Will Indian cricket die if BCCI withdraws from ICC?

[horizonspeaks]

BCB Chief Nazmul Hasan thinks so. 

http://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/bangladesh-cricket-boss-justifies-not-backing-india-on-icc-revenue-roll-back/story-WMevSEOmHb4Ir1NE7exHxH.html

 

Quote

Some Indian cricket officials have even threatened to pull out of ICC tournaments, but Hasan feels India only will suffer.

“They can’t pull out of ICC tournaments. If they play only Zimbabwe, Bangladesh or Sri Lanka, who’ll watch them? Having said that, we, especially Bangladesh cricket, need a strong India. If they are strong, we are safe.”

Ruling out a tour to Pakistan over security concerns, Hasan said, “We don’t want to be the first one. We don’t want to put pressure on other nations.”

Is pull-out threat a real? Why does BCB think that Indian cricket will die if BCCI gets out of ICC?

 

If India focuses on IPL alone, the TV rights could fetch more than what ICC rights earn. 

 

I feel that ICC-backed resource grab will come back again and again. I feel it's time to limit ICC/Other country commitment to 6 months and have 2 IPLs in two windows. The second IPL could grab the September-October festive season. It hurts that ICC is mandating how many international matches India would play per year and the burden would be so high that a fair way to expand IPL would be lost. 

 

No to pull out, but yes to IPL expansion!

 

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by horizonspeaks

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Pull out from icc tournaments will kill icc not bcci.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Btw Nazmul has slyly put in his boards name as BCCI supporter.

[horizonspeaks]

3 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

Btw Nazmul has slyly put in his boards name as BCCI supporter.

This is true for Manohar too, they have become super friendly when they want BCCI to sign the agreement. That's what made BCCI rep in ICC meeting think BCCI has been hard handed to them before. It's like when a bad guy wants his parents to sign a inheritance deed or will. 

 

I feel even if BCCI agrees to take a cut, they should - 

1) Keep the path to expand IPL open. 

2) Try to get more for Associate fund and keep money away from ECB and CA. 

3) Try to put a limit on costs. Otherwise, CA & ECB will start to use ICC money as their pocket-money.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

This is true for Manohar too, they have become super friendly when they want BCCI to sign the agreement. That's what made BCCI rep in ICC meeting think BCCI has been hard handed to them before. It's like when a bad guy wants his parents to sign a inheritance deed or will. 

 

I feel even if BCCI agrees to take a cut, they should - 

1) Keep the path to expand IPL open. 

2) Try to get more for Associate fund and keep money away from ECB and CA. 

3) Try to put a limit on costs. Otherwise, CA & ECB will start to use ICC money as their pocket-money.

 

1.If new rules come then there is hardly any place for the present IPL let alone an expansion.

 

2.Look at the division.Unless bcci gets its way.This will pass.

 

3.Again for that these icc proposals have to be defeated.

[horizonspeaks]

11 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

1.If new rules come then there is hardly any place for the present IPL let alone an expansion.

 

2.Look at the division.Unless bcci gets its way.This will pass.

 

3.Again for that these icc proposals have to be defeated.

I agree with you on #1 & #3. That's why I feel pull-out threat might be the only option currently. Even if it doesn't happen, BCCI should float press releases on their plan post pull-out etc etc. If some of the members realize they will earn exact 0 revenue post BCCI pull-out, they will automatically vote against it.

Edited February 15, 2017 by horizonspeaks

[horizonspeaks]

10 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

1.If new rules come then there is hardly any place for the present IPL let alone an expansion.

 

2.Look at the division.Unless bcci gets its way.This will pass.

 

3.Again for that these icc proposals have to be defeated.

On #2, if Zimbabwe & SL votes with BCCI I think the proposal will fail. 

[mishra]

BCCI can provisionally pull out (say till next odi world Cup) as its management weren't ready for ICC changes and need more time. And this shouldnt be placed as threat to ICC.

It should be - we are provisionally out unless ICC increases BCCI's revenue share percentage. It will make every other nation to rethink and press ICC to share revenues more fairly

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by mishra

[Vilander]

He is just saying if BCCI pulls out of ICC BD,SL and Zim will still play India, we can add Afgan to it. So the question is who wont play SA/Aus/Eng/WI/Pak. You can obviously buy WI and SA players if not the board, even in a hypothetical situation of BCCI pullout of ICC, Indian cricket will not die but ICC will be reduced to 'Ashes' sorry for the pun :).

[Vilander]

So this is how test cricket had to die. 

[Vilander]

32 minutes ago, sarchasm said:

The uncontroversial premise would be:

 

1) All the boards are rational players although doubts may be raised about PCB

2) Boards are format agnostic regardless of their public statements concerning primacy of test cricket.

3) The economic interests alone would drive their choices, and not their stated commitment to any particular format, or traditional schedules (such as boxing day tests)

4) What else?

I would add , what is the ICC's principle in this, do they really want the least bad consequence( and what are those) at all or are they irrational too ( under Manohar) 

[Vilander]

9 minutes ago, sarchasm said:

ICC is not an independent body with its own self interest, it's only a vehicle that expresses the collective will of its constituent members. In that sense, ICC won't be a player in its own right like national boards. Although it would be used by other boards to further their interest. But if BCCI pulled out, the ICC will simply wither away as a body, it'll be each board on their own, forging alliances for themselves.

 

This 'anarchic' scenario ought to work out best for BCCI because they can independently negotiate with other boards without being subjected to intrusive ICC rules that actually curtails their freedom. But there are caveats as well. ICC works as a legitimizing body that recognizes BCCI as the only representative body from India. With ICC gone, BCCI can face a rival cricketing body within India. So there would be all sorts of concerns but still should play in BCCI's favor.

hmm yup thats valid, if it just a play of every board then BCCI will have its way. ICC would play a role in the current argument/reasoning though, their irrationality will be sourced from PCB and Manohar whatever but they will play in effect to try to limit BCCI. ICC position is a bit weaker since they are not like an state Olympic federation or an international federation of state bodies, they are a state independent body, i think that makes them inherently replaceable as an organization, say by a Council for multi-national cricket relations for instance.

Makes one wonder how was the ICL saga handled, how did ICC legitimize BCCI and delegitimise ICL ? from a legal parlance it would be an interesting precedence to the future power struggle. ICC could encourage or help float an other ICL for instance.

[KeyboardWarrior]

"If they are strong, we are safe."

How?

[Vilander]

1 hour ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

"If they are strong, we are safe."

How?

Not all countries believe India is the enemy thats how, normal countries gain strength from each others prosperity.

[jalebi_bhai]

3 hours ago, Vilander said:

He is just saying if BCCI pulls out of ICC BD,SL and Zim will still play India, we can add Afgan to it. So the question is who wont play SA/Aus/Eng/WI/Pak. You can obviously buy WI and SA players if not the board, even in a hypothetical situation of BCCI pullout of ICC, Indian cricket will not die but ICC will be reduced to 'Ashes' sorry for the pun :).

+1 throw the money, watch the tamaasha. BCCI'S biggest leveraging tool is the 1.25 billion large Indian market. Without this market, intl. cricket will perish.

 

We might be returning to World Series era cricket. RSA, WI, NZ, Ban, SL, Afg, Zim can all be bought on board. ICC can conduct Ashes and UAE series all year long.

[jalebi_bhai]

10 hours ago, sarchasm said:

ICC is not an independent body with its own self interest, it's only a vehicle that expresses the collective will of its constituent members. In that sense, ICC won't be a player in its own right like national boards. Although it would be used by other boards to further their interest. But if BCCI pulled out, the ICC will simply wither away as a body, it'll be each board on their own, forging alliances for themselves.

 

This 'anarchic' scenario ought to work out best for BCCI because they can independently negotiate with other boards without being subjected to intrusive ICC rules that actually curtails their freedom. But there are caveats as well. ICC works as a legitimizing body that recognizes BCCI as the only representative body from India. With ICC gone, BCCI can face a rival cricketing body within India. So there would be all sorts of concerns but still should play in BCCI's favor.

The key here is the IPL. 6th largest sporting league in the world last time I checked. Not bad for a 6 week long tournament. BCCI has a proven commodity which the rival league will have to compete with.

Edited February 16, 2017 by jalebi_bhai

[KeyboardWarrior]

15 hours ago, Vilander said:

Not all countries believe India is the enemy thats how, normal countries gain strength from each others prosperity.

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by KeyboardWarrior

[chewy]

India (or BCCI) will survive without ICC, the domestic structure is now robust, plenty of world class stadiums and enough quality Indian players to play within and invite others from overseas. With or without ICC, BCCI will only grow their revenues as incomes of people increase. 

 

ICC will survive but it will become a hegemony of Anglo-Australia and will cut out all associates and leave likes of Pakistan, West Indies and Sri Lanka fighting for scraps. Not too mention they will be haemorrhaging discontent players to IPL (especially the white players from South Africa).

 

ICC will grow poorer as revenue from ICC events will shrink considerably and the HQ will be moved backed to London. 

 

And if someone visionary like Lalit Modi arrives at BCCI, then they will probably set-up a parallel World Cricket body tweaking some playing rules, with parallel bodies in the big cricket playing countries. Basically what you have with Rugby Union vs Rugby League. ICC being Rugby league. 

[chewy]

ICC are fortunate that the bums in BCCI are bean counters with zero creativity or vision. 

[mishra]

2 hours ago, jalebi_bhai said:

+1 throw the money, watch the tamaasha. BCCI'S biggest leveraging tool is the 1.25 billion large Indian market. Without this market, intl. cricket will perish.

 

We might be returning to World Series era cricket. RSA, WI, NZ, Ban, SL, Afg, Zim can all be bought on board. ICC can conduct Ashes and UAE series all year long.

Windies south african , may be Australian and Few English tooo, they all will retire from national duties and play IPL. 

I will gi as far as to say that even not that it not now but due to lack of interest even Ashes may become loss making series.