Cricket match prediction discussions

[Sithara007]

I have one doubt why Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not part of ODI and T20 tournament for India as i have not seen them in the team even if Jasprit Bumrah was injured in the recent series and India was experimenting with new bowlers rather than picking Ishant Sharma nor Umesh Yadav. In the case of Mitchell Starc he was not playing in the Ashes because the selectors thought he was not that important in the Test and when he was given an opportunity after that he bowled really well and now he is a pick in the Test format.

Perhaps the selectors want to limit the bowlers such as Sharma/Shami/Yadav to test matches, and for some of the important ODI matches. For some time now, they have been experimenting with inexperienced bowlers for the T20 format. Shardul Thakur, Khaleel Ahmed, Mohammed Siraj, Deepak Chahar and Navdeep Saini are some of the pacers who got the opportunity recently. But none of them could perform consistently against the top sides.

[vella85]

The Australian summer cricket series is strange this year as now that all the test matches are over, Australia now travel to India for a ODI series and then travel to South Africa for a T20 and ODI series and then come back to Australia to play New Zealand in an ODI series. And after all this they then travel to New Zealand to play in a T20 series and all this in just 2 months which is crazy. I've never seen anything like this as the Australian summer ends at the end of February so it doesn't make sense to me. 

[Sithara007]

The Australian summer cricket series is strange this year as now that all the test matches are over, Australia now travel to India for a ODI series and then travel to South Africa for a T20 and ODI series and then come back to Australia to play New Zealand in an ODI series. And after all this they then travel to New Zealand to play in a T20 series and all this in just 2 months which is crazy. I've never seen anything like this as the Australian summer ends at the end of February so it doesn't make sense to me. 

Earlier, test matches used to be mandatory for any bilateral series. But now the priority is being given to T20 matches, as they suit both the sides (the players as well as the board). A few years ago, a typical tour would have included anywhere from 3 to 5 test matches and a bilateral or triangular ODI tournament. But now T20 matches have become more frequent and the number of test matches have gone down. People don't have time to watch test matches and therefore the boards don't earn much if they schedule too many test matches.

[Vishnu.Reang]

I have one doubt why Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not part of ODI and T20 tournament for India as i have not seen them in the team even if Jasprit Bumrah was injured in the recent series and India was experimenting with new bowlers rather than picking Ishant Sharma nor Umesh Yadav. In the case of Mitchell Starc he was not playing in the Ashes because the selectors thought he was not that important in the Test and when he was given an opportunity after that he bowled really well and now he is a pick in the Test format.

My guess is that the selectors want them to play Ranji Trophy (4-day domestic competition in India) instead of the T20 series against Sri Lanka. They want to make sure that these players remain 100% fit for the longer format. For the shorter format, they have so many options (Shardul, Saini, Khaleel.etc), but that is not the case with the test format.

[7788bitcoin]

Earlier, test matches used to be mandatory for any bilateral series. But now the priority is being given to T20 matches, as they suit both the sides (the players as well as the board). A few years ago, a typical tour would have included anywhere from 3 to 5 test matches and a bilateral or triangular ODI tournament. But now T20 matches have become more frequent and the number of test matches have gone down. People don't have time to watch test matches and therefore the boards don't earn much if they schedule too many test matches.

With the T20 world cup coming up it is quite natural that all the cricket boards are preferring T20 matches in their bilateral series and it shows that all the teams are really looking forward to send the best team for the world cup and it is fascinating because of the commercial success T20 had after its inception and many small teams are coming up because of the T20 format in the past ten years .

[ene1980]

~snip
My guess is that the selectors want them to play Ranji Trophy (4-day domestic competition in India) instead of the T20 series against Sri Lanka. They want to make sure that these players remain 100% fit for the longer format. For the shorter format, they have so many options (Shardul, Saini, Khaleel.etc), but that is not the case with the test format.

The concept of using different batsman for different format is possible according to the skill level of a player but if you are differentiating bowlers according to different format and that too fast bowlers this is the first instance i am seeing because if a player is able to perform well in Test they can perform the same in other formats too, may be India has more players and the competition is high and may be because of that players like Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not in the shorter format .

[pakhitheboss]

~snip
My guess is that the selectors want them to play Ranji Trophy (4-day domestic competition in India) instead of the T20 series against Sri Lanka. They want to make sure that these players remain 100% fit for the longer format. For the shorter format, they have so many options (Shardul, Saini, Khaleel.etc), but that is not the case with the test format.

The concept of using different batsman for different format is possible according to the skill level of a player but if you are differentiating bowlers according to different format and that too fast bowlers this is the first instance i am seeing because if a player is able to perform well in Test they can perform the same in other formats too, may be India has more players and the competition is high and may be because of that players like Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not in the shorter format .

With India batsmen were never an issue, it is the bowlers that they might want to test. Bowlers tend to suffer a lot from injuries and the best way to test them will be playing them in a longer format. I agree ranji matches are the best source of  finding those talents.

[pakhitheboss]

Earlier, test matches used to be mandatory for any bilateral series. But now the priority is being given to T20 matches, as they suit both the sides (the players as well as the board). A few years ago, a typical tour would have included anywhere from 3 to 5 test matches and a bilateral or triangular ODI tournament. But now T20 matches have become more frequent and the number of test matches have gone down. People don't have time to watch test matches and therefore the boards don't earn much if they schedule too many test matches.

With the T20 world cup coming up it is quite natural that all the cricket boards are preferring T20 matches in their bilateral series and it shows that all the teams are really looking forward to send the best team for the world cup and it is fascinating because of the commercial success T20 had after its inception and many small teams are coming up because of the T20 format in the past ten years .

T20 has become the soul of cricket as of now, viewership is very high therefore commercially it is a success. Every board wants it's team to win the T20 worldcup as well as cash in the enormous revenue. That is why you see more T20 games being played nowdays.

[Sithara007]

~snip
My guess is that the selectors want them to play Ranji Trophy (4-day domestic competition in India) instead of the T20 series against Sri Lanka. They want to make sure that these players remain 100% fit for the longer format. For the shorter format, they have so many options (Shardul, Saini, Khaleel.etc), but that is not the case with the test format.

The concept of using different batsman for different format is possible according to the skill level of a player but if you are differentiating bowlers according to different format and that too fast bowlers this is the first instance i am seeing because if a player is able to perform well in Test they can perform the same in other formats too, may be India has more players and the competition is high and may be because of that players like Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not in the shorter format .

I have to disagree here. In test matches, it is the wicket taking ability that matters. So the selectors may prefer bowlers with better strike rate, such as Umesh Yadav and Ishant Sharma. On the other hand, in the T20 matches discipline counts a lot. Bowlers with average speed in excess of 140 kmph may find themselves at a disadvantage in T20 format and it is usually the medium pacers who are preferred there. But I agree that the spin bowlers don't have such limitations.

[7788bitcoin]

T20 has become the soul of cricket as of now, viewership is very high therefore commercially it is a success. Every board wants it's team to win the T20 worldcup as well as cash in the enormous revenue. That is why you see more T20 games being played nowdays.

I think the idea is to attract new fans to the franchise game, i still remember the first T20 World Cup and India winning the tournament with a relatively young team and then they started IPL and it was a grand success and rest of the countries are trying to continue the same concept now and everyone knows the commercial success it can bring if the fans gets interested and every team is eyeing for that winning combination to attract more eyes to their franchise cricket.

[Vishnu.Reang]

I think the idea is to attract new fans to the franchise game, i still remember the first T20 World Cup and India winning the tournament with a relatively young team and then they started IPL and it was a grand success and rest of the countries are trying to continue the same concept now and everyone knows the commercial success it can bring if the fans gets interested and every team is eyeing for that winning combination to attract more eyes to their franchise cricket.

The problem here is that every other board is trying to copy the IPL. But they fail to understand that they don't have such large market at home. For example, the Sri Lankan Cricket Board had launched a similar league a few years back. It folded after just one year, resulting in huge losses to the board. The Msanzi Super League (MSL) of South Africa is also in deep loss. Only a few such as the BBL and CPL are in profit.

[Avirunes]

T20 has become the soul of cricket as of now, viewership is very high therefore commercially it is a success. Every board wants it's team to win the T20 worldcup as well as cash in the enormous revenue. That is why you see more T20 games being played nowdays.

I would say viewership as the biggest weight factor out of all in emerging of lot of T-20 tournaments and series. The fact that it is the format that takes not too much times and delivers the best sports entertainment is something which keeps the audience glued to their seat/TV.

[Juggy777]

I think the idea is to attract new fans to the franchise game, i still remember the first T20 World Cup and India winning the tournament with a relatively young team and then they started IPL and it was a grand success and rest of the countries are trying to continue the same concept now and everyone knows the commercial success it can bring if the fans gets interested and every team is eyeing for that winning combination to attract more eyes to their franchise cricket.

The problem here is that every other board is trying to copy the IPL. But they fail to understand that they don't have such large market at home. For example, the Sri Lankan Cricket Board had launched a similar league a few years back. It folded after just one year, resulting in huge losses to the board. The Msanzi Super League (MSL) of South Africa is also in deep loss. Only a few such as the BBL and CPL are in profit.

@Vishnu.Reang copying IPL is suicidal because none of the leagues can match the salary that IPL players get, and if there’s no good salary on the table then no top player would like to come and play in those leagues. Second reason why other leagues are a big flop is because IPL plans it’s schedule in such a way that no major ICC tournament is on, which allows all global stars to participate in IPL and other’s leagues do not get such kind of luxury.

[Vishnu.Reang]

@Vishnu.Reang copying IPL is suicidal because none of the leagues can match the salary that IPL players get, and if there’s no good salary on the table then no top player would like to come and play in those leagues. Second reason why other leagues are a big flop is because IPL plans it’s schedule in such a way that no major ICC tournament is on, which allows all global stars to participate in IPL and other’s leagues do not get such kind of luxury.

That's true. There is an informal agreement between the BCCI and the ICC that no major global tournament will be scheduled during the IPL duration. The national boards are also reluctant to conduct their tournaments or bilateral tours during this time, because they know that the star players would definitely prefer their IPL franchise over the national team.

[SaShiRaJaVu]

I would say viewership as the biggest weight factor out of all in emerging of lot of T-20 tournaments and series. The fact that it is the format that takes not too much times and delivers the best sports entertainment is something which keeps the audience glued to their seat/TV.

The television rights is the biggest cash cow and it all depends upon the viewership level, Indian board gets billions simply because of the huge viewership and so does the BBL but not sure about the rest of the leagues. I hope that PCL has a much bigger audience and that can be the case with BPL too as they have a huge number of population who does love cricket but not sure about the numbers.

[Sithara007]

I would say viewership as the biggest weight factor out of all in emerging of lot of T-20 tournaments and series. The fact that it is the format that takes not too much times and delivers the best sports entertainment is something which keeps the audience glued to their seat/TV.

The television rights is the biggest cash cow and it all depends upon the viewership level, Indian board gets billions simply because of the huge viewership and so does the BBL but not sure about the rest of the leagues. I hope that PCL has a much bigger audience and that can be the case with BPL too as they have a huge number of population who does love cricket but not sure about the numbers.

Even the other leagues depend a lot on the Indian audience. For example, CPL gets the majority of its TV revenue from India (and not from the West Indies). And this is also one of the reasons why the PSL of Pakistan is in loss now. They are not allowed to broadcast their matches in India and therefore the corporations are not willing to pay large amounts for TV rights. BBL gets most of its revenue from Australia itself, but it has a considerable fan base in India, as well as the other sub-continental countries.

[SaShiRaJaVu]

~snip
Even the other leagues depend a lot on the Indian audience. For example, CPL gets the majority of its TV revenue from India (and not from the West Indies). And this is also one of the reasons why the PSL of Pakistan is in loss now. They are not allowed to broadcast their matches in India and therefore the corporations are not willing to pay large amounts for TV rights. BBL gets most of its revenue from Australia itself, but it has a considerable fan base in India, as well as the other sub-continental countries.

When it comes to global markets i think that Pakistan is also having a big market and they are a cricket enthusiastic country and why are they not getting the viewership or the advertising is beyond my understanding of the market situation in Pakistan. India does have a fair share of foreign investment companies and there is a real competition to attract users and thereby advertisement is a huge part and i guess there is no real competition in Pakistan to attract more advertisers .

[Sithara007]

When it comes to global markets i think that Pakistan is also having a big market and they are a cricket enthusiastic country and why are they not getting the viewership or the advertising is beyond my understanding of the market situation in Pakistan. India does have a fair share of foreign investment companies and there is a real competition to attract users and thereby advertisement is a huge part and i guess there is no real competition in Pakistan to attract more advertisers .

Indian population is around 1,400 million and the Pakistan population is only around 1/7th of that. The same can be said about the economy as well. The Indian GDP is 10 times that of Pakistan. So you can't really compare these two economies. Even if you combine Pakistan and Bangladesh, their economy is only around one-fifth of that of India. Also, the TV revenues are lower in Pakistan, due to a wide variety of reasons.

For the foreseeable future, I am sure that the Indian market will remain as the backbone for any T20 franchise league around the world. The BBL has been quite successful in extracting most of their revenue from Australia itself. But even for them, they need to depend on India for any future growth in revenues. Australia is having a population of only 25 million and cricket is not the no.1 sport there.

[Tipstar]

When it comes to global markets i think that Pakistan is also having a big market and they are a cricket enthusiastic country and why are they not getting the viewership or the advertising is beyond my understanding of the market situation in Pakistan. India does have a fair share of foreign investment companies and there is a real competition to attract users and thereby advertisement is a huge part and i guess there is no real competition in Pakistan to attract more advertisers .

Indian population is around 1,400 million and the Pakistan population is only around 1/7th of that. The same can be said about the economy as well. The Indian GDP is 10 times that of Pakistan. So you can't really compare these two economies. Even if you combine Pakistan and Bangladesh, their economy is only around one-fifth of that of India. Also, the TV revenues are lower in Pakistan, due to a wide variety of reasons.

For the foreseeable future, I am sure that the Indian market will remain as the backbone for any T20 franchise league around the world. The BBL has been quite successful in extracting most of their revenue from Australia itself. But even for them, they need to depend on India for any future growth in revenues. Australia is having a population of only 25 million and cricket is not the no.1 sport there.

India is the only feasible market for franchise league. Not only India is a populous country, Cricket is the most favourite sports for Indians. It's not the same for Australia, England or South Africa.
South Asia is where the cricket is the sports that's given a first priority. And India lies in its center. The exclusion of Pakistani players in IPL is the only thing that hurts me. Cricket should have been higher than the petty politics.

[Vishnu.Reang]

India is the only feasible market for franchise league. Not only India is a populous country, Cricket is the most favourite sports for Indians. It's not the same for Australia, England or South Africa.
South Asia is where the cricket is the sports that's given a first priority. And India lies in its center. The exclusion of Pakistani players in IPL is the only thing that hurts me. Cricket should have been higher than the petty politics.

I would disagree when you say that India is the only feasible market for franchise league.

The BBL of Australia and the Vitality Blast of England is doing pretty well, without much help from India. But that said, India remains the largest market and it will be impossible for any of the other franchise T20 leagues to overtake the Indian Premier League (IPL) in terms of popularity or revenues. My advice to the other leagues is not to compare themselves with the IPL.