breaking news Supreme Court Asks BCCI To Implement Lodha Report In Full,BCCI To Reply In 4 Week

[Chandan]

2 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

I am following this on a day to day basis and from people who are involved.No BCCI member has supported this.

What other bodies do doesnt matter because they are not BCCI members.BCCI isnt a govt body nor does it take any taxpayers money so it is under no obligation to have all these stupid reforms SC has asked it to follow.SC wants BCCI to be another third rate Indian sporting body which goes to the govt and around the world begging for coins.And many BCCI member bodies have already raised their objections to the court and others will do the same.

We'll see Merlyn, who wins in the end and why has BCCI already implemented half of the stupid reforms.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Just tell me, if the board starts showing just a 4 ball over,(2 balls are gulped by ads) and that over too is intervened by L shaped ads and what nots, who will take care of spectators interest? Just answer this Q.

No one shows 4 ball overs.Money runs the sports not Supreme court.And people are watching the sports.There are already guidelines on no. of ads that can be shown.

Who will Pay the players?How will the game develop?Who will pay the pension?Any idea how Indian cricket was before 1994?Any freaking Idea?

You will rather see our players line up to play in county cricket for peanuts or go to Sharjah and play and get some CBFS funds for ex players.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

We'll see Merlyn, who wins in the end and why has BCCI already implemented half of the stupid reforms.

Ofcourse some reforms are good and made sense and have been implemented.

Wins?Who will win againist a constitutional body hell bent on running the country by decree and without any accountability.But judges dont last forever and they retire and hopefully the new ones will have better sense to not try and run the country.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Dont know how can court decide about the tv commercial. Who will compensate for the revenue loss?

Either we will pay huge subscription fees or our players will beg in county cricket or go play in Sharjah.That will satisfy the SC.

[bulbul]

22 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

Either we will pay huge subscription fees or our players will beg in county cricket or go play in Sharjah.That will satisfy the SC.

SC is giving random verdicts now a days...They also deciding ban of diesel cars without thinking its effects....

27 minutes ago, Chandan said:

We'll see Merlyn, who wins in the end and why has BCCI already implemented half of the stupid reforms.

Some reform needed we all know..but SC should not touch free market economics.....

[Malcolm Merlyn]

SC is giving random verdicts now a days...They also deciding ban of diesel cars without thinking its effects....

The NEET verdict on MBBS exams is another one given without any thought.

[bulbul]

8 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

The NEET verdict on MBBS exams is another one given without any thought.

Forgot that as well...looks like SC is taking revenge for not appointing enough judges.

 

Who will monitor these judges? President ??

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Forgot that as well...looks like SC is taking revenge for not appointing enough judges.

 

Who will monitor these judges? President ??

Thats the issue.These judges dont have any accountability and if the parliament passes a law to make them accountable they strike it down as unconstitutional.

[rkt.india]

8 hours ago, Chandan said:

Just tell me, if the board starts showing just a 4 ball over,(2 balls are gulped by ads) and that over too is intervened by L shaped ads and what nots, who will take care of spectators interest? Just answer this Q.

But that's not happening so why are you talking about it?

[Chandan]

3 hours ago, rkt.india said:

But that's not happening so why are you talking about it?

You Q was:  Dont know how can court decide about the tv commercial. Who will compensate for the revenue loss? In reply to it, my ans

was

Quote

 if the board starts showing just a 4 ball over,(2 balls are gulped by ads) and that over too is intervened by L shaped ads and what nots, who will take care of spectators interest? Just answer this Q.

 This is when a court can decide about TV ads.

 

There are many overs in ODIs where one or two balls are not shown due to ads. And those L shaped ads are intruding all over. Can you deny that?These things are not happening? In ODIs?

[Chandan]

12 hours ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

Ofcourse some reforms are good and made sense and have been implemented.

Wins?Who will win againist a constitutional body hell bent on running the country by decree and without any accountability.But judges dont last forever and they retire and hopefully the new ones will have better sense to not try and run the country.

So now you thinksome of the reforms made sense, rest are stupid?

 

See, we have very limited knowledge of what happens in BCCI, how the states functions, how they spend their money and other functions of BCCI.

 

On which basis, can you call these reforms stupid which has been suggested after huge survey of 6-8 months and many well wishers of cricket think that these would take Indian cricket forward?

 

Only people in BCCI who have vested interest there are resisting few of the reforms there.

 

I was also against One sate one vote, and 3 selectors reform but then read in detail their reasonings and understood.

 

Edit:

 

Ringing out the old

 

BCCI have done a few things on their own — appointing a CEO, clearing conflict of interest issues, attempting to bring more transparency by putting more details on their website. But the SC wants them to go further and change the BCCI’s very soul.

 

Will the recommendations of the Lodha committee change cricket as we know it? It will take ministers and ageing industrialists out of the picture, make it a tad more professional, get more bargaining power for former players in the administration. It will be interesting to see how that player power plays out in actual practice. Not all examples of players-turned-administrators have been great advertisements for their tribe. Overhauling the BCCI is one thing but trying to change the fabric of state associations — a cluster of club members, individuals, and patrons — is a different and difficult task. We can see that change is on the way but it’s not clear, as yet, how it will play out in the real world.

 

Edited May 12, 2016 by Chandan

[rkt.india]

2 hours ago, Chandan said:

You Q was:  Dont know how can court decide about the tv commercial. Who will compensate for the revenue loss? In reply to it, my ans

was

 This is when a court can decide about TV ads.

 

There are many overs in ODIs where one or two balls are not shown due to ads. And those L shaped ads are intruding all over. Can you deny that?These things are not happening? In ODIs?

only exceptions and it doesn't mean court will decide when to show the ads. 

[Malcolm Merlyn]

4 hours ago, Chandan said:

You Q was:  Dont know how can court decide about the tv commercial. Who will compensate for the revenue loss? In reply to it, my ans

was

 This is when a court can decide about TV ads.

 

There are many overs in ODIs where one or two balls are not shown due to ads. And those L shaped ads are intruding all over. Can you deny that?These things are not happening? In ODIs?

How can the court decide free market economics?The Tv rights are the property of BCCI that was settled way back in 1995 by the supreme court.There are no 4 ball overs for a long long time.Not since Star took over.

 

And the court wants no ADs in between overs?Who will compensate for the revenue loss?Supreme court?

 

This is what happens when there is no accoutability for one's actions.

 

The Latest Nugget from the SC is that govt should set up a drought fund this year,after the appropriation bill is already passed.Now the court will decide even the budget of the land.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

2 hours ago, rkt.india said:

only exceptions and it doesn't mean court will decide when to show the ads. 

Its heading for a big collision with the Supreme Court interfering in everything.

 

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/2m9PbrftK4yPh5lT8Y2KuK/Arun-Jaitley-criticizes-judicial-overreach.html

 

This is the latest one.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

4 hours ago, Chandan said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edit:

 

Ringing out the old

 

BCCI have done a few things on their own — appointing a CEO, clearing conflict of interest issues, attempting to bring more transparency by putting more details on their website. But the SC wants them to go further and change the BCCI’s very soul.

 

Will the recommendations of the Lodha committee change cricket as we know it? It will take ministers and ageing industrialists out of the picture, make it a tad more professional, get more bargaining power for former players in the administration. It will be interesting to see how that player power plays out in actual practice. Not all examples of players-turned-administrators have been great advertisements for their tribe. Overhauling the BCCI is one thing but trying to change the fabric of state associations — a cluster of club members, individuals, and patrons — is a different and difficult task. We can see that change is on the way but it’s not clear, as yet, how it will play out in the real world.

 

Quote

So now you thinksome of the reforms made sense, rest are stupid?

1.If 70 year old can be PM,President,CM,MLA,MP,Minister why cant they be BCCI President?What is the logic behind this?

 

2.How can Supreme court decide whether Mumbai or Hyderabad or Baroda be a full member of BCCI or not?Considering their contribution to Indian cricket they are far more worth than any North Eastern state,whose case the SC is pushing.The BCCI money is not taxpayers money,its not to be given away in charity to N-E states where Cricket has little popularity.When states with huge cricket following are not properly developed how can funds be directed to areas where cricket has little to gain.

 

3.Majority of BCCI's funding comes from Tv rights sale.The broadcaster gets its money by showing Ads,if they cant show Ads they will pay less and BCCI will get less revenue.How will they develop the game then?There is a regularatory body to look into Ads and broadcasting standards,people can complain to them,but no SC wants no ads.And before you go on about the 4 ball overs of L shaped Ads,tell me who will make up the revenue shortfall?

 

These are some of the examples of Lodha committee recommedations that make no sense.

 

Quote

See, we have very limited knowledge of what happens in BCCI, how the states functions, how they spend their money and other functions of BCCI.

 

Is BCCI using tax payers money?Can you go and ask XYZ association about how they spend their money unless ofcourse you are a member of that association?THIS IS NOT PUBLIC MONEY.

 

Quote

On which basis, can you call these reforms stupid which has been suggested after huge survey of 6-8 months and many well wishers of cricket think that these would take Indian cricket forward?

 

Survey?What Survey?Can you tell me who were interviewed?Can you tell how can the committee study Tv revenue models of ENG and AUS and implement it in India without interviewing a single Sports broadcaster of BCCI?What is the logic behind the 70 yr limit?On what basis can Mumbai,Baroda,Hyderabad etc be denied full membership of BCCI?3 judges with no experience of Marketing,administration,business etc sat and made the recommedations.

 

Quote

Only people in BCCI who have vested interest there are resisting few of the reforms there.

 

I was also against One sate one vote, and 3 selectors reform but then read in detail their reasonings and understood.

 

What is their reasoning?

 

How will the revenue shortfall be managed?

 

Please tell us.

[Chandan]

6 hours ago, rkt.india said:

only exceptions and it doesn't mean court will decide when to show the ads. 

 

 

Why not? Why should ads between overs be shown?

[Chandan]

4 hours ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

How can the court decide free market economics?The Tv rights are the property of BCCI that was settled way back in 1995 by the supreme court.There are no 4 ball overs for a long long time.Not since Star took over.

 

And the court wants no ADs in between overs?Who will compensate for the revenue loss?Supreme court?

 

This is what happens when there is no accoutability for one's actions.

 

The Latest Nugget from the SC is that govt should set up a drought fund this year,after the appropriation bill is already passed.Now the court will decide even the budget of the land.

So ads being shown bet the overs is full acountability of the board? What right does board have to eat between the overs?

 

And who will look after the rights as to what are shown? What if only ads are shown and no match? Court has to intervene. BCCI can't introduce L shaped, D shaped ads while the over is going on. And only court can stop it from doing so. AND IT WILL. With full accountability, it'll bring the BCCI with no accountability on line.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

9 minutes ago, Chandan said:

 

 

Why not? Why should ads between overs be shown?

So how will the broadcaster recoup the money it paid BCCI for the rights?Unless you want them to pay BCCI a lot less and cause revenue loss.In that case how will BCCI make up the loss?

[Malcolm Merlyn]

3 minutes ago, Chandan said:

So ads being shown bet the overs is full acountability of the board? What right does board have to eat between the overs?

 

And who will look after the rights as to what are shown? What if only ads are shown and no match? Court has to intervene. BCCI can't introduce L shaped, D shaped ads while the over is going on. And only court can stop it from doing so. AND IT WILL. With full accountability, it'll bring the BCCI with no accountability on line.

Why are there ADs between various programmes on TV?Can that be stopped as well?

 

This has nothing to do with accountability.Like all other programmes,cricket is also a programme and the rights holder has rights to show ADs.

 

You are totally confused here.

 

And you still havent answered my question,WHO WILL MAKE UP FOR THE REVENUE SHORTFALL?

[Chandan]

8 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

So how will the broadcaster recoup the money it paid BCCI for the rights?Unless you want them to pay BCCI a lot less and cause revenue loss.In that case how will BCCI make up the loss?

Oh come on Merlyn. If those ads while the over is going on are stopped, BCCI won't come on roads. No body is saying to show an ad free test or ODI or T20I. Just the request to show full six balls without any intrusions. All the boards show that. They HAVE to show that. Just read the arguments going on. If the revenues without those L shaped, D shaped ads fall, no one can help that. They are illegal anyway.

 

Why should the money paying fans bear the brunt?

 

Just give me any reason, why should I (a fan, who is watching, paying full subscription) bear those L shaped, D shaped ads while watching an international?