ICC has become a Joke !!!

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Shaz1 said:

 

If he wanted to talk about finance than he could have said it in a different way, other than singling out one nation.  If he plans to expand cricket how will he do it if only one nation is producing 70 percent of the revenue? Why isn't there any effort on providing chances for smaller teams to succeed? 

 

Using a nation as a tool to gain money is utterly crap. I am suprised none you are offended by this.

India is producing a huge share of revenue for the ICC . Why should it not be mentioned in a discussion about ICCs finances ? If anything, there seems to be too little recognition of the fact that the other countries,  apart from India,  are not trying hard enough to popularize cricket in their own countries.

 

If one nation is producing 70% of revenue then it is not  that country's  fault or  the ICC's fault .    Why are other countries not trying hard enough to popularize cricket  ?  It also requires improvement of the financial situation of the weaker countries. The onus is on the other countries and not the ICC. 

 

There seems to be quite a bit of effort to make the smaller teams succeed. However, the smaller teams cannot keep on blaming the ICC and BCCI for everything.   For any team or any player to succeed, there has to be a lot of will to succeed...and that has been missing from some teams.  Just blaming others don't bring success.

 

I don't think using a nation to earn money is bothering anybody....it is the  'giving recognition to India '  part and any added power that may follow as a result, which is bothering some people.

 

 

Edited April 4, 2016 by express bowling

[Adi_91]

1 hour ago, Shaz1 said:

 

If he wanted to talk about finance than he could have said it in a different way, other than singling out one nation.  If he plans to expand cricket how will he do it if only one nation is producing 70 percent of the revenue? Why isn't there any effort on providing chances for smaller teams to succeed? 

 

Using a nation as a tool to gain money is utterly crap. I am suprised none you are offended by this.

 

So that is ICC's fault, so why even drag India in it?

[sscomp32]

7 minutes ago, Adi_91 said:

 

So that is ICC's fault, so why even drag India in it?

Because BCCI=ICC. 

[kosingh]

3 hours ago, broken_wings said:

 

That tone !!

 

For matter of fact, no country should show its power in the ICC, be it India or England. You sound as if you own ICC. Don't be arrogant fool. Be brave enough to say wrong what is wrong, and right what is right.

That tone is warranted. Try making a couple of weeks worth of posts where you're not whining about India. Do that, and your complaints about India might actually be heard here.

 

But if you are going to let your dissatisfaction with India consume every single aspect  of your cricket related thinking, you will not be taken seriously here.  You'll be dismissed as a bitter, jealous and sore loser.

 

Perhaps you could learn from Sammy and Samuels. Win something relevant, and then use that as a platform to air your grievances. People are more willing to listen to winners. 

[Adi_91]

3 hours ago, Shaz1 said:

 

Because ICC dragged India into it. Why was I not supposed to take a dig at ICC by not mentioning India? The fault goes to the ICC. India is just being mentioned here because they pointed out its revenue gain. In fact this whole thread was ment to be a dig at ICC not India. Which the opening poster clearly tried to identify.

 

I am sorry bro, but the cricketing revenue is in India and Indians constitute the largest set of viewers in the cricketing world. So, its a fact that Mr. Richardson has stated.

 

If you can't accept the fact, please go and protest outside the ICC headquarters. Maybe that will help.

 

ICC is headquartered in Dubai, so you may proceed there. 

[Adi_91]

5 minutes ago, Shaz1 said:

 

Wow are you really gonna make me repeat myself? Lol

 

Stupid post.

 

The wonder thread opener has made it seem almost as if ICC has fixed games for India to win, which clearly doesn't make any sense.

 

In fact some padosis jumping just because he mentioned the word "India" is even more laughable.

[Adi_91]

1 minute ago, Shaz1 said:

 

No one claimed ICC is fixing Indian games. If anything that is your own assumption. But what this message from the ICC does is create a awkward feel to the Indian team. Meaning now instead of watching them for entertainment purposes its all about numbers ICC makes in there pockets.

 

Also I find it funny how you attack my nationality over argument. You don't even know who I am nor know where I was brought up. So lets keep the personal insults out of it. 

 

I made an observation, not an insult my friend. 

 

I know truth is bitter sometimes, but take it easy. Revenues are always going to be good even if it is a second string Indian side. The viewership is immense in the country and that is the fact.

[Adi_91]

Just now, Shaz1 said:

 

Well your observation was incorrect. Just letting you know.

 

This has nothing to do with the truth. The point is no professional organization should single out one entity above others. No matter how special one entity is. It should stay neutral and try to expend its horizons.

 

But stating truth is also no offense. Better than coming with loose claims which cannot be verified. Like Mr. Kamal did last year and BCB chief Nazmul Hassan did recently during the World Twenty20.

[Adi_91]

2 minutes ago, Shaz1 said:

 

So should we expect India to play 9 matches in the next Tournament?

 

He is the ICC CEO, let him make the call. They own ICC tournaments, so they will take the call. 

[kosingh]

The excuses these chumps come up with. The last thing I expected was Paki fans to complain that India has an easier schedule than Pak because India plays Pak, whereas Pak has to play difficult India. 

[vijay50]

All losers have one thing in common. Complaining and conspiracy.

Edited April 5, 2016 by vijay50

[HippoSucks]

The ICC obviously does not favour India, but this is a stupid thing to say in public. You don't have to discuss your financial incentives with everyone. 

[express bowling]

7 hours ago, Shaz1 said:

 

So should we expect India to play 9 matches in the next Tournament?

I think this " guaranteed 9 matches " refers to a format where all the top 10 teams would play more league games or " pre-knockout " games....not just India.

 

In the current format, lots and lots of games were between minnow teams ....for the promotion of the game. I think the ICC head was stating that , even though having a tournament featuring " guaranteed 9 games each  " for  India and the other top nations would bring more revenue to their coffers...they were preferring to have less such games to promote more games between associate members and hence promote cricket.

 

Many people have mis-understood the meaning of his statement.

Edited April 5, 2016 by express bowling

[broken_wings]

9 hours ago, kosingh said:

That tone is warranted. Try making a couple of weeks worth of posts where you're not whining about India. Do that, and your complaints about India might actually be heard here.

 

But if you are going to let your dissatisfaction with India consume every single aspect  of your cricket related thinking, you will not be taken seriously here.  You'll be dismissed as a bitter, jealous and sore loser.

 

Perhaps you could learn from Sammy and Samuels. Win something relevant, and then use that as a platform to air your grievances. People are more willing to listen to winners. 

 

I don't want to repeat myself. After explaining myself for last few posts, you still can't get it.

 

Leave it man. My words won't get into your thick head, if you can't accept criticism then don't make to others.

Edited April 5, 2016 by broken_wings

[moniker]

22 hours ago, broken_wings said:

 

Seriously ! How sensible for ICC to say like this for a global event ? ICC itself wants India to play guaranteed matches till Final only to make financial gain from a global event ? This statement shows how biased ICC is towards India in order to make sure they don't exit early. Is it fair for other countries ? Or, other countries have accepted this as a fact ?

 

 

That is incorrect. ICC never told that India will be guaranteed matches till final. World Cup 2019 will have only one group of 10 teams. Each team plays the other nine teams once, guaranteeing a total of nine matches per team before semi-finals.

 

Quote

Every team will play against other 9 teams in the round robin fashion, which means every team will play 9 matches and top 4 teams will qualify for the semifinals.

 

http://www.totalsportek.com/cricket/icc-world-cup-2019-10-team-format/

 

 

20 hours ago, broken_wings said:

Can ICC make such comment that guaranteed 9 matches of India will be more beneficial to ICC than not having Indian matches in a global event like WC ?

 

As long as India is playing the same number of matches as the other nine teams till the semi-final, what is wrong in mentioning that India generates revenue? It's not as if India is getting a veto into the final.

 

20 hours ago, broken_wings said:

What I am saying, Should ICC get influenced by the monetary benefits of having more Indian matches in WC which might hamper the spirit of the game and fair play ?

 

Nobody read the article, it seems !

 

ICC has not indicated there being more India matches than other teams. All teams will play the same number of matches till the knockouts. Where is fair play breached here?

 

Maybe it is you that needs to take a closer look at the article and stop forming conclusions. Your interpretation of the article is awfully off the mark.

[kosingh]

2 hours ago, broken_wings said:

 

I don't want to repeat myself. After explaining myself for last few posts, you still can't get it.

 

Leave it man. My words won't get into your thick head, if you can't accept criticism then don't make to others.

You've been repeating yourself for several weeks with your whining.

 

You want us to accept your complaints about the ICC? We are not the ICC. Take it to the ICC forums.

 

Leave you with a quote from the wise Fulton Sheen:

 

"Jealousy is the tribute mediocrity pays to genius."
 

[express bowling]

1 minute ago, Shaz1 said:

 

You miss my point completly. Even if they make a tournament that makes sure every nation plays all nine games. In the end after reading this, in the mind of a reader it will go down as a way for ICC to get that financial gain. Him openly stating that India game will generate that money is singling out one nation. As a professional organization they should avoid making statements like these. Because its no ones business to know which team is generating that money.

 

Yes its a fact that India generates 70 percent of the revenue. But there is no reason of mentioning it and making it obvious. That is all my complaint.

I did not  miss your point.  I just don't agree with you.  

[express bowling]

11 hours ago, Shaz1 said:

 

Other countries have there own problems with there boards. Not every country sees cricket as there main sport. So before you bring up what other countries do its best to look at your own. 

 

How is his statement relevant to this discussion ?  Why should we look at our own when our country and Board are doing their utmost best to popularize cricket ? 

 

I am saying that other countries and their Board's are not doing enough to improve or / and  popularize cricket in their own land.  And this is giving rise to all these weird allegations. Everybody has problems and that should not be given as an excuse.

 

11 hours ago, Shaz1 said:

 

Once again you won't get 70 percent of revenue from other countries when they got either board issues or simply got other sports they prefer to play besides cricket. It is Icc's job to look after these countries. Not Indias or anyone elses. They should focus on expending the game instead of worrying about which country gives them more money. 

 

Hardly. Cricket in the States has not become big yet. They are not trying to sponsar this game much here unfortunately. They need to get China to play or any other big countries. If those countries become successful there is a chance they will earn more money. But sadly there obsession with Indian money has stopped them from going that far. 

 

Looking after other countries is all good in theory...but how will the money to do that come from ?  With the low interest in cricket among most associate nations and cricketing nations  like Pakistan not doing enough to improve their cricketing infrastructure leading to them going downhill as a team leading to non-improvement in the revenue they generate....where will the money come from to popularize cricket  unless ICC gets it from  India  ??

 

That is why I say....countries like yours should make more of an effort to improve cricket in your country and contribute to world cricket as a whole...because Pakistan has a huge population with genuine interest in cricket.

 

There is also the question of discontent among many Indians about the huge revenue we generate and hence contribute to the betterment of cricket....but whenever it comes to recognition, countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan  want to sweep it under the rug.

 

Even 25  years back, cricket was way less popular across other nations. Now, we at least see small countries playing ICC tournaments quite regularly.  New countries like Bangladesh have come up.  Finance is needed for this kind of expansion, because money will be only spent in hosting these games and  financial planning is required for that.  If ICC does not look at money at all then only the existing nations will play cricket and no expansion is possible.

 

 

[Zero_Unit]

this guy is talking about ICC and it's screw ups and majority of you guys are bashing him about our board being caught up in mess like this and Bangladesh being cry babies. Either am blind or some of you just can't read ... just saying

[horizonspeaks]

On 4/4/2016 at 6:55 AM, Shaz1 said:

 

But even if what you say is true. Do you think its appropraite for a professional organization to come out and say what nation benefits them the most? I mean thats like singling out one nation from 9 others that play the game. There is no need for ICC to play the favorites. 

 

I agree that it was not professionally or politically correct statement. But look at the member boards - do they come out and oppose it? Did some board spokesperson came and said that they just want a better competition irrespective of how many matches India plays? Rather all boards are busy negotiating a home series against India. End of the day, all the boards want to maximize revenue, all the players want to get paid more and all the sponsors want to show their advertisements to most of the people watching the game. He gets blamed because he's talking about it.