Cricket match prediction discussions

[Marvell1]

Quota system is blot to modern society in any freaking form.
Financial deprived section quota i can understand but not on historical based even after 100 and 1000's of years.
Point is majority of black community in south africa is not interested in cricket at all. They target for other sports, mainly in football and Rugby and also there is racism history hence quota system due to so called diversity and inclusiveness. In doing so extremely talented white players sit out all the time.

Couldn't put it any better than this. Politics of any type should be separated from sports. Quota in sports teams is unheard of anywhere else in the world. If there are enough coaching academies and more importantly interest among the black population in cricket, then automatically black players will get included in the playing XI. Rather than making sure these steps, the CSA is going for short cut by implementing quota based on race and color in the national and state level cricket teams. 

Yes, Black people are trying to take advantage of it. Those who have connections are trying to put their relatives or people who are close to them in the playing 11 of the South African National team. If they put a quota system in place, the South African cricket board probably assumed Black people would be interested automatically. But that is never going to happen.

Instead, we will have people who will try to take advantage of the system. And a big reason why Black people are not interested in cricket is that the majority of the black community in Africa has to do really strenuous work to put food on the table. Under those circumstances, it is difficult to imagine playing cricket, which is a game that costs a lot of money.

[1714792128]

1714792128

[1714792128]

1714792128

[1714792128]

1714792128

[Sithara007]

Their new league is coming up so it would be interesting to see if they keep following same policy, considering IPL owners owns all the teams.

This is a very sensitive topic in South Africa. From what I heard, CSA has assured the franchise owners that there will be no quota based on skin color or race. But there is no confirmation. The officials from the ruling party (ANC) are going to put a lot of pressure to implement the quota for this league as well. But the franchise owners will be unhappy if that happens. And a lot of overseas players may refuse to play, on ethical grounds. Quality players will be included in the playing XI irrespective of their skin color. It will be good if CSA stop pushing low quality players for selection, just because they have another shade of skin.

[Haunebu]

He's already a big name in red ball cricket. The reason he went under radar in recent time because he didn't play much red ball cricket due to injuries here n there, also during covid they hardly played any matches. During same period of time Ind-Eng-Aus played like million tests in comparison to Proteas.

Exactly. Many people expect way too much from athletes in order to properly call them legends. One of the easiest ways to identify a legend in any sport is to observe how many games his/her actions changed in a favorable way.

And a big reason why Black people are not interested in cricket is that the majority of the black community in Africa has to do really strenuous work to put food on the table. Under those circumstances, it is difficult to imagine playing cricket, which is a game that costs a lot of money.

At the moment, Cricket is the least of their worries. They need to focus on improving other more important aspects of their country instead due to the recent rape incident etc.

[YinShuiSiYuan]

This is a very sensitive topic in South Africa. From what I heard, CSA has assured the franchise owners that there will be no quota based on skin color or race. But there is no confirmation. The officials from the ruling party (ANC) are going to put a lot of pressure to implement the quota for this league as well. But the franchise owners will be unhappy if that happens. And a lot of overseas players may refuse to play, on ethical grounds. Quality players will be included in the playing XI irrespective of their skin color. It will be good if CSA stop pushing low quality players for selection, just because they have another shade of skin.

We the people living outside RSA are not aware of ground realities. If there central government is doing such thing then defiantly there is some reason for that. Black people in RSA are suffering from discrimination for decades and now they said enough is enough. Black lives matter and they have equal right to play cricket just like white people.

[eaLiTy]

~
and obviously, the number of teams playing cricket right now is going to increase and that is exactly what the big 4 fear

FYI there are 94 Associate Members and 12 Full Members under ICC, which means 106 countries are playing cricket. Unless the quality of Cricket increases they wont be getting a full membership.

~
cricket was first played in the Olympics in the year 1900 if i am not wrong, cricket is not part of the Olympics since the ICC has never submitted an application to the Olympics committee to include cricket

a big part of that is the big four, they do not want to lose their authority, they know very well that if cricket is included in the Olympics there will be a lot more teams playing cricket, it is very easy for them to lose their authority at that time

This is another lie, Olympic committee was not ready to accept Cricket because the length of the matches and the other hassles of organizing the matches during the Olympics was the reason why Cricket was not included in Olympics after 1900. If you really think that the associate countries can create the revenue, why not now and waiting for them to be included in the Olympics .

[Ayers]

~
and obviously, the number of teams playing cricket right now is going to increase and that is exactly what the big 4 fear

FYI there are 94 Associate Members and 12 Full Members under ICC, which means 106 countries are playing cricket. Unless the quality of Cricket increases they wont be getting a full membership.

when i said that there are not too many teams playing cricket right now i meant not many teams playing cricket right now regularly, tell me when did you last see a cricket match between an associate team? let alone watch the whole match

if anyone is actually watching the whole match which is being played by two associate teams, i think they should get a life, i bet that the citizens of many associate countries don’t even know that they have a cricket team, lol

~
cricket was first played in the Olympics in the year 1900 if i am not wrong, cricket is not part of the Olympics since the ICC has never submitted an application to the Olympics committee to include cricket
a big part of that is the big four, they do not want to lose their authority, they know very well that if cricket is included in the Olympics there will be a lot more teams playing cricket, it is very easy for them to lose their authority at that time

This is another lie, Olympic committee was not ready to accept Cricket because the length of the matches and the other hassles of organizing the matches during the Olympics was the reason why Cricket was not included in Olympics after 1900. If you really think that the associate countries can create the revenue, why not now and waiting for them to be included in the Olympics .

there is a lot of shorter cricket being played right now, including the t-ten format, yes i know it’s still going to be a pretty time-consuming match, but it’s a lot better than having a five-day match with no results, i don’t think the Olympics committee should have any problems arranging t20 matches

[YinShuiSiYuan]

~
and obviously, the number of teams playing cricket right now is going to increase and that is exactly what the big 4 fear

FYI there are 94 Associate Members and 12 Full Members under ICC, which means 106 countries are playing cricket. Unless the quality of Cricket increases they wont be getting a full membership.

~
cricket was first played in the Olympics in the year 1900 if i am not wrong, cricket is not part of the Olympics since the ICC has never submitted an application to the Olympics committee to include cricket

a big part of that is the big four, they do not want to lose their authority, they know very well that if cricket is included in the Olympics there will be a lot more teams playing cricket, it is very easy for them to lose their authority at that time

This is another lie, Olympic committee was not ready to accept Cricket because the length of the matches and the other hassles of organizing the matches during the Olympics was the reason why Cricket was not included in Olympics after 1900. If you really think that the associate countries can create the revenue, why not now and waiting for them to be included in the Olympics .

No matter how many associate countries are there in icc the fact is only 5 to 6 teams are worthy enough to play quality cricket. Not many associate teams take cricket seriously. The only way cricket can be introduced to other part of the world is through t20 format only.

[Sithara007]

No matter how many associate countries are there in icc the fact is only 5 to 6 teams are worthy enough to play quality cricket. Not many associate teams take cricket seriously. The only way cricket can be introduced to other part of the world is through t20 format only.

In that case we should restrict international cricket to the pig-4 nations only. Because whenever they play against a team such as Sri Lanka or Bangladesh, it results in a lop-sided match. Funding is the main reason why the ICC doesn't want associate nations participate in the main tournaments. For example, Zimbabwe cricket board receives around $12 million per year from the ICC, and more from TV deals because pig-4 teams do play regularly against them. Associate nations receive far less. Nepal for example receives around $200,000 per year and this means that they can't offer contracts to their players. So obviously they won't be able to perform when they play in ICC tournaments.

[jostorres]

No matter how many associate countries are there in icc the fact is only 5 to 6 teams are worthy enough to play quality cricket. Not many associate teams take cricket seriously. The only way cricket can be introduced to other part of the world is through t20 format only.

In that case we should restrict international cricket to the pig-4 nations only. Because whenever they play against a team such as Sri Lanka or Bangladesh, it results in a lop-sided match. Funding is the main reason why the ICC doesn't want associate nations participate in the main tournaments. For example, Zimbabwe cricket board receives around $12 million per year from the ICC, and more from TV deals because pig-4 teams do play regularly against them. Associate nations receive far less. Nepal for example receives around $200,000 per year and this means that they can't offer contracts to their players. So obviously they won't be able to perform when they play in ICC tournaments.

In last few years ICC completely fail to maintain good control on finances, and they are also failed to give proper funds to associate countries because even they have enough funds, and they can do some good for this game and development in these few associate countries specially which are doing with their native players because they deserve some better treatment from them for their infrastructure and other developments.

I am very much sure that ICC can manage this all with their sources they are not doing any good thing which is surely hurting as cricketing fan because this game surely deserve much better than which is currently happening around with just for better and secure future of these B-4 instead of all countries those are involved and can bring better quality and entertainment.

[Hamza2424]

Bangladesh and Zimbabwe ODI update for now the ZIM is already leading by the 2-0 and according to the current match situation the BAN alredy lost 7 wickets and made 236 Runs in 47.3 overs. ZIM is leading with the strategy BAN  has many week points in their batting order for me the results of the match seems very clear for now. ZIM can Win the match if they stop the total before the 260. Batting Order of the ZIM is much better then the BAN

[JSRAW]

In that case we should restrict international cricket to the pig-4 nations only. Because whenever they play against a team such as Sri Lanka or Bangladesh, it results in a lop-sided match. Funding is the main reason why the ICC doesn't want associate nations participate in the main tournaments. For example, Zimbabwe cricket board receives around $12 million per year from the ICC, and more from TV deals because pig-4 teams do play regularly against them. Associate nations receive far less. Nepal for example receives around $200,000 per year and this means that they can't offer contracts to their players. So obviously they won't be able to perform when they play in ICC tournaments.

In last few years ICC completely fail to maintain good control on finances, and they are also failed to give proper funds to associate countries because even they have enough funds, and they can do some good for this game and development in these few associate countries specially which are doing with their native players because they deserve some better treatment from them for their infrastructure and other developments.

I am very much sure that ICC can manage this all with their sources they are not doing any good thing which is surely hurting as cricketing fan because this game surely deserve much better than which is currently happening around with just for better and secure future of these B-4 instead of all countries those are involved and can bring better quality and entertainment.

ICC generate enough fund to sustain limited over cricket especially T-20 cricket but everyone romanticize with the test cricket and in doing so they get destroyed every single time. ICC do understand these economics but reluctant to take any concrete steps due to "Test Lobby". If they restrict Test format to only 10 nations max and no fake promises or rhetoric of being test nation, it could potentially do wonder for international cricket. Every associate member will start focusing on T-20 completely and the way franchise cricket is taking all the space, they don't even need to play any bilateral cricket, simply play in leagues and ICC tournaments.

@Sithara007 ICC hardly earn any money from bilateral cricket.

[Smack That Ace]

In that case we should restrict international cricket to the pig-4 nations only. Because whenever they play against a team such as Sri Lanka or Bangladesh, it results in a lop-sided match. Funding is the main reason why the ICC doesn't want associate nations participate in the main tournaments. For example, Zimbabwe cricket board receives around $12 million per year from the ICC, and more from TV deals because pig-4 teams do play regularly against them. Associate nations receive far less. Nepal for example receives around $200,000 per year and this means that they can't offer contracts to their players. So obviously they won't be able to perform when they play in ICC tournaments.

In last few years ICC completely fail to maintain good control on finances, and they are also failed to give proper funds to associate countries because even they have enough funds, and they can do some good for this game and development in these few associate countries specially which are doing with their native players because they deserve some better treatment from them for their infrastructure and other developments.
I am very much sure that ICC can manage this all with their sources they are not doing any good thing which is surely hurting as cricketing fan because this game surely deserve much better than which is currently happening around with just for better and secure future of these B-4 instead of all countries those are involved and can bring better quality and entertainment.

ICC generate enough fund to sustain limited over cricket especially T-20 cricket but everyone romanticize with the test cricket and in doing so they get destroyed every single time. ICC do understand these economics but reluctant to take any concrete steps due to "Test Lobby". If they restrict Test format to only 10 nations max and no fake promises or rhetoric of being test nation, it could potentially do wonder for international cricket. Every associate member will start focusing on T-20 completely and the way franchise cricket is taking all the space, they don't even need to play any bilateral cricket, simply play in leagues and ICC tournaments.
@Sithara007 ICC hardly earn any money from bilateral cricket.

I think ICC gets enough funds to give the associate teams and weaker teams a lot more money. The ICC is always giving too much importance to the most powerful teams.

@Sithara007, If ICC decides to limit cricket to the top four teams, that is obviously not going to be good because they will not be receiving good money. But they can do the same thing and receive more money by implementing a tier system. And keeping a promotion-demotion system between tiers. But I don’t think they are willing to do that. The big four will need to get back to form when they get destroyed by opponents at their level, and they will need to play it against weaker opponents.

@JSRAW, I firmly believe the ICC has enough funds to support T20 and one-day international cricket. They also have a good enough fund to play test cricket. But the problem is there are always going to be corrupt people. And I also think ICC itself has become a lot more greedy. Otherwise, they could have given a lot more money to the weaker teams so that they could get better.


regards
duke

[Haunebu]

I firmly believe the ICC has enough funds to support T20 and one-day international cricket. They also have a good enough fund to play test cricket. But the problem is there are always going to be corrupt people. And I also think ICC itself has become a lot more greedy. Otherwise, they could have given a lot more money to the weaker teams so that they could get better.

Let's be honest here. Which big organization isn't corrupt in this world? ICC is no exception and it's understandable why they choose to focus on the big teams because they rake in the big bucks through them primarily.

Why on earth would they want to divert their resources towards weaker teams when they benefit less from them? They aren't some sort of charity or anything. Business!

[BobK71]

I firmly believe the ICC has enough funds to support T20 and one-day international cricket. They also have a good enough fund to play test cricket. But the problem is there are always going to be corrupt people. And I also think ICC itself has become a lot more greedy. Otherwise, they could have given a lot more money to the weaker teams so that they could get better.

Let's be honest here. Which big organization isn't corrupt in this world? ICC is no exception and it's understandable why they choose to focus on the big teams because they rake in the big bucks through them primarily.

Why on earth would they want to divert their resources towards weaker teams when they benefit less from them? They aren't some sort of charity or anything. Business!

If I think about the business then they have to increase the number of countries or the number of teams. Thus the organization will be able to achieve their success quickly. Football is so popular and financially viable today because of its large audience. The number of footballers is also high. Most of the countries in the world play football. Therefore, in the larger interest of cricket, ICC should take new steps.

[Webetcoins]

I think ICC gets enough funds to give the associate teams and weaker teams a lot more money. The ICC is always giving too much importance to the most powerful teams.

@Sithara007, If ICC decides to limit cricket to the top four teams, that is obviously not going to be good because they will not be receiving good money. But they can do the same thing and receive more money by implementing a tier system. And keeping a promotion-demotion system between tiers. But I don’t think they are willing to do that. The big four will need to get back to form when they get destroyed by opponents at their level, and they will need to play it against weaker opponents.

@JSRAW, I firmly believe the ICC has enough funds to support T20 and one-day international cricket. They also have a good enough fund to play test cricket. But the problem is there are always going to be corrupt people. And I also think ICC itself has become a lot more greedy. Otherwise, they could have given a lot more money to the weaker teams so that they could get better.

Right now, ICC is most difficult sports authority in sports world because they are not doing decisions as professional which are hurting this game very badly, and we can expect some big disaster in near future because these things never works for long time mostly have their side effects as well but no one caring about this all right now because they have enough funds from IPL, and they are enjoying with this all which is surely never been good for spirit of game as well.

If they want to do something then surely now it's time for them to bring big changes in this game and few formats with now their main focus could be T-20 and this is surely going to help them in long run test cricket is not good enough for associate countries and many others they need to restrict this just for 10 or 12 countries with two groups can create some good interest and with this we can work on quality as well.

[Sithara007]

ICC generate enough fund to sustain limited over cricket especially T-20 cricket but everyone romanticize with the test cricket and in doing so they get destroyed every single time. ICC do understand these economics but reluctant to take any concrete steps due to "Test Lobby". If they restrict Test format to only 10 nations max and no fake promises or rhetoric of being test nation, it could potentially do wonder for international cricket. Every associate member will start focusing on T-20 completely and the way franchise cricket is taking all the space, they don't even need to play any bilateral cricket, simply play in leagues and ICC tournaments.

@Sithara007 ICC hardly earn any money from bilateral cricket.

BTW any information on the ICC media rights auction? It was supposed to happen sometime soon. The last time I heard (in July), the broadcasters were unhappy over the lack of transparency in bidding:

https://www.insidesport.in/icc-media-rights-auction-icc-in-fix-as-top-broadcasters-upset-over-lack-of-transparency-in-tendering-process-follow-live-updates/

I am not surprised, given the level of corruption and nepotism that is prevalent among the ICC officials. Indian broadcasters have threatened to pull out from the auction unless their concerns are addressed. The bids need to be submitted by August 22nd BTW. Bids will be opened on 26th August, and after that the ICC officials will "negotiate" individually with each of the broadcasters. The main issue as far as I know, is the "sealed envelope bidding" process instead of e-auction (similar to what they had in IPL).

[noormcs5]

I firmly believe the ICC has enough funds to support T20 and one-day international cricket. They also have a good enough fund to play test cricket. But the problem is there are always going to be corrupt people. And I also think ICC itself has become a lot more greedy. Otherwise, they could have given a lot more money to the weaker teams so that they could get better.

Let's be honest here. Which big organization isn't corrupt in this world? ICC is no exception and it's understandable why they choose to focus on the big teams because they rake in the big bucks through them primarily.

Why on earth would they want to divert their resources towards weaker teams when they benefit less from them? They aren't some sort of charity or anything. Business!

For the short term, yes there seems no benefit for the ICC to spend on weaker teams to grow and compete with the few cricketing giants. However, if you think of a long term, in 10 to 15 years time ICC could target to make 10 more strong teams and then we would be having a more competitive matches. With no weak teams, all the tournaments and matches will generate a lot of revenue for the ICC. Don't know if anyone in ICC has the vision of 10-20 years ahead.

[JSRAW]

ICC generate enough fund to sustain limited over cricket especially T-20 cricket but everyone romanticize with the test cricket and in doing so they get destroyed every single time. ICC do understand these economics but reluctant to take any concrete steps due to "Test Lobby". If they restrict Test format to only 10 nations max and no fake promises or rhetoric of being test nation, it could potentially do wonder for international cricket. Every associate member will start focusing on T-20 completely and the way franchise cricket is taking all the space, they don't even need to play any bilateral cricket, simply play in leagues and ICC tournaments.

@Sithara007 ICC hardly earn any money from bilateral cricket.

BTW any information on the ICC media rights auction? It was supposed to happen sometime soon. The last time I heard (in July), the broadcasters were unhappy over the lack of transparency in bidding:

https://www.insidesport.in/icc-media-rights-auction-icc-in-fix-as-top-broadcasters-upset-over-lack-of-transparency-in-tendering-process-follow-live-updates/

I am not surprised, given the level of corruption and nepotism that is prevalent among the ICC officials. Indian broadcasters have threatened to pull out from the auction unless their concerns are addressed. The bids need to be submitted by August 22nd BTW. Bids will be opened on 26th August, and after that the ICC officials will "negotiate" individually with each of the broadcasters. The main issue as far as I know, is the "sealed envelope bidding" process instead of e-auction (similar to what they had in IPL).

Yeah i posted this news back then when the news of media tenders came out in public domain.

The real reason is ICC got way too much excited when they noticed BCCI fetched billions of bucks for IPL without any fuss from the broadcasters and they literally followed the same pattern like online and tv rights but the main kicker was every bid was behind the closed door with zero transparency, at the same time broadcasters tasted the blood of transparent procedure in last ipl auction so almost every broadcaster revolted against ICC, rightly so.

[Sithara007]

Yeah i posted this news back then when the news of media tenders came out in public domain.

The real reason is ICC got way too much excited when they noticed BCCI fetched billions of bucks for IPL without any fuss from the broadcasters and they literally followed the same pattern like online and tv rights but the main kicker was every bid was behind the closed door with zero transparency, at the same time broadcasters tasted the blood of transparent procedure in last ipl auction so almost every broadcaster revolted against ICC, rightly so.

IPL is different from ICC tournaments. In the ICC tournaments, there will be only a few matches involving India and therefore the overall TRP will be lower than that in the IPL. On top of that, there is always a chance of something like what happened in 2007 repeating. India and Pakistan got out in the preliminary phase and that resulted in huge losses to the broadcasters. And also, given the declining popularity of the ODI format, I am not sure whether the ODI World Cup will remain as one of the premier tournaments in the long term.

[Smack That Ace]

I firmly believe the ICC has enough funds to support T20 and one-day international cricket. They also have a good enough fund to play test cricket. But the problem is there are always going to be corrupt people. And I also think ICC itself has become a lot more greedy. Otherwise, they could have given a lot more money to the weaker teams so that they could get better.

Let's be honest here. Which big organization isn't corrupt in this world? ICC is no exception and it's understandable why they choose to focus on the big teams because they rake in the big bucks through them primarily.

Why on earth would they want to divert their resources towards weaker teams when they benefit less from them? They aren't some sort of charity or anything. Business!

I agree that almost all big organizations have some corrupt personnel. But I also think that no other organization is as greedy as the ICC. I want them to divert a little more resources to the weaker teams. This is because by doing that those teams are eventually going to get better and by that time they will also bring in a significant amount of revenue. But that is a long-term plan and is almost certain to have some problems at the start of the execution of the plan.

Right now, ICC is most difficult sports authority in sports world because they are not doing decisions as professional which are hurting this game very badly, and we can expect some big disaster in near future because these things never works for long time mostly have their side effects as well but no one caring about this all right now because they have enough funds from IPL, and they are enjoying with this all which is surely never been good for spirit of game as well.
If they want to do something then surely now it's time for them to bring big changes in this game and few formats with now their main focus could be T-20 and this is surely going to help them in long run test cricket is not good enough for associate countries and many others they need to restrict this just for 10 or 12 countries with two groups can create some good interest and with this we can work on quality as well.

Let’s be realistic. ICC is not intending to do anything except sleep on the fact that cricket is dying day by day. In order to make cricket matches interesting between contenders, only the top and big teams can do so. It is always one-sided when the big team meets a smaller one and almost no one wants to see number nine and number ten play each other. So cricket is gradually dying and the only thing that might be able to save it is the shorter formats like T20 and T10.


regards

duke