BCCI-ICC Saga ICC finance reforms to hit India in a Big Way,Should BCCI boycott the CT?[Update:Post 4 Pakistan Pushes To Reduce BCCI's Revenue]

[chewy]

no gives a flying rats ass what a filthy Pakistani official thinks or proposes, they are a bunch of retards and continue remain retards like that prick Ijaz Butt

 

But agree with finance reforms to an extent, but more should be shared with associates and grow the game, especially targeting Ireland, Nepal, Afghanistan, Holland and Kenya where most of the players are indigenous or born there and not some third class ringers from Australia or South Africa.  

[chewy]

10 minutes ago, Stumped said:

You serious?

oops, i just checked seems like Holland is filled up with reject Saffers and Aussies, no money for them too then, lol

seems like all those dutch sounding names are all south african

[sandeep]

38 minutes ago, chewy said:

oops, i just checked seems like Holland is filled up with reject Saffers and Aussies, no money for them too then, lol

seems like all those dutch sounding names are all south african

why pick on the little guys.  Even if they use expats to fill the teams, expanding the sport is only a good thing.  

 

I think its funny how BCCI is being used as the bogeyman while the ICC continues to mismanage the funds it has.  And its convenient to make BCCI the bad guy - when you think about it - England cricket wants to get 1/4 the amount that BCCI would get, while BCCI has to support and provide infrastructure for 100 times the players, and 10000 times the fan-base and population pool, inspite of it generating the overwhelming majority of the revenue in the first place.  Its a machivellian masterstroke, really.    

[cowboysfan]

I have a hard time caring about this,isnt it a good thing lesser teams get money to improve their cricket?.Cricket has been fatally declining in the west indies,new countries like Afghanistan could use the money to grow too.Its not like BCCI dont have other revenue streams like IPL etc.

[Vilander]

Time to show who f'n owns cricket. if BCCI has any balls extend IPL, create a A,B side which would still win the CT and attract as many players from SA,WI,Eng,Aus as possible to it.  

[Vilander]

While at it send periodic teams to Holland,uae,ireland if icc wants a war give one to them, expand icc or rival it..total war BCCI. accept it as a siege.

[Lannister]

There's just so much potential with respect to our domestic Cricket but BCCI is too incompetent and ineffective to come up with new ideas, to think out of the book once in a while. Its a good thing there's a change in the management with all the oldies and idiotic politicians are removed. Who the eff needs ICC when we have the biggest fan base in the world. 

[chewy]

5 hours ago, Lannister said:

There's just so much potential with respect to our domestic Cricket but BCCI is too incompetent and ineffective to come up with new ideas, to think out of the book once in a while. Its a good thing there's a change in the management with all the oldies and idiotic politicians are removed. Who the eff needs ICC when we have the biggest fan base in the world. 

+1, 

A billion people, states size of nations, BCCI is too reliant on international cricket for it's brand. 

 

You don't necessary have to be the best in world, but as long as enough competent pool of players are available it is enough, just like how MBL or NHL dominates baseball and ice hockey, but USA doesn't dominate baseball or ice-hockey world cups. 

 

Should invest in domestic cricket and improve the domestic brand 

[Malcolm Merlyn]

I have a hard time caring about this,isnt it a good thing lesser teams get money to improve their cricket?.Cricket has been fatally declining in the west indies,new countries like Afghanistan could use the money to grow too.Its not like BCCI dont have other revenue streams like IPL etc.

What will happen to our players?250mn USD hit.It will wipe off Indias entire surplus.

[Lannister]

6 hours ago, chewy said:

+1, 

A billion people, states size of nations, BCCI is too reliant on international cricket for it's brand. 

 

You don't necessary have to be the best in world, but as long as enough competent pool of players are available it is enough, just like how MBL or NHL dominates baseball and ice hockey, but USA doesn't dominate baseball or ice-hockey world cups. 

 

Should invest in domestic cricket and improve the domestic brand 

Apart from 3-4 nations, there's really not much competition in International Cricket. It's getting repetitive and boring, not to mention the poor scheduling by BCCI (Play 2 years at home and spend the next 2 years away ). I really want to see strong domestic tournaments like IPL,  played in other two formats as well. 

[Silva]

23 minutes ago, Lannister said:

Apart from 3-4 nations, there's really not much competition in International Cricket. It's getting repetitive and boring, not to mention the poor scheduling by BCCI (Play 2 years at home and spend the next 2 years away ). I really want to see strong domestic tournaments like IPL,  played in other two formats as well. 

True given the succes of IPL Bcci should also try a franchised based first class and list a league as well. Probably more money to be made their than through bilateral series. Plus dont have to deal with ICC politics. 

Edited February 4, 2017 by Silva

[mishra]

Cant help linking IPL water shortage, stadium alteration and Srini mama,Lodha comission, manohar at ICC and over active Supreme Court when it came to "BCCI management" directly culminating to handout BCCI/Indian money to rest of world in name of cricket.

 

With todays ICC moove it is prooven again that fair play, equality doesnt exist in ICC, And i will take allegedly corrupt but efficient Srinimama against prooven noogood supreme court apointed BCcI chewtiya managers

Edited February 4, 2017 by mishra

[jalebi_bhai]

Pull out of CT. ICC can enjoy running the tournament while making huge losses. If there is no India, sponsors will automatically withdraw. Let's have another financial disaster like the 2007 WC. 

[BeautifulGame]

The 2007 world cup wasn't a financial disaster from any of the cricket boards or the ICCs point of view. It was a disaster for the host broadcaster and the broadcaster for the Indian market, who just happened to be the same company in Sony. From the ICCs point of view all their deals were already done and dusted, it was Sony who had the financial implications of the lack of viewers and consequently a huge devaluation of their own sponsor and advertising spots. Considering that Sony are a fairly large player in cricket broadcasting in India if anything the only thing it probably hurt financially at all (and in a cricket sense as well I guess) was Indian cricket.

 

That is because India got knocked out.

 

But if India pulls out , now Star has the clause to reduce the payments or pull out .Same with the sponsors .So completely different scenarios,here the board's will be financially hit.And considering half of them are solely dependent on ICC revenues (and India tours ) it would be disaster.

 

Not that I am advocating pull out but you are comparing two completely different situations.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

 

That is because India got knocked out.

 

But if India pulls out , now Star has the clause to reduce the payments or pull out .Same with the sponsors .So completely different scenarios,here the board's will be financially hit.And considering half of them are solely dependent on ICC revenues (and India tours ) it would be disaster.

 

Not that I am advocating pull out but you are comparing two completely different situations.

 

All Indian sponsors will pull out.

 

 

But that Gutless bureaucrat Vinod Rai has no spine.

[King Tendulkar]

Listen

 

we are loaded lol if a bit more goes to the poor while we stinking rich have a litttle less it's all good . Bit of charity lol

 

dont worry we are mega money power and always be lol you guys act is if kohli suddenly won't earn a lot . Or ipl money goes to Pakistan or suddenly no Indian cricket infrastructure.

 

stop panicking lol

 

ps pak will always be begging nothing will change. Chill

[sscomp32]

Wonderful reforms from ICC. Confirming the 10 team world cup in 2023.  Wasn't this money being snatched from BCCI going to be used for associates and growing the game? 

The snake manohar is just taking out some personal vendetta against BCCI. 

[jalebi_bhai]

5 hours ago, Stumped said:

The 2007 world cup wasn't a financial disaster from any of the cricket boards or the ICCs point of view. It was a disaster for the host broadcaster and the broadcaster for the Indian market, who just happened to be the same company in Sony. From the ICCs point of view all their deals were already done and dusted, it was Sony who had the financial implications of the lack of viewers and consequently a huge devaluation of their own sponsor and advertising spots. Considering that Sony are a fairly large player in cricket broadcasting in India if anything the only thing it probably hurt financially at all (and in a cricket sense as well I guess) was Indian cricket.

Ok. Fair enough.

 

Hypothetically, if India boycotts CT 2017 and every Indian sponsor follows suit by pulling out their money, do you think the ICC would still be able to run a financially successful tournament? Personally, I'd like to see this happen.   

[BeautifulGame]

Under the new financial model proposed by the ICC, the BCCI will earn US$ 290 million from ICC revenues in the 2015-2023 rights cycle. That figure, according to a BCCI member familiar with the figures, is the net amount of earning, and what amounts to a 34% cut in what would have been their net earnings under the Big-Three model - the net earning in that model was US$450 million (the more widely circulated figure of US$571.25 was the gross earning).

 

BCCI is unhappy because it is earning less money in this model while, according to the member, every other board stands to earn more than projected in the Big-Three model. What has also irked the BCCI is that the ICC decided to push ahead with the new constitution and governance structure and, by going to vote, presented it to the Indian board effectively as a fait accompli on Saturday.

 

The ICC said the model was built on guiding principles of equity, good conscience, revenue generated by members and a recognition of an interdependency among members. The BCCI claims that in the working group's report - from which this model comes - the ICC said its calculations were not backed by a scientific model. One of the major planks of opposition to the Big Three's calculations were that its authors never revealed the formula by which they had arrived at their figures, instead measuring in generic terms the financial and historic contribution of boards to the game.

 

At today's meeting, Vikram Limaye, BCCI's representative at the ICC Board, argued that two wrongs don't make a right. "You are deciding the fortunes of world cricket on good faith?" the BCCI member said.

 

In a statement issued minutes after the ICC's press release on the meetings, the BCCI said it had wanted to defer the vote today. But ICC chairman Shashank Manohar, the driving force behind these proposals, was eager to have the draft of a constitution approved in principle, while leaving room for members to discuss and debate ideally smaller changes by April.

 

The BCCI was not impressed. "What was the tearing hurry?" the BCCI member said. "We could have easily moved the vote to next round [of meetings]. Given the Committee of Administrators [temporarily overseeing the BCCI] has just come in four days back. Give it time to find its feet, to understand the nuances. In the interim engage with us actively before the vote."

 

The BCCI is, however, unperturbed by the 7-2 vote (Zimbabwe abstained from voting; Sri Lanka joined the BCCI in the opposition) that favoured the new constitution model. It had entered the board meeting expecting to be the lone voice of opposition against nine Full Members. "So a 7-2 vote with one abstention is actually good," the BCCI member pointed out. "And we will get the numbers on our side by the time final vote takes place." He said the ICC needs a three-fourths majority to pass any resolution, and numbers will favour BCCI. "They need an 8-2 majority. And the vote cannot go forward if four members oppose the resolution. We will get them."

 

The BCCI is, however, unperturbed by the 7-2 vote (Zimbabwe abstained from voting; Sri Lanka joined the BCCI in the opposition) that favoured the new constitution model. It had entered the board meeting expecting to be the lone voice of opposition against nine Full Members. "So a 7-2 vote with one abstention is actually good," the BCCI member pointed out. "And we will get the numbers on our side by the time final vote takes place." He said the ICC needs a three-fourths majority to pass any resolution, and numbers will favour BCCI. "They need an 8-2 majority. And the vote cannot go forward if four members oppose the resolution. We will get them."

 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/story/1080897.html

 

So somehow despite it being a rollback on the big three reforms , only BCCI will lose money. Both England and Australia will gain more despite revenue .

 

When asked for explanation, the metric is good faith

 

 

And Manohar wasn't even interested in giving the new BCCI board time to study the proposals .Just wanted to put it for a vote even though it's meaningless .Badly boomeranged though for the snake.

 

And more importantly , We all need is just two votes to stop this passing through ICC committee in April.Srilanka already voted against it and Zimbabwe abstained .So shouldn't be too hard to get their votes .West Indies also most likely get on board .

 

Srini needs to get his start working his magic.3 months should be more than enough .

[vijay50]

Feck ICC and snake Manohar. BCCI show your power and put snake Manohar in his place.