, I don't think it will be that big as nos suggest, bcci will never agree to that big a cut, it will be a matter of negotiation, especially given the sc appointed guys are not exactly mugs not to mention taking a bad deal will have ramifications with media and perception issues, it will be a big test for them.

Could be, there are a lot of things that are against India's interest. Could well by ICC's ploy to put so much on BCCI's plate that they only stand firm on the most important ones and end up giving in on some other non important issues.

IMO if BCCI had to choose between a 1-2% lesser cut or no window for IPL. I am sure they know where there is more money.

 

[jagatk]

Could be, there are a lot of things that are against India's interest. Could well by ICC's ploy to put so much on BCCI's plate that they only stand firm on the most important ones and end up giving in on some other non important issues.

IMO if BCCI had to choose between a 1-2% lesser cut or no window for IPL. I am sure they know where there is more money.

I don't know about percentages but threatening bcci will never work, you are overestimating icc's powers my friend, window for ipl was in place for most boards even without icc having said anything in that regard as players would go against their boards given the money involved not to mention bcci pays them for their player's availability and bilaterals now not being under icc's controls mean bcci could screw over any individual board it wants if things don't go its way remember lorgat and csa issues, no way will any board disagree with bcci on ipl window.

 

[Donal Cozzie]

All I know is that if the overly patriotic Indians who's ego's are inexplicably tied to BCCI revenue/power are getting flustered and money gets more evenly spread this can only be a good thing

 

[zn426]

Can someone explain to me why everyone is up so happy to upset India? Cricket is the sport of the subcontinent now, not England and Australia. And the biggest force is India. Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, these countries are great for world cricket, but even though the population base and demand for cricket is there, we still have only half of the people combined of India. And the three economies are in poor shape compared with India (although steadily improving).

Do you all want cricket to die when it is 70 to 80 percent dependent on Indian money?
I support Pakistani cricket, I love Pakistani cricket, but let's face it, Pakistan has defined itself by it's rivalry with India. Meanwhile, India is moving on. I see it every day on this board-people blow their tops about how bad the infrastructure is in Pakistani cricket-well, fix it and Pakistan will be a world power in cricket again! It's amazing how Pakistani cricket is a microcosm of Pakistan at a whole-overly reliant on shortcuts, not willing to put in the work to advance the country, everyone is for themselves without considering how they can work with others to achieve their goals.

 

[Markhor]

I think Icc is amazing the only organization that rewards sporting boards for being mediocre.

I wish we all had such bosses world would be a better place.

If the argument is that BCCI simply wants other boards to get their houses in order and shouldn't have to prop up mediocre boards - its not entirely true.

Take Zimbabwe. India have toured Zimbabwe four times in the last six years and those tours are probably the only thing keeping the near-bankrupt ZCB afloat.

ZCB is possibly the most corrupt and inept organisation in world cricket today (not to mention racist), millions of ICC dollars have been looted by its directors for personal gain. Yet BCCI in 2008 helped with others to bury a KPMG report that investigated irregularities in ZCB's finances. ICC have never made that report public.

But we never heard any hue and cry from you guys that a corrupt board was being propped up because ZCB is a useful voting ally.

 

[Madplayer]

No matter what anyone says, the guy with more money than others will always be held responsible.

 

[USofA]

Just walk away yar...why threaten threaten threaten... India should just issue a statement saying that agree to all our demands or else.....

That would truly make is simple for everyone involved.

Wouldn't it ??

That is how BCCI gets what they want. It has been happening for years and will continue.

 

[USofA]

No matter what anyone says, the guy with more money than others will always be held responsible.

But that is not the case and never has been. BCCI has always got what they want over the years. The ICC and the other boards have only acted as enablers in supporting this for their own selfish reasons and greed for BCCI $$.

 

[USofA]

If the argument is that BCCI simply wants other boards to get their houses in order and shouldn't have to prop up mediocre boards - its not entirely true.

Take Zimbabwe. India have toured Zimbabwe four times in the last six years and those tours are probably the only thing keeping the near-bankrupt ZCB afloat.

ZCB is possibly the most corrupt and inept organisation in world cricket today (not to mention racist), millions of ICC dollars have been looted by its directors for personal gain. Yet BCCI in 2008 helped with others to bury a KPMG report that investigated irregularities in ZCB's finances. ICC have never made that report public.

But we never heard any hue and cry from you guys that a corrupt board was being propped up because ZCB is a useful voting ally.

Then it is the ICC's fault. They are the ones governing the game. Why are they afraid of the BCCI? Why did they not make the report public? Just because the BCCI did not want it?

I am not defending the BCCI here. Just holding the ICC accountable. What is the ICC afraid of?

 

[Markhor]

Then it is the ICC's fault. They are the ones governing the game. Why are they afraid of the BCCI? Why did they not make the report public? Just because the BCCI did not want it?

I am not defending the BCCI here. Just holding the ICC accountable. What is the ICC afraid of?

There was a vote on the matter at an ICC board meeting in 2008 and the result was split so the KPMG report has never been made public or even distributed to the ICC member boards. India along with other boards voted against.

 

[Madplayer]

But that is not the case and never has been. BCCI has always got what they want over the years. The ICC and the other boards have only acted as enablers in supporting this for their own selfish reasons and greed for BCCI $$.

At the same time everyone has blamed bcci for bullying others at the back of their money.

 

[USofA]

At the same time everyone has blamed bcci for bullying others at the back of their money.

Yes, but that does/did not accomplish anything and did/does not affect the BCCI. They continue to have their way and keep the money they bring in.

 

[USofA]

There was a vote on the matter at an ICC board meeting in 2008 and the result was split so the KPMG report has never been made public or even distributed to the ICC member boards. India along with other boards voted against.

So essentially the whole setup (ICC and some boards) just mutually agreed to brush in under the carpet. So majority of the cricket setup is to blame. Not just BCCI.

 

[Madplayer]

Yes, but that does/did not accomplish anything and did/does not affect the BCCI. They continue to have their way and keep the money they bring in.

True. Never disputed it.

If cricketing market in other countries would have been tapped, things wouldn't have gotten so bad.

 

[JaDed]

If the argument is that BCCI simply wants other boards to get their houses in order and shouldn't have to prop up mediocre boards - its not entirely true.

Take Zimbabwe. India have toured Zimbabwe four times in the last six years and those tours are probably the only thing keeping the near-bankrupt ZCB afloat.

ZCB is possibly the most corrupt and inept organisation in world cricket today (not to mention racist), millions of ICC dollars have been looted by its directors for personal gain. Yet BCCI in 2008 helped with others to bury a KPMG report that investigated irregularities in ZCB's finances. ICC have never made that report public.

But we never heard any hue and cry from you guys that a corrupt board was being propped up because ZCB is a useful voting ally.

First i agree Zim shouldnt be toured just on principle and the discrimination,second it was tier 2 team touring there just for intl experience,no kohli too man

 

[spade]

I hope its sarcastic otherwise this post couldn't be further from the truth. BCCI's profits will be reduced a great deal if they part ways from ICC and world cricket, there is no doubt but due to IPL they will still comfortably remain a profitable body, something other boards are barely managing to do with BCCI in the mix atm.

I don't know if BCCI will play the 'I quit' card but if they do ICC will do everything in its grasp to keep BCCI on board. They wont let Manohar's ego clash with BCCI affect other member nations and their own pockets.

There is absolutely no sarcasm involved. As you have highlighted we have the deepest pockets in world cricket, we have the best stadiums and world class infrastructure in place therefore there is no need for extra finance flowing into our pond when it could help revive smaller nations which are on the verge of becoming non existent, countries like Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, also Sri Lanka, Pakistan, WI could use the money in developing the game and making the sport more competitive.
At present the standard of cricket is at its lowest most of the talent and resources are concentrated within the "big 3", there is just too much gulf in quality and that makes for poor viewing and development of the game. If someone has the intent of expanding the game and making it more popular then such predatory tactics have to be shelved forthwith.

 

[JaDed]

[MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION] no offense but u r making sound like everything evil in ICC is BCCI unfortunate that is.