BCCI may be forced to accept DRS

[Era of Gold]

That nation and its cricket board' date=' by default, represent the masses of cricket followers so assuming BCCI is catering to the interests of Indian cricket and its fans, it is by default, catering to the interest of cricket and the majority of its followers. India is cricket. [b']The rest of the nations exist to make up the numbers but cricket = India. Market forces dictate that and no sport has survived by resiting the market force. They've either resisted and caved or resisted and faded away. Cricket will be no exception and the only way cricket is going to succeed, is by catering to the larger interests of Indian cricket. Rest of the nations simply should accept that.

Funny how with all those numbers India can't consistently dominate. "Jab" aside, honestly I can't even understand how your ego could be that big.

[superstar]

You guys are unbelievably arrogant. Can you imagine if it were Australia or England deciding a certain rule? You'd all be livid. I don't know what experience you guys have had but in most matches I've seen, DRS is becoming better and better. I haven't seen DRS mess up something in WI's recent matches.

Make it better in domestic cricket then. Fine tune. Reduce the dubious decisions. Reduce the cost. Then we can implement it . Probably WI should concentrate on using DRS instead of spending money on CPL

[superstar]

A better option would be to fine the batsman and team the entire match fees for standing ground after nicking the ball. They would stop cheating then

[special K]

India should be forced to accept it or banned from cricket. If that happens then Ireland can replace them as a test nation.

[superstar]

India should be forced to accept it or banned from cricket. If that happens then Ireland can replace them as a test nation.

India can then start a new ICC and own it fully :hysterical::hysterical:

[Era of Gold]

Make it better in domestic cricket then. Fine tune. Reduce the dubious decisions. Reduce the cost. Then we can implement it . Probably WI should concentrate on using DRS instead of spending money on CPL

Yes only India deserve their own T20 league B-> Also..the point of the CPL is to make money..

[Era of Gold]

India can then start a new ICC and own it fully :hysterical::hysterical:

Yep, sums up the mentality of BCCI.

[superstar]

Yes only India deserve their own T20 league B-> Also..the point of the CPL is to make money..

You need a market for a league. Did you watch SLPL and Bpl...played in empty stadiums :orderorder::orderorder:

[velu]

no one can force BCCI

[SLICKR392]

Yep' date=' sums up the mentality of BCCI.[/quote'] We are the boss, obey us. :bigboss:

[Sachin=GOD]

just saw that India has had 3 review in the tournament till now and all 3 have been successful.

[G_B_]

I dont see what the problem is BCCI allows DRS to be used in an ICC event. Two consenting nations can implement the DRS. More than arrogance the BCCI has allowed the ICC and other nations options. So i dont see what the problem is.

[Muloghonto]

Funny how with all those numbers India can't consistently dominate.

Not so funny, there are plenty of sports teams out there who are the runaway market leader but mediocre performers. Just look at Toronto Maple Leafs. For 40+ years they are the runaway leaders in net worth as a hockey franchise. And they havnt won a stanley cup since 1967. It doesnt matter what the performance is, its the team that dominates revenue earning that dictate what happens to the sport.

"Jab" aside, honestly I can't even understand how your ego could be that big.

What ego ? India has 1.2 billion people, 90% of them being cricket nutters. There are easily 600 million+ Indians who worship cricket and cricketers. England ? A nation of 70 million where cricket is a distant third in rating (behind soccer and rugby). Australia ? nation of 25 million with cricket not even being a top 3 sporting persuit for Aussies. Saffies ? They are 40 million or so and care way more about soccer than cricket. Pakis + Bangles = another 200 million or so followers. West Indies has less than 10 million people living in it, even if everyone there were cricket crazies (which they are not, as soccer & basketball has greater youth level participation than cricket in British west indies) they still do not equal Mumbai's cricket nutter population alone. So there is nothing arrogant in stating that India, thus BCCI is the end-all be-all of cricket. They represent almost 80% of the fanbase. It is unbelievably arrogant to think that nations like England, West Indies, Australia, etc. have any credible basis in dictating cricketing terms to India and 80% of the fanbase. To deny BCCI monopoly of cricket is to deny the largest fanbase a monopoly, which is clearly undemocratic and elitist. BCCI vote *should* count more than ACB or ECB votes. ECB+ACB represents less than 10% of the popular interest represented by BCCI.

[special K]

ECB and CA can live without India in cricket. We're doing it for the next 8 months and I don't think anybody is fussed about it.

[superstar]

ECB and CA can live without India in cricket. We're doing it for the next 8 months and I don't think anybody is fussed about it.

Why is PCB coming with a begging bowl to India? Apparently Ishant Sharma earns more money in IPL than the whole pakistan team :hysterical: CA had a 40 million profit when India lost 4-0 England had loss last year but had a profit the previous year when India lost 4-0 Yes they can live without India but their cricket will die :finger::finger:

[Muloghonto]

ECB and CA can live without India in cricket. We're doing it for the next 8 months and I don't think anybody is fussed about it.

You cant live without your players. Open conflict with BCCI = IPL teams makes 'offers that you cannot refuse' to brit or Aussie players. Besides, piss BCCI off totally and if BCCI withdraws from the FTP program, that means 6 months of IPL a year, primier league style. Kiss any competent player from England or Australia goodbye, for an extended IPL season will equal 5-10 million dollar per salaries being handed out at the top end. So no, international cricket cannot live without BCCI. It exists because BCCI tolerates it. If BCCI wanted international cricket gone, it could be done at the drop of a hat. All it will require is for BCCI to make two announcements : 1. 'We withdraw from ICC' 2. 'We are going to make a 16 team IPL lasting six months'. The end for Aussie/English cricket if that happens.

[moniker]

Not so funny, there are plenty of sports teams out there who are the runaway market leader but mediocre performers. Just look at Toronto Maple Leafs. For 40+ years they are the runaway leaders in net worth as a hockey franchise. And they havnt won a stanley cup since 1967. It doesnt matter what the performance is, its the team that dominates revenue earning that dictate what happens to the sport. What ego ? India has 1.2 billion people, 90% of them being cricket nutters. There are easily 600 million+ Indians who worship cricket and cricketers. England ? A nation of 70 million where cricket is a distant third in rating (behind soccer and rugby). Australia ? nation of 25 million with cricket not even being a top 3 sporting persuit for Aussies. Saffies ? They are 40 million or so and care way more about soccer than cricket. Pakis + Bangles = another 200 million or so followers. West Indies has less than 10 million people living in it, even if everyone there were cricket crazies (which they are not, as soccer & basketball has greater youth level participation than cricket in British west indies) they still do not equal Mumbai's cricket nutter population alone. So there is nothing arrogant in stating that India, thus BCCI is the end-all be-all of cricket. They represent almost 80% of the fanbase. It is unbelievably arrogant to think that nations like England, West Indies, Australia, etc. have any credible basis in dictating cricketing terms to India and 80% of the fanbase. To deny BCCI monopoly of cricket is to deny the largest fanbase a monopoly, which is clearly undemocratic and elitist. BCCI vote *should* count more than ACB or ECB votes. ECB+ACB represents less than 10% of the popular interest represented by BCCI.

A direct democracy isn't what anyone would ideally want, views of the majority aren't always right. That's why we are a democratic republic. Representatives of the minority should be given equal rights.

[FischerTal]

Why is PCB coming with a begging bowl to India? Apparently Ishant Sharma earns more money in IPL than the whole pakistan team :hysterical: CA had a 40 million profit when India lost 4-0 England had loss last year but had a profit the previous year when India lost 4-0 Yes they can live without India but their cricket will die :finger::finger:

:cantstop:

[urbestfriend]

Meh. Then they'll use what's available. The system is meant to eliminate howlers so even without advanced tech' date=' it shouldn't be a problem.[/quote'] A good reason why BCCI is opposing DRS, either all teams should have the best of technologies available or they should accept umpires verdict. In the past hawkeye and Hotspot have been very inconsistent, no point using half baked technologies.

[Muloghonto]

A direct democracy isn't what anyone would ideally want' date=' views of the majority aren't always right. That's why we are a democratic republic. Representatives of the minority should be given equal rights.[/quote'] This is inapplicable in the case of a business, since in business terms, all parties have identical objective (to make more money) and therefore, there is no effective difference between direct or representative 'democracy' in marketplace. 'Shaftin the minority' does not relate to shafting a particular lifestyle or ethos, it simply boils down to bigger bucks winning versus smaller bucks. The market pressure ensures that the one who has the most capital, the most backing and the most at stake (which in this case would be BCCI unquestionably), is the one who's interest wins, period. Cricket, as any professional sport, is a business first and foremost. In this case, simple supply and demand ensures that the way india moves, so does cricket. This is not for the worse, as long as we hold BCCI to be competent at delivering the goods to the Indian public. This is so, because so long as we assume that BCCI is competent, then BCCI's interests directly serve the interest of the lion's share of the market. As such, on any business terms, BCCI can only be termed as extremely competent. They've exponentially increased their revenue, while attracting greater fanbase, while ticket prices have kept pace with currency inflation.