The reality of the BCCI versus ICC dramas

[Junaids]

We have all had a lot of fun this last ten days since the dramas erupted.

But the various threads have become little more than a venue for arguments as to the power through wealth of Indian cricket.

I'm hoping to discuss something deeper here, without the trolling of which I'm as guilty as the next man. And for legal reasons I will pick my words carefully.

So let's go back to basics.

1) The BCCI's own income is by far the largest in the cricket world.

2) Until 2014, every major cricket nation shared equally any profit surplus made by the ICC, in addition to their own revenue.

3) In 2014, the BCCI, aided and abetted by Cricket Australia and the ECB, mounted a hostile coup within the ICC. It's main effect was to reduce everyone else's financial share of ICC profits and to multiply India's share by 500%. They also seized control of every ICC committee, leading to the current situation in which they award themselves hosting rights for every ICC tournament. At this time N Srinivasan controlled the BCCI, and shortly afterwards the ICC.

4) In 2017 it has become apparent that the BCCI only spends a small proportion on audited cricket-related activities and that most of its expenditure is in the form of unregulated and unaudited payments to state cricket associations. And the clique which is jumping up and down in anger at the idea of the ICC reducing its BCCI payments is the Srinivasan clique.

All in all, this is my conclusion, worded in such a way as to not allege any wrongdoing by anyone.

N Srinivasan appears to have cultivated a power base within the BCCI which appears to be based in certain state cricket associations.

On his watch, the BCCI "negotiated" a vast increase in its share of ICC profits, which seems to have been primarily used to pay enormous sums to those state cricket associations, with the seemingly deliberate failure to introduce any processes to audit what they spend that money on.

I have a dark and dirty confession to make here. I enjoy the posts of [MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] , [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] and [MENTION=143357]kdoversmg[/MENTION] just as much as I enjoy teasing them. Same with [MENTION=143252]Poutine[/MENTION] and [MENTION=83349]R0H1T[/MENTION] . I like to think that we are all friends who love the same game, but who tease one another.

But I am starting to suspect that all of us - including myself - have misread what is going on at the BCCI.

I think that this is all about the Srinivasan power base. The BCCI really is rich and powerful, but Srinivasan saw the ICC surplus and engineered the Big Three coup in order to source massive amounts of money to pay to his desired power base, the state cricket associations.

There is no crime in that. But it strikes me that the Srinivasan bloc is trying to paint this dispute as a matter of national honour and prestige for India when it is nothing more than an attempt by the ICC to stop its profits from being used to buy power within the BCCI.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

I'm surprised you are giving this issue so much time and energy [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION].

 

[big_gamer007]

So first you come up with a theory hell bent on proving BCCI is bankrupt..
Now you are coming up with a theory Srini and gang is trying to stir up a coup in BCCI..

What if maybe just maybe BCCI bringing is major chunk of the revenue wants a figure which they seem is just?

 

[Junaids]

So first you come up with a theory hell bent on proving BCCI is bankrupt..
Now you are coming up with a theory Srini and gang is trying to stir up a coup in BCCI..

What if maybe just maybe BCCI bringing is major chunk of the revenue wants a figure which they seem is just?

We have fully covered that elsewhere.

The BCCI stopped paying an ICC subscription in 2014. It pays no money to the ICC.

 

[big_gamer007]

We have fully covered that elsewhere.

The BCCI stopped paying an ICC subscription in 2014. It pays no money to the ICC.

Same old arguments going in circle.. Anyways let's wait for he next move if BCCI has any left and we will find the answers..

 

[Napa]

We have all had a lot of fun this last ten days since the dramas erupted.

But the various threads have become little more than a venue for arguments as to the power through wealth of Indian cricket.

I'm hoping to discuss something deeper here, without the trolling of which I'm as guilty as the next man. And for legal reasons I will pick my words carefully.

So let's go back to basics.

1) The BCCI's own income is by far the largest in the cricket world.

2) Until 2014, every major cricket nation shared equally any profit surplus made by the ICC, in addition to their own revenue.

3) In 2014, the BCCI, aided and abetted by Cricket Australia and the ECB, mounted a hostile coup within the ICC. It's main effect was to reduce everyone else's financial share of ICC profits and to multiply India's share by 500%. They also seized control of every ICC committee, leading to the current situation in which they award themselves hosting rights for every ICC tournament. At this time N Srinivasan controlled the BCCI, and shortly afterwards the ICC.

4) In 2017 it has become apparent that the BCCI only spends a small proportion on audited cricket-related activities and that most of its expenditure is in the form of unregulated and unaudited payments to state cricket associations. And the clique which is jumping up and down in anger at the idea of the ICC reducing its BCCI payments is the Srinivasan clique.

All in all, this is my conclusion, worded in such a way as to not allege any wrongdoing by anyone.

N Srinivasan appears to have cultivated a power base within the BCCI which appears to be based in certain state cricket associations.

On his watch, the BCCI "negotiated" a vast increase in its share of ICC profits, which seems to have been primarily used to pay enormous sums to those state cricket associations, with the seemingly deliberate failure to introduce any processes to audit what they spend that money on.

I have a dark and dirty confession to make here. I enjoy the posts of [MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] , [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] and [MENTION=143357]kdoversmg[/MENTION] just as much as I enjoy teasing them. Same with [MENTION=143252]Poutine[/MENTION] and [MENTION=83349]R0H1T[/MENTION] . I like to think that we are all friends who love the same game, but who tease one another.

But I am starting to suspect that all of us - including myself - have misread what is going on at the BCCI.

I think that this is all about the Srinivasan power base. The BCCI really is rich and powerful, but Srinivasan saw the ICC surplus and engineered the Big Three coup in order to source massive amounts of money to pay to his desired power base, the state cricket associations.

There is no crime in that. But it strikes me that the Srinivasan bloc is trying to paint this dispute as a matter of national honour and prestige for India when it is nothing more than an attempt by the ICC to stop its profits from being used to buy power within the BCCI.

Srinivasan and politics are just transient issues. The basic reality is that ICC is an anachronistic organization with countries with 1% or 2% revenue contributions having the same voting power as India which contributes 70%.

Indians are not fools, they will stop the drain of Indian money out of India one way or another, Srinivasan or no Srinivasan. It may take a decade to happen but it will happen.

 

[Junaids]

Srinivasan and politics are just transient issues. The basic reality is that ICC is an anachronistic organization with countries with 1% or 2% revenue contributions having the same voting power as India which contributes 70%.

Indians are not fools, they will stop the drain of Indian money out of India one way or another, Srinivasan or no Srinivasan. It may take a decade to happen but it will happen.

That's not an anachronism. That's the reality of international sport, EVERY international sport.

If football adopted your model, Mexico and Japan and China would get much more FIFA money than little countries like Holland or Uruguay.

 

[Napa]

That's not an anachronism. That's the reality of international sport, EVERY international sport.

<b>If football adopted your model, Mexico and Japan and China would get much more FIFA money than little countries like Holland or Uruguay.</b>

I think Japan and China already get a lot more FIFA money than Uruguay does.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

It is very simple, no need to over-complicate what's happening here.

On one side you have BCCI- governed by businessmen with no ethic centered towards betterment of game of cricket. Bottom line is the only priority for the Indians.

ICC, well, are a spineless bunch who are letting BCCI do whatever they want to.

Hopefully, status-quo will change.

 

[Junaids]

I think Japan and China already get a lot more FIFA money than Uruguay does.

Actually no, they don't.

FIFA pays an identical amount to each national federation.

They then pay a fee to cover all expenses for teams which qualify for global tournaments.

And the only other payment - and by far the biggest - is according to where a team finishes in the World Cup.

So let me give you two countries.

Uruguay
- population 3 million, its TV channels pay $1.5 million to broadcast each World Cup
- finished 4th at 2010 World Cup - paid $19 million
- finished 12th at 2014 World Cup - paid $10.5 million
- finished 4th at 2013 Confederations Cup - paid $2.5 million
- total FIFA payment = $32 million

England
- population 57 million
- BBC and ITV pay a total of $500 million per World Cup for broadcast rights
- finished 13th at 2010 World Cup - paid $9 million
- eliminated in group stage at 2014 World Cup - paid $8 million
- total FIFA payment = $17 million

Uruguay - broadcasters paid FIFA $3 million, FIFA paid its federation $32 million
England - broadcasters paid $1,000 million, FIFA paid its federation $17 million.

Of course by BCCI logic, England should get over $100 million from FIFA!

 

[R0H1T]

Actually no, they don't.

FIFA pays an identical amount to each national federation.

They then pay a fee to cover all expenses for teams which qualify for global tournaments.

And the only other payment - and by far the biggest - is according to where a team finishes in the World Cup.

So let me give you two countries.

Uruguay
- population 3 million, its TV channels pay $1.5 million to broadcast each World Cup
- finished 4th at 2010 World Cup - paid $19 million
- finished 12th at 2014 World Cup - paid $10.5 million
- finished 4th at 2013 Confederations Cup - paid $2.5 million
- total FIFA payment = $32 million

England
- population 57 million
- BBC and ITV pay a total of $500 million per World Cup for broadcast rights
- finished 13th at 2010 World Cup - paid $9 million
- eliminated in group stage at 2014 World Cup - paid $8 million
- total FIFA payment = $17 million

Uruguay - broadcasters paid FIFA $3 million, FIFA paid its federation $32 million
England - broadcasters paid $1,000 million, FIFA paid its federation $17 million.

Of course by BCCI logic, England should get over $100 million from FIFA!

Not sure what your point is, do you also count UEFA & proceeds from Euro championship? Also EPL, the FA gets tons of (foreign) money via this route. Just an FYI the (English) FA earning foreign money is akin to ICC ploughing money, though most of it is from Indian broadcasters & sponsors.

A better comparison would be USA & China, take these markets out & see what the broadcast rights sell for, also AFAIK the WC rights aren't sold to a single entity as is the case with ICC. Can you deny that India, not BCCI, brings more $ to the ICC table than any other nation, if so then why this equidistribution non sense? Why should we pay for corrupt & incompetent boards like Zim, SL or WI at our expense? Do you donate to your next door failing business out of the goodness of your heart?

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Not that I have much knowledge about the profit distribution system but you gotta laugh out aloud at the idea of "equity" which the likes of ECB have now adopted. I'm all for profit sharing actually but it's the disgusting hypocrisy of the liberal West in general that needs to be pointed. Capitalism when it suits them and them only. If ECB were in BCCI's position they would most likely accuse the lesser boards of theft most likely. And lol at BCCI being run by businessman with no interest in the sport. Like Giles Clarke and co were saonts and hermits whose only agenda was to protect the noble. Disgusting hypocrites!

 

[Junaids]

Not sure what your point is, do you also count UEFA & proceeds from Euro championship? Also EPL, the FA gets tons of (foreign) money via this route. Just an FYI the (English) FA earning foreign money is akin to ICC ploughing money, though most of it is from Indian broadcasters & sponsors.

A better comparison would be USA & China, take these markets out & see what the broadcast rights sell for, also AFAIK the WC rights aren't sold to a single entity as is the case with ICC. Can you deny that India, not BCCI, brings more $ to the ICC table than any other nation, if so then why this equidistribution non sense? Why should we pay for corrupt & incompetent boards like Zim, SL or WI at our expense? Do you donate to your next door failing business out of the goodness of your heart?

I'm sorry, that makes no sense at all.

Just like the BCCI with the IPL, the English FA gets considerable revenue from the EPL.

But that's not what this is about.

This is about the preposterous notion that the global governing body must for some reason give a disproportionate part of its revenue from selling World Cup TV rights to the boards (or federations in football's case) of the nations whose broadcasters paid the global body the most to show the World Cup.

I have clearly shown you that the BCCI is asking the ICC for something which the English FA does not get from FIFA.

The national boards are not entitled to anything from the global body. And it it chooses to give them a share of its profits, it should either be:

1. Equitable, or
2. On the basis of performance, or
3. Targeted at specific items which need funding.

Don't just give it blindly to whichever country has the most viewers. Unless you want FIFA to give all its money to China and Indonesia.

And don't give a cent without receipts for its expenditure.

 

[Napa]

Actually no, they don't.

FIFA pays an identical amount to each national federation.

They then pay a fee to cover all expenses for teams which qualify for global tournaments.

And the only other payment - and by far the biggest - is according to where a team finishes in the World Cup.

So let me give you two countries.

Uruguay
- population 3 million, its TV channels pay $1.5 million to broadcast each World Cup
- finished 4th at 2010 World Cup - paid $19 million
- finished 12th at 2014 World Cup - paid $10.5 million
- finished 4th at 2013 Confederations Cup - paid $2.5 million
- total FIFA payment = $32 million

England
- population 57 million
- BBC and ITV pay a total of $500 million per World Cup for broadcast rights
- finished 13th at 2010 World Cup - paid $9 million
- eliminated in group stage at 2014 World Cup - paid $8 million
- total FIFA payment = $17 million

Uruguay - broadcasters paid FIFA $3 million, FIFA paid its federation $32 million
England - broadcasters paid $1,000 million, FIFA paid its federation $17 million.

Of course by BCCI logic, England should get over $100 million from FIFA!

Again, FIFA is hardly the role model for anyone. It is the most corrupt organization you can imagine, with many of its top officers headed to US jails.

Did you also know that FIFA paid salaries like $250K to its employees for practically doing nothing. And that it has done practically nothing the past 50 years other than changing the number of countries that participate in the WC.

Unlike cricket, in football FIFA has very little to do. It just organizes the WC once every 4 years. Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

 

[Junaids]

Again, FIFA is hardly the role model for anyone. It is the most corrupt organization you can imagine, with many of its top officers headed to US jails.

Did you also know that FIFA paid salaries like $250K to its employees for practically doing nothing. And that it has done practically nothing the past 50 years other than changing the number of countries that participate in the WC.

Unlike cricket, in football FIFA has very little to do. It just organizes the WC once every 4 years. Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

Wrong.

To be precise, a number of South American and Concacaf executives have been caught by the Americans for corruption.

But overall the governance of FIFA is a million times better than that of the ICC and especially BCCI. As seen by the difference between what happened to Blatter and what happened (or rather didn't) to Srinivasan.

There is a whole professional field of sports governance, with accepted rules, ethics and payment structures. That's how you get a job in any major sport's administration in Australia, Europe or the USA.

That's also why the ICC commissioned Price Waterhouse to produce the Woolf Report, which took modern sports governance standards as its benchmarks.

The ICC commissioned and received a world class governance model. And Srinivasan blustered, bluffed and bullied the members to accept the precise opposite, a Big Three model of governance and funding which fails on almost every single benchmark of good sports governance.

 

[Taaya]

How difficult is it for Indians to understand that the BCCI will not be generating its current revenues without the rest of the international cricket community? The only reason Indian revenues have gotten this high is because of a long history of international cricket. But suddenly, cricket is apparently a product of India and Indians should get their share because only they deserve whatever revenue they make. What a simple-minded thought process that is completely devoid of any contemplation.

India generates high revenues because of the quality of international cricket. You will generate nothing close if Sandeep Sharma is bowling to Gautam Gambhir every other day. The older cricketing nations have also helped develop the game in India, who was once a minnow. Its time to pay it back to younger cricket nations. Stop with the jingoism and extreme greediness already, its embarrassing your respectable nation.

 

[Junaids]

[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION]
There are two universities in the town in which I live which offer MBA and B.Sc qualifications in Sports Adminstration.

And the Woolf benchmarks basically precisely follow modern professional standards in the area. Even FIFA and the IOC, after all their scandals, finally do. As in Australia do AFL, ARL, ARU, Soccer Australia, Cricket Australia and every state governing body in the major sports.

And at least one of those two universities in my town actually makes reference to the ICC governance and funding models as an example of rogue governance, of what happens when you discard every accepted standard of funding and governance in favour of the law of the jungle.

 

[Napa]

And at least one of those two universities in my town actually makes reference to the ICC governance and funding models as an example of rogue governance, of what happens when you discard every accepted standard of funding and governance in favour of the law of the jungle.

I don't particularly care about what silly academics in universities get agitated about. They are a waste of mental space.

Anyone who thinks FIFA is a role model is seriously deluded, unless the goal is to end up in a US jail.

The governance of cricket has been pretty good till now, with new formats being introduced and new tournaments being successfully conducted. In comparison FIFA (besides being a criminal organization) has done nothing.

 

[amit]

We have all had a lot of fun this last ten days since the dramas erupted.

But the various threads have become little more than a venue for arguments as to the power through wealth of Indian cricket.

I'm hoping to discuss something deeper here, without the trolling of which I'm as guilty as the next man. And for legal reasons I will pick my words carefully.

So let's go back to basics.

1) The BCCI's own income is by far the largest in the cricket world.

2) Until 2014, every major cricket nation shared equally any profit surplus made by the ICC, in addition to their own revenue.

3) In 2014, the BCCI, aided and abetted by Cricket Australia and the ECB, mounted a hostile coup within the ICC. It's main effect was to reduce everyone else's financial share of ICC profits and to multiply India's share by 500%. They also seized control of every ICC committee, leading to the current situation in which they award themselves hosting rights for every ICC tournament. At this time N Srinivasan controlled the BCCI, and shortly afterwards the ICC.

4) In 2017 it has become apparent that the BCCI only spends a small proportion on audited cricket-related activities and that most of its expenditure is in the form of unregulated and unaudited payments to state cricket associations. And the clique which is jumping up and down in anger at the idea of the ICC reducing its BCCI payments is the Srinivasan clique.

All in all, this is my conclusion, worded in such a way as to not allege any wrongdoing by anyone.

N Srinivasan appears to have cultivated a power base within the BCCI which appears to be based in certain state cricket associations.

On his watch, the BCCI "negotiated" a vast increase in its share of ICC profits, which seems to have been primarily used to pay enormous sums to those state cricket associations, with the seemingly deliberate failure to introduce any processes to audit what they spend that money on.

I have a dark and dirty confession to make here. I enjoy the posts of [MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] , [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] and [MENTION=143357]kdoversmg[/MENTION] just as much as I enjoy teasing them. Same with [MENTION=143252]Poutine[/MENTION] and [MENTION=83349]R0H1T[/MENTION] . I like to think that we are all friends who love the same game, but who tease one another.

But I am starting to suspect that all of us - including myself - have misread what is going on at the BCCI.

I think that this is all about the Srinivasan power base. The BCCI really is rich and powerful, but Srinivasan saw the ICC surplus and engineered the Big Three coup in order to source massive amounts of money to pay to his desired power base, the state cricket associations.

There is no crime in that. But it strikes me that the Srinivasan bloc is trying to paint this dispute as a matter of national honour and prestige for India when it is nothing more than an attempt by the ICC to stop its profits from being used to buy power within the BCCI.

Well said Fully agree with u

BCCI is rich enough and can do even without getting any revenue from ICC

In 2011-2012, ICC revenue to BCCI was just 7% of their total earnings, in 2014-15, it was just 3.49% and in 2015-16, after Big 3 came, it became 11.94%, but still a very minor part of their total earnings

$293 million for BCCI is already much more than what they deserve. It is just Srinivasan and his ******* who have brought in nationalism into the matter. The truth is that the extra money will just go the hands of the corrupt people running the BCCI rather than going to domestic cricketers. Even after BCCI increased it's share by more than 5 times in the Big 3 model, there wasn't any significant increase in the salaries of cricketers, both international & domestic

And I always stand for truth and against corruption and I don't want BCCI share to be increased even $1 more than the $293 million which they will get. Instead, it should be reduced and brought to about $200 million with the additional $93 million going to the top associates like Ireland, Afghanistan, Netherlands, Scotland, etc

 

[Junaids]

Well said Fully agree with u

BCCI is rich enough and can do even without getting any revenue from ICC

In 2011-2012, ICC revenue to BCCI was just 7% of their total earnings, in 2014-15, it was just 3.49% and in 2015-16, after Big 3 came, it became 11.94%, but still a very minor part of their total earnings

$293 million for BCCI is already much more than what they deserve. It is just Srinivasan and his ******* who have brought in nationalism into the matter. The truth is that the extra money will just go the hands of the corrupt people running the BCCI rather than going to domestic cricketers. Even after BCCI increased it's share by more than 5 times in the Big 3 model, there wasn't any significant increase in the salaries of cricketers, both international & domestic

And I always stand for truth and against corruption and I don't want BCCI share to be increased even $1 more than the $293 million which they will get. Instead, it should be reduced and brought to about $200 million with the additional $93 million going to the top associates like Ireland, Afghanistan, Netherlands, Scotland, etc

Thanks - it's nice to hear an Indian agree with me.
[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] ? [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] ? [MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] ?

 

[Napa]

Well said Fully agree with u

BCCI is rich enough and can do even without getting any revenue from ICC

In 2011-2012, ICC revenue to BCCI was just 7% of their total earnings, in 2014-15, it was just 3.49% and in 2015-16, after Big 3 came, it became 11.94%, but still a very minor part of their total earnings

$293 million for BCCI is already much more than what they deserve. It is just Srinivasan and his ******* who have brought in nationalism into the matter. The truth is that the extra money will just go the hands of the corrupt people running the BCCI rather than going to domestic cricketers. Even after BCCI increased it's share by more than 5 times in the Big 3 model, there wasn't any significant increase in the salaries of cricketers, both international & domestic

And I always stand for truth and against corruption and I don't want BCCI share to be increased even $1 more than the $293 million which they will get. Instead, it should be reduced and brought to about $200 million with the additional $93 million going to the top associates like Ireland, Afghanistan, Netherlands, Scotland, etc

Thanks - it's nice to hear an Indian agree with me.

[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] ? [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] ? [MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] ?

Not a whole lot to be said, the numbers can't be believed unless there is source to back it up. If $570M is 11.94%, then total revenues are $570/0.1194 = $4.77 B. That is a very big number and for credibility it needs a source.

Statements like "$293 million for BCCI is already much more than what they deserve" are illogical, giving the Irish $26 for $1 for every Indian makes no sense. Just because someone is Indian (assuming that is true) does not make them rational, there are plenty of Indians who are not.

 

[amit]

Not a whole lot to be said, the numbers can't be believed unless there is source to back it up. If $570M is 11.94%, then total revenues are $570/0.1194 = $4.77 B. That is a very big number and for credibility it needs a source.

Statements like "$293 million for BCCI is already much more than what they deserve" are illogical, giving the Irish $26 for $1 for every Indian makes no sense. Just because someone is Indian (assuming that is true) does not make them rational, there are plenty of Indians who are not.

$570 million is over 8 years, not 1 year. In 1 year, the BCCI revenue will be $570/8 = $71.25 million

 

[amit]

Thanks - it's nice to hear an Indian agree with me.

[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] ? [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] ? [MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] ?

Many Indians are against BCCI, but I am yet to see even 1 foreigner who is supporting BCCI in this issue

 

[Tusker]

Many Indians are against BCCI, but I am yet to see even 1 foreigner who is supporting BCCI in this issue

And why would they ... when they are bound to get rich by doing nothing more than voting for free money ? Think !!

 

[Napa]

$570 million is over 8 years, not 1 year. In 1 year, the BCCI revenue will be $570/8 = $71.25 million

Yes, I know it is not 1 year, that is why I did not say 1 year. 8 years still means BCCI is generating close to $600 million a year. Do you have a source for that?

As an Indian you think it is okay for India to subsidize Ireland so that it gets $26 per youth while India gets $1 per youth?

 

[Moh@n]

The ICC could have completely avoided paying the "handout" (LOL) to BCCI had they told them to bugger off once BCCI missed the squad naming deadline for CT. Spineless ICC.

 

[HitWicket]

And why would they ... when they are bound to get rich by doing nothing more than voting for free money ? Think !!

Except the ECB also voted for a decrease in their own funding.

 

[Tusker]

Except the ECB also voted for a decrease in their own funding.

In the long run they don't stand to lose much if anything at all. Plus they have 2017 CT and 2019 WC hosting rights.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Yes, I know it is not 1 year, that is why I did not say 1 year. 8 years still means BCCI is generating close to $600 million a year. Do you have a source for that?

As an Indian you think it is okay for India to subsidize Ireland so that it gets $26 per youth while India gets $1 per youth?

As an Indian aren't you worried that Indian demand for monopoly in cricket will make cricket more like NBA or MLB with Delhi vs Bangalore being the matches people watch?

My problem with BCCI demands is not the due share. They are entitled to it.

But the camel story shows that if you give a camel a little bit of space, it will push you out to create the entire space for itself.

And if the camel takes the space of the human, what's the point of human (playing cricket in this example).

 

[Napa]

As an Indian aren't you worried that Indian demand for monopoly in cricket will make cricket more like NBA or MLB with Delhi vs Bangalore being the matches people watch?

My problem with BCCI demands is not the due share. They are entitled to it.

But the camel story shows that if you give a camel a little bit of space, it will push you out to create the entire space for itself.

And if the camel takes the space of the human, what's the point of human (playing cricket in this example).

I don't mind some money being spent on promoting cricket in other countries. But it should have a plan and measurable milestones. Otherwise it will just be money thrown into a hole.

There is also an issue of equity. Some Indian money going to other countries is okay, but giving Ireland 26X per capita when it is already a rich country seems excessive. This distribution is the result of politics rather than any serious plan to make cricket grow in other countries.

 

[Shutdown Corner]

Again, FIFA is hardly the role model for anyone. It is the most corrupt organization you can imagine, with many of its top officers headed to US jails.

Did you also know that FIFA paid salaries like $250K to its employees for practically doing nothing. And that it has done practically nothing the past 50 years other than changing the number of countries that participate in the WC.

Unlike cricket, in football FIFA has very little to do. It just organizes the WC once every 4 years. Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

FIFA is 1000x more competent than ICC. Even the ICC's incompetence is mostly due to prissy drama queen BCCI. ICC wants DRS, BCCI obected for years.

ICC bans Kusal Perera for doping...then retracts the ban once biochemists get involved.

ICC bans Taskin, who then gets unbanned without any change to his action.

The ICC is joke in terms of organizational clarity, competence, and overall guardianship of the game.

 

[Napa]

FIFA is 1000x more competent than ICC. Even the ICC's incompetence is mostly due to prissy drama queen BCCI. ICC wants DRS, BCCI obected for years.

ICC bans Kusal Perera for doping...then retracts the ban once biochemists get involved.

ICC bans Taskin, who then gets unbanned without any change to his action.

The ICC is joke in terms of organizational clarity, competence, and overall guardianship of the game.

Do tell what has FIFA done for it to be judged 1000X more competent.

 

[HitWicket]

FIFA is 1000x more competent than ICC. Even the ICC's incompetence is mostly due to prissy drama queen BCCI. ICC wants DRS, BCCI obected for years.

ICC bans Kusal Perera for doping...then retracts the ban once biochemists get involved.

ICC bans Taskin, who then gets unbanned without any change to his action.

The ICC is joke in terms of organizational clarity, competence, and overall guardianship of the game.

Perera was banned based on information supplied by WADA. Any football player would've been banned had the same information been supplied to FIFA.

No way of telling if there's been a tiny change to Taskins action since his test, especially since he was only found to be chucking a specific length ball so it was evidently very tight margins.

 

[amit]

Yes, I know it is not 1 year, that is why I did not say 1 year. 8 years still means BCCI is generating close to $600 million a year. Do you have a source for that?

As an Indian you think it is okay for India to subsidize Ireland so that it gets $26 per youth while India gets $1 per youth?

This is 1 of the most ridiculous explanation I see from BCCI *******. Ireland currently gets almost nothing from the ICC. In the new model, atleast they will be getting something. BCCI makes loads of money every year and they hardly need any ICC revenue, whereas Ireland depend on ICC revenue

And cricket needs new teams. Ireland, Afghanistan, Netherlands, Scotland, Nepal, etc need ICC revenues to grow. All of them have the potential

 

[big_gamer007]

This is 1 of the most ridiculous explanation I see from BCCI *******. Ireland currently gets almost nothing from the ICC. In the new model, atleast they will be getting something. BCCI makes loads of money every year and they hardly need any ICC revenue, whereas Ireland depend on ICC revenue

And cricket needs new teams. Ireland, Afghanistan, Netherlands, Scotland, Nepal, etc need ICC revenues to grow. All of them have the potential

Pfft take from the poor and make rich more richer, isn't that how the world is?

 

[Napa]

This is 1 of the most ridiculous explanation I see from BCCI *******. Ireland currently gets almost nothing from the ICC. In the new model, atleast they will be getting something. BCCI makes loads of money every year and they hardly need any ICC revenue, whereas Ireland depend on ICC revenue

And cricket needs new teams. Ireland, Afghanistan, Netherlands, Scotland, Nepal, etc need ICC revenues to grow. All of them have the potential

Cool the hype and pay attention to the actual numbers. Divide the money being offered by ICC by the country's population to get the per capita contributions by ICC.

 

[cr7great]

wasting money on ireland,netherland,scotland

 

[amit]

wasting money on ireland,netherland,scotland

Wasting money on BCCI who earn billions of dollars every year for themselves when the money could be spent on countries like Ireland, Netherlands, Scotland, Afghanistan, Nepal, PNG, Kenya, Namibia, etc who have the talent

The leading associates need the money and be competitive rather than giving it to the already filthy rich BCCI

 

[amit]

Pfft take from the poor and make rich more richer, isn't that how the world is?

That's what the BCCI wants to do. They are making the rich more richer and the poor more poorer

 

[amit]

I don't particularly care about what silly academics in universities get agitated about. They are a waste of mental space.

Anyone who thinks FIFA is a role model is seriously deluded, unless the goal is to end up in a US jail.

The governance of cricket has been pretty good till now, with new formats being introduced and new tournaments being successfully conducted. In comparison FIFA (besides being a criminal organization) has done nothing.

FIFA is not corrupt at all. Here are some questions for those who think FIFA is corrupt -

1. Do FIFA talk of reducing Football WC from 32 teams to 24 so that the big teams can get to play more matches in football WC ?
2. Do FIFA plan to have any Big 3,4,5,10 whatever ?
3. Does FIFA cut funding of low ranked Asian & African nations so that the higher ranked European nations can get more funding ?
4. Do FIFA keep the football WC only in European & South American nations and don't allow the low ranked Asian & African nations to host WC ?
5. Does FIFA discourage new countries from taking up football ?

If u can't answer any of these above 5 questions as "Yes", then stop calling FIFA corrupt and thank god that Football has a truly professional and non-corrupt board like FIFA running their sport which looks to expand football all the time

We cricket fans see ICC do the above 5 things all the time and we will happily take a board similar to FIFA to run cricket rather than this corrupted ICC

 

[amit]

How difficult is it for Indians to understand that the BCCI will not be generating its current revenues without the rest of the international cricket community? The only reason Indian revenues have gotten this high is because of a long history of international cricket. But suddenly, cricket is apparently a product of India and Indians should get their share because only they deserve whatever revenue they make. What a simple-minded thought process that is completely devoid of any contemplation.

India generates high revenues because of the quality of international cricket. You will generate nothing close if Sandeep Sharma is bowling to Gautam Gambhir every other day. The older cricketing nations have also helped develop the game in India, who was once a minnow. Its time to pay it back to younger cricket nations. Stop with the jingoism and extreme greediness already, its embarrassing your respectable nation.

Well said

Being a true Indian, I am ashamed of the BCCI and their bullying of the cricket world. Cricket needs to grow. At a time when BCCI should be helping countries like Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, etc, they are instead eating into their share

 

[amit]

I don't particularly care about what silly academics in universities get agitated about. They are a waste of mental space.

Anyone who thinks FIFA is a role model is seriously deluded, unless the goal is to end up in a US jail.

The governance of cricket has been pretty good till now, with new formats being introduced and new tournaments being successfully conducted. In comparison FIFA (besides being a criminal organization) has done nothing.

You need to watch the movie "Death of a gentleman" to realise how corrupt ICC and BCCI are

 

[amit]

In the long run they don't stand to lose much if anything at all. Plus they have 2017 CT and 2019 WC hosting rights.

And neither are the BCCI losing anything in the new model. They have the 2023 WC hosting rights and host IPL every year

 

[Napa]

FIFA is not corrupt at all. Here are some questions for those who think FIFA is corrupt -

1. Do FIFA talk of reducing Football WC from 32 teams to 24 so that the big teams can get to play more matches in football WC ?
2. Do FIFA plan to have any Big 3,4,5,10 whatever ?
3. Does FIFA cut funding of low ranked Asian & African nations so that the higher ranked European nations can get more funding ?
4. Do FIFA keep the football WC only in European & South American nations and don't allow the low ranked Asian & African nations to host WC ?
5. Does FIFA discourage new countries from taking up football ?

If u can't answer any of these above 5 questions as "Yes", then stop calling FIFA corrupt and thank god that Football has a truly professional and non-corrupt board like FIFA running their sport which looks to expand football all the time

We cricket fans see ICC do the above 5 things all the time and we will happily take a board similar to FIFA to run cricket rather than this corrupted ICC

What sort of reasoning is this? The above 5 are the only way in which one can be "corrupt"? Bribing is not "corrupt"? Do you even know that senior FIFA officials have been charged with bribery etc. and are now in US jails?

And as for your "FIFA cut funding of low ranked Asian & African nations so that the higher ranked European nations can get more funding", you do realize that ICC is cutting India's funding to give more funding to countries that include Ireland.

I am not reply to any more of this till I hear something sensible.

 

[JaDed]

You need to watch the movie "Death of a gentleman" to realise how corrupt ICC and BCCI are

That is a point of view Amit,BCCI might have issues but it also has to deal with many associations and players and locations where infrastructure is poor w.r.t cricket.There are obviously shady deals also cricket requires high initial investment esp for batsmen with all the kit and what not so it was never going to get promoted across the world but ICC bringing out T20 has not only made many countries interested in the sport but also the kids playing on street can actually watch and aspire to play the sport.

You are an Associate nation supporter do you think they will capture the crowd imagination with test cricket or T20?Corruption is wrong and there is no way on about how to see it,but BCCI has tried its best to take care of its associations and players(even ex-players),we are not a rich nation but if idealistic behavior is expected out of all our organizations we will be stuck back in 70's with our players hardly making money.

Corrupt officials must be banned if there is an issue, and yes its true BCCI needs ICC but that doesn't mean we give into many of their illogical demands,cricketjoshila has shared some of their new governance rules which are at best shady,this is inspite of BCCI not being involved.

 

[amit]

What sort of reasoning is this? The above 5 are the only way in which one can be "corrupt"? Bribing is not "corrupt"? Do you even know that senior FIFA officials have been charged with bribery etc. and are now in US jails?

And as for your "FIFA cut funding of low ranked Asian & African nations so that the higher ranked European nations can get more funding", you do realize that ICC is cutting India's funding to give more funding to countries that include Ireland.

I am not reply to any more of this till I hear something sensible.

I hope u realise that in 2014 in the Big 3 takeover, BCCI, led by N Srinivasan, cut funding of Associates and affiliates from $550 million to about $230 million, they cut funding of Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, etc as well and increased their own funding from $135 million to $570 million

The current revenue model is more fairer and it restores funding of others to some extent, but more improvement can be done. $293 million is more than enough for BCCI who earn loads of money from other sources

 

[Yossarian]

A load of tosh being spouted yet again.

First of all, the BCCI is a completely separate entity to that of the various Indian tv broadcasters. For any and all matches played under the jurisdiction of the BCCI (IPL, Tests/ODI's/T20's etc), the BCCI auctions the rights to Indian broadcasters for broadcasting within India, and to international broadcasters (such as Sky UK) for broadcasting in their home countries. The BCCI is entitled to all the money generated from these broadcasting rights along with the sponsorship that goes with it.

In the case of ICC tournaments, team India is no more, and no less, than simply being one of the participants. It has absolutely no links whatsoever to any broadcasters or sponsor involved with these tournaments. The 'product' (ie the ICC tournament) belongs to the ICC, and thus to the ICC members as a group, and not to any individual Board such as the BCCI, ECB, CA etc.

ICC, and not the BCCI or ECB or CA .... auctions these rights to various broadcasters for broadcasting in various countries. None of the broadcasters in these countries have any links to the various home Boards. The broadcasters in turn bid an amount based upon how much they think they could generate in revenue and profits from broadcasting these matches to their viewers.

The fact that in some countries (eg the UK and India) the broadcasters feel they could generate considerably more than the broadcasters in other countries is purely dependant upon their own calculations. Whether that is based upon the sheer number of potential viewers (eg India) or upon the purchasing power of the average viewer (eg the UK) is purely down to each bidding broadcaster. In the UK for example, the BBC and ITV could probably get larger viewing numbers, but Sky nearly always wins by bidding higher, despite lower viewership numbers, because it can charge more per viewer due to it being a subscription, and not a 'free to air' broadcaster, and thus is able to pay a larger amount for the rights. But Sky has nothing to do with the ECB or team England.. Similar for the broadcasters in India and the BCCI.

So just like the ECB doesn't 'generate' the money that Sky bids for broadcasting ICC tournaments, the BCCI doesn't 'generate' any money that Indian broadcasters bid for broadcasting in India.

For example, US broadcasters and Arab Gulf countries broadcasters still bid against each other for the rights to broadcast the ICC World Cup and T20 World Cups in their own own countries even when their own national teams are not participating. You don't hear the cricket boards in these countries (where they exist) shouting 'but...but ... this money is generated in our country..!

Is that too difficult to comprehend for those somehow directly equating the BCCI to the amount bid and paid by Indian brodcasters for rights to ICC tournaments?

 

[Junaids]

Well said

Being a true Indian, I am ashamed of the BCCI and their bullying of the cricket world. Cricket needs to grow. At a time when BCCI should be helping countries like Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, etc, they are instead eating into their share

You need to watch the movie "Death of a gentleman" to realise how corrupt ICC and BCCI are

And neither are the BCCI losing anything in the new model. They have the 2023 WC hosting rights and host IPL every year

I really admire the integrity of people like [MENTION=208]amit[/MENTION] who don't take a narrow self-serving view of this issue.

 

[amit]

A load of tosh being spouted yet again.

First of all, the BCCI is a completely separate entity to that of the various Indian tv broadcasters. For any and all matches played under the jurisdiction of the BCCI (IPL, Tests/ODI's/T20's etc), the BCCI auctions the rights to Indian broadcasters for broadcasting within India, and to international broadcasters (such as Sky UK) for broadcasting in their home countries. The BCCI is entitled to all the money generated from these broadcasting rights along with the sponsorship that goes with it.

In the case of ICC tournaments, team India is no more, and no less, than simply being one of the participants. It has absolutely no links whatsoever to any broadcasters or sponsor involved with these tournaments. The 'product' (ie the ICC tournament) belongs to the ICC, and thus to the ICC members as a group, and not to any individual Board such as the BCCI, ECB, CA etc.

ICC, and not the BCCI or ECB or CA .... auctions these rights to various broadcasters for broadcasting in various countries. None of the broadcasters in these countries have any links to the various home Boards. The broadcasters in turn bid an amount based upon how much they think they could generate in revenue and profits from broadcasting these matches to their viewers.

The fact that in some countries (eg the UK and India) the broadcasters feel they could generate considerably more than the broadcasters in other countries is purely dependant upon their own calculations. Whether that is based upon the sheer number of potential viewers (eg India) or upon the purchasing power of the average viewer (eg the UK) is purely down to each bidding broadcaster. In the UK for example, the BBC and ITV could probably get larger viewing numbers, but Sky nearly always wins by bidding higher, despite lower viewership numbers, because it can charge more per viewer due to it being a subscription, and not a 'free to air' broadcaster, and thus is able to pay a larger amount for the rights. But Sky has nothing to do with the ECB or team England.. Similar for the broadcasters in India and the BCCI.

So just like the ECB doesn't 'generate' the money that Sky bids for broadcasting ICC tournaments, the BCCI doesn't 'generate' any money that Indian broadcasters bid for broadcasting in India.

For example, US broadcasters and Arab Gulf countries broadcasters still bid against each other for the rights to broadcast the ICC World Cup and T20 World Cups in their own own countries even when their own national teams are not participating. You don't hear the cricket boards in these countries (where they exist) shouting 'but...but ... this money is generated in our country..!

Is that too difficult to comprehend for those somehow directly equating the BCCI to the amount bid and paid by Indian brodcasters for rights to ICC tournaments?

Well said

This is the reason why after being asked to show the proof of BCCI contributing to 70-80% of ICC revenues, the BCCI supporters have been left with no answer. Because no such proof exists. It is just that sponsors, most of whom happen to be from India pay to the ICC for the rights

And if BCCI had to give something to the ICC, they wouldn't give. BCCI earns 100% of revenues from IPL with ICC getting nothing

 

[amit]

I really admire the integrity of people like [MENTION=208]amit[/MENTION] who don't take a narrow self-serving view of this issue.

I am a true Indian and I will never support if any of my countrymen are doing something wrong. The fact that no one outside India supports BCCI is a big enough proof of BCCI being wrong

There is a line between patriotism and jingoism and people need to understand it

 

[R0H1T]

I am a true Indian and I will never support if any of my countrymen are doing something wrong. The fact that no one outside India supports BCCI is a big enough proof of BCCI being wrong

There is a line between patriotism and jingoism and people need to understand it

And who told you that, an Op Ed on pakpassion? If you bothered to look outside this bubble, called PP, you'd realize that people from other nations also support the BCCI's stance, to a certain extent.

Yeah you're clearly the flag bearer of everything self righteous & socialist in nature, I'm sure the majority of PPers do tons of charity work in the name of cricket &/or God, why don't you join them & see where that takes you?

 

[Junaids]

And who told you that, an Op Ed on pakpassion? If you bothered to look outside this bubble, called PP, you'd realize that people from other nations also support the BCCI's stance, to a certain extent.

Yeah you're clearly the flag bearer of everything self righteous & socialist in nature, I'm sure the majority of PPers do tons of charity work in the name of cricket &/or God, why don't you join them & see where that takes you?

Nobody non-Indian supports the behaviour of the BCCI. I'm English and live in Australia and I'm ashamed of my Boards' roles in the Big Three.

 

[R0H1T]

Nobody non-Indian supports the behaviour of the BCCI. I'm English and live in Australia and I'm ashamed of my Boards' roles in the Big Three.

Right, let's take a look at "the guardian" comments section shall we? Sort the comments section using recommendations & see some of the top responses.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/27/india-champions-trophy-icc-vote-bcci-income-cricket

PP is clearly a bubble, not unlike some Indian boards, but to say that no one supports BCCI, to be more precise that everyone supports the socialistic cause/agenda that ICC & some boards are pushing is a flat out lie. It's easy to see why that is, so while we're at it why don't we bail Greece or any other nation out of their massive debt (ZCB anyone?) or let's make medicare free for all, why should we pay anything to the doctors let them negotiate their rates with the govt who'll likely pay them pennies on the dollar!

 

[Yossarian]

[MENTION=83349]R0H1T[/MENTION] If I can politely suggest, do read post #47 above. That should clarify all this nonsense of board XYZ generating ICC tournament $$$'s.

 

[amit]

Nobody non-Indian supports the behaviour of the BCCI. I'm English and live in Australia and I'm ashamed of my Boards' roles in the Big Three.

Same here. I am Indian and I ashamed of BCCI and their role in creating the Big 3 and cutting the WC from 16 teams to just 10 Instead BCCI should have let WC remain at 16, but pushed for 2 group of 8

 

[R0H1T]

[MENTION=83349]R0H1T[/MENTION] If I can politely suggest, do read post #47 above. That should clarify all this nonsense of board XYZ generating ICC tournament $$$'s.

And I've expressed my views on this in the other thread as well, the BCCI is not India & what drives world cricket is Indian money, not BCCI. The lead broadcaster & the major sponsors should tell you all that you need to know ~ https://iccct.cricket/sponsors

A large part of it coming back to India is in India's interest, anyone else having a full list of sponsors or advertisers (for STAR) should give us a bigger picture. At the end of the day let's not pretend the ICC is the saint here, corrupt or incompetent boards like the Zim & WICB are getting a free ride thanks to the "we'll show you who's the boss" approach by the ICC. In the name of spreading cricket far & wide, do you have any idea what they are doing? OR do you think allocating xyz millions of $ to US or China is enough, is there any accountability in place at the ICC, in terms of developmental goals or free rides that ICC execs get by virtue of them being (part of) the establishment?

Same here. I am Indian and I ashamed of BCCI and their role in creating the Big 3 and cutting the WC from 16 teams to just 10 Instead BCCI should have let WC remain at 16, but pushed for 2 group of 8

That's on the ECB, India vetoed this for the 2015 WC but I guess ECB got backed by all the other 10 saints at the ICC. Seems like you're not only a hypocrite but also ignorant.

 

[Yossarian]

And I've expressed my views on this in the other thread as well, the BCCI is not India & what drives world cricket is Indian money, not BCCI. The lead broadcaster & the major sponsors should tell you all that you need to know ~ https://iccct.cricket/sponsors

A large part of it coming back to India is in India's interest, anyone else having a full list of sponsors or advertisers (for STAR) should give us a bigger picture. At the end of the day let's not pretend the ICC is the saint here, corrupt or incompetent boards like the Zim & WICB are getting a free ride thanks to the "we'll show you who's the boss" approach by the ICC. In the name of spreading cricket far & wide, do you have any idea what they are doing? OR do you think allocating xyz millions of $ to US or China is enough, is there any accountability in place at the ICC, in terms of developmental goals or free rides that ICC execs get by virtue of them being (part of) the establishment?That's on the ECB, India vetoed this for the 2015 WC but I guess ECB got backed by all the other 10 saints at the ICC. Seems like you're not only a hypocrite but also ignorant.

ICC tournaments (ODI & T20 World Cup's, Champions Trophy etc) are also shown in numerous countries other than those directly participating in the tournaments themselves. For example, most of the Gulf states show these matches due to the large numbers of expats from cricket playing countries (from the sub-continent, UK, Australasia etc). Similarly, these tournaments are also bid for and shown by broadcasters in the USA, Canada .. and even in some European countries.

Going by the logic of the Indians, then all the cricket organisations in these other countries should be demanding sizeable chunks of the ICC revenue because it's generated in these countries? Again going by the logic of the Indians, should the ECB get chunks of the IPL revenue because the UK broadcasters pay the BCCI for the rights to show IPL matches in the UK because the money is 'generated' in the UK?

If it were not for the fact that the other Boards are scared stiff of India refusing to tour in their countries, and thus these Boards losing the revenue from selling the rights from these bilateral tours, the Boards will be giving the middle finger to the BCCI and all it's demands.

In fact, if the ICC were to be a fully democratic organisation, with one member one vote, and none of this nonsense of multi-tier membership, with just the 10 'Full members' running the whole show, then the only Boards who will be bowing to the BCCI will be those where the Indian team tours, and the rest not giving a t**s about the BCCI.

 

[R0H1T]

ICC tournaments (ODI & T20 World Cup's, Champions Trophy etc) are also shown in numerous countries other than those directly participating in the tournaments themselves. For example, most of the Gulf states show these matches due to the large numbers of expats from cricket playing countries (from the sub-continent, UK, Australasia etc). Similarly, these tournaments are also bid for and shown by broadcasters in the USA, Canada .. and even in some European countries.

Going by the logic of the Indians, then all the cricket organisations in these other countries should be demanding sizeable chunks of the ICC revenue because it's generated in these countries? Again going by the logic of the Indians, should the ECB get chunks of the IPL revenue because the UK broadcasters pay the BCCI for the rights to show IPL matches in the UK because the money is 'generated' in the UK?

If it were not for the fact that the other Boards are scared stiff of India refusing to tour in their countries, and thus these Boards losing the revenue from selling the rights from these bilateral tours, the Boards will be giving the middle finger to the BCCI and all it's demands.

In fact, if the ICC were to be a fully democratic organisation, with one member one vote, and none of this nonsense of multi-tier membership, with just the 10 'Full members' running the whole show, then the only Boards who will be bowing to the BCCI will be those where the Indian team tours, and the rest not giving a t**s about the BCCI.

Going by your logic shouldn't one of Sky, Fox or any other broadcaster from the gulf ought to have shown interest in securing the telecast rights from the ICC, gee I wonder what happened to all that (expat) interest from the gulf or the states?

Who's fault is it that they aren't able to make a profit, if it weren't for the Indian tours, surely not the BCCI? Why doesn't ICC draft a plan to make these boards better at governance & profitability, but hey they love socialism so cares about sustainable cricket development? Kenya, 2003 WC semi finalists, would like to have a word with you.

It is, for the most part, but unless you also missed the point where their primary objective is making money, cricket is all but a sideshow in this game of balls. The recent amendment also says that the ICC will receive a greater cut from the pie than what they currently do, the variable revenue/expenditure (i.e. more profit) will not benefit member boards but the ICC itself.

Finally it's all India when it comes to cricket, take us out & see what happens, but since this is a kleptocracy it's free lunch for all courtesy the Indian public ~

Electronic Arts have recently announced the release of new cricket game under the banner of ‘EA Sports Cricket 2019’, despite discontinuation of the series back in 2007. EA Sports has decided to venture into the cricket field yet again looking at the popularity in the Indian Market.

EA Sports Cricket 2007 sold over 50 million copies worldwide and approximately 15 million people still play the game. Apart from the statistical fact, the game has been a vital component of every ninety’s born child even though the game did not have player rights for the game. Only Boards of England, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand availed the player rights for the game.

Since then, EA Sports discontinue the release of newer versions of the game annually as they focussed on the release of highly popular FIFA and NBA series. Meanwhile, cricket lovers had to go ahead with other series such as Brian Lara Cricket and Don Bradman cricket.

Seeking the high potential in the market especially in India, EA Sports decided to move forward with the release of EA Sports Cricket 2019 with adequate player rights from all boards especially BCCI. Even though the avid fans of the game have to wait for the game for two years, the announcement might come to them as a pleasant surprise.

“Yes, the board is currently contemplating on how to move forward with the cricket game. We did a market study and realized that close to 15 million people still play the game, even after we stopped producing in 2007. Hence, it only makes sense for us to acknowledge a strong potential there. We are also aware that there are hardly any competitors within this market.” said a source close to Electronic Arts according to Sportskeeda.

Source: https://www.crictracker.com/electron...m_content=News

 

[Usman Chadda]

Going by your logic shouldn't one of Sky, Fox or any other broadcaster from the gulf ought to have shown interest in securing the telecast rights from the ICC, gee I wonder what happened to all that (expat) interest from the gulf or the states?

Who's fault is it that they aren't able to make a profit, if it weren't for the Indian tours, surely not the BCCI? Why doesn't ICC draft a plan to make these boards better at governance & profitability, but hey they love socialism so cares about sustainable cricket development? Kenya, 2003 WC semi finalists, would like to have a word with you.

It is, for the most part, but unless you also missed the point where their primary objective is making money, cricket is all but a sideshow in this game of balls. The recent amendment also says that the ICC will receive a greater cut from the pie than what they currently do, the variable revenue/expenditure (i.e. more profit) will not benefit member boards but the ICC itself.

Finally it's all India when it comes to cricket, take us out & see what happens, but since this is a kleptocracy it's free lunch for all courtesy the Indian public ~

You know its funny reading the replies to this drama from Indians on this forum. You lot predicted the members never going against the BCCI in the ICC board meeting, that fell through. You lot predicted "big, bad BCCI" going downtown on the ICC and pulling out of the Champions Trophy. That fell through. You lot also predicted the BCCI revoking the MPA agreement with dire consequences, that fell through spectacularly with BCCI not taking any legal action so far.

When have you been right? Why should the countless members on this forum take you seriously when all you have done is thumped your chest and make noises while your board gets mercilessly thrashed on the center stage by the same organization you belittle consistently? I think its time to stop making fools out of yourselves and pray your cricket board walks the talk for once.

 

[HitWicket]

That's on the ECB, India vetoed this for the 2015 WC but I guess ECB got backed by all the other 10 saints at the ICC. Seems like you're not only a hypocrite but also ignorant.

Your source on the votes for this?

 

[R0H1T]

Your source on the votes for this?

Like I said the other 10 saints

ICC confirms 10 teams for next two World Cups

Associates be damned, yup such was the enthusiasm on this board ~ http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/story/521049.html

Much like what transpired on the opening day of the ICC conference, when the discussion on the FTP and the DRS was pushed over to the next morning due to the intensity of the debate, discussions on Tuesday around the proposed amendment over the appointment of the ICC president were also postponed to Wednesday. At Tuesday's meeting, the first move towards overturning the Executive Board's original plan to restrict the 2015 World Cup to full member nations came from the BCCI.

So all the saints & charity owners can rejoice at their hypocrisy!

 

[R0H1T]

You know its funny reading the replies to this drama from Indians on this forum. You lot predicted the members never going against the BCCI in the ICC board meeting, that fell through. You lot predicted "big, bad BCCI" going downtown on the ICC and pulling out of the Champions Trophy. That fell through. You lot also predicted the BCCI revoking the MPA agreement with dire consequences, that fell through spectacularly with BCCI not taking any legal action so far.

When have you been right? Why should the countless members on this forum take you seriously when all you have done is thumped your chest and make noises while your board gets mercilessly thrashed on the center stage by the same organization you belittle consistently? I think its time to stop making fools out of yourselves and pray your cricket board walks the talk for once.

You know what's even funnier is to strip naked the hypocrites & their arguments, sure let's about the BCCI when the real BCCI is in power, till then pray do tell how the CT (or any other ICC event) will be a resounding success without Indian participation?

Who cares about the sentiments of countless members on this forum, I'm here to state facts & some opinions, if you can't handle facts then so be it. The BCCI lost at the ICC because they were outnumbered 13(?)-1 on the hypocrite, err I mean the socialist vote. The saints at the ICC, CA, ECB, PCB, CSA et al are emptying their cash registers to make the game an even bigger spectacle. The BCCI, even though for it's own benefit, has done more for cricket in the last 10 years (since the first WT20) than the ICC has done for the last so many years.

But since it's the evil BCCI, no two _____ will be wasted, just like none were on some of the hypocrite & ignorant sentiments. The lot that does charity work can carry on, the other one that sings hymns & songs about the charitable ICC & the other ten saints can carry on with their good work as well. I won't bother with the circle ____ no more.

 

[Usman Chadda]

You know what's even funnier is to strip naked the hypocrites & their arguments, sure let's about the BCCI when the real BCCI is in power, till then pray do tell how the CT (or any other ICC event) will be a resounding success without Indian participation?

Who cares about the sentiments of countless members on this forum, I'm here to state facts & some opinions, if you can't handle facts then so be it. The BCCI lost at the ICC because they were outnumbered 13(?)-1 on the hypocrite, err I mean the socialist vote. The saints at the ICC, CA, ECB, PCB, CSA et al are emptying their cash registers to make the game an even bigger spectacle. The BCCI, even though for it's own benefit, has done more for cricket in the last 10 years (since the first WT20) than the ICC has done for the last so many years.

But since it's the evil BCCI, no two _____ will be wasted, just like none were on some of the hypocrite & ignorant sentiments. The lot that does charity work can carry on, the other one that sings hymns & songs about the charitable ICC & the other ten saints can carry on with their good work as well. I won't bother with the circle ____ no more.

Who cares aboutYOUR opinion or YOUR twisted facts? All I read is more talk without any substance. Here's a fact for you, BCCI has been thrashed around on the world stage by ICC quite comprehensively. You can return with this rubbish IF and WHEN BCCI is in a position to save some face.

 

[Specialisttailender]

Logically I can't take the side of BCCI. I try my best to see from BCCI's supporters but I logically can't. If a neutral fan can't take BCCI's side, even when some indians can't take BCCI's side maybe those of you who are defending BCCI should start doubting your choice. It's the same guys again and again )

 

[R0H1T]

Who cares aboutYOUR opinion or YOUR twisted facts? All I read is more talk without any substance. Here's a fact for you, BCCI has been thrashed around on the world stage by ICC quite comprehensively. You can return with this rubbish IF and WHEN BCCI is in a position to save some face.

It's pretty obvious who does but hey don't let hormones get in the way of a nice thumb fight.

In the meantime CA isn't so keen on getting it's honorary badge of sainthood renewed, the others (including the ICC) can keep it in the meantime ~ www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/story/1097409.html