World Cricketers' Association calls for a more equitable revenue distribution and a revamp of the ICC's governance model

[rpant_gabba]

Here is the list of ICC committees showing the WCA/FICA designated positions: https://www.icc-cricket.com/about/the-icc/structure/committees.

Thanks

They were very vocal critics of those changes. Notably the majority of the changes made at the time were reversed in some way (either fully or partially) a short while later.

In other words, they were ignored on the the crux issue

 

[rpant_gabba]

They were very vocal critics of those changes. Notably the majority of the changes made at the time were reversed in some way (either fully or partially) a short while later.

what major changes were introduced in 2023?

 

[HitWicket]

what major changes were introduced in 2023?

I mixed up the years you were using in your pot and assumed you were still referring to the 2014 changes.

 

[rpant_gabba]

I mixed up the years you were using in your pot and assumed you were still referring to the 2014 changes.

sure.

So the major revenue share in model 2023, did the FICA/WCA go along with or could do nothing to stop it?

 

[HitWicket]

sure.

So the major revenue share in model 2023, did the FICA/WCA go along with or could do nothing to stop it?

I can't find any public comments from the time, given their report I think it's safe to assume they didn't agree with it.

 

[rpant_gabba]

I can't find any public comments from the time, given their report I think it's safe to assume they didn't agree with it.

and couldn't do f'all to stop it

guessing their say in the votes thro' their positions on sub-committees of the CEC was as useful as used toilet paper

BTW, glad you woke up and joined the thread.

 

[rpant_gabba]

They were very vocal critics of those changes. Notably the majority of the changes made at the time were reversed in some way (either fully or partially) a short while later.

I'm guess it was all WCA/FICA and nothing to do with Shashank Manohar and Indian supreme court handicapping the BCCI

 

[HitWicket]

Sanjog Gupta, part of the panel who put together this report, has just been appointed ICC CEO.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Sanjog Gupta, part of the panel who put together this report, has just been appointed ICC CEO.

and? wasn't Lorgat CEO of ICC at some point?

 

[U$ofA]

These Cricketers Associations are a waste of time. They don't get anywhere. I remember the one headed by Tim May. He tried for years but could not get anywhere or accomplish much. Not sure if that organization is still active.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Was WCA able to do anything for BCB in the WC issue? or simply a lame moral support like PCB?

 

[sweep_shot]

Dissolve ICC. Launch a new cricketing governing body. Exclude India or limit their influence.

 

[Hitman]

Dissolve ICC. Launch a new cricketing governing body. Exclude India or limit their influence.

Yea, because PCB and BCB are unhappy with ICC.

 

[U$ofA]

Dissolve ICC. Launch a new cricketing governing body. Exclude India or limit their influence.

Yea, because PCB and BCB are unhappy with ICC.

No point in dissolving the ICC. The one that replaces it will do the same.

The goal should be to have a strong governing body. Where there is less chances for one board's influence. As with everything in the real world, $$$$$ is the main sticking point. $$$$$ is what runs things. That needs to be addressed.

One of the ways to do that would be to reverse the current revenue model. Sort of a subscription model. Where the member boards contribute equally to the ICC for it's annual budget.

Not sure that will work though. Given that the ICC and the boards have tasted the current model and seem to like it very much. Likely there will be no push back. The PCB and BCB seem to attempt at a change. But they do not have much traction or support from the rest. Things will continue as is.

 

[rpant_gabba]

<Bump>

Any updates on this?

 

[U$ofA]

<Bump>

Any updates on this?

I am going to take a wild guess and say, nothing has changed!

Everyone from the ICC on down have savored BCCI $$. No way any of them want anything to change.

Sure the PCB and BCB have now forged a new path. This could be considered a change. Let's wait and see where this leads to.

 

[rpant_gabba]

I am going to take a wild guess and say, nothing has changed!

Everyone from the ICC on down have savored BCCI $$. No way any of them want anything to change.

Sure the PCB and BCB have now forged a new path. This could be considered a change. Let's wait and see where this leads to.

But, but... they have the CEO in their pocket... they are in key committees... blah blah blah

@HitWicket tell him bro.

 

[harshjoshi87]

BCCI have already arranged fixtures against Afghanistan (June 2026), Ireland (June 2026), England (July 2026), Sri Lanka (August 2026), Zimbabwe (September 2026), Afghanistan (September 2026), West Indies (October 2026), New Zealand (November 2026), Sri Lanka (December 2026) & Australia (Jan-Feb 2027).

There is a remote chance of India playing Pakistan in Asian Games in Japan in September 2026.

After keeping all the teams & their cricket boards happy, BCCI will keep its 40% share as they generate 80-85% of the total ICC revenue.

 

[Josh]

I am going to take a wild guess and say, nothing has changed!

Everyone from the ICC on down have savored BCCI $$. No way any of them want anything to change.

Sure the PCB and BCB have now forged a new path. This could be considered a change. Let's wait and see where this leads to.

Bangladesh are going to leave this camp soon and get back to BCCICC camp or be neutral. This will be a betrayal to the brotherly mulq of Pakistani

 

[sithb]

The only way things will change is if Pakistan cricket becomes economically strong enough to force the changes needed through. They need to be a net contributor to ICC and not a board which relies on ICC funding to function.

 

[sithb]

Pakistan and/or bangladesh.

 

[HitWicket]

But, but... they have the CEO in their pocket... they are in key committees... blah blah blah

@HitWicket tell him bro.

Putting aside the bit where you seem to have decided to put words in my mouth again, the fact you seem happy the BCCI have been shutting down any ideas that favour world cricket because it would benefit other nations and practically leave them unaffected says it all. You're not interested in global cricket, you're just another overly nationalistic zealot.

 

[Sachin fan]

Putting aside the bit where you seem to have decided to put words in my mouth again, the fact you seem happy the BCCI have been shutting down any ideas that favour world cricket because it would benefit other nations and practically leave them unaffected says it all. You're not interested in global cricket, you're just another overly nationalistic zealot.

Prove that communist way of working in cricket will actually improve world cricket. In the past, when unearned money has been thrown at boards, it's only resulted in corruption and players not being treated fairly. None of those cricket teams improved.

If we only distribute the money equally and ignore the supply and demand, earth will become like heaven - is a very childish thinking not rooted in reality.

That's not how money and finances have worked ever in any field.

 

[Sachin fan]

Sure the PCB and BCB have now forged a new path. This could be considered a change. Let's wait and see where this leads to.

That was only under the previous government. The new government is trying to fix things with india and considering the global climate, they really do need India.

 

[Josh]

Prove that communist way of working in cricket will actually improve world cricket. In the past, when unearned money has been thrown at boards, it's only resulted in corruption and players not being treated fairly. None of those cricket teams improved.

If we only distribute the money equally and ignore the supply and demand, earth will become like heaven - is a very childish thinking not rooted in reality.

That's not how money and finances have worked ever in any field.

Right! Money must be earned. Obviously a support is needed too and one can argue about it how much support each board needs. But to divide money equally is childish.

 

[sweep_shot]

Current cricketing status quo is very discriminatory.

We need to go back to pre-BCCICC days or have something new. Current system is stupid.

 

[HitWicket]

Prove that communist way of working in cricket will actually improve world cricket. In the past, when unearned money has been thrown at boards, it's only resulted in corruption and players not being treated fairly. None of those cricket teams improved.

If we only distribute the money equally and ignore the supply and demand, earth will become like heaven - is a very childish thinking not rooted in reality.

That's not how money and finances have worked ever in any field.

The WCA proposals never involved money being distributed equally.

 

[sweep_shot]

Current cricketing status quo is very discriminatory.

We need to go back to pre-BCCICC days or have something new. Current system is stupid.

Current status quo only benefits India.

Cricket is meant to be a global sport and not about one particular country.

 

[sithb]

Other countries need to protect their distribution rights more. Even for bilaterals for that matter.

A sizable chunk of Pakistani population watches Pakistani cricket using Indian dishes(especially spread across major cities and border areas). Another sizable chunk using illegal streams. This figure hits high when PCB wants to sell their bilateral tournament rights. How would they get fair market value when a huge chunk watches through illegal methods. Even if 2m to 3m use indian dish TV, the blowback is huge in terms of how PCB monetizes their tv rights

Fix those first and you'll see the Pakistani TV rights increase in value and then have a bigger space in the bargaining table because Pakistan does really generate that revenue.

 

[sithb]

Prove that communist way of working in cricket will actually improve world cricket. In the past, when unearned money has been thrown at boards, it's only resulted in corruption and players not being treated fairly. None of those cricket teams improved.

If we only distribute the money equally and ignore the supply and demand, earth will become like heaven - is a very childish thinking not rooted in reality.

That's not how money and finances have worked ever in any field.

Pakistan is earning more than what they were earning 20 years back. If they really want to earn more , monetize the Pakistan market fully , get better at cricket and be a net contributor to the icc instead of having to rely on icc revenue.

Pretty sure none of the major boards will have a problem when they find that pcb is pulling it's weight and their tv audience is generating money.

 

[just a fan]

Current status quo only benefits India.

Cricket is meant to be a global sport and not about one particular country.

More

 

[Sachin fan]

The WCA proposals never involved money being distributed equally.

Ok, replace the world equally in my post, with the word more. The point still stands

 

[HitWicket]

Ok, replace the world equally in my post, with the word more. The point still stands

How exactly do you expect associates to develop things to improve their own revenue sources on $150k of funding a month (just about enough to give a full squad of players a reasonable livable wage in many countries) and no structure in place to actually give them the regular fixtures that will allow them to develop better revenue streams themselves.

 

[U$ofA]

Prove that communist way of working in cricket will actually improve world cricket. In the past, when unearned money has been thrown at boards, it's only resulted in corruption and players not being treated fairly. None of those cricket teams improved.

If we only distribute the money equally and ignore the supply and demand, earth will become like heaven - is a very childish thinking not rooted in reality.

That's not how money and finances have worked ever in any field.

Spot on. Free money never works out well. In any situation. When you don't earn your money, you never realize the value of it.

Sure there are boards that need monetary help. And they should get it. But there should be an end game to it. No $$$ given perpetually. I would say 5-7 years max. That too with stringent monitoring and result oriented.

I would not include the perennially corrupt and incompetent boards CWI, SLC, Zim. In the above list. I think they have been given enough $$$ and time to right their course.

Few of the assosiates can be given the opportunity and see where there get to.

 

[U$ofA]

How exactly do you expect associates to develop things to improve their own revenue sources on $150k of funding a month (just about enough to give a full squad of players a reasonable livable wage in many countries) and no structure in place to actually give them the regular fixtures that will allow them to develop better revenue streams themselves.

I agree, to a certain extent. They should be supported. But with a preset end date/game. No $$ in perpetuity. And with strict oversight. The boards must be transparent. Set a timline and pre-requisite to produce results. There must be consquences and responsibilities.

 

[sithb]

so that actually requires more money going out to developing cricket nations

 

[rpant_gabba]

How exactly do you expect associates to develop things to improve their own revenue sources on $150k of funding a month (just about enough to give a full squad of players a reasonable livable wage in many countries) and no structure in place to actually give them the regular fixtures that will allow them to develop better revenue streams themselves.

Same way India developed without any external funding

 

[rpant_gabba]

Given that there is possibility of WCA goals with BCCI involved,

Will WCA push for a international cricket organization w/o BCCi?

 

[rpant_gabba]

A possible model could be where the 500+ professional cricketers work together, redistributing their income and do a collaborative negotiation with ICC where they all get a standard minimum salary while the likes of Cummins thro in their full cricketing income in to the pot, including endorsement revenue

Bit like how the cast of Friends worked together

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/31/entertainment/friends-cast-contract-negotiations-matthew-perry

If not, it’s just lip service

 

[HitWicket]

Same way India developed without any external funding

You're kidding right? The BCCI were happy taking an equal handout to other boards for years whilst contributing very little to that revenue. Suddenly their contribution to that revenue increases and they decide their handout should increase and other boards shouldn't be given the same opportunity.

 

[rpant_gabba]

You're kidding right? The BCCI were happy taking an equal handout to other boards for years whilst contributing very little to that revenue.

Really? when exactly was india taking handouts while contributing very little? bring the source.

the 1st. WC outside England happened becos India was willing to increase the prize money to new levels which Prudential was not willing to

Bring your source.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Only brainless clowns or lying scumbags will be under state that India contributed very little while taking handouts.

Which one are you @HitWicket ?

either way I'll gladly have you as a competitor.

https://gulfnews.com/sport/cricket/icc/icc-mens-cricket-world-cup-the-evolution-of-prize-money-over-the-years-1.98280300

When India hosted the Reliance World Cup in 1987 for the first time away from England, the total prize money stood at $160,000 with the winners receiving approximately $53,000 and the runners-up $21,000. Today, a group stage win earns teams almost the same money as the World Cup winners of the past.
West Indies, who won the first World Cup in 1975, received $9,000 while the runners-up $4,500 and the semifinalists $2,250 each. The prize money more than doubled in the next edition in 1979 when West Indies won for the second time, defeating hosts England by 92 runs. That effort got them $21,000 while England were content with $8,500.
When India stopped West Indies from winning their third straight title, the Kapil Devils were awarded $31,000. Though the winners’ prize money doubled again to £20,000 in 1983, the weak pound translated to a lesser amount then.

 

[HitWicket]

Only brainless clowns or lying scumbags will be under state that India contributed very little while taking handouts.

Which one are you @HitWicket ?

either way I'll gladly have you as a competitor.

https://gulfnews.com/sport/cricket/icc/icc-mens-cricket-world-cup-the-evolution-of-prize-money-over-the-years-1.98280300

When India hosted the Reliance World Cup in 1987 for the first time away from England, the total prize money stood at $160,000 with the winners receiving approximately $53,000 and the runners-up $21,000. Today, a group stage win earns teams almost the same money as the World Cup winners of the past.
West Indies, who won the first World Cup in 1975, received $9,000 while the runners-up $4,500 and the semifinalists $2,250 each. The prize money more than doubled in the next edition in 1979 when West Indies won for the second time, defeating hosts England by 92 runs. That effort got them $21,000 while England were content with $8,500.
When India stopped West Indies from winning their third straight title, the Kapil Devils were awarded $31,000. Though the winners’ prize money doubled again to £20,000 in 1983, the weak pound translated to a lesser amount then.

Not sure why you're going on about prize money in a conversation about excess revenue distribution. From that very first world cup until 2014 the excess revenue was distributed equally between participating teams/later ICC full members with the exception of a small fee to cover hosting costs. India benefited from this equal handout even at times when they weren't the largest revenue generator.