It's time to stop calling international cricket international cricket

[Gilly]

We all agree that Big three should do more to support cricket in other countries and make this game grow internationally.

HOW? rather than why?
How do you propose big three do it?


1) Spread money around - will fail as it will make the other boards more relaxed and will set a bad precedent of lack of self reliance.

2) Stages matches and share media revenue - Yes. Although who would be interested in watching Aus-Ireland or India-Zim matches? How does revenue get realised?

3) IPL - the much maligned Pyjama league to be embraced more? Lets have a bigger IPL window and make it mandatory to have two overseas player from associates in every team.
It sounds impractical to me as this is a bit like expecting social service from franchisee who are already struggling with budget to buy crucial players. None of the associates (Rashid Khan or some being exception) are in demand.
Similar rule in other T20 leagues will have similar challanges.

4) Big three donate to ICC and make infrastructure ready in other parts of the world? - This partially looks at coaching camps and stadiums.

5) Privatise cricket boards in other countries - make it into corporation. leave the regulation to government and the operations to the corporations. This is something outside the power of ICC or big three.

6) Restrict bilaterals and have World test Championships with leagues matches and eliminators. This will ensure test match experience to all teams.

add your own ideas with a view to contributing positively.

Forcing the big three to play more matches/series where they lose money, restricting the amount of series where they can make money, force them to pay for stadiums in other countries, reduce the quality of their T20's.

Sounds like a plan to destroy cricket completely.

 

[Gilly]

To add to post #79:

I would say that the Big3 and ICC create a fund and an oversight committee to help the likes of CWI, SLC, Zim. Help create a path to self sufficiency.

The Big3/ICC committee should reach out to the struggling boards and help them come up with 5-7 year plan towards self sufficiency.

They should give them the money to get the ball rolling and carry out the plan. At end of one year, the committee goes and audits the progress made and help them tweak things if needed and give them more funds.

Do the same at the end of third and fifth years. If by the end of the fifth year if the board shows progress the committee extends their administrative and $$$ support one year at a time for years six and seven.

So by seven years the board should be fully self sufficient.

If they are not, then no point in keep giving them money.

Have you not followed cricket for very long, some teams are into year 16 of your plan. CWI, SLC and ZIM do not generate enough capitol to have the same budget as the major boards. Just like in Australia we have a professional basketball competition and you could pour a billion dollars a year into it but it would never produce a team capable of competing in the NBA.

 

[U$ofA]

Have you not followed cricket for very long, some teams are into year 16 of your plan. CWI, SLC and ZIM do not generate enough capitol to have the same budget as the major boards. Just like in Australia we have a professional basketball competition and you could pour a billion dollars a year into it but it would never produce a team capable of competing in the NBA.

i understand and agree with your point. It is very likely the boat to self sufficiency has sailed for a number of boards.

Also, I am not for giving free money to anyone. I just want these boards to take another shot at self sufficiency. But likely will not happen.

The Big3 should not be saddled with giving anyone handouts. The words Money Pit comes to mind.

 

[Gilly]

i understand and agree with your point. It is very likely the boat to self sufficiency has sailed for a number of boards.

Also, I am not for giving free money to anyone. I just want these boards to take another shot at self sufficiency. But likely will not happen.

The Big3 should not be saddled with giving anyone handouts. The words Money Pit comes to mind.

Every board can be self sufficient, its just some boards are going to have bigger budgets and boards with smaller budgets are going to be more streamlined and a much lower profile.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Forcing the big three to play more matches/series where they lose money, restricting the amount of series where they can make money, force them to pay for stadiums in other countries, reduce the quality of their T20's.

Sounds like a plan to destroy cricket completely.

Agree. Big 3 should just play each other as much as possible and let the rest get on with organising their own games between each other.

 

[Gayle_Force]

England and Wales Cricket Board announces £16.1m loss as result of pandemic
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/57077561

So based on the above article from BBC, ECB(1 of the Big 3) itself had a loss of £16 million and only has £2.2M in cash reserves. Now can someone explain to me how this ‘wealth’ can be shared to make smaller boards better?

Even in 2019 their profit was £6.5M, which seems modest at most for a board of this size.

 

[OMB]

Forcing the big three to play more matches/series where they lose money, restricting the amount of series where they can make money, force them to pay for stadiums in other countries, reduce the quality of their T20's.

Sounds like a plan to destroy cricket completely.

I am not in favour of any of the points except maybe 4 & 6.
So what do you think the big three can or should do?
Do nothing?

 

[Gilly]

I am not in favour of any of the points except maybe 4 & 6.
So what do you think the big three can or should do?
Do nothing?

They already do a great deal for cricket.

 

[Babu Bhaiya]

I don't know how feasible will be this but this could be a solution for financially struggling boards-

Big 3 tour each other almost every year to play 3/4/5 tests, 3/5 ODIs and 3/5 T20Is.

Leave tests schedule as it is. But in place of meaning less bilateral ODIs and T20Is, a four team T20Is/ODI tournament can be organised.

Let me give an example. Lets suppose Australia is touring India. For the LOIs leg, out of rest of the teams- any 2 of WI,SL,BD, Ireland,AFG,ZIM can be invited. Viewership interest will be there of course because of involvement of Aus and India. Matches between lets say BD and SL may not attract much revenue if they are the 3rd and 4th team. But overall TV revenue should be pretty good.
Overall revenue generated by this tournament can be shared between the home team and other 2 as opposed to current system where everything goes to home board.

Same with England and Australia. This way atleast 6 boards can be benefited in an year. I understand that home board will get a hit in the profit but it should not impact them much.

This is better than BIG 3 hosting weaker teams for an entire tour as nobody wants to see a Zim vs India or Australia vs Ireland tests or even bilateral ODIs/T20Is.

 

[Babu Bhaiya]

I don't know how feasible will be this but this could be a solution for financially struggling boards-

Big 3 tour each other almost every year to play 3/4/5 tests, 3/5 ODIs and 3/5 T20Is.

Leave tests schedule as it is. But in place of meaning less bilateral ODIs and T20Is, a four team T20Is/ODI tournament can be organised.

Let me give an example. Lets suppose Australia is touring India. For the LOIs leg, out of rest of the teams- any 2 of WI,SL,BD, Ireland,AFG,ZIM can be invited. Viewership interest will be there of course because of involvement of Aus and India. Matches between lets say BD and SL may not attract much revenue if they are the 3rd and 4th team. But overall TV revenue should be pretty good.
Overall revenue generated by this tournament can be shared between the home team and other 2 as opposed to current system where everything goes to home board.

Same with England and Australia. This way atleast 6 boards can be benefited in an year. I understand that home board will get a hit in the profit but it should not impact them much.

This is better than BIG 3 hosting weaker teams for an entire tour as nobody wants to see a Zim vs India or Australia vs Ireland tests or even bilateral ODIs/T20Is.

I wanted to make a thread for this suggestion but this thread seemed appropriate for my post.