Cricket match prediction discussions

[Minecache]

Never say never.

I've mentioned this to you earlier that there is narrative building in BCCI regarding the existing revenue model due to the recent media rights auction. This discussion could take place once ICC concludes the bidding process and reveals the numbers in Dec this year.

Well... then it is a concern. And I am even more worried at this point, because Ganguly is no longer associated with the BCCI. If a former cricketer was in BCCI, then there was at least a hope that he would sympathize with the smaller (associate) nations. If the power is in the hands of businessmen and politicians, then we can't expect any such treatment. Before the ICC reveals the numbers in December, the chairman elections are there and may be held by November. It may gave a broad idea in which direction the ICC is moving.

The Indian cricket board and Australian cricket board and also the England cricket board are always hoping to try to revive the Big3 or Big4 models. Because they will obviously like to be in charge. Additionally, I am aware that there is something going on where the team that is able to generate more revenue is supposed to get a substantial amount of money from the International Cricket Council or something along those lines is being discussed or something like that. There is a chance that those countries which are small and trying to develop genuine talent will die if that happens. This is most likely to have a negative effect on cricket in the long run as well, which is unfortunate.

[KennyR]

If the ruling government is able to win the next election, then there is more chances of Gautam Gambhir to be the president of ICC. Possibly he'll take a chance as he's a member of parliament from the ruling government. With the incident of Ganguly it is very clear, anyone who could get political support will get the post. I think it is good for Ganguly to stay away from politics and ruining his name.

[Sithara007]

The Indian cricket board and Australian cricket board and also the England cricket board are always hoping to try to revive the Big3 or Big4 models. Because they will obviously like to be in charge. Additionally, I am aware that there is something going on where the team that is able to generate more revenue is supposed to get a substantial amount of money from the International Cricket Council or something along those lines is being discussed or something like that. There is a chance that those countries which are small and trying to develop genuine talent will die if that happens. This is most likely to have a negative effect on cricket in the long run as well, which is unfortunate.

There are several obstacles in reviving the pig-3 model. First of all, the voting structure of ICC has changed and there are now 12 full members. And the smaller test nations are more or less united against the pig-3 model. But the biggest obstacle is that there is no unity between the 3 pigs (BCCI, ECB and CA). Back during the days of pig-3 dominance, there was perfect understanding between the two top members of the mafia (Srinivasan and Pawar), and the other two (Giles Clarke of the ECB and Wally Edwards of CA).

[BobK71]

If the ruling government is able to win the next election, then there is more chances of Gautam Gambhir to be the president of ICC. Possibly he'll take a chance as he's a member of parliament from the ruling government. With the incident of Ganguly it is very clear, anyone who could get political support will get the post. I think it is good for Ganguly to stay away from politics and ruining his name.

Honest and good characteristics people hate politics. Those who are greedy for money or power are the ones who dominate politics. Honest  people can also come here but they can not survive because when it comes to politics, being good is a tough challenge. And if the ruling party comes to power, any party with its supporters can take that position, it is not impossible.

[Sithara007]

Honest and good characteristics people hate politics. Those who are greedy for money or power are the ones who dominate politics. Honest  people can also come here but they can not survive because when it comes to politics, being good is a tough challenge. And if the ruling party comes to power, any party with its supporters can take that position, it is not impossible.

Politics in cricket can be overwhelming for honest people. And that is one of the reasons why legendary players hardly ever feature among the administrative bodies. Sourav Ganguly was an exception and we saw how it ended up for him. Guys like Rahul Dravid chose to be in the coaching domain, rather than in administration. And IMO, his choice was good. Maybe Dravid should get some experience with coaching, before jumping in to administrative domain. But in the end, I would still prefer ex-players in the administration department.

[Minecache]

There are several obstacles in reviving the pig-3 model. First of all, the voting structure of ICC has changed and there are now 12 full members. And the smaller test nations are more or less united against the pig-3 model. But the biggest obstacle is that there is no unity between the 3 pigs (BCCI, ECB and CA). Back during the days of pig-3 dominance, there was perfect understanding between the two top members of the mafia (Srinivasan and Pawar), and the other two (Giles Clarke of the ECB and Wally Edwards of CA).

I really don't feel that the Big 3 project is going to be revived if the Big 3 does not have unity among themselves. And I also believe that not having the Big 3 model at all is going to be beneficial for cricket in the long run. The problem is even though we are thinking that the Big 3 is not coordinated they might still come together just to have this model revived. But I think that ICC alone should have the authority over cricket. If ICC cannot be the lone authority over all the cricket boards then we shouldn't have ICC in the first place.

Actually, I don't think that the Big 3 is going to get revived. However, if the cricket boards and ICC have some understanding between themselves it is going to be a lot more hazardous for cricket.

[GigaBit]

Honest and good characteristics people hate politics. Those who are greedy for money or power are the ones who dominate politics. Honest  people can also come here but they can not survive because when it comes to politics, being good is a tough challenge. And if the ruling party comes to power, any party with its supporters can take that position, it is not impossible.

Politics in cricket can be overwhelming for honest people. And that is one of the reasons why legendary players hardly ever feature among the administrative bodies. Sourav Ganguly was an exception and we saw how it ended up for him. Guys like Rahul Dravid chose to be in the coaching domain, rather than in administration. And IMO, his choice was good. Maybe Dravid should get some experience with coaching, before jumping in to administrative domain. But in the end, I would still prefer ex-players in the administration department.

The current political environment has taken on a different dimension. It is never possible to stay that position unless the government is supported. Although it is a cricket organization in name but money and power are given more importance than cricket. As a cricket organization which is never expected. I myself also consider it from all these aspects that it will be good for cricket if a former cricketer gets this administrative power.

[bitgov]

The current political environment has taken on a different dimension. It is never possible to stay that position unless the government is supported. Although it is a cricket organization in name but money and power are given more importance than cricket. As a cricket organization which is never expected. I myself also consider it from all these aspects that it will be good for cricket if a former cricketer gets this administrative power.

there is a weather prediction that T20 world cup match on Sunday between Paksitan will be a draw match due to heavy rain
Yet all the tickets are sold. What will happen - will the prediction be true - or will the team win the match. We are all waiting for this match

[Tony116]

Honest and good characteristics people hate politics. Those who are greedy for money or power are the ones who dominate politics. Honest  people can also come here but they can not survive because when it comes to politics, being good is a tough challenge. And if the ruling party comes to power, any party with its supporters can take that position, it is not impossible.

Politics in cricket can be overwhelming for honest people. And that is one of the reasons why legendary players hardly ever feature among the administrative bodies. Sourav Ganguly was an exception and we saw how it ended up for him. Guys like Rahul Dravid chose to be in the coaching domain, rather than in administration. And IMO, his choice was good. Maybe Dravid should get some experience with coaching, before jumping in to administrative domain. But in the end, I would still prefer ex-players in the administration department.

The majority of people I think would like to see ex-players in administration, but on the other hand, I believe that politics in administration is inevitable and cannot be avoided in any way. The hunger for power is one of the worst parts of society, and politics is the outcome of that hunger for power. There has already been a lot of buzz about the situation with Sourov Ganguly, and I am glad that Dravid has chosen to go into the coaching department, and I think that is quite a good fit for him. In spite of the fact that the majority of people would like to see ex-players in administrative positions, it rarely happens.

[Sithara007]

I really don't feel that the Big 3 project is going to be revived if the Big 3 does not have unity among themselves. And I also believe that not having the Big 3 model at all is going to be beneficial for cricket in the long run. The problem is even though we are thinking that the Big 3 is not coordinated they might still come together just to have this model revived. But I think that ICC alone should have the authority over cricket. If ICC cannot be the lone authority over all the cricket boards then we shouldn't have ICC in the first place.

Actually, I don't think that the Big 3 is going to get revived. However, if the cricket boards and ICC have some understanding between themselves it is going to be a lot more hazardous for cricket.

Instead of the pig-3, we may witness the rise of pig-1. I don't know whether the BCCI need CA or ECB anymore. But a lot will depend on how the BCCI will do their bargaining for the fund allocation next year, for the 2024-31 cycle. As a result of the inflated media rights auction, the available funds for next cycle is almost 2.5 times higher than what we had last time. The BCCI receives around $50 million per year from the ICC as of now and it may go up by anywhere from $100 million to $200 million. 

[justdimin]

I really don't feel that the Big 3 project is going to be revived if the Big 3 does not have unity among themselves. And I also believe that not having the Big 3 model at all is going to be beneficial for cricket in the long run. The problem is even though we are thinking that the Big 3 is not coordinated they might still come together just to have this model revived. But I think that ICC alone should have the authority over cricket. If ICC cannot be the lone authority over all the cricket boards then we shouldn't have ICC in the first place.

Actually, I don't think that the Big 3 is going to get revived. However, if the cricket boards and ICC have some understanding between themselves it is going to be a lot more hazardous for cricket.

As of now, ICC is surely one of the biggest joke around the sports world because of their poor management and weak policies which are creating problems for them and no one going to solve this even for the personal interest they are creating more problems here now time for having a big discussion are they serious for this game's development, or they are just going to for their own interests which are surely going to be the dark future of this game BCCI's greediness is going on their high for more stake from media rights even they are the biggest market in the world now it's time for having big heart and allow things could be fair and for the better development of this game they need to scarify few points which will surely increase funds for associate countries which will bring better results.

Here are now all boards surely need to sit and talk about this all as it's right time and for me if India is going to be fit in these policies then surely we can expect big issues in this sports organization and this game could be bigger loser in this all issue.

[JSRAW]

I really don't feel that the Big 3 project is going to be revived if the Big 3 does not have unity among themselves. And I also believe that not having the Big 3 model at all is going to be beneficial for cricket in the long run. The problem is even though we are thinking that the Big 3 is not coordinated they might still come together just to have this model revived. But I think that ICC alone should have the authority over cricket. If ICC cannot be the lone authority over all the cricket boards then we shouldn't have ICC in the first place.

Actually, I don't think that the Big 3 is going to get revived. However, if the cricket boards and ICC have some understanding between themselves it is going to be a lot more hazardous for cricket.

Instead of the pig-3, we may witness the rise of pig-1. I don't know whether the BCCI need CA or ECB anymore. But a lot will depend on how the BCCI will do their bargaining for the fund allocation next year, for the 2024-31 cycle. As a result of the inflated media rights auction, the available funds for next cycle is almost 2.5 times higher than what we had last time. The BCCI receives around $50 million per year from the ICC as of now and it may go up by anywhere from $100 million to $200 million. 

The situation could have been much simpler if other Full cricketing nations start contributing to ICC revenue.

BCCI does have a very solid case this time. During the ICC auction, I tuned in to some cricketing podcasts and I got to know that Broadcasters paid 97-99% money just to capture the Indian market. That's a very shocking number to me.

[KennyR]

I really don't feel that the Big 3 project is going to be revived if the Big 3 does not have unity among themselves. And I also believe that not having the Big 3 model at all is going to be beneficial for cricket in the long run. The problem is even though we are thinking that the Big 3 is not coordinated they might still come together just to have this model revived. But I think that ICC alone should have the authority over cricket. If ICC cannot be the lone authority over all the cricket boards then we shouldn't have ICC in the first place.

Actually, I don't think that the Big 3 is going to get revived. However, if the cricket boards and ICC have some understanding between themselves it is going to be a lot more hazardous for cricket.

Instead of the pig-3, we may witness the rise of pig-1. I don't know whether the BCCI need CA or ECB anymore. But a lot will depend on how the BCCI will do their bargaining for the fund allocation next year, for the 2024-31 cycle. As a result of the inflated media rights auction, the available funds for next cycle is almost 2.5 times higher than what we had last time. The BCCI receives around $50 million per year from the ICC as of now and it may go up by anywhere from $100 million to $200 million.  

The situation could have been much simpler if other Full cricketing nations start contributing to ICC revenue.

BCCI does have a very solid case this time. During the ICC auction, I tuned in to some cricketing podcasts and I got to know that Broadcasters paid 97-99% money just to capture the Indian market. That's a very shocking number to me.

If China is in high position(cricket), the same could've happened with China. These countries on the top of the population makes it a big market for every business. Anything successful in these countries will generate big revenue. This is the prime reason why companies and sponsors spend big on leagues conducted on these countries.

[BobK71]

I really don't feel that the Big 3 project is going to be revived if the Big 3 does not have unity among themselves. And I also believe that not having the Big 3 model at all is going to be beneficial for cricket in the long run. The problem is even though we are thinking that the Big 3 is not coordinated they might still come together just to have this model revived. But I think that ICC alone should have the authority over cricket. If ICC cannot be the lone authority over all the cricket boards then we shouldn't have ICC in the first place.

Actually, I don't think that the Big 3 is going to get revived. However, if the cricket boards and ICC have some understanding between themselves it is going to be a lot more hazardous for cricket.

Instead of the pig-3, we may witness the rise of pig-1. I don't know whether the BCCI need CA or ECB anymore. But a lot will depend on how the BCCI will do their bargaining for the fund allocation next year, for the 2024-31 cycle. As a result of the inflated media rights auction, the available funds for next cycle is almost 2.5 times higher than what we had last time. The BCCI receives around $50 million per year from the ICC as of now and it may go up by anywhere from $100 million to $200 million.  

The situation could have been much simpler if other Full cricketing nations start contributing to ICC revenue.

BCCI does have a very solid case this time. During the ICC auction, I tuned in to some cricketing podcasts and I got to know that Broadcasters paid 97-99% money just to capture the Indian market. That's a very shocking number to me.

If China is in high position(cricket), the same could've happened with China. These countries on the top of the population makes it a big market for every business. Anything successful in these countries will generate big revenue. This is the prime reason why companies and sponsors spend big on leagues conducted on these countries.

It will be easier to conduct any business in the country where have the large number of population. India easily get the commercial success in cricket due to this reason. When there is a game in India, the entire gallery is fulled with viewers. They also have no shortage of sponsorships. As a result they demand more. There is no doubt that if China also loved cricket then their position would have been the same.

[smartaction]

I really don't feel that the Big 3 project is going to be revived if the Big 3 does not have unity among themselves. And I also believe that not having the Big 3 model at all is going to be beneficial for cricket in the long run. The problem is even though we are thinking that the Big 3 is not coordinated they might still come together just to have this model revived. But I think that ICC alone should have the authority over cricket. If ICC cannot be the lone authority over all the cricket boards then we shouldn't have ICC in the first place.

Actually, I don't think that the Big 3 is going to get revived. However, if the cricket boards and ICC have some understanding between themselves it is going to be a lot more hazardous for cricket.

Instead of the pig-3, we may witness the rise of pig-1. I don't know whether the BCCI need CA or ECB anymore. But a lot will depend on how the BCCI will do their bargaining for the fund allocation next year, for the 2024-31 cycle. As a result of the inflated media rights auction, the available funds for next cycle is almost 2.5 times higher than what we had last time. The BCCI receives around $50 million per year from the ICC as of now and it may go up by anywhere from $100 million to $200 million.  

The situation could have been much simpler if other Full cricketing nations start contributing to ICC revenue.

BCCI does have a very solid case this time. During the ICC auction, I tuned in to some cricketing podcasts and I got to know that Broadcasters paid 97-99% money just to capture the Indian market. That's a very shocking number to me.

If China is in high position(cricket), the same could've happened with China. These countries on the top of the population makes it a big market for every business. Anything successful in these countries will generate big revenue. This is the prime reason why companies and sponsors spend big on leagues conducted on these countries.

It will be easier to conduct any business in the country where have the large number of population. India easily get the commercial success in cricket due to this reason. When there is a game in India, the entire gallery is fulled with viewers. They also have no shortage of sponsorships. As a result they demand more. There is no doubt that if China also loved cricket then their position would have been the same.

India is a huge populous country and there are many cricket lovers who are very excited to watch their country play so when India plays most of the Indians go to the stadium to enjoy the game which is why when India plays there is a gallery full of spectators to enjoy their game.  For and the gallery filled crowd instilled a kind of confidence in India which allowed them to play very well and win most of the matches.

[JSRAW]

~snip~  

The situation could have been much simpler if other Full cricketing nations start contributing to ICC revenue.

BCCI does have a very solid case this time. During the ICC auction, I tuned in to some cricketing podcasts and I got to know that Broadcasters paid 97-99% money just to capture the Indian market. That's a very shocking number to me.

If China is in high position(cricket), the same could've happened with China. These countries on the top of the population makes it a big market for every business. Anything successful in these countries will generate big revenue. This is the prime reason why companies and sponsors spend big on leagues conducted on these countries.

That's a valid point.

But at the same time, Pakistan and Bangaladesh are also populace countries with combined numbers of close to 380 Million and per capita is not very different from India still, contribution shares are not encouraging.

[Sithara007]

The India-Pakistan spat is getting very ugly now. Jay Shah (secretary of the BCCI, and president of the Asian Cricket Council) made a controversial remark that Indian team may not visit Pakistan for the 2023 Asia Cup, and asked the ACC to move the venue to a "neutral" country. The PCB has responded by saying that if India refuses to visit Pakistan for the Asia Cup, then Pakistan may skip the ODI world cup of 2023, which is hosted by India. Being an Indian, I have to say that Jay Shah's comments doesn't make any sense. He just want to divert the attention from Ganguly's sacking.

[JSRAW]

The India-Pakistan spat is getting very ugly now. Jay Shah (secretary of the BCCI, and president of the Asian Cricket Council) made a controversial remark that Indian team may not visit Pakistan for the 2023 Asia Cup, and asked the ACC to move the venue to a "neutral" country. The PCB has responded by saying that if India refuses to visit Pakistan for the Asia Cup, then Pakistan may skip the ODI world cup of 2023, which is hosted by India. Being an Indian, I have to say that Jay Shah's comments doesn't make any sense. He just want to divert the attention from Ganguly's sacking.

He's also heading the ACC. It looks like he as a member proposed the neutral venue idea and as a head gave the green light as well lol.

Although IMO it was obvious, people were living in la la land if they thought India would visit Pakistan.

I would prefer if both boards keep boycotting each other instead of creating nonsensical drama.

[Sithara007]

I would prefer if both boards keep boycotting each other instead of creating nonsensical drama.

I don't think that this is an acceptable solution. Already we are down to a handful of countries in world cricket. And among these few countries, we can't afford to have boycotting and other types of drama. I can understand if India refuses to visit Pakistan for bilateral tours. But there is absolutely no justification for boycotting multi-nation tournaments. If they do that, then it will significantly weaken the Asian Cricket Council (ACC), because most of the revenues earned from the Asia Cup goes to the ACC.

[BobK71]

I really don't feel that the Big 3 project is going to be revived if the Big 3 does not have unity among themselves. And I also believe that not having the Big 3 model at all is going to be beneficial for cricket in the long run. The problem is even though we are thinking that the Big 3 is not coordinated they might still come together just to have this model revived. But I think that ICC alone should have the authority over cricket. If ICC cannot be the lone authority over all the cricket boards then we shouldn't have ICC in the first place.

Actually, I don't think that the Big 3 is going to get revived. However, if the cricket boards and ICC have some understanding between themselves it is going to be a lot more hazardous for cricket.

Instead of the pig-3, we may witness the rise of pig-1. I don't know whether the BCCI need CA or ECB anymore. But a lot will depend on how the BCCI will do their bargaining for the fund allocation next year, for the 2024-31 cycle. As a result of the inflated media rights auction, the available funds for next cycle is almost 2.5 times higher than what we had last time. The BCCI receives around $50 million per year from the ICC as of now and it may go up by anywhere from $100 million to $200 million.  

The situation could have been much simpler if other Full cricketing nations start contributing to ICC revenue.

BCCI does have a very solid case this time. During the ICC auction, I tuned in to some cricketing podcasts and I got to know that Broadcasters paid 97-99% money just to capture the Indian market. That's a very shocking number to me.

If China is in high position(cricket), the same could've happened with China. These countries on the top of the population makes it a big market for every business. Anything successful in these countries will generate big revenue. This is the prime reason why companies and sponsors spend big on leagues conducted on these countries.

It will be easier to conduct any business in the country where have the large number of population. India easily get the commercial success in cricket due to this reason. When there is a game in India, the entire gallery is fulled with viewers. They also have no shortage of sponsorships. As a result they demand more. There is no doubt that if China also loved cricket then their position would have been the same.

India is a huge populous country and there are many cricket lovers who are very excited to watch their country play so when India plays most of the Indians go to the stadium to enjoy the game which is why when India plays there is a gallery full of spectators to enjoy their game.  For and the gallery filled crowd instilled a kind of confidence in India which allowed them to play very well and win most of the matches.

Not only the population is the main fact. Because the population in a country may be much higher, there may be different games. I think which game will have more popularity the spectators normally will more than others. Cricket is a popular sport in Indian subcontinent, so there is no shortage of viewers in the cricket. When population and popularity will be similar, then we expect the maximum.