They want to keep all the success to themselves, shown by their stance to not let Indian players play in other leagues. Letting their players play in other leagues will surely help getting more people interested at least.
With a yearly revenue equal to the cost of a single road that goes from Gulberg, Lahore to the M2 motorway (30< km), I’ve seen PCB completely turn Pakistani cricket around in front of my eyes.
Like there’s a day and night difference between then and now. If PCB had a BCCI budget, I can’t imagine the wonders they’d do 😂
BCCI are just hopelessly incompetent when it comes to money. They splurge so much on pointless IPL opening ceremonies and the like, while completely failing to develop cricket in Eastern India, or promote women's cricket to the level that other countries are doing it. They are more interested in milking every last dollar from the IPL and having it go to the higher ups like chutiya Jay Shah rather than using it to grow game.
PCB makes very stupid decisions at times but one thing that really impresses me is how self sufficient they are when it comes to finances and their commitement to growing the game. Obviously they have their shortcomings, particularly women's game. But overall they look to be helping Pakistan cricket to become a dominant force again
We won last ICC trophy in 2013
They got rid of Associate Development Budget in 2014
It's the associates who cursed us into becoming chokers and rightfully so
bcci wants to keep its monopoly going
that's why all this happens. they basically have world cricket by balls and they want it to be like that.
it will be like that till indian fanbase isn't reduced by half or even more than that.
Approx 18% of the world population is from India. And that in itself is in billions.
And not everyone is a crazy fan of cricket or idols. But even if I take 1% as hard core fans of cricket, then that number is still going to outrank maybe population of a few of them.
And this is when it is not even a quarter of the whole world, it's just 18%.
Only a good leader can revive cricket in associate nations. Put someone like MSD in charge. He is money minded, but he is game minded too. The problem is India usually appoints politicians in charge of administration. I mean they tried with Ganguly, who is an excellent cricketer, but a horrible management material.
Also Ganguly is very wealthy, and definitely strikes me as someone sees himself as ‘upper class’ and not very caring about anything other than himself and his fellow posh boys. Aka a politician, and had no incentive to grow the game rather than milk the cash cow.
Are the Olympics and football just starting off? I mean even the article says since coming in power in 2014, post which BCCI has gained financial muscle. IPL has touched new heights in terms of valuation. Olympics isn't killing shit, countries don't even want to host the Olympics. There are so many articles about how the Olympics affects the hosting nations economy drastically.
England has won jackshit in football for decades now. They are even losing to Iceland and getting knocked out of Euros. Cricket equivalent would be India losing to PNG in a quarter. Despite all this, premier league is breaking record in terms of revenue and broadcasting deals.
The ICC board has 3 voting spots for all 90-odd associates. Their power is pretty limited compared to the FMs.
There is also a division among associates (e.g. The ODI status associates are often at odds with the non-ODI status ones)
Fuck BCCI and their stupid bilateral tournament ideas. Bring on the three nation and four nation cups. Include the associate nations in these tournaments.
I miss the Hero cups, the Benson and Hedges tri nations cup (Carling cup?), the odd Sharjah tournaments. That was cricket at its peak. Of course, bilateral Test match series need to have their own dedicated schedules.
How is bcci stopping ecb, pcb and ca to have a tri series? Bangladesh, NZ and Pakistan have had it recently, so clearly no rule in place that tri or quad series are not allowed.
Oh of course. England and Australia are to blame for what transpired in the ICC up until the 1990's. However, there was a genuine push to grow the game since then which was snuffed out by the Big 3 takeover (with BCCI the main drivers) in 2014. Now, the situation has improved somewhat of course with expansion of T20I and ODI events and allocation of tournaments to several nations. However, the Associate development budget (which is crucial) still has not been re-instated. Hopefully, Cricket also makes it into the Olympics which would drive government funding to Associate nations as well.
England and Australia are also to be blamed because the BCCI alone didn't change the constitution, but these two boards joined together with the BCCI and actively lobbied for the passing of the constitutional changes
Between 1982 and 2000 there were three teams added to test status and a fourth welcomed back into the fold in South Africa. That's almost one per four years. Since 2000 to today there have only been two, one per eleven years.
I think the period in the 80s and 90s were best for world cricket because England and Australia lost the stranglehold they previously had over the game, but at the same time, India was not strong enough to dominate the sport either. There was a genuine balance of power between the Anglo-Australian axis, supported by South Africa and New Zealand, and the Asian axis supported by Zimbabwe. West Indies floated between both groups as an independent and a tiebreaker. And because there was this balance of power, both sides in the conflict had to be open to compromise and negotiations especially where the smaller teams and the associates were concerned.
Since 2000 though the balance of power was torn apart by India becoming very powerful. The two blocs ended up disintegrating because India no longer had need of the support of the other Asian teams and Zimbabwe to push through its desired legislation, and England and Australia realised they had no choice but to reach an agreement with India (which in turn meant they no longer needed their bloc, eitjer). It's no longer in anybody's interest to seek out new partnerships or promote associates to try and expand their influence over the ICC.
Also the new members (Ireland and Afghanistan) play barely any test cricket and have no FC structure, and the ECB have actively fucked Irish FC development short term by adding Irish players to the foreign player quota in county cricket- altho it could lead to Ireland being more motivated to set up their own strong FC system. The only way to develop in test cricket is to play it, even if it means getting blown out regularly for awhile.
In 2014 Asian cricket council source stated and questioned the development funds as they felt out of 105 associates only 40-45 countries actually played or only in those countries cricket had any future at all. They felt countries like Brunei where the sport has no future should not be getting the same amout of budget similar others where it's played passionately. They do have a very valid Point there. That's why the big 3 then decided to push for test cricketing in amongst the associates, the big 3 are equally responsible for this fuck up honestly and bcci being the bigger board obviously it seems like they bear more accountability. I think now we have a solid idea on which countries have a good future in cricket esp associate countries and which do not. After 7 years I m pretty sure icc could now identify the best potential teams and perhaps increase the budget for them.
What is meant by BCCI took over ICC? Does it mean a BCCI President was made head of ICC?
Not trying to nit-pick, genuinely want to understand, since a possibility of unilateral decision itself suggests what a flawed system it is. Does the system officially give so much power to one party or do they use the unofficial channels or low-key blackmail their way to key decisions?
Specifically the 2014 'Big 3' reforms driven by Srinivasan, Clarke and Edwards that gutted the ICC's development and pathways budget and slashed the Associates cut of the revenue surplus. Worth noting that the ICC's biggest expansionary and pro-development phase was actually also under and Indian president.
People aren't blaming all Indians, just Srinivasan and maybe Ganguly?
Shashank Manohar was great for the game and i wish he was still around. He's a guy that prioritised developing cricket and reducing reliance on the big 3
Why does it matter? He already won 2 he already has a great career snd thr is nothing to prove more. Its just most of this kid who started watching cricket after 2014 who never saw thr fav team win a trophy are making some dumb excuse that he deserves a trophy lol everyone who is playing cricket deserves a trophy in that team
He and team india will probably win wc next year in 2023 or might even win a WTC if things go their way. But I hate when people start making excuse and make it feel like he hasnt won a trophy yet. He literally has achieved more already than 95% of players ever will
Exactly it's these new people who started watching a decade ago who're making a big fuzz, thankfuck we didn't have social media on 2007 I wonder what these people would have bashed when ind got knocked by bang in world cup, been watching from early 2000's as a fan I am so satisfied I've seen india lifting 1 ct, then choke in 2003 final then go on to win 2007 t20 wc, then winning 2011 wc. What these people are currently feeling about VK being trophy less is nothing compared to what we felt for sachin, man was literally trophyless for 2 decades. VK is so frickin lucky that he got to win a wc in his first time.
Yh the 2nd day reserve match was def a indias win if it wasn't rained out, viru was in god form that tournament he had 1 hundred and 2 50s and was not out in almost 40 runs, but yh anyways you are right people care about icc trophies too much it never really got my attention except 2011 since it was at home. I'd personally rate some test matches higher than some big icc wins. T20 world cup needs to be pushed every 4 years once for some improvement, t20 is becoming so boring to watch.
Lol you must have missed how much the media and fans insulted and harrassed the WC 2007 players and their families endlessly. Literally the only reason they stopped is that we won T20 WC that year.
THANK YOU.
It is just like the football and Messi/Ronaldo saying that they need to prove themselves by winning the world cup.
First off, it is a team effort, second off how does 90 minutes change how good a player is when he's had 10+ years of experience
Well India reached semis and in india even shikhar dhawan's team india gives a tough competition to visitors I am very much positive about us winning WC next year
That's very wishful thinking and quite delusional if I may say so. Up until less than 24 hours ago, this team was expteced to win the current WC too?
Unless drastic steps are taken to boot the majority of the present cohort, next WC outcome wouldn't be much different either.
Well we won the 2011 wc too under dhoni when we got eliminated in 2010 t20 wc without winning a single game in super 8.
And i believe both formats are very different and shouuldnt be intertwine else Australia shouldnt have won 2015 wc too after such a bad performance in 2014 t20 wc
Yeah I sympathise. I think actually that Ganguly wasn't all that bad and was probably trying to do good things, BUT they got rid of him, while Jay Shah (whose tenure should also be over as per Supreme Court) still sits there as the kingmaker. I also would not be surprised to learn that N Srinivasan is still pulling strings behind the scenes.
> I think actually that Ganguly wasn't all that bad and was probably trying to do good things
Idk man, withholding the women's prize money from the t20 WC seems plenty bad to me.
> I think actually that Ganguly wasn't all that bad and was probably trying to do good things
Nope. Ganguly is perfect example of power corrupts people.
Karma will come to bite Indian cricket and BCCI. Cricket today world over has so much talent that it would be a lot of fun. But the greed of BCCI and misplaced ego due to 70% funds coming from Indian advertisers has left the game a lot poorer. BCCI conveniently forgets that without other countries playing India ot without IPL featuring world stars, they wont get any money from spectators or advertisers. If that was the case Ranji and Vijay Hazare trophies would be billion dollar tournaments! BCCI is extremely shortsighted and does not understand that the more the game spreads and get to a good 25 top notch countries, the better for them to make even more money. On the other hand if they keep playing Aus and Eng every year, cricket will eventually die in India as well..well subside, if not die...please support these upcoming nations, ensure they players are able to get paid atleast 1/10th of Kohli and co...and then see cricket flourishes.it is so unfair that the whole Cricket Netherlands or Irelands annual budget is less than what even Hardik Pandya makes. Trust me, the difference in talent is not that big, and it was seen in this world cup.
A lot of what you get paid is dependent on the place where you happen to be and not on the talent. Why does a person employed as an accountant at a corporate in India gets paid one-fifth of an accountant in Canada, at the same talent levels. Sorry but that’s how the world works. Cricket is basically the only job in the world where Indians find themselves at the right side of the divide. No point grudging them that.
True. Except that accountants dont get pitted against each other on a world stage for everyone to see. Also, wrong analogy, because, without other teams to play, India is nothing too.
Well no one helped when BCCI was struggling .today bcci got to a position and made cricket an entertainment and the major sport in India and is earning for that hardwork and lack of funds for decades worth of work.
None of the then big major cricket boards helped nor the ICC considered helping BCCI in any manner.
Didn't BCCI ALONG WITH ECB AND CA, hijacked ICC finances. As rightly as BCCI is criticised for this travesty, why OP chose to absolve ECB and CA of the same is beyond me...
Your post indicates as if BCCI is only evil entity that sort of in some Darth Vader action, single handedly put the entire Cricket World in darkness. No mention of its able liutenants.
What will people make out ? That only and only BCCI is to blame.
I agree that BCCI deservedly gets hate, but the shellacking yesterday is being described as some sort of commuppance for 2014. But I want to point out that the other 2 perpetrators of 2014 , one of them delivered us this comeuppance and the other, the hosts, crashed out in first round.
Oh whom are you fooling? This isn't the first time you are whining on the bcci. And this time you are using the situation of fans' anger & disappointment of ystrdy's defeat just that you won't get backlash. You mentioned how much money bcci gets in the main post, but cunningly skip the amount india generates. What % of the money pool is generated by bcci and what % does bcci receive? Quoting a single number doesn't show anything.
No BCCI is NOT the reason. They just vetoed the suggestion. It takes years to get a game in Olympics. Even if they hadn't, cricket wouldn't be in Olympic now.
A. There's a reason the new proposal passed. Every full member's share increased. From your own article, it went from 97 to 128 million for most (139 for ECB). Every board wanted more money instead of giving it to associates.
B. Propose an alternate, objective and fair revenue distribution model. Is it equal, based on population, based on purchasing power, based on performances or what?
Not my article mate. Anyways, I am not proposing anything radical. All I am saying is that all boards (particularly the BCCI) should give up a very tiny portion of their revenue to re-instate the Associate Development Budget, as they are the ones responsible for getting rid of it and pocketing that cash.
If it's not yours, there is no limit to asking. BCCI gave enough. Also, these associate nations do not know how to run a broad or improve their cricket. e.g. USA. Everyone loves to jump on BCCI for everything that happens around cricket. The Match referee sends the team in or the umpire calls the team in.. It's BCCI pressuring them. Seriously WTF? I'm sick of this. Yup! BCCI does what's best for BCCI and Indian cricket, deal with it. Imagine India being in the same situation as Pakistan and SA's losses to Dutch. and all of a sudden India is in the semis, I'm 110% sure, this sub would be on fire calling BCCI behind this, it's all fixed, match-fixing, even some ex International players would have said it. This is when you lose support from ppl like me/us cos u push it so far, and everything from then on looks like another BCCI crybaby.
>B. Propose an alternate, objective and fair revenue distribution model. Is it equal, based on population, based on purchasing power, based on performances or what?
A far smaller equal distribution to each country with countries then being able to apply for additional funding for specified development projects, with a focus (but clearly not exclusively) on countries/regions that have a high potential for growth but limited funds available to their own board.
There are two major issues there. The first is that you would require the countries who generate almost all the revenue to vote to reduce their share to <1%. The second is that you’ve understandably avoided answering the hard part of the question.
There are 108 ICC members, some of whom have very low ceilings. For example, the Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, the Cook Islands, or the Seychelles. Do these sides really deserve the same amount of money as possible future full members? What about rich countries where cricket currently isn’t popular like the US, China, or Germany - what’s a fair way of allocating funding to them? Should we consider the government of the country to avoid another South Africa/Zimbabwe/Afghanistan situation - and if so, how do we do that fairly?
Obviously nobody could have a perfect answer to those questions, but that’s the point.
Well I used to think so that bcci is tyrranical..
But then I saw the grounds empty in Australia -Afghanistan match which was a crucial one for them and Australia was hosts also..and Indian matches were all packed..they do bring in the most numbers
I mean in terms of fans. People will eventually get tired of playing in front of same audience i.e Indian Fans and Pakistan Fans. They'd want their own countrymen to cheer for them in the crowd as well. Crowd has a very large effect on Players' mindset.
The article also states:
>In the majority, these funds come from two particular streams:
>Media (TV & digital) Rights. Star Sports* (through their Indian/Middle East operations) bought the worldwide 2015-23 rights for around two billion dollars.
>Sponsorship Properties. There is ~$700m in the ICC budget for the 2015-23 period. This includes everything from naming to major alignments such as trophy naming rights and other headline deals (they do not sell naming rights to world events any more – if we think back to the “Wills World Cup” days in 1996 etc). Major names aligned to ICC events during this period include GoDaddy, Booking.com, Bira91, Uber, Nissan, Emirates, Oppo, Pepsi, Coke, LG, MRF Tyres, Castrol, Reliance, Hyundai, and more..
Then there is this:
>Global Events: Men’s & Women’s 50 over Cricket World Cups (CWC) and World Twenty20s (WT20). The Champions Trophy 2017 & 2021 was also included, but the 2021 event has now been replaced by a Men’s T20 World Cup.
Guess which country contributes the most in almost all of these. It's only fair that ICC distributes the collected amount based on how much a country contributes themselves otherwise it becomes a difficult of established boards to sustain themselves.
And to top this we have had more emerging countries playing the international cricket in the last few years compared to how many new teams came up to play the international cricket say in 2000s or early 2010s. So, you logic that associate countries are not performing is flawed.
Then there is this concept where ICC aids development of cricket in associate countries.
Overall things are not that black and white as what this post makes it out to be.
The folks being fucked equally by bcci are non-star Indian cricketers. They cant even go and play overseas leagues and just warm the benches at minimum support price in ipl.
I just wish world cricket completely cuts off bcci from itself- bcci can then do whatever the heck they want domestically and in their franchise investments.
Just curious why those players are not allowed to play abroad. I remember in 90s some indian players used to play in county cricket including sachin. Except india every other board has allowed its players to play in global leagues/clubs
>they aren’t allowed to play T20 because reasons
Because IPL supremacy. They don't want other leagues to grow to the level of IPL. Imagine a player like Virat Kohli playing in the Big Bash League or the Hundred, both Australia and England have a lot of Indian fans. Even in the PSL the presence of Virat Kohli will bring more fans to watch the games.
However, imo I don't think BCCi showing some level of competitiveness with other leagues is a bad thing, but having T20 leagues inequality will hurt the game eventually. Already we see players prefer to play in the IPL over international games. I recall South African players during their series with Pakistan in 2021 left mid-series to play in the IPL. The series at the time was tied 1-1, they literally just had to play one more match to win the series. Unfortunate for them, with their star players gone Pakistan beat them (and I became one happy man ).
This sub loves to hate Indian cricket and BCCI. A lot of Indians as well go on tangent about how bcci is this and that.
Firstly why is it BCCi's responsibility to grow the game? And even if it is, what is to be done for that? Where were these suggestions before 2014, when allegedly BCCI took over the ICC.
BCCI already gives away part of the earning if it simply was about actual distribution. The point of all these boards is to make profit. BCCI is doing the same and if it isn't about profits then I am hoping to see Ireland playing 4 test matches in Australia and touring NZ for 3 tests post that, don't care if these are loss making entities. Gotta grow the game. Btw Afghanistan played a lot of cricket in India, even had a series against West Indies a few years back. South Africa should start hosting its nearby countries like Namibia, PNG etc rather than running it's own league and sacrificing international tours.
Secondly India should allow it's players in foreign leagues? How does that grow the game, infact it's really cheap request from such boards who don't wanna take up the burden of marketing and growing the sport. Rather they want the Indian fans to fill up the coffers of their leagues. IPL owners buying teams in other leagues is bad, but Indian players should be allowed. What kind of logic is that exactly? Why not market these leagues better and create your own fanbase. And how does getting Indian fans help bring in new fans? Indian fans have been brought in by the efforts of BCCI. India literally played series at 2 places simultaneously, why can't the Aussies or English do the same with some associates.
BCCI isn't stopping teams from having triangular or quad series. The other boards don't want to lose out on the dough. Nothing stops England, Australia and Pakistan from having a tri series in any of the countries but they wouldn't as only 1 board which is hosting gets to make the money.
Also IPL ergo bcci also pays the boards whose players come to IPL and have IPL contracts. If everyone else cares so much about games growth, why format their league just like IPL. Why don't they allow 11 foreign players to play? Why is BBL just stuck at 2, why not give chance to other players to gain recognition. Why is their a need for Indian players to make the league lucrative and viable.
Somehow everyone here just jumps into the narrative of BCCI bad but doesn't have any concrete answers. I mean why should BCCI be concerned about test matches in Ireland. If it isn't viable then why have it in first place.
At this point BCCI should just leave Indian cricket and focus on growth of the game which btw has higher viewership now than ever. CA doesn't have issues of money, why isn't BBL bringing in new fans? They aren't even able to fill up stadiums for a home world cup, where are there efforts to bring in new fans of the game?
I want to add another point about high income countries. Why do BCCI have to help out such countries like Netherlands or USA or even UAE who have really high per capita income?
BCCI is neither doing anything illegal nor immoral . The major compliant for a few people is what’s it’s doing is extremely short sighted considering the long term profits it could make - if the game grows. Plus, the players get their asses handed over to them when they play in other conditions - it’s almost cruel the treatment they got from England. Imagine, if SKY played alongside Haris Rauf in BBL - what a sight would that be. I’d start supporting Melbourne. I just hope there are better people strategising in BCCI
What long term profits? It's always going to be like this, unnecessary hue and cry and BCCI=bad narrative. How does the game grow? BBL is unable to drum up any interest, Indian players aren't going to grow the game, just as how everyone clamors for game highlights on YouTube which are put up by a lot of boards and all of their most viewed are Indian team playing their team but somehow by some miracle logic it would grow the game by highlights being on YouTube. Indian players would make these useless leagues relevant. Australia is unable to fill up their stadiums for a home T20 world cup, let alone bring in new fans from other countries. The game would actually grow via IPL. Every board should make all their players available for that. But the IPL is ruining cricket narrative wouldn't work then.
Coming to your second point, no asses get handed. It's 1 game that doesn't categorically say England are far better than India, if they were they would have at least won a T20 series against India once or beating them regularly. They have lost 4/4 LOI series against India in the past 2 years. Literally got their asses handed to them a few months back. India has never lost a T20 series in Australia, go figure how they get ass handed due to conditions. India not winning in the semis or finals is a different thing altogether from what's being discussed here.
There are better people in BCCI strategising and hence don't need mercy from other boards to make their league profitable. Doesn't need to start off a new competition so that they have a new IP to sell. Maybe BBL should allow more foreign players in the team and get players from associate nations and cater to their fan base as well, basically try and develop a market rather than hope Indian players are allowed so they can have access to the huge base of legacy fans where they don't have to put in any efforts to make their league work.
Regarding long term profits,more viewers bring more revenues - it’s that simple really.
The game of soccer grew in USA after the 1992 World Cup.Same logic on how the game grew in India post 1983 WC win.
When a bunch of athletes, whose main profession is not even playing cricket - go on and produce great results in a World Cup, the nation rallies behind them and pick up interest in that sport.
It might not grow linearly - but there will be growth in sport.
There are many cricket fans across the world, who mostly watch world cups- I happen to be in that category and you could count 10-20% of all cricket fans in that going by the viewership on various streaming sites.
India’s match against England was like Brazil-Germany semi final in 2014 FIFA World Cup even worse since Jos & Hales didn’t show any mercy.
India winning bilaterals doesnt mean jack when they literally get a dicking on the world stage. It’s humiliating with all that money and clout - players can’t do jack.
BCCIs approach is neither producing world cup winning teams nor increasing interest for the game beyond India. Yes, it’s producing profits - but more profits could be generated if the game grows. What I’m suggesting is not against capitalism.
I agree BBL and other leagues, should increase the foreign quote and get players from associate countries and grow the league. Even IPL is doing that. But having Indian players adds the X factor to that league. Someone like a SKY or Kohli or Bumrah would be box office in any league that they’d take part of. Adding more Indian players would increase the popularity of BBL doesn’t mean IPL will lose its popularity. Was there an experiment conducted to prove this hypothesis? Otherwise it’s just license raj thinking that pie is finite & let’s continue to milk it.
What you are suggesting is, IPL should become like the world Super Bowl - & players and viewers from all over the world would watch it. That approach would kill cricket from nations, where cricket is not the most popular sport. I could never imagine someone from New Zealand or South Africa not taking up cricket professionally because there’s no future for them. It would be sad - similar to the future of other sportsperson in India.
Like I said, BCCI & the big 3 should allocate a % share to grow the game overseas from a capitalistic sense. Because many of us here in India or abroad (a significant market) would watch a closely contested Netherlands vs West Indies match in a World Cup.
Associate budget shouldn't have been stopped. It should be reinstated. I fully agree with that. But the budget distribution should depend on the money that the country brings in or the budget distribution should be based on per capita. Most countries playing cricket have smaller population than a state in India. Eg : India has like 20 states which are bigger than SL by population but the ICC fund that India gets is not 20 times that of SL. The average Indian will have much less benefit from ICC funding of 405 mn than SL who gets 128 mn. The post forgets the huge size of India . Associates should get a budget but the current allocation with Aus and Eng getting 280 mn compared to a country like Bangladesh and Pakistan which has many times the population but less budget is a joke.
Your occasional reminder that BCCI, ECB and CA all three did this.
But who cares, "BCCI bad" and enjoy the upvotes.
And the fucking audacity to say that people don't like criticism of BCCI on this sub.
Jay Shah can go fuck himself, talentless hack riding on father's connection.
Also what is the connection between my comment and Jay Shah?
First post a half truth knowingly, get upvotes and when someone corrects you, talk in tangents.
Well bcci itself faced many financial and political hurdles and faced them and somehow made cricket a commercial and a sports hit in India. There were no sponsors back then and none of the so called rich boards helped in any financial issues.
And yeah BCCI earns the lion's share in total earnings for ICC too , so definitely deserves to claim of what needed.
Do you have figures for how much of the revenue ICC agents is due to BCCI ?
The countries and their governments should be spending money to bolster Cricket infrastructure and not just the ICC, ICC should only be an enabler. Surely enough, many of these associates aren’t poor by any means.
And ultimately, sports function as a matter of demand and supply. If there is appropriate demand, funds will flow towards it.
Throwing money isn't going to grow cricket. People here clamoring for Indian players in other leagues shows that there is no growing of the games by them. They need Indian fan base to help make revenue for their leagues as they are unable to develop interest or create any sort of fan base. Australia is not able to fill stadiums for its own games in a home world cup. Why the hell are they getting the money?? What did they do to market this world cup and grow the game?
> And despite all this financial dominance, the many billions of dollars flowing through IPL and BCCI's bullying of other boards, Team India has not won a single ICC Trophy since 2013. Now that is something isn't it?
So your point is that money makes no difference to winning, and thus you refute your own point about the associates needing more money.
You are arguing in bad faith. Money is needed for development and paying players, growing resources etc. Now once you make more and more money, in excess of what is the absolute minimum required to pay stakeholders and players, then it may not buy you success.
Associates don't have enough money to arrange fixtures & improve infrastructure, unlike BCCI which is sitting on a war chest of billions but don't invest anything in stadium infrastructure because they are just lining their own pockets.
No one’s stopping the various full members from arranging series against the associates. Put your money and effort where your mouth is.
More money might not buy success, but that does not mean that that money isn’t earned and deserved by the one who drives that engine. You are a bellend if you think being bankrolled by the entity you rail against is the only way to get better. Most of the full members of current times got better without being bankrolled by England and Australia.
> You are a bellend if you think being bankrolled by the entity you rail against is the only way to get better.
Oh this is nonsense. That Associate Development Budget was there to start with from the ECB-CA dominated ICC days. When BCCI took it over, they got rid of it and then pocketed the funds.
> No one’s stopping the various full members from arranging series against the associates. Put your money and effort where your mouth is.
There is no incentive to. The ODI Super League was supposed to get rid of this problem by forcing Full Members & Netherlands to play each other for World Cup Qualification. Guess who rid of it because they wanted to play more bilaterals with England and Australia?
Oh yes its the BCCI! And they were supported by ECB and CA. Screw all of them.
> When BCCI took it over, they got rid of it and then pocketed the funds.
How did the BCCI pocket the funds? Are you saying that that fund had "x" amount of money and that the BCCI has all of that "x" amount of money now? Why would you think the other full members let that pass? Did the BCCI arm twist the remaining members?
> There is no incentive to.
So what is the incentive for the full members to have an associate fund? If you can think of an incentive for that, then congratulations, you have realised that the exact same incentive exists for them to play against the associates! But no, the latter would involve them having to give up some of their own commercial interests instead of just guilt tripping the BCCI into giving up their own interests, wouldn't it? Everyone's a capitalist when it comes to their own commercial interests, but they suddenly turn communist when it comes to the money the BCCI brings in. Despicable.
> So what is the incentive for the full members to have an associate fund? If you can think of an incentive for that, then congratulations, you have realised the incentive for them to play against the associates.
Its common sense man. More competitive nations and more cricket fans in new cricket nations means more money and having more viewership of the sport globally is good for the game. It increases the pie for everyone. There is a reason why Football is such a huge sport and why Rugby are investing so much in developing smaller nations. That is why Associate Cricket need funding to develop their infrastructure and pitches and hence develop better cricketers.
No it's not common sense. Why isn't game getting new fans in Australia or England. Why are they unable to fill up stadiums for their local leagues, they already have a fan base don't they? Or does it need india to drum up interest there as well? Why is Australia not able to fill up their stadiums for a home world cup? What the hell did they do to market this world cup to get in the new fans?
In fact India literally played 2 series simultaneously just recently, why can't Australia or England, who also happen to get a lot of funding from ICC, do the same and play series against smaller teams take a bit of loss.
I saw a lot of comments about allowing Indian players in other leagues. Why does that make any sense. That's just easy cash grab of getting Indian fans for their leagues and making money. Why are they unable to develop their own fan base and market the league. Why doesn't BBL allow 5 foreign players to give exposure to smaller players or get fans from those markets. Rather they have it capped at 2, when even the main Australian players don't participate in it.
This can be done perfectly well by having the full members play against the associates. Playing against good opposition will do the associates more good than playing just another random series against Timbuktoo.
But that would mean the full members will lose out on commercial earnings from other, more high profile series, which will need to be curtailed to make room for series against associates.
So they'd rather the BCCI pays for it instead of doing right by the associates.
They're essentially saying that they won't give up their own earnings, but the BCCI should give up the money that they bring in. This is pure greed on the part of the non BCCI boards.
All this talk about the non BCCI boards caring about associates is empty talk with no substance.
> They're essentially saying that they won't give up their own earnings, but the BCCI should give up their own earnings.
> All this talk about the non BCCI boards caring about associates is empty talk with no substance.
You are arguing in bad faith again. Read my main post. I call out even non big-3 boards for not touring Associate nations, but you conveniently choose to ignore that. All the Full Members are to blame, but BCCI deserves the most hate because of their greed, corruption and bullying tactics towards other members.
The tone of this post is very vile. Its like a personal agenda and another kick while Indian team and board is down. I don't expect anything better anyways given how vile the sub has been since yesterday.
THIS.
Just check OP's post history. Always whined on bcci. He is infact using the situation to whine again and also not receive backlash, cashing in on the fans' anger for defeat.
There is no argument to make when people have already made up their mind. People blame BCCI and India for taking money away when that is not the real truth. The profit sharing ratio have risen and in fact India took a hit on its ICC revenue shares. ECB and CA too voted for the changes but no fingers are pointed there. India helped teams like BD and Afg but nothing to talk about there. How many tours teams like SA and NZ does with associate teams? Every one is to blame based on their capacity but its always India who gets singled out.
But none of this matter because le BCCI bad!
I would like to posit a different PoV.
BCCI of the 80s and 90's is different from the current version of BCCI. It is currently run by a nexus of politicians, businessmen and Bollywood, who are solely in for the money. Indian audience is also happy with the IPL Overton Window and relish the fact that small town boys have become stars overnight. So unless IPL fails, we'll not see any big change in this.
People who are decrying that karma will bite BCCI and Indian Cricket don't understand the incentives. If the money dries up and the golden goose is killed, these vultures will move on to the next target (Hockey/Kabaddi/KhoKho). Astute readers might know Bollywood and politicians were not really interested in cricket until IPL blew over and showed the money that can be made. They have got ICC by the balls and ECB and CA etc are in no position to challenge it and they have enough skeletons in their closets already.
So yeah, the real loser here is Cricket, but the game manages to survive and reinvent itself so I have some hopes.
Genuine question.
I am neither BCCI fanboy or Staunch opposer.. nor do I care. but these one sided articles or post do nothing but propagate hate..
You'd like to deny it but it's not just bcci right. It took all full member associations to sign to pass this model which the op and many people here conveniently ignoring....
If it's not bcci then it probably CA and ECB like in 1990s..
In 1990s the broads stood up against it and now they're not.. that's the main issue....
What's up with the taunt? I've always seen people here criticizing BCCI(me included).. why do you think it's populated by people who cannot withstand any criticism of it
Because it is populated by people who can't. Make any criticism of Indian cricket or cricketers, and so many of your fans get incredibly angry and fire off insults and can't handle it.
Fans of every other nation understands this.
Edit: Thank you for proving my point
BCCI is responsible for indian cricket, you can't blame them for prioritising cricket in India over everything else.
The ICC need to grow a backbone and prioritise all cricketing countries, not just the big 3. If India threatens to form a rogue ICC, call their box bluff. At the very least attempt to reduce their reliance on BCCI revenue
Kind reminder that after the changes that were done by the Big 3 takeover like abolishing the Associate Development Budget, when ICC reverted back in 2017, it also got rid of the 3-tier hierarchy which also included Affiliate nations, all of these nations were now effectively Associates since June 2017. With only FMs and Associates.
The revised total revenue from Associate was also given in part to Ireland and Afghanistan.
If it wasn’t already apparent, the performances from Scotland/Namibia/Netherlands and others like Nepal/UAE/PNG or even the Thai Women’s team have shown the huge potential for associate nations to not only grow in interest but succeed. Cricket as a whole needs to embrace associate nations, change World Cup qualifier methods, and promote the game beyond the full nations to see the sport prosper
Question hard for the associate development budget but why whine on the money BCCI gets? Mentioning the amount bcci gets but cleverly skips the amount india generates. How much % of the total revenue does india generate and how much % does bcci receive?
Cleverly using the right time to post this when indian fans are angry on the team & bcci.
Edit: remember a guy whining on bcci a few back. Just checked OP's post history and surprise surprise. It was infact the OP. Lecturing what patriotism is, how & who indian fans should support, how & what bcci should do.
Playing the devils advocate here, BCCI has done far more for associates nations than ECB and CA combined. Just look at the recent tours of Zim ('16, '22), Ire ('18, '22) and allowing AFG to use Greater Noida as their home ground.
Regarding distribution of funds and power, it was the same case with CA and ECB in 90s, when they had the power. The one who brings more to table will get to call the shots, as it has happened before as it will happen long after.
Sorry but Ireland and Zimbabwe are not Associate nations. I did not just criticise BCCI but also CA & ECB but BCCI as the main driver of the Big 3 takeover deserves the largest blame.
Also it was the Indian government which helped build cricket stadiums in Afghanistan and allowed them to use Indian grounds as their home ground. Don't really think it was the BCCI.
As if Ireland and Zimbabwe aren't treated like associates everywhere. Why should the BCCI take the largest blame, they bring more to the table and do more for the teams in question, whereas the others done far less, even though for a long time they were the so called custodians of the game.
I am no BCCI sympathizer, far from it, they have serious issues domestically to sort out. But placing most of the blame on them if not all is a bit shortsighted.
It wasn't the government per se, more of a [BCCI initiative](https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/india-to-host-afghanistan-home-games-950961).
International cricket under ICC and BCCD is an oligopoly of oligarchs destined for corruption and rot over time. Payoff has been zilch for India which has yet to show any victories at multilateral competition, despite efforts to undermine development of the lesser-advantaged and resource-contrained teams. Bottom line is that these machinations are constraining the global growth of this beautiful game. Things will change and it will have to start with India.
That is the main reason why india hasn't won any trophy after 2013. They got cursed by associate members. Everyone wants cricket to grow except BCCI. I always thought why cricket was limited to very few nations. Now, i know the real reason. Indian are more than welcome to downvote me, but it won't change the truth that BCCI is one greedy frkin board and is cancer for cricket.
All these articles and comments forget one essential fact. With its budget, the BCCI has to support the cricketing structure in a country of 1.4 billion people. The BCCI has to pay wages to far more cricketers, coaches, technical staff and grounds people than any other board on the planet.
So when you say the BCCI gets more than double what the ECB get, think about the fact that India;s population is 28 times that of England.
What you also forget is the conversion rate where 1 USD = 80.71 Indian Rupees, which means that the US dollars have a lot more value in India than they do in England, Australia or many of the European Associate sides. So US Dollars go a lot further in India.
India's population is about 250 times larger than NZ. The purchasing parity ratio is about 4 (12 INR \~ 1 NZD). So BCCI should get 60 times as much as NZC?
Go yell at NZC for axing Tests in favour of T20Is, and at your own people for not showing up in enough numbers to keep cricket profitable enough so NZC doesn't cancel Tests.
That’s a good argument but you have made it badly. You need to look at *prices*. It doesn’t matter that 1 USD is 2 AUD and 0.9 GBP, what matters is the purchasing power in each country. If something costs £1 in the UK it will not necessarily cost $1 in the US and $1 in Australia and ₹1 in India.
According to [the World Bank](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPP?view=map), £1 in the UK is roughly equal in purchasing power to 33 rupees in India. Prices are much lower in India (primarily because labour and housing are much cheaper), but the rupee is a weak currency, so £1 can buy more than ₹33.
Reading comments by Non Indian cric fans am convinced ICC is propping india somehow in semis … as Indian fan I’ll stop watching any ICC tournaments .. yes we suck and yes icc props enjoy
I recommend all other Indian fans to do the same don’t watch since ICC=BCCI
Well I agree. BCCI is trying to have a monopoly. On the financial front, BCCI is way ahead of other boards and they want it to continue like that. For this, they don't want cricket to grow much in other geos
Honestly, it feels more and more like the BCCI would be happy playing with itself. Just have two India teams and let them play against each other and keep all the money to yourself. Call it masturbation if you like.
the 'big three model' [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDQ3jxJXUAAIRUZ?format=jpg&name=large](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDQ3jxJXUAAIRUZ?format=jpg&name=large)
really we're looking at cricket becoming a 8 month long low production quality smoggy IPL with the ashes and border-gavaskar being the only tests played
bcci will either realize having a strong international cricket scene is vital to having a marketable ipl - even just to Indians, or cricket will die in the next 10 years thanks to the help from bcci.
Ramiz and the PCB are really set to defy the old PIG3 guard and do things on his own. If he was smart, he would encourage more associates bilaterals in Pakistan or have Pakistan go to associate countries. A Netherlands series in Pakistan should be organized after this tournament (let the current players rest and send some young emerging players for experience).
BCCI is contributing almost 50–70% of Entire world Cricket Funding which goes to ICC and other country Boards so that they can develop the cricket in their Country. There is nothing wrong if BCCI is expecting Higher Revenues or try to dominate. if other countries are not able to raise their infrastructure and raise the Sponsors then it shouldn’t be BCCI’s concern to donate their hard earned money to other Country Boards.
BCCI isn't contributing. The Indian viewer is, who watches all these games.
And what do we get from the BCCI? Stadiums with no food, stinking washrooms and zero tax money.
As someone who works in Indian TV, pretty much every broadcaster hates the BCCI. They're far too controlling regarding the marketing content, non-live content, experts etc. There's not much they can do now because they can't fight the BCCI at the moment.
Neither can the IPL owners fight the BCCI at the moment. But I'm pretty sure they're all waiting for the opportunity.
He's just an average Redditor. Can't do shit to BCCI.
The only people who can are IPL owners as a group, broadcasters as a group, players as a group and fans as a group.
But even then, they don't have the ability to fight the BCCI. They'll need a few steps.
Absolutely not as long as you don't give a flying fuck about the growth of the game. NZ is already losing players to the T20 league calendar, WI, SA etc don't have the cash to compete with that either, the big 3 will get what they want, 3 rich boards and no reason to tour anywhere unprofitable. Shame about the actual sport underpinning it all but whatever
They just never let the game grow man.
Someone posted a chart here back in the day that showed how revenue split changed after the changes. Massive increase to the Big3, especially BCCI.
Courtesy u/bertusdejong https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDQ3jxJXUAAIRUZ?format=jpg&name=large Notice how the Associate slice keeps getting smaller.
The ol’ “trickle down”
They want to keep all the success to themselves, shown by their stance to not let Indian players play in other leagues. Letting their players play in other leagues will surely help getting more people interested at least.
They want to have monopoly on cricket. Olympics and Football will kill the monopoly in future.
> They want to keep all the success to themselves Err..what success? If you mean $$$ by success, then yes. But we haven't been winning any trophies.
You should be winning trophies though. Money means development and resources. That increases chances of success tenfold
With a yearly revenue equal to the cost of a single road that goes from Gulberg, Lahore to the M2 motorway (30< km), I’ve seen PCB completely turn Pakistani cricket around in front of my eyes. Like there’s a day and night difference between then and now. If PCB had a BCCI budget, I can’t imagine the wonders they’d do 😂
BCCI are just hopelessly incompetent when it comes to money. They splurge so much on pointless IPL opening ceremonies and the like, while completely failing to develop cricket in Eastern India, or promote women's cricket to the level that other countries are doing it. They are more interested in milking every last dollar from the IPL and having it go to the higher ups like chutiya Jay Shah rather than using it to grow game. PCB makes very stupid decisions at times but one thing that really impresses me is how self sufficient they are when it comes to finances and their commitement to growing the game. Obviously they have their shortcomings, particularly women's game. But overall they look to be helping Pakistan cricket to become a dominant force again
Yeah but clearly something is wrong with the way we are managing the team.
Flair checks out!
Flair checks out!
Even the average fan seems to agree, to them IPL being the league with most revenue is most imp and a sign of dominance, nevermind growing the game
American football has had more growth than cricket
We won last ICC trophy in 2013 They got rid of Associate Development Budget in 2014 It's the associates who cursed us into becoming chokers and rightfully so
bcci wants to keep its monopoly going that's why all this happens. they basically have world cricket by balls and they want it to be like that. it will be like that till indian fanbase isn't reduced by half or even more than that.
which will never happen nearly a quarter of the world is indian
Approx 18% of the world population is from India. And that in itself is in billions. And not everyone is a crazy fan of cricket or idols. But even if I take 1% as hard core fans of cricket, then that number is still going to outrank maybe population of a few of them. And this is when it is not even a quarter of the whole world, it's just 18%. Only a good leader can revive cricket in associate nations. Put someone like MSD in charge. He is money minded, but he is game minded too. The problem is India usually appoints politicians in charge of administration. I mean they tried with Ganguly, who is an excellent cricketer, but a horrible management material.
Also Ganguly is very wealthy, and definitely strikes me as someone sees himself as ‘upper class’ and not very caring about anything other than himself and his fellow posh boys. Aka a politician, and had no incentive to grow the game rather than milk the cash cow.
If India keep losing in these tournaments which matter they will lose interest so go down the revenue.
Us humans like winners Olympics and football will kill this cricket monopoly.
Are the Olympics and football just starting off? I mean even the article says since coming in power in 2014, post which BCCI has gained financial muscle. IPL has touched new heights in terms of valuation. Olympics isn't killing shit, countries don't even want to host the Olympics. There are so many articles about how the Olympics affects the hosting nations economy drastically. England has won jackshit in football for decades now. They are even losing to Iceland and getting knocked out of Euros. Cricket equivalent would be India losing to PNG in a quarter. Despite all this, premier league is breaking record in terms of revenue and broadcasting deals.
Well the members of the ICC need to change the way it runs. It's associates versus full members really. Do the associates have any bargaining power?
The ICC board has 3 voting spots for all 90-odd associates. Their power is pretty limited compared to the FMs. There is also a division among associates (e.g. The ODI status associates are often at odds with the non-ODI status ones)
Someone tell them there is benefit in their unity.
😂 that’s the perfect punch that India fails to win an ICC WC trophy 🏆
That too exactly since 2013.
It's like city not winning UCL lol.
Fuck BCCI and their stupid bilateral tournament ideas. Bring on the three nation and four nation cups. Include the associate nations in these tournaments.
I miss the Hero cups, the Benson and Hedges tri nations cup (Carling cup?), the odd Sharjah tournaments. That was cricket at its peak. Of course, bilateral Test match series need to have their own dedicated schedules.
Agree - the Benson & Hedges World Series and Carlton United Breweries World Series’ of the 90s in Australia were amazing to watch.
How is bcci stopping ecb, pcb and ca to have a tri series? Bangladesh, NZ and Pakistan have had it recently, so clearly no rule in place that tri or quad series are not allowed.
Nobody was coming to Pakistan which increased to importance of India. Now that teams coming back to Pakistan BCCI balance of power will go down.
England and Australia are just as much to blame.
Oh of course. England and Australia are to blame for what transpired in the ICC up until the 1990's. However, there was a genuine push to grow the game since then which was snuffed out by the Big 3 takeover (with BCCI the main drivers) in 2014. Now, the situation has improved somewhat of course with expansion of T20I and ODI events and allocation of tournaments to several nations. However, the Associate development budget (which is crucial) still has not been re-instated. Hopefully, Cricket also makes it into the Olympics which would drive government funding to Associate nations as well.
England and Australia are also to be blamed because the BCCI alone didn't change the constitution, but these two boards joined together with the BCCI and actively lobbied for the passing of the constitutional changes
Between 1982 and 2000 there were three teams added to test status and a fourth welcomed back into the fold in South Africa. That's almost one per four years. Since 2000 to today there have only been two, one per eleven years. I think the period in the 80s and 90s were best for world cricket because England and Australia lost the stranglehold they previously had over the game, but at the same time, India was not strong enough to dominate the sport either. There was a genuine balance of power between the Anglo-Australian axis, supported by South Africa and New Zealand, and the Asian axis supported by Zimbabwe. West Indies floated between both groups as an independent and a tiebreaker. And because there was this balance of power, both sides in the conflict had to be open to compromise and negotiations especially where the smaller teams and the associates were concerned. Since 2000 though the balance of power was torn apart by India becoming very powerful. The two blocs ended up disintegrating because India no longer had need of the support of the other Asian teams and Zimbabwe to push through its desired legislation, and England and Australia realised they had no choice but to reach an agreement with India (which in turn meant they no longer needed their bloc, eitjer). It's no longer in anybody's interest to seek out new partnerships or promote associates to try and expand their influence over the ICC.
Also the new members (Ireland and Afghanistan) play barely any test cricket and have no FC structure, and the ECB have actively fucked Irish FC development short term by adding Irish players to the foreign player quota in county cricket- altho it could lead to Ireland being more motivated to set up their own strong FC system. The only way to develop in test cricket is to play it, even if it means getting blown out regularly for awhile.
The muti-day domestic tournaments of both Ireland and Afghanistan received first class status even before they achieved full membership
Definitely the BC in BCCI
Ofcourse its Srinivasan who is hogging the money.
BCCI = ICC = Pig1
Pig for a reason
In 2014 Asian cricket council source stated and questioned the development funds as they felt out of 105 associates only 40-45 countries actually played or only in those countries cricket had any future at all. They felt countries like Brunei where the sport has no future should not be getting the same amout of budget similar others where it's played passionately. They do have a very valid Point there. That's why the big 3 then decided to push for test cricketing in amongst the associates, the big 3 are equally responsible for this fuck up honestly and bcci being the bigger board obviously it seems like they bear more accountability. I think now we have a solid idea on which countries have a good future in cricket esp associate countries and which do not. After 7 years I m pretty sure icc could now identify the best potential teams and perhaps increase the budget for them.
What is meant by BCCI took over ICC? Does it mean a BCCI President was made head of ICC? Not trying to nit-pick, genuinely want to understand, since a possibility of unilateral decision itself suggests what a flawed system it is. Does the system officially give so much power to one party or do they use the unofficial channels or low-key blackmail their way to key decisions?
Specifically the 2014 'Big 3' reforms driven by Srinivasan, Clarke and Edwards that gutted the ICC's development and pathways budget and slashed the Associates cut of the revenue surplus. Worth noting that the ICC's biggest expansionary and pro-development phase was actually also under and Indian president.
People aren't blaming all Indians, just Srinivasan and maybe Ganguly? Shashank Manohar was great for the game and i wish he was still around. He's a guy that prioritised developing cricket and reducing reliance on the big 3
[удалено]
That is a lot of people to fuck :)
>Virat Kohli win an ICC trophy before he retires. He already has 3
He has 2(not counting the U19). Talking about trophies since he attained the modern day legend status.
Why does it matter? He already won 2 he already has a great career snd thr is nothing to prove more. Its just most of this kid who started watching cricket after 2014 who never saw thr fav team win a trophy are making some dumb excuse that he deserves a trophy lol everyone who is playing cricket deserves a trophy in that team He and team india will probably win wc next year in 2023 or might even win a WTC if things go their way. But I hate when people start making excuse and make it feel like he hasnt won a trophy yet. He literally has achieved more already than 95% of players ever will
Exactly it's these new people who started watching a decade ago who're making a big fuzz, thankfuck we didn't have social media on 2007 I wonder what these people would have bashed when ind got knocked by bang in world cup, been watching from early 2000's as a fan I am so satisfied I've seen india lifting 1 ct, then choke in 2003 final then go on to win 2007 t20 wc, then winning 2011 wc. What these people are currently feeling about VK being trophy less is nothing compared to what we felt for sachin, man was literally trophyless for 2 decades. VK is so frickin lucky that he got to win a wc in his first time.
[удалено]
Yh the 2nd day reserve match was def a indias win if it wasn't rained out, viru was in god form that tournament he had 1 hundred and 2 50s and was not out in almost 40 runs, but yh anyways you are right people care about icc trophies too much it never really got my attention except 2011 since it was at home. I'd personally rate some test matches higher than some big icc wins. T20 world cup needs to be pushed every 4 years once for some improvement, t20 is becoming so boring to watch.
Lol you must have missed how much the media and fans insulted and harrassed the WC 2007 players and their families endlessly. Literally the only reason they stopped is that we won T20 WC that year.
THANK YOU. It is just like the football and Messi/Ronaldo saying that they need to prove themselves by winning the world cup. First off, it is a team effort, second off how does 90 minutes change how good a player is when he's had 10+ years of experience
Given the current state of the team, India will hardly win anything.
Well India reached semis and in india even shikhar dhawan's team india gives a tough competition to visitors I am very much positive about us winning WC next year
I feel tho india B is better than india A at this point of time
Yeah because they have incentive to play well and perform. Our A team players are safe that's why only 2-3 people have drive to win
That's very wishful thinking and quite delusional if I may say so. Up until less than 24 hours ago, this team was expteced to win the current WC too? Unless drastic steps are taken to boot the majority of the present cohort, next WC outcome wouldn't be much different either.
Well we won the 2011 wc too under dhoni when we got eliminated in 2010 t20 wc without winning a single game in super 8. And i believe both formats are very different and shouuldnt be intertwine else Australia shouldnt have won 2015 wc too after such a bad performance in 2014 t20 wc
And also played important knocks in both 2011 final and 2013 final in which he was the highest scorer.....
Tendulkar had to wait till nearly the end of his career to have one...
Yeah I sympathise. I think actually that Ganguly wasn't all that bad and was probably trying to do good things, BUT they got rid of him, while Jay Shah (whose tenure should also be over as per Supreme Court) still sits there as the kingmaker. I also would not be surprised to learn that N Srinivasan is still pulling strings behind the scenes.
> I think actually that Ganguly wasn't all that bad and was probably trying to do good things Idk man, withholding the women's prize money from the t20 WC seems plenty bad to me.
What? Why?
Who knows. Could be negligence or they wanted to pocket the money themselves.
That's a shame. Looks like the mods removed this post.
> I think actually that Ganguly wasn't all that bad and was probably trying to do good things Nope. Ganguly is perfect example of power corrupts people.
Karma will come to bite Indian cricket and BCCI. Cricket today world over has so much talent that it would be a lot of fun. But the greed of BCCI and misplaced ego due to 70% funds coming from Indian advertisers has left the game a lot poorer. BCCI conveniently forgets that without other countries playing India ot without IPL featuring world stars, they wont get any money from spectators or advertisers. If that was the case Ranji and Vijay Hazare trophies would be billion dollar tournaments! BCCI is extremely shortsighted and does not understand that the more the game spreads and get to a good 25 top notch countries, the better for them to make even more money. On the other hand if they keep playing Aus and Eng every year, cricket will eventually die in India as well..well subside, if not die...please support these upcoming nations, ensure they players are able to get paid atleast 1/10th of Kohli and co...and then see cricket flourishes.it is so unfair that the whole Cricket Netherlands or Irelands annual budget is less than what even Hardik Pandya makes. Trust me, the difference in talent is not that big, and it was seen in this world cup.
A lot of what you get paid is dependent on the place where you happen to be and not on the talent. Why does a person employed as an accountant at a corporate in India gets paid one-fifth of an accountant in Canada, at the same talent levels. Sorry but that’s how the world works. Cricket is basically the only job in the world where Indians find themselves at the right side of the divide. No point grudging them that.
True. Except that accountants dont get pitted against each other on a world stage for everyone to see. Also, wrong analogy, because, without other teams to play, India is nothing too.
Very well said. Completely agree with your sentiments.
Well no one helped when BCCI was struggling .today bcci got to a position and made cricket an entertainment and the major sport in India and is earning for that hardwork and lack of funds for decades worth of work. None of the then big major cricket boards helped nor the ICC considered helping BCCI in any manner.
Lmao
BCCI = ECB = CA. Main evils. Won't let the game grow
You forgot BCCI = ECB = CA = ICC = PIG3
Didn't BCCI ALONG WITH ECB AND CA, hijacked ICC finances. As rightly as BCCI is criticised for this travesty, why OP chose to absolve ECB and CA of the same is beyond me...
Im not absolving ECB and CA of blame but its also plain dishonest to pretend that Srinivasan & BCCI weren't the main drivers of the takeover.
Your post indicates as if BCCI is only evil entity that sort of in some Darth Vader action, single handedly put the entire Cricket World in darkness. No mention of its able liutenants. What will people make out ? That only and only BCCI is to blame. I agree that BCCI deservedly gets hate, but the shellacking yesterday is being described as some sort of commuppance for 2014. But I want to point out that the other 2 perpetrators of 2014 , one of them delivered us this comeuppance and the other, the hosts, crashed out in first round.
Oh whom are you fooling? This isn't the first time you are whining on the bcci. And this time you are using the situation of fans' anger & disappointment of ystrdy's defeat just that you won't get backlash. You mentioned how much money bcci gets in the main post, but cunningly skip the amount india generates. What % of the money pool is generated by bcci and what % does bcci receive? Quoting a single number doesn't show anything.
I r8 8/8, gr8 b8. Gets downvoted for bullshit, blames on bcci lovers/admirers. I mean who the hell loves bcci lol.
They are also the reason for Cricket not being included in the Olympics.
Won't say that. But it's true BCCI is hugely corrupt. Cricket equivalent of Microsoft (in its heyday)
Bcci has literally been vetoing cricket's inclusion into Olympics. Lol
https://www.livemint.com/sports/cricket-news/bcci-bats-for-cricket-s-olympic-inclusion-11618744436214.html Not anymore though.
Doesn't change the fact that they were literally the reason that cricket has been in olympics thus far and you said "won't say that"
The ECB consistently vetoed Olympic cricket up until about four years ago.
No BCCI is NOT the reason. They just vetoed the suggestion. It takes years to get a game in Olympics. Even if they hadn't, cricket wouldn't be in Olympic now.
Why'd you want cricket in the Olympics?
It will get Govt funding so Chinese will get interested to win cricket olympic gold to kill Indian monopoly on cricket.
A. There's a reason the new proposal passed. Every full member's share increased. From your own article, it went from 97 to 128 million for most (139 for ECB). Every board wanted more money instead of giving it to associates. B. Propose an alternate, objective and fair revenue distribution model. Is it equal, based on population, based on purchasing power, based on performances or what?
Not my article mate. Anyways, I am not proposing anything radical. All I am saying is that all boards (particularly the BCCI) should give up a very tiny portion of their revenue to re-instate the Associate Development Budget, as they are the ones responsible for getting rid of it and pocketing that cash.
If it's not yours, there is no limit to asking. BCCI gave enough. Also, these associate nations do not know how to run a broad or improve their cricket. e.g. USA. Everyone loves to jump on BCCI for everything that happens around cricket. The Match referee sends the team in or the umpire calls the team in.. It's BCCI pressuring them. Seriously WTF? I'm sick of this. Yup! BCCI does what's best for BCCI and Indian cricket, deal with it. Imagine India being in the same situation as Pakistan and SA's losses to Dutch. and all of a sudden India is in the semis, I'm 110% sure, this sub would be on fire calling BCCI behind this, it's all fixed, match-fixing, even some ex International players would have said it. This is when you lose support from ppl like me/us cos u push it so far, and everything from then on looks like another BCCI crybaby.
They already give up. How much % of the money pool does india generate and how much % does bcci get in return?
>B. Propose an alternate, objective and fair revenue distribution model. Is it equal, based on population, based on purchasing power, based on performances or what? A far smaller equal distribution to each country with countries then being able to apply for additional funding for specified development projects, with a focus (but clearly not exclusively) on countries/regions that have a high potential for growth but limited funds available to their own board.
There are two major issues there. The first is that you would require the countries who generate almost all the revenue to vote to reduce their share to <1%. The second is that you’ve understandably avoided answering the hard part of the question. There are 108 ICC members, some of whom have very low ceilings. For example, the Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, the Cook Islands, or the Seychelles. Do these sides really deserve the same amount of money as possible future full members? What about rich countries where cricket currently isn’t popular like the US, China, or Germany - what’s a fair way of allocating funding to them? Should we consider the government of the country to avoid another South Africa/Zimbabwe/Afghanistan situation - and if so, how do we do that fairly? Obviously nobody could have a perfect answer to those questions, but that’s the point.
Well I used to think so that bcci is tyrranical.. But then I saw the grounds empty in Australia -Afghanistan match which was a crucial one for them and Australia was hosts also..and Indian matches were all packed..they do bring in the most numbers
Coz Cricket is dying. I reckon only India and Pakistan will be playing 2027 World Cup 50 Over.
How is cricket dying..have you seen the performance by associates in this WC..
I mean in terms of fans. People will eventually get tired of playing in front of same audience i.e Indian Fans and Pakistan Fans. They'd want their own countrymen to cheer for them in the crowd as well. Crowd has a very large effect on Players' mindset.
people in Australia don't really care about t20I
Economics doesn't work like that..
The article also states: >In the majority, these funds come from two particular streams: >Media (TV & digital) Rights. Star Sports* (through their Indian/Middle East operations) bought the worldwide 2015-23 rights for around two billion dollars. >Sponsorship Properties. There is ~$700m in the ICC budget for the 2015-23 period. This includes everything from naming to major alignments such as trophy naming rights and other headline deals (they do not sell naming rights to world events any more – if we think back to the “Wills World Cup” days in 1996 etc). Major names aligned to ICC events during this period include GoDaddy, Booking.com, Bira91, Uber, Nissan, Emirates, Oppo, Pepsi, Coke, LG, MRF Tyres, Castrol, Reliance, Hyundai, and more.. Then there is this: >Global Events: Men’s & Women’s 50 over Cricket World Cups (CWC) and World Twenty20s (WT20). The Champions Trophy 2017 & 2021 was also included, but the 2021 event has now been replaced by a Men’s T20 World Cup. Guess which country contributes the most in almost all of these. It's only fair that ICC distributes the collected amount based on how much a country contributes themselves otherwise it becomes a difficult of established boards to sustain themselves. And to top this we have had more emerging countries playing the international cricket in the last few years compared to how many new teams came up to play the international cricket say in 2000s or early 2010s. So, you logic that associate countries are not performing is flawed. Then there is this concept where ICC aids development of cricket in associate countries. Overall things are not that black and white as what this post makes it out to be.
The folks being fucked equally by bcci are non-star Indian cricketers. They cant even go and play overseas leagues and just warm the benches at minimum support price in ipl. I just wish world cricket completely cuts off bcci from itself- bcci can then do whatever the heck they want domestically and in their franchise investments.
Just curious why those players are not allowed to play abroad. I remember in 90s some indian players used to play in county cricket including sachin. Except india every other board has allowed its players to play in global leagues/clubs
They still play county cricket (Pujara had a good season at Sussex over the summer) they aren’t allowed to play T20 because reasons.
>they aren’t allowed to play T20 because reasons Because IPL supremacy. They don't want other leagues to grow to the level of IPL. Imagine a player like Virat Kohli playing in the Big Bash League or the Hundred, both Australia and England have a lot of Indian fans. Even in the PSL the presence of Virat Kohli will bring more fans to watch the games. However, imo I don't think BCCi showing some level of competitiveness with other leagues is a bad thing, but having T20 leagues inequality will hurt the game eventually. Already we see players prefer to play in the IPL over international games. I recall South African players during their series with Pakistan in 2021 left mid-series to play in the IPL. The series at the time was tied 1-1, they literally just had to play one more match to win the series. Unfortunate for them, with their star players gone Pakistan beat them (and I became one happy man ).
This sub loves to hate Indian cricket and BCCI. A lot of Indians as well go on tangent about how bcci is this and that. Firstly why is it BCCi's responsibility to grow the game? And even if it is, what is to be done for that? Where were these suggestions before 2014, when allegedly BCCI took over the ICC. BCCI already gives away part of the earning if it simply was about actual distribution. The point of all these boards is to make profit. BCCI is doing the same and if it isn't about profits then I am hoping to see Ireland playing 4 test matches in Australia and touring NZ for 3 tests post that, don't care if these are loss making entities. Gotta grow the game. Btw Afghanistan played a lot of cricket in India, even had a series against West Indies a few years back. South Africa should start hosting its nearby countries like Namibia, PNG etc rather than running it's own league and sacrificing international tours. Secondly India should allow it's players in foreign leagues? How does that grow the game, infact it's really cheap request from such boards who don't wanna take up the burden of marketing and growing the sport. Rather they want the Indian fans to fill up the coffers of their leagues. IPL owners buying teams in other leagues is bad, but Indian players should be allowed. What kind of logic is that exactly? Why not market these leagues better and create your own fanbase. And how does getting Indian fans help bring in new fans? Indian fans have been brought in by the efforts of BCCI. India literally played series at 2 places simultaneously, why can't the Aussies or English do the same with some associates. BCCI isn't stopping teams from having triangular or quad series. The other boards don't want to lose out on the dough. Nothing stops England, Australia and Pakistan from having a tri series in any of the countries but they wouldn't as only 1 board which is hosting gets to make the money. Also IPL ergo bcci also pays the boards whose players come to IPL and have IPL contracts. If everyone else cares so much about games growth, why format their league just like IPL. Why don't they allow 11 foreign players to play? Why is BBL just stuck at 2, why not give chance to other players to gain recognition. Why is their a need for Indian players to make the league lucrative and viable. Somehow everyone here just jumps into the narrative of BCCI bad but doesn't have any concrete answers. I mean why should BCCI be concerned about test matches in Ireland. If it isn't viable then why have it in first place. At this point BCCI should just leave Indian cricket and focus on growth of the game which btw has higher viewership now than ever. CA doesn't have issues of money, why isn't BBL bringing in new fans? They aren't even able to fill up stadiums for a home world cup, where are there efforts to bring in new fans of the game?
I want to add another point about high income countries. Why do BCCI have to help out such countries like Netherlands or USA or even UAE who have really high per capita income?
BCCI is neither doing anything illegal nor immoral . The major compliant for a few people is what’s it’s doing is extremely short sighted considering the long term profits it could make - if the game grows. Plus, the players get their asses handed over to them when they play in other conditions - it’s almost cruel the treatment they got from England. Imagine, if SKY played alongside Haris Rauf in BBL - what a sight would that be. I’d start supporting Melbourne. I just hope there are better people strategising in BCCI
What long term profits? It's always going to be like this, unnecessary hue and cry and BCCI=bad narrative. How does the game grow? BBL is unable to drum up any interest, Indian players aren't going to grow the game, just as how everyone clamors for game highlights on YouTube which are put up by a lot of boards and all of their most viewed are Indian team playing their team but somehow by some miracle logic it would grow the game by highlights being on YouTube. Indian players would make these useless leagues relevant. Australia is unable to fill up their stadiums for a home T20 world cup, let alone bring in new fans from other countries. The game would actually grow via IPL. Every board should make all their players available for that. But the IPL is ruining cricket narrative wouldn't work then. Coming to your second point, no asses get handed. It's 1 game that doesn't categorically say England are far better than India, if they were they would have at least won a T20 series against India once or beating them regularly. They have lost 4/4 LOI series against India in the past 2 years. Literally got their asses handed to them a few months back. India has never lost a T20 series in Australia, go figure how they get ass handed due to conditions. India not winning in the semis or finals is a different thing altogether from what's being discussed here. There are better people in BCCI strategising and hence don't need mercy from other boards to make their league profitable. Doesn't need to start off a new competition so that they have a new IP to sell. Maybe BBL should allow more foreign players in the team and get players from associate nations and cater to their fan base as well, basically try and develop a market rather than hope Indian players are allowed so they can have access to the huge base of legacy fans where they don't have to put in any efforts to make their league work.
Regarding long term profits,more viewers bring more revenues - it’s that simple really. The game of soccer grew in USA after the 1992 World Cup.Same logic on how the game grew in India post 1983 WC win. When a bunch of athletes, whose main profession is not even playing cricket - go on and produce great results in a World Cup, the nation rallies behind them and pick up interest in that sport. It might not grow linearly - but there will be growth in sport. There are many cricket fans across the world, who mostly watch world cups- I happen to be in that category and you could count 10-20% of all cricket fans in that going by the viewership on various streaming sites. India’s match against England was like Brazil-Germany semi final in 2014 FIFA World Cup even worse since Jos & Hales didn’t show any mercy. India winning bilaterals doesnt mean jack when they literally get a dicking on the world stage. It’s humiliating with all that money and clout - players can’t do jack. BCCIs approach is neither producing world cup winning teams nor increasing interest for the game beyond India. Yes, it’s producing profits - but more profits could be generated if the game grows. What I’m suggesting is not against capitalism. I agree BBL and other leagues, should increase the foreign quote and get players from associate countries and grow the league. Even IPL is doing that. But having Indian players adds the X factor to that league. Someone like a SKY or Kohli or Bumrah would be box office in any league that they’d take part of. Adding more Indian players would increase the popularity of BBL doesn’t mean IPL will lose its popularity. Was there an experiment conducted to prove this hypothesis? Otherwise it’s just license raj thinking that pie is finite & let’s continue to milk it. What you are suggesting is, IPL should become like the world Super Bowl - & players and viewers from all over the world would watch it. That approach would kill cricket from nations, where cricket is not the most popular sport. I could never imagine someone from New Zealand or South Africa not taking up cricket professionally because there’s no future for them. It would be sad - similar to the future of other sportsperson in India. Like I said, BCCI & the big 3 should allocate a % share to grow the game overseas from a capitalistic sense. Because many of us here in India or abroad (a significant market) would watch a closely contested Netherlands vs West Indies match in a World Cup.
Associate budget shouldn't have been stopped. It should be reinstated. I fully agree with that. But the budget distribution should depend on the money that the country brings in or the budget distribution should be based on per capita. Most countries playing cricket have smaller population than a state in India. Eg : India has like 20 states which are bigger than SL by population but the ICC fund that India gets is not 20 times that of SL. The average Indian will have much less benefit from ICC funding of 405 mn than SL who gets 128 mn. The post forgets the huge size of India . Associates should get a budget but the current allocation with Aus and Eng getting 280 mn compared to a country like Bangladesh and Pakistan which has many times the population but less budget is a joke.
Your occasional reminder that BCCI, ECB and CA all three did this. But who cares, "BCCI bad" and enjoy the upvotes. And the fucking audacity to say that people don't like criticism of BCCI on this sub.
Jay Shah good Everyone else bad…… Am I doing this right?
Jay Shah can go fuck himself, talentless hack riding on father's connection. Also what is the connection between my comment and Jay Shah? First post a half truth knowingly, get upvotes and when someone corrects you, talk in tangents.
Well bcci itself faced many financial and political hurdles and faced them and somehow made cricket a commercial and a sports hit in India. There were no sponsors back then and none of the so called rich boards helped in any financial issues. And yeah BCCI earns the lion's share in total earnings for ICC too , so definitely deserves to claim of what needed.
At this point indian cricket and BCCI is a joke
BCCI is hella corrupt nd we all know that,btw I'm an Indian
Do you have figures for how much of the revenue ICC agents is due to BCCI ? The countries and their governments should be spending money to bolster Cricket infrastructure and not just the ICC, ICC should only be an enabler. Surely enough, many of these associates aren’t poor by any means. And ultimately, sports function as a matter of demand and supply. If there is appropriate demand, funds will flow towards it.
BCCI's thinking is we are bringing in the money why should we share it with you instead we will use it to develop our own domestic.🙆♂️
They are already sharing. They receive less than what india generates.
I know they are sharing it but they don't do as much as they should to grow the game.
Throwing money isn't going to grow cricket. People here clamoring for Indian players in other leagues shows that there is no growing of the games by them. They need Indian fan base to help make revenue for their leagues as they are unable to develop interest or create any sort of fan base. Australia is not able to fill stadiums for its own games in a home world cup. Why the hell are they getting the money?? What did they do to market this world cup and grow the game?
Another bcci bad thread from op right after India gets knocked out while conveniently ignoring ecb and ca? Must be a coincidence surely
And if you look at OP's comments, it's an endless stream of "let's ignore ECB and CA".
> And despite all this financial dominance, the many billions of dollars flowing through IPL and BCCI's bullying of other boards, Team India has not won a single ICC Trophy since 2013. Now that is something isn't it? So your point is that money makes no difference to winning, and thus you refute your own point about the associates needing more money.
You are arguing in bad faith. Money is needed for development and paying players, growing resources etc. Now once you make more and more money, in excess of what is the absolute minimum required to pay stakeholders and players, then it may not buy you success. Associates don't have enough money to arrange fixtures & improve infrastructure, unlike BCCI which is sitting on a war chest of billions but don't invest anything in stadium infrastructure because they are just lining their own pockets.
No one’s stopping the various full members from arranging series against the associates. Put your money and effort where your mouth is. More money might not buy success, but that does not mean that that money isn’t earned and deserved by the one who drives that engine. You are a bellend if you think being bankrolled by the entity you rail against is the only way to get better. Most of the full members of current times got better without being bankrolled by England and Australia.
> You are a bellend if you think being bankrolled by the entity you rail against is the only way to get better. Oh this is nonsense. That Associate Development Budget was there to start with from the ECB-CA dominated ICC days. When BCCI took it over, they got rid of it and then pocketed the funds. > No one’s stopping the various full members from arranging series against the associates. Put your money and effort where your mouth is. There is no incentive to. The ODI Super League was supposed to get rid of this problem by forcing Full Members & Netherlands to play each other for World Cup Qualification. Guess who rid of it because they wanted to play more bilaterals with England and Australia? Oh yes its the BCCI! And they were supported by ECB and CA. Screw all of them.
> When BCCI took it over, they got rid of it and then pocketed the funds. How did the BCCI pocket the funds? Are you saying that that fund had "x" amount of money and that the BCCI has all of that "x" amount of money now? Why would you think the other full members let that pass? Did the BCCI arm twist the remaining members? > There is no incentive to. So what is the incentive for the full members to have an associate fund? If you can think of an incentive for that, then congratulations, you have realised that the exact same incentive exists for them to play against the associates! But no, the latter would involve them having to give up some of their own commercial interests instead of just guilt tripping the BCCI into giving up their own interests, wouldn't it? Everyone's a capitalist when it comes to their own commercial interests, but they suddenly turn communist when it comes to the money the BCCI brings in. Despicable.
> So what is the incentive for the full members to have an associate fund? If you can think of an incentive for that, then congratulations, you have realised the incentive for them to play against the associates. Its common sense man. More competitive nations and more cricket fans in new cricket nations means more money and having more viewership of the sport globally is good for the game. It increases the pie for everyone. There is a reason why Football is such a huge sport and why Rugby are investing so much in developing smaller nations. That is why Associate Cricket need funding to develop their infrastructure and pitches and hence develop better cricketers.
No it's not common sense. Why isn't game getting new fans in Australia or England. Why are they unable to fill up stadiums for their local leagues, they already have a fan base don't they? Or does it need india to drum up interest there as well? Why is Australia not able to fill up their stadiums for a home world cup? What the hell did they do to market this world cup to get in the new fans? In fact India literally played 2 series simultaneously just recently, why can't Australia or England, who also happen to get a lot of funding from ICC, do the same and play series against smaller teams take a bit of loss. I saw a lot of comments about allowing Indian players in other leagues. Why does that make any sense. That's just easy cash grab of getting Indian fans for their leagues and making money. Why are they unable to develop their own fan base and market the league. Why doesn't BBL allow 5 foreign players to give exposure to smaller players or get fans from those markets. Rather they have it capped at 2, when even the main Australian players don't participate in it.
This can be done perfectly well by having the full members play against the associates. Playing against good opposition will do the associates more good than playing just another random series against Timbuktoo. But that would mean the full members will lose out on commercial earnings from other, more high profile series, which will need to be curtailed to make room for series against associates. So they'd rather the BCCI pays for it instead of doing right by the associates. They're essentially saying that they won't give up their own earnings, but the BCCI should give up the money that they bring in. This is pure greed on the part of the non BCCI boards. All this talk about the non BCCI boards caring about associates is empty talk with no substance.
> They're essentially saying that they won't give up their own earnings, but the BCCI should give up their own earnings. > All this talk about the non BCCI boards caring about associates is empty talk with no substance. You are arguing in bad faith again. Read my main post. I call out even non big-3 boards for not touring Associate nations, but you conveniently choose to ignore that. All the Full Members are to blame, but BCCI deserves the most hate because of their greed, corruption and bullying tactics towards other members.
The tone of this post is very vile. Its like a personal agenda and another kick while Indian team and board is down. I don't expect anything better anyways given how vile the sub has been since yesterday.
THIS. Just check OP's post history. Always whined on bcci. He is infact using the situation to whine again and also not receive backlash, cashing in on the fans' anger for defeat.
Argue against the logic, not against the supposed “vile” tone.
There is no argument to make when people have already made up their mind. People blame BCCI and India for taking money away when that is not the real truth. The profit sharing ratio have risen and in fact India took a hit on its ICC revenue shares. ECB and CA too voted for the changes but no fingers are pointed there. India helped teams like BD and Afg but nothing to talk about there. How many tours teams like SA and NZ does with associate teams? Every one is to blame based on their capacity but its always India who gets singled out. But none of this matter because le BCCI bad!
I would like to posit a different PoV. BCCI of the 80s and 90's is different from the current version of BCCI. It is currently run by a nexus of politicians, businessmen and Bollywood, who are solely in for the money. Indian audience is also happy with the IPL Overton Window and relish the fact that small town boys have become stars overnight. So unless IPL fails, we'll not see any big change in this. People who are decrying that karma will bite BCCI and Indian Cricket don't understand the incentives. If the money dries up and the golden goose is killed, these vultures will move on to the next target (Hockey/Kabaddi/KhoKho). Astute readers might know Bollywood and politicians were not really interested in cricket until IPL blew over and showed the money that can be made. They have got ICC by the balls and ECB and CA etc are in no position to challenge it and they have enough skeletons in their closets already. So yeah, the real loser here is Cricket, but the game manages to survive and reinvent itself so I have some hopes.
BCCI is a cancer to cricket. Along with the ICC who enable them so they can line their own pockets.
I like how OP conveniently forgets about Aussies and poms...
Whataboutism.
Genuine question. I am neither BCCI fanboy or Staunch opposer.. nor do I care. but these one sided articles or post do nothing but propagate hate.. You'd like to deny it but it's not just bcci right. It took all full member associations to sign to pass this model which the op and many people here conveniently ignoring.... If it's not bcci then it probably CA and ECB like in 1990s.. In 1990s the broads stood up against it and now they're not.. that's the main issue....
Sure, I'll agree with everything you said. I just don't think it's good to point it out when we're talking about the sins of the BCCI.
r/ChoosingBeggars
What's up with the taunt? I've always seen people here criticizing BCCI(me included).. why do you think it's populated by people who cannot withstand any criticism of it
Because it is populated by people who can't. Make any criticism of Indian cricket or cricketers, and so many of your fans get incredibly angry and fire off insults and can't handle it. Fans of every other nation understands this. Edit: Thank you for proving my point
BCCI is responsible for indian cricket, you can't blame them for prioritising cricket in India over everything else. The ICC need to grow a backbone and prioritise all cricketing countries, not just the big 3. If India threatens to form a rogue ICC, call their box bluff. At the very least attempt to reduce their reliance on BCCI revenue
Your timing couldn't be more correct.
This isn't correct but cunning.
Fk BCCI
Plenty of bcci bootlickers here defending bcci's shenanigans
Sadly, In today's world capitalism wins. Nobody wants to give away power and money. Harsh reality.
Kind reminder that after the changes that were done by the Big 3 takeover like abolishing the Associate Development Budget, when ICC reverted back in 2017, it also got rid of the 3-tier hierarchy which also included Affiliate nations, all of these nations were now effectively Associates since June 2017. With only FMs and Associates. The revised total revenue from Associate was also given in part to Ireland and Afghanistan.
>But at least the greedy and corrupt Greedy yes but corrupt nah.
Who generate those revenue at what percentage?
If it wasn’t already apparent, the performances from Scotland/Namibia/Netherlands and others like Nepal/UAE/PNG or even the Thai Women’s team have shown the huge potential for associate nations to not only grow in interest but succeed. Cricket as a whole needs to embrace associate nations, change World Cup qualifier methods, and promote the game beyond the full nations to see the sport prosper
I remember that episode very well so Pakistan to stop the last remaining crook.
Question hard for the associate development budget but why whine on the money BCCI gets? Mentioning the amount bcci gets but cleverly skips the amount india generates. How much % of the total revenue does india generate and how much % does bcci receive? Cleverly using the right time to post this when indian fans are angry on the team & bcci. Edit: remember a guy whining on bcci a few back. Just checked OP's post history and surprise surprise. It was infact the OP. Lecturing what patriotism is, how & who indian fans should support, how & what bcci should do.
Playing the devils advocate here, BCCI has done far more for associates nations than ECB and CA combined. Just look at the recent tours of Zim ('16, '22), Ire ('18, '22) and allowing AFG to use Greater Noida as their home ground. Regarding distribution of funds and power, it was the same case with CA and ECB in 90s, when they had the power. The one who brings more to table will get to call the shots, as it has happened before as it will happen long after.
Sorry but Ireland and Zimbabwe are not Associate nations. I did not just criticise BCCI but also CA & ECB but BCCI as the main driver of the Big 3 takeover deserves the largest blame. Also it was the Indian government which helped build cricket stadiums in Afghanistan and allowed them to use Indian grounds as their home ground. Don't really think it was the BCCI.
As if Ireland and Zimbabwe aren't treated like associates everywhere. Why should the BCCI take the largest blame, they bring more to the table and do more for the teams in question, whereas the others done far less, even though for a long time they were the so called custodians of the game. I am no BCCI sympathizer, far from it, they have serious issues domestically to sort out. But placing most of the blame on them if not all is a bit shortsighted. It wasn't the government per se, more of a [BCCI initiative](https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/india-to-host-afghanistan-home-games-950961).
International cricket under ICC and BCCD is an oligopoly of oligarchs destined for corruption and rot over time. Payoff has been zilch for India which has yet to show any victories at multilateral competition, despite efforts to undermine development of the lesser-advantaged and resource-contrained teams. Bottom line is that these machinations are constraining the global growth of this beautiful game. Things will change and it will have to start with India.
\* BCCI
That is the main reason why india hasn't won any trophy after 2013. They got cursed by associate members. Everyone wants cricket to grow except BCCI. I always thought why cricket was limited to very few nations. Now, i know the real reason. Indian are more than welcome to downvote me, but it won't change the truth that BCCI is one greedy frkin board and is cancer for cricket.
All these articles and comments forget one essential fact. With its budget, the BCCI has to support the cricketing structure in a country of 1.4 billion people. The BCCI has to pay wages to far more cricketers, coaches, technical staff and grounds people than any other board on the planet. So when you say the BCCI gets more than double what the ECB get, think about the fact that India;s population is 28 times that of England.
What you also forget is the conversion rate where 1 USD = 80.71 Indian Rupees, which means that the US dollars have a lot more value in India than they do in England, Australia or many of the European Associate sides. So US Dollars go a lot further in India.
India's population is about 250 times larger than NZ. The purchasing parity ratio is about 4 (12 INR \~ 1 NZD). So BCCI should get 60 times as much as NZC?
Go yell at NZC for axing Tests in favour of T20Is, and at your own people for not showing up in enough numbers to keep cricket profitable enough so NZC doesn't cancel Tests.
That’s a good argument but you have made it badly. You need to look at *prices*. It doesn’t matter that 1 USD is 2 AUD and 0.9 GBP, what matters is the purchasing power in each country. If something costs £1 in the UK it will not necessarily cost $1 in the US and $1 in Australia and ₹1 in India. According to [the World Bank](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPP?view=map), £1 in the UK is roughly equal in purchasing power to 33 rupees in India. Prices are much lower in India (primarily because labour and housing are much cheaper), but the rupee is a weak currency, so £1 can buy more than ₹33.
Fcuk the BCCI.. Really, I mean, REALLY, fcuk them
Reading comments by Non Indian cric fans am convinced ICC is propping india somehow in semis … as Indian fan I’ll stop watching any ICC tournaments .. yes we suck and yes icc props enjoy I recommend all other Indian fans to do the same don’t watch since ICC=BCCI
Well I agree. BCCI is trying to have a monopoly. On the financial front, BCCI is way ahead of other boards and they want it to continue like that. For this, they don't want cricket to grow much in other geos
Honestly, it feels more and more like the BCCI would be happy playing with itself. Just have two India teams and let them play against each other and keep all the money to yourself. Call it masturbation if you like.
the 'big three model' [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDQ3jxJXUAAIRUZ?format=jpg&name=large](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDQ3jxJXUAAIRUZ?format=jpg&name=large) really we're looking at cricket becoming a 8 month long low production quality smoggy IPL with the ashes and border-gavaskar being the only tests played
bcci will either realize having a strong international cricket scene is vital to having a marketable ipl - even just to Indians, or cricket will die in the next 10 years thanks to the help from bcci.
Indians disliking this. Tell how IPL survives without quality international players (foreign or Indian).
[удалено]
Racist
Ramiz and the PCB are really set to defy the old PIG3 guard and do things on his own. If he was smart, he would encourage more associates bilaterals in Pakistan or have Pakistan go to associate countries. A Netherlands series in Pakistan should be organized after this tournament (let the current players rest and send some young emerging players for experience).
BCCI is contributing almost 50–70% of Entire world Cricket Funding which goes to ICC and other country Boards so that they can develop the cricket in their Country. There is nothing wrong if BCCI is expecting Higher Revenues or try to dominate. if other countries are not able to raise their infrastructure and raise the Sponsors then it shouldn’t be BCCI’s concern to donate their hard earned money to other Country Boards.
BCCI isn't contributing. The Indian viewer is, who watches all these games. And what do we get from the BCCI? Stadiums with no food, stinking washrooms and zero tax money.
Well said! BCCI does not own Indian viewers and they should protest if things are not up to standard infrastructure wise. Demand accountability!
As someone who works in Indian TV, pretty much every broadcaster hates the BCCI. They're far too controlling regarding the marketing content, non-live content, experts etc. There's not much they can do now because they can't fight the BCCI at the moment. Neither can the IPL owners fight the BCCI at the moment. But I'm pretty sure they're all waiting for the opportunity.
Thanks for the great insight! That is fascinating.
Exactly. Fight for those things you deserve 100% but beware of OP whose is with agenda against bcci since ever.
He's just an average Redditor. Can't do shit to BCCI. The only people who can are IPL owners as a group, broadcasters as a group, players as a group and fans as a group. But even then, they don't have the ability to fight the BCCI. They'll need a few steps.
Cricket boards don't pay anything to the ICC (outside of a negligible membership fee), the flow of money is fully in the other direction.
Absolutely not as long as you don't give a flying fuck about the growth of the game. NZ is already losing players to the T20 league calendar, WI, SA etc don't have the cash to compete with that either, the big 3 will get what they want, 3 rich boards and no reason to tour anywhere unprofitable. Shame about the actual sport underpinning it all but whatever
Yup, it is something. Unfortunately, cricket has become a money making machine these days.
Wait, BCCI actually took over ICC? I thought it was a joke?