NareshK Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 You didn't get my point. BCCI has probably agreed to play with Pakistan. They have to host a series against them according to FTP. So, here they don't like Pakistan but ready to play with them. For India's tour of Pakistan, India doesn't want to play on a neutral venue. My question was that since BCCI has agreed to play with Pakistan in India's home series, shouldn't they be playing them on neutral venue also for past series? We don't like them, then why play them at all? India playing Pakistan itself is doing a favor to Pakistan cricket as interest is fading there because Pakistan hasnt been playing at home for a while because of the security situation. PCB stands to make money because of tv rights and also by promoting the game at home. Why should BCCI pay PCB as though Pak is doing a favor to BCCI ? Its PCB which needs this tour, not the other way around.
vvvslaxman Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Has Pakistan given money to anyone lol. Always begging.
ganeshran Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Why doesnt Butt impose fines on players to generate revenue :dontknow:
achilles Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Abe ******* samaj rakha hai kya hame? Why should we share our revenue with you?
Crookbond Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 The PCB chairman speaks from the same place as his name seems to suggest and there's no prizes for guessing what comes out. :--D
Trichromatic Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 BCCI doesnt play bilateral series on neutral territories for quite some time. There is so much money to be made in a home series, why should they play at some place which doesn't benefit either board. But 50-50 revenue sharing is complete bull especially when BCCI pays so much to get stadiums ready and putting the necessary infrastructure. Even without revenue sharing PCB would make 20-30 million from an India series First this series was supposed to be Pakistan's home series which Pakistan could have hosted on a neutral venue. In a bilateral series on a neutral venue, PCB would have to make all the arrangements and they would have earned from it. That's what happens in home series. Whoever organizes the series, earns from it by selling broadcasting rights etc. It's not that none of the boards earn from playing in neutral venue. But since BCCI doesn't want to play on neutral venue, PCB proposed that their "home series" to be played in India itself. BCCI agreed, but BCCI refused on the revenue sharing part. In my opinion, BCCI should follow the FTP and play the series on a neutral venue. All other boards do so. They are committed to the FTP, but BCCI doesn't seem to. Earlier decision of not playing with Pakistan at all was justified because of Mumbai attacks and situations arising because of that. But now since we are ready to play with them then we should not have problems with playing on a neutral venue. But that's what should happen ideally.
Cricket Tragic Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Purely from a cricketing point of view, playing in a neutral venue like Dubai/AD would be a waste of time. Batsmen filling their boots in front of empty stands and another drawn series is hardly what India-Pak tests need given their history of boring draws.
Show_stopper Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Hahaha what was he expecting? I bet they are so desperate for a series with us...we should squeeze htem. See if they agree to 90:10 revenue sharing agreement. i bet they would.
Trichromatic Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 First this series was supposed to be Pakistan's home series which Pakistan could have hosted on a neutral venue. In a bilateral series on a neutral venue, PCB would have to make all the arrangements and they would have earned from it. That's what happens in home series. Whoever organizes the series, earns from it by selling broadcasting rights etc. It's not that none of the boards earn from playing in neutral venue. But since BCCI doesn't want to play on neutral venue, PCB proposed that their "home series" to be played in India itself. BCCI agreed, but BCCI refused on the revenue sharing part. In my opinion, BCCI should follow the FTP and play the series on a neutral venue. All other boards do so. They are committed to the FTP, but BCCI doesn't seem to. Earlier decision of not playing with Pakistan at all was justified because of Mumbai attacks and situations arising because of that. But now since we are ready to play with them then we should not have problems with playing on a neutral venue. But that's what should happen ideally. Hahaha what was he expecting? I bet they are so desperate for a series with us...we should squeeze htem. See if they agree to 90:10 revenue sharing agreement. i bet they would. They would agree even at 100:0 agreement. They don't have any choice. BCCI is powerful enough to deny the series with Pakistan. No other boards can do that. PCB won't be in loss with this series anyway. However they won't get the same amount of profit, if BCCI had agreed to play matches hosted by Pakistan somewhere else.
jf1gp_1 Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 First this series was supposed to be Pakistan's home series which Pakistan could have hosted on a neutral venue. In a bilateral series on a neutral venue, PCB would have to make all the arrangements and they would have earned from it. That's what happens in home series. Whoever organizes the series, earns from it by selling broadcasting rights etc. It's not that none of the boards earn from playing in neutral venue. But since BCCI doesn't want to play on neutral venue, PCB proposed that their "home series" to be played in India itself. BCCI agreed, but BCCI refused on the revenue sharing part. In my opinion, BCCI should follow the FTP and play the series on a neutral venue. All other boards do so. They are committed to the FTP, but BCCI doesn't seem to. Earlier decision of not playing with Pakistan at all was justified because of Mumbai attacks and situations arising because of that. But now since we are ready to play with them then we should not have problems with playing on a neutral venue. But that's what should happen ideally. according to the OP Pak has to visit India as per FTP ; there is no question of neutral venue or revenue sharing. 2008 series was not postponed it was cancelled and thats the end of it. We cant go back and plan that series; if we start doing that next we will hear X ODIs and y Test with aussies were lost/cancel due to rain so we are going to plan an additional series outside of FTP . Ind - Aus is after all big money for BCCI
Crookbond Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Purely from a cricketing point of view' date=' playing in a neutral venue like Dubai/AD would be a waste of time. Batsmen filling their boots in front of empty stands and another drawn series is hardly what India-Pak tests need given their history of boring draws.[/quote'] I think the last time we played them in Abu Dhabi the crowd was pretty decent. Hell it was even decent when we played them in Netherlands! I am not sure crowd is an issue. I think the real problem is the venue. India would always try to avoid places like Sharjah, Dubai etc. due to match-fixing concerns. Pakistan would push such venues to help them earn.
Cricket Tragic Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 I think the last time we played them in Abu Dhabi the crowd was pretty decent. Hell it was even decent when we played them in Netherlands! I am not sure crowd is an issue. I think the real problem is the venue. India would always try to avoid places like Sharjah' date=' Dubai etc. due to match-fixing concerns. Pakistan would push such venues to help them [b']earn. Talking about tests.
Midfielder Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Pakistan series is not fun anymore. Australia and England and SA are more worthy opponents. Why play with Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Ireland and Pakistan.
Cricket_Guru Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Pakistan series is not fun anymore. Australia and England and SA are more worthy opponents. Why play with Zimbabwe' date=' Bangladesh, Ireland and Pakistan.[/quote'] because play us to improve you overall record against us. 20 years down the line, you might still be champions after champions in everything but if keep on ignoring pakistan then us pakis will always haunt you with stats. and i personally think, india shouldnt play pakistan yet. let the heat build up. another 3 years then. gap of 7 years is good for tests.
Midfielder Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 because play us to improve you overall record against us. 20 years down the line, you might still be champions after champions in everything but if keep on ignoring pakistan then us pakis will always haunt you with stats. and i personally think, india shouldnt play pakistan yet. let the heat build up. another 3 years then. gap of 7 years is good for tests. Which stat are you going to bug us with. What is it 5-0 in world cup. Anyway we dont live in past.
jaggadaku Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Pakistan can still make enough revenue by selling the tv rights in their country. They should be thankful that we are at least playing against them
Trichromatic Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 They should be thankful that we are at least playing against them Playing with some country according to FTP is not a favor. If BCCI plays more matches than what's decided in FTP, then it can be called as favor and other board should be thankful in that case.
jairamesh Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 Pakistan "home series" against NZ was played in NZ. During that tour, all TV rights were owned by NZ Sky Sports. All NZ ad-revenue, ticket sales, etc. stayed with NZC. Hence PCB didn't receive a penny during that FTP commitment. So again, just more embarrassing chest thumping from another disillusioned paki to the media.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now