BCCI pressured CA, ECB for ICC revamp: Sanjay Patel

[G_B_]

Fiba is the governing body of Olympic basketball. NBA allows its star players to play in that tournament without bullying fiba or the IOC into giving them money because they know in the long term it would benefit them financially. Again no one is against BCCI making as much money as possible. people are questioning the way its behaving. If Nadal federer and dokokovic demanded That Wimbledon organizers give them more money regardless of how the do in the tournament because of the money they bring in they would be attacked by everyone. And Wimbledon would loose its prestige if they caved into their demands.

you cant compare an individual sport to a global team sport. Your case of Tennis, the likes of Federar Nadal and Novak earn more from endorsements than what they do playing tennis. At the time of Fred Perry thats exactly what he demanded to play wimbledon when there were no major endorsements around. The truth is that cricket is an international game. Its different from most games such as basketball and football which is based on domestic leagues.

[Zap_Brannigan]

Fiba is the governing body of Olympic basketball. NBA allows its star players to play in that tournament without bullying fiba or the IOC into giving them money because they know in the long term it would benefit them financially. Again no one is against BCCI making as much money as possible. people are questioning the way its behaving. If Nadal federer and dokokovic demanded That Wimbledon organizers give them more money regardless of how the do in the tournament because of the money they bring in they would be attacked by everyone. And Wimbledon would loose its prestige if they caved into their demands.

Does Fiba asks these players to play 2 months every year for them? Apart from the grand slams and certain high reward/profile tournaments, some players do get more.In tennis, athletics,badminton and pretty much all non team sports, players get appearance fees in most low profile tournaments. Thats similar to India asking 20 million $ for every tour.. But tennis grandslams are a horrible example since these are tournaments that run on prize money. WC prize money is 3 million $, thats split between 15 players, staff and the board..Its less than what most players earn for 1 IPL game. Besides wimbledon doesnt makes players give up their sponsorship during the tournament..Moreover all 4 grandslams are run by different boards..the closest cricket comes to this is something like champions league. Like the English counties, they can not participate.Thats not ICC..

[G_B_]

I think the BCCI gets 25% under the new deals. Thats still a big subsidy to the world of cricket If you bring in 70% and get 25%. 4% was a joke. Even i was in charge even i would have demanded more than 4%. The needs of a board like the BCCI who are responsible for providing facilities for 1.2 billion people will always be more than those from smaller countries.

[G_B_]

On the issue of Sanhat Patel. All this moron has done is given the ECB and ACB sympathisers a get out of jail card. Keep your mouth shut Patel.

[Vilander]

India should get a larger share, give all boards except Pak/SL what they need. And Pak/SL should get based on what they pull in.

[Silva]

Does Fiba asks these players to play 2 months every year for them?

BCCI wants an ICC event every year because its easy money for them. Thats why Srivasian canceled the test championship in order to save the champions trophy. If BCCI was truly wanted to improve Indian cricket they would figure out a way to make first class and List a cricket more profitable and make more money that way. But its easier to not be innovative and just have a two world t20 and basically 2 world cups in four years mixed with some meaningless jamodis.

[Silva]

I think the BCCI gets 25% under the new deals. Thats still a big subsidy to the world of cricket If you bring in 70% and get 25%. 4% was a joke. Even i was in charge even i would have demanded more than 4%. The needs of a board like the BCCI who are responsible for providing facilities for 1.2 billion people will always be more than those from smaller countries.

If you think like that than why even have an ICC world cup? Just make it BCCI world cup and Srivasian gets to keep all the money he wants. ICC (like fifa and fiba) should only exist to make the sport it represents more popular world wide, but basically its just a cash cow for the big 8 and a few chosen associates.

[rajmarie]

We need other countries just as much as they need us. The revenue generation that is happening in India is not to watch Indian team but Indian team vs aussies/eng/etc. IPL is successful because of oversees players. One fine day BCCI is going to force all other cricket boards to join hand and dump India' date=' bars its contracted players from playing in India (sure few will still play specially retired ones) but who will watch year long IPL as it is noone watches Ranji or any other domestic series.[/quote'] Other board may bar it's contracted players to play in IPL but then again which players will sign those contracts. Common sense. You make the money in one year in IPL vs earning the same money playing throughout the life of your contract and that is also if that board has any money and not have to take a loan from world bank. What do you think why other boards agree to bcci demands. Sent from my LG-D800 using Tapatalk

[GrandMasterSaxy]

ICC earns 68-72% of the profit from BCCI. All BCCI gets in return is 4% (equivalent to what other countries get). I do not think there is anything wrong if BCCI is demanding more profilt. If I do all the hardwork in a business and my business partner is doing nothing, I would obviously expect more profit. I don't think even my business partner would mind it as far as he is getting his profit for doing nothing.

[G_B_]

If you think like that than why even have an ICC world cup? Just make it BCCI world cup and Srivasian gets to keep all the money he wants. ICC (like fifa and fiba) should only exist to make the sport it represents more popular world wide, but basically its just a cash cow for the big 8 and a few chosen associates.

Cause its a good tournament. You talk about FIFA but the nation of India with 1.25 billion people got $2 million from FIFA last year to develop football. Compare that to say a country like Zimbabwe which gets nearly $10 million from the ICC even for tournaments such as the champions trophy. Or even for that matter Ireland which gets 2-3 million a year from the ICC. Considering the Indian economy is going to reach something like 4 trillion from about 2 trillion currently in terms of absolute returns every permanent member will see an increase. There will also be big increases for assciate members such as ireland. The real question is how much money do nations like WI Zim SL Nz Ireland etc need to keep themselves afloat?

[Scarves]

On the FIBA thing, the European players generally play about 2 months a year for their country in WC, Olympics and Eurobasket, so they do play a fair bit after the NBA season finishes. Anyway in regards to Patel, why would you say these things out loud? That's really not the smartest thing to say. At least we know Srini is going to Melbourne, so that's interestingly useless info.

[sachin34357]

Imagine if BCCI secedes from ICC. Increases IPL teams to 12. Allows 5 overseas players in playing 11 in IPL. Allows 3 overseas players in playing 11 in Ranji Trophy and Vijay Hazare Trophy. I bet ICC would be finished.

[rajmarie]

Imagine if BCCI secedes from ICC. Increases IPL teams to 12. Allows 5 overseas players in playing 11 in IPL. Allows 3 overseas players in playing 11 in Ranji Trophy and Vijay Hazare Trophy. I bet ICC would be finished.

Like the above 2 ideas. But not sure if we have enough decent desi players (6*12). The biggest thing will be to make sure 1 or 2 team don't hog good desi players even though they will never play. Having overseas players in Ranji is also not a bad idea. ICC anyway do nothing until BCCI let it do.

[sachin34357]

Like the above 2 ideas. But not sure if we have enough decent desi players (6*12). The biggest thing will be to make sure 1 or 2 team don't hog good desi players even though they will never play. Having overseas players in Ranji is also not a bad idea. ICC anyway do nothing until BCCI let it do.

number of overseas players playing would increase to 60 from 32 but desi players would only increase by 16 to 72

[Vilander]

Imagine if BCCI secedes from ICC. Increases IPL teams to 12. Allows 5 overseas players in playing 11 in IPL. Allows 3 overseas players in playing 11 in Ranji Trophy and Vijay Hazare Trophy. I bet ICC would be finished.

Funding a cricket board in each country the cost could be astronomical and not to mention the amount of skilled manpower...lol not possible it would be undertaking on the scale of Indian foreign offices and external affairs. I think the aim should be to only ensure Pak/SL do not get any extra money everyone else should be invited to the party.

[Vilander]

Cause its a good tournament. You talk about FIFA but the nation of India with 1.25 billion people got $2 million from FIFA last year to develop football. Compare that to say a country like Zimbabwe which gets nearly $10 million from the ICC even for tournaments such as the champions trophy. Or even for that matter Ireland which gets 2-3 million a year from the ICC. Considering the Indian economy is going to reach something like 4 trillion from about 2 trillion currently in terms of absolute returns every permanent member will see an increase. There will also be big increases for assciate members such as ireland. The real question is how much money do nations like WI Zim SL Nz Ireland etc need to keep themselves afloat?

Let it go dude, its fashionable to bash India.

[Zap_Brannigan]

BCCI wants an ICC event every year because its easy money for them. Thats why Srivasian canceled the test championship in order to save the champions trophy. If BCCI was truly wanted to improve Indian cricket they would figure out a way to make first class and List a cricket more profitable and make more money that way. But its easier to not be innovative and just have a two world t20 and basically 2 world cups in four years mixed with some meaningless jamodis.

Srinivasan did not cancel the test championship. The TV companies did not want to bid for it. It was cancelled when each board had a single vote. It was cancelled because the other boards wouldn't take the hit. No,ICC tournaments are not easy money for BCCI. If India hosts an ICC tournament, all the revenue goes to ICC. ICC just pays the host board hosting fees which is much less than what BCCI could earn with an Indian bilateral series. The only reason that BCCI is planning to host more is to give the best time slots for TV right holders and ICC gets more money. BCCI makes 8 million $ from ICC tournaments..25 with the new system. Meanwhile it gets 100 million from bilateral series, 100 million from IPL and 50 million from champions league. Which is easy money? Why does making list A cricket profitable the only way to show improvements in domestic games? Are you forgetting that IPL is domestic cricket? BCCI has improved domestic pay manifold over the last 2 decades. From the pathetic 20$ per game in the 90's to 1000$ today. Now even ranji cricketers can make a career out of cricket without ever playing for India. Again you seem to mix ICC's greed with BCCI. It was ICC that wants a world tournament every year. It was ICC that bans team sponsors during these events. It is also the ICC that banned multi team tournaments hosted by boards. Coming back to Fiba...how many times has lebron james or kobe or shaq or jordan played in FIBA championships? How many ICC tournaments has Sachin played?

[Silva]

Srinivasan did not cancel the test championship. The TV companies did not want to bid for it. It was cancelled when each board had a single vote. It was cancelled because the other boards wouldn't take the hit. No,ICC tournaments are not easy money for BCCI. If India hosts an ICC tournament, all the revenue goes to ICC. ICC just pays the host board hosting fees which is much less than what BCCI could earn with an Indian bilateral series. The only reason that BCCI is planning to host more is to give the best time slots for TV right holders and ICC gets more money. BCCI makes 8 million $ from ICC tournaments..25 with the new system. Meanwhile it gets 100 million from bilateral series, 100 million from IPL and 50 million from champions league. Which is easy money?

Your forgetting that the ICC and BCCI are basically the same thing now. Look who bullied his way into becoming the next ICC chairman. And as soon as he did that it was announced that the champions trophy will not be canceled.

Why does making list A cricket profitable the only way to show improvements in domestic games? Are you forgetting that IPL is domestic cricket? BCCI has improved domestic pay manifold over the last 2 decades. From the pathetic 20$ per game in the 90's to 1000$ today. Now even ranji cricketers can make a career out of cricket without ever playing for India.

That salary increase is not impressive at all considering how much Indias economy has expanded since that time and how much of a monopoly BCCI on cricket in cricket crazy India.

Again you seem to mix ICC's greed with BCCI. It was ICC that wants a world tournament every year. It was ICC that bans team sponsors during these events. It is also the ICC that banned multi team tournaments hosted by boards.

Again the ICC is basically now the same as BCCI. At any point in time the BCCI can basically bully the ICC into what ever it wants the same way Srinivasan bullied his way into becoming chairman of the ICC. He even said that he will Be chairman of ICC and BCCI at the same time.

Coming back to Fiba...how many times has lebron james or kobe or shaq or jordan played in FIBA championships? How many ICC tournaments has Sachin played?

Not sure why this is relevant at all. You look at any prestigious league or tournament in the world I can't think of any where the central body has a revenue sharing model where the team that brings in the most gets out the most, and one team is basically allowed to bully every one into doing what they want. The ICC and its world tournament lost what ever prestige they had when it was announced that Srinivasian will now become the next ICC Chairman.

[Zap_Brannigan]

Your forgetting that the ICC and BCCI are basically the same thing now. Look who bullied his way into becoming the next ICC chairman. And as soon as he did that it was announced that the champions trophy will not be canceled. That salary increase is not impressive at all considering how much Indias economy has expanded since that time and how much of a monopoly BCCI on cricket in cricket crazy India. Again the ICC is basically now the same as BCCI. At any point in time the BCCI can basically bully the ICC into what ever it wants the same way Srinivasan bullied his way into becoming chairman of the ICC. He even said that he will Be chairman of ICC and BCCI at the same time. Not sure why this is relevant at all. You look at any prestigious league or tournament in the world I can't think of any where the central body has a revenue sharing model where the team that brings in the most gets out the most, and one team is basically allowed to bully every one into doing what they want. The ICC and its world tournament lost what ever prestige they had when it was announced that Srinivasian will now become the next ICC Chairman.

ICC is BCCI conspiracy...all i need to know..make more stuff up. The 1st test championship was supposed to be in 2013..a year before these new changes was even mentioned..who cancelled that? If you think that BCCI is ICC before then why did they even need the votes of other boards to make the changes. If you are so keen on sharing Indian players earnings, start by donating 60% of your salary. 1000$ is impressive considering that BCCI gets only 40% of the money generated by Indian cricket and there are hundreds of players in the domestic system. ICC had prestige..thats news to me..When was it? When ECB and CA had veto or was it when they decided to put all the money earned by 1 team and spread it to support corrupt boards like SL that sold its TV rights to the presidents son for very low price? If the other boards dont want to get bullied, then they should have worked to spread the game in their country instead of sitting on their asses and taking handouts. How hard is it for 8 members against one when they all had 1 vote each. BCCI is not US.It wasnt going to invade another board. It merely said that if everyone is dependent on its earnings, then they might as well run the game.

[Silva]

ICC is BCCI conspiracy...all i need to know..make more stuff up. The 1st test championship was supposed to be in 2013..a year before these new changes was even mentioned..who cancelled that? If you think that BCCI is ICC before then why did they even need the votes of other boards to make the changes.

Srini isn't going to be icc chairman?

If you are so keen on sharing Indian players earnings, start by donating 60% of your salary. 1000$ is impressive considering that BCCI gets only 40% of the money generated by Indian cricket and there are hundreds of players in the domestic system.

again rather than getting emotional and personal name me leagues or tournaments where players get paid by the central governing body according to how much they put in.

ICC had prestige..thats news to me..When was it? When ECB and CA had veto or was it when they decided to put all the money earned by 1 team and spread it to support corrupt boards like SL that sold its TV rights to the presidents son for very low price?

Your a pyromaniac in a field filled with straw men. No one is defending the way ICC was before.

It merely said that if everyone is dependent on its earnings, then they might as well run the game.

Finally we agree the ICC is basically now the BCCI.