Cricket match prediction discussions

[Iranus]

Haha You know what funny part is?
PCB did file a case against BCCI but they lost the suit and additionally $2.2 Million, they even had to pay BCCI 1.6 million dollars as compensation for covering the cost, fees etc.
This case was related to 2015-2023 bilateral proposal between both boards.
PCB pays compensation to BCCI after losing case in the ICC’s Dispute Resolution Committee

Don't know whether the ruling is acceptable to everyone. Anyway, the decision of the Dispute Resolution Committee is final and can't be appealed. PCB was already in a poor financial state, and they got slapped with additional expenditure. My take is that since Pakistan toured India in 2007, the BCCI should have reciprocated the favor. The MoU may not be legally binding, but going with the agreement they should have done that. Anyway, now any such tour looks like a distant possibility, at least for the next 10 years.

BCCI never signed any MOU documents after Mumbai terror attack and i can't blame them for that, you can't expect any favor after butchering innocent people in Financial city of India. Although both boards did try to calm things down after 2013-14 and bilateral series was looking real deal but then Pathankot happened and all 2-3 efforts went down the drain overnight, as everybody knows public sentiments already were not favorable at all due to continuous cross border terrorism.  

There are always going to be problems between these countries. and these problems are often triggered by the religious differences between the two countries.
You know, the people who are reliable for triggering these problems are powerful people.

Another thing is there are too many differences in these countries and that's why these problems are continuous. I don't blame any team for not playing with others in this situation.

[sovie]

~
You know what - that is not funny at all.
India would always play games to keep PK away from the international cricket. So that they are always in trouble - but I hope God plans are more powerful than men's plan. Why are Indian always happy when something bad happens?

How can India play games on keeping Pakistan away from International Cricket, the sole reason the teams were afraid of touring Pakistan is simply because of security threats and the attack against Sri Lanka team while they were touring and some of the players were injured with bull wounds and it was an unfortunate incident and hence there was no tour planned for decades. I suggest not to drag politics here in the forum.

Well its not dragging politics here. But cricket and politics are linked somehow.
If we start dragging these issue they will lead to a trouble but that is also true how hard Paksitan tries to bring things on a peaceful level there are always a trouble and IND celebrates it.

[Sithara007]

Pakistan in 2012/13 toured India https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/pakistan-tour-of-india-2012-13-589300/match-results and played 3 ODIs and 2 T20Is. Since it was financially in favour of India so Mumbai and Pathankot incidents were set aside. But when India was required to tour back they recalled Mumbai and Pathankot. India has taken full advantage of Mumbia attacks in establishing its narrative worldwide (they planned it very well) while Pakistan is the one who suffered this incident - Pakistan government spokesman said years back.

In my opinion, politics should be kept aside from sports. Here the real problem is not with PCB or BCCI, but with the ICC. The ICC should ask the Indian board to pay compensation, in case they are unable to tour Pakistan. If a small board such as New Zealand can compensate Pakistan for their inability to tour, then a rich board such as BCCI should definitely do that one moral grounds. Take the case of football. North Korea participated in the 2010 FIFA world cup, despite the fact that they have horrible relations with their neighbors and with the United States. Sports help us to alleviate political tensions. And the same approach can be tried with India and Pakistan as well.

[Juggy777]

Pakistan in 2012/13 toured India https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/pakistan-tour-of-india-2012-13-589300/match-results and played 3 ODIs and 2 T20Is. Since it was financially in favour of India so Mumbai and Pathankot incidents were set aside. But when India was required to tour back they recalled Mumbai and Pathankot. India has taken full advantage of Mumbia attacks in establishing its narrative worldwide (they planned it very well) while Pakistan is the one who suffered this incident - Pakistan government spokesman said years back.

In my opinion, politics should be kept aside from sports. Here the real problem is not with PCB or BCCI, but with the ICC. The ICC should ask the Indian board to pay compensation, in case they are unable to tour Pakistan. If a small board such as New Zealand can compensate Pakistan for their inability to tour, then a rich board such as BCCI should definitely do that one moral grounds. Take the case of football. North Korea participated in the 2010 FIFA world cup, despite the fact that they have horrible relations with their neighbors and with the United States. Sports help us to alleviate political tensions. And the same approach can be tried with India and Pakistan as well.

@Sithara007 I don’t think that BCCI will compensate Pakistan, but why can’t they allow India to play Pakistan on a neutral venue like Dubai and this way both the teams can earn some revenues, and both countries fans too want to see them on the pitch against one another. Furthermore ICC failed to force India to play against Pakistan, but I hope that in coming year’s these two can face off against each other in ODI and T20 series, and I’m sure that we’ll witness even bigger coverage then what Ashes gets.

[blatchcorn]

In my opinion, politics should be kept aside from sports. Here the real problem is not with PCB or BCCI, but with the ICC. The ICC should ask the Indian board to pay compensation, in case they are unable to tour Pakistan. If a small board such as New Zealand can compensate Pakistan for their inability to tour, then a rich board such as BCCI should definitely do that one moral grounds. Take the case of football. North Korea participated in the 2010 FIFA world cup, despite the fact that they have horrible relations with their neighbors and with the United States. Sports help us to alleviate political tensions. And the same approach can be tried with India and Pakistan as well.

We all know that ICC is now a days in full control of India, Australia and England. Pakistan being arch rival of India has very rear chances of getting any benefit from ICC and too against India. Keep cricket limited to few countries and big 3 will take full advantage of that. Since that's not the case with football that's why the case you are referring happens not in cricket.   

[CryptoYar]

BCCI never signed any MOU documents after Mumbai terror attack and i can't blame them for that, you can't expect any favor after butchering innocent people in Financial city of India.

Proxy war has always been going on in both the countries and you can't say that only India has suffered the loss. Pakistan also huge terrorist attacks have been carried out by India.
Moreover, India trying hard to destroy Pakistan cricket, and it is on record that galbushan yadav was the mastermind behind many terror attacks (And the attack on Sri Lankan team was one of them)

[...]but I hope that in coming year’s these two can face off against each other in ODI and T20 series, [..]

We can only hope that both countries will forget their past bitterness and become friends and then we will see such cricket series(s)

[YinShuiSiYuan]

Proxy war has always been going on in both the countries and you can't say that only India has suffered the loss. Pakistan also huge terrorist attacks have been carried out by India.
Moreover, India trying hard to destroy Pakistan cricket, and it is on record that galbushan yadav was the mastermind behind many terror attacks (And the attack on Sri Lankan team was one of them)

India can bear any financial loss as long as it hurts PCB. BCCI is richest board and can easily digest losses incurred by not touring Pakistan, But PCB is not in a position to bear any financial loss. Role of ICC is very important in this case, but sadly its no where seen. I remember in 90s, ICC still have some say but these days its just a symbolic authority.

[Sithara007]

India can bear any financial loss as long as it hurts PCB. BCCI is richest board and can easily digest losses incurred by not touring Pakistan, But PCB is not in a position to bear any financial loss. Role of ICC is very important in this case, but sadly its no where seen. I remember in 90s, ICC still have some say but these days its just a symbolic authority.

If the countries outside big-4 unite, then it will be possible to free ICC from the control of a few powerful boards. But that is not the case now, as seen from the election of ICC chairman. Greg Barclay was the nominee from big-4 and still he was able to secure two-thirds of the votes. PCB should be supported by other smaller boards such as CSA, BCB and WICB. But as we have seen from previous instances, these smaller boards are very dependent on the BCCI and never take any step that antagonizes the Indian board.

[JSRAW]

If the countries outside big-4 unite, then it will be possible to free ICC from the control of a few powerful boards. But that is not the case now, as seen from the election of ICC chairman. Greg Barclay was the nominee from big-4 and still he was able to secure two-thirds of the votes. PCB should be supported by other smaller boards such as CSA, BCB and WICB. But as we have seen from previous instances, these smaller boards are very dependent on the BCCI and never take any step that antagonizes the Indian board.

Ganging up is only going to help with the votings, like we witnessed couple of times. Otherwise i don't see anything substantial coming out from any rebellion grouping. But yeah if they can become self sufficient then it's completely different story.

Just to give others one example how WICB, CSA etc are completely dependent on BIG-3 for bilateral series, specially BCCI. Single bilateral tour which last for max 1 month generate minimum $80-90 Millions easily, not sure if these boards are going to upset BIG-3 in any drastic way.

---
Actual figures are more than $100 millions according to WICB's recent interview.

[Minor Miner]

If the countries outside big-4 unite, then it will be possible to free ICC from the control of a few powerful boards. But that is not the case now, as seen from the election of ICC chairman. Greg Barclay was the nominee from big-4 and still he was able to secure two-thirds of the votes. PCB should be supported by other smaller boards such as CSA, BCB and WICB. But as we have seen from previous instances, these smaller boards are very dependent on the BCCI and never take any step that antagonizes the Indian board.

Ganging up is only going to help with the votings, like we witnessed couple of times. Otherwise i don't see anything substantial coming out from any rebellion grouping. But yeah if they can become self sufficient then it's completely different story.
Just to give others one example how WICB, CSA etc are completely dependent on BIG-3 for bilateral series, specially BCCI. Single bilateral tour which last for max 1 month generate minimum $80-90 Millions easily, not sure if these boards are going to upset BIG-3 in any drastic way.
---
Actual figures are more than $100 millions according to WICB's recent interview.

And if you look at it realistically I think you will recognize that the matches that will be played without the involvement of the big three are not going to generate much revenue. so the smaller teams will obviously look for matches against the big 3 or 4. but I think if all the other teams actually come forward and make a combined decision, changes can be made but it will be really hard for all the teams for boards to be on the same page.

[JSRAW]

If the countries outside big-4 unite, then it will be possible to free ICC from the control of a few powerful boards. But that is not the case now, as seen from the election of ICC chairman. Greg Barclay was the nominee from big-4 and still he was able to secure two-thirds of the votes. PCB should be supported by other smaller boards such as CSA, BCB and WICB. But as we have seen from previous instances, these smaller boards are very dependent on the BCCI and never take any step that antagonizes the Indian board.

Ganging up is only going to help with the votings, like we witnessed couple of times. Otherwise i don't see anything substantial coming out from any rebellion grouping. But yeah if they can become self sufficient then it's completely different story.
Just to give others one example how WICB, CSA etc are completely dependent on BIG-3 for bilateral series, specially BCCI. Single bilateral tour which last for max 1 month generate minimum $80-90 Millions easily, not sure if these boards are going to upset BIG-3 in any drastic way.
---
Actual figures are more than $100 millions according to WICB's recent interview.

And if you look at it realistically I think you will recognize that the matches that will be played without the involvement of the big three are not going to generate much revenue. so the smaller teams will obviously look for matches against the big 3 or 4. but I think if all the other teams actually come forward and make a combined decision, changes can be made but it will be really hard for all the teams for boards to be on the same page.

Like i said if they are not coming up with any self sustaining plan then there is no hope whatsoever.

Another scenario would be revamp of ICC sharing revenue but then there is a slight possibility of BCCI pulling out from ICC completely and if by any chance it happens then i can guarantee you ICC is dead for good.

[minairia3]

Pakistan in 2012/13 toured India https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/pakistan-tour-of-india-2012-13-589300/match-results and played 3 ODIs and 2 T20Is. Since it was financially in favour of India so Mumbai and Pathankot incidents were set aside. But when India was required to tour back they recalled Mumbai and Pathankot. India has taken full advantage of Mumbia attacks in establishing its narrative worldwide (they planned it very well) while Pakistan is the one who suffered this incident - Pakistan government spokesman said years back.

In my opinion, politics should be kept aside from sports. Here the real problem is not with PCB or BCCI, but with the ICC. The ICC should ask the Indian board to pay compensation, in case they are unable to tour Pakistan. If a small board such as New Zealand can compensate Pakistan for their inability to tour, then a rich board such as BCCI should definitely do that one moral grounds. Take the case of football. North Korea participated in the 2010 FIFA world cup, despite the fact that they have horrible relations with their neighbors and with the United States. Sports help us to alleviate political tensions. And the same approach can be tried with India and Pakistan as well.

I don’t think that BCCI will compensate Pakistan, but why can’t they allow India to play Pakistan on a neutral venue like Dubai and this way both the teams can earn some revenues, and both countries fans too want to see them on the pitch against one another. Furthermore ICC failed to force India to play against Pakistan, but I hope that in coming year’s these two can face off against each other in ODI and T20 series, and I’m sure that we’ll witness even bigger coverage then what Ashes gets.

These teams don't even seem to be on speaking terms and we are talking about compensation! that is obviously not going to happen. The problem is India is not going to play against Pakistan. Pakistan is not going to play in a Neutral Venue. that's what Pakistan is saying right now. yes, we are surely going to have some matches when we say these teams are against each other in some ICC tournament but the bilateral series seems to be quite impossible.

[Minor Miner]

Like i said if they are not coming up with any self sustaining plan then there is no hope whatsoever.

Another scenario would be revamp of ICC sharing revenue but then there is a slight possibility of BCCI pulling out from ICC completely and if by any chance it happens then i can guarantee you ICC is dead for good.

yeah, that is true.

ICC is a lot dependent on the BCCI. And not having the BCCI on their side can cause a lot of problems for them. But, I think a complete change of Personnel in the ICC is not going to be that bad, right?
I believe they also might be offered bribery.

[Sithara007]

Ganging up is only going to help with the votings, like we witnessed couple of times. Otherwise i don't see anything substantial coming out from any rebellion grouping. But yeah if they can become self sufficient then it's completely different story.

Just to give others one example how WICB, CSA etc are completely dependent on BIG-3 for bilateral series, specially BCCI. Single bilateral tour which last for max 1 month generate minimum $80-90 Millions easily, not sure if these boards are going to upset BIG-3 in any drastic way.

---
Actual figures are more than $100 millions according to WICB's recent interview.

What is the need for the smaller boards to appease BCCI? As per the schedule, BCCI needs to reciprocate the tours. The case with Pakistan is understandable. But they can't refuse to tour other countries such as Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, West Indies or South Africa. Now it may be true that if the boards are hostile then the BCCI may agree only to a bare minimum of matches. Then it is up to the opposite side to decide, whether they want to go for monetary gain or self respect. And once again, the real reason why revenues are so concentrated in India is due to the fact that ICC refused to popularize the game.

[galambo]

Like i said if they are not coming up with any self sustaining plan then there is no hope whatsoever.

Another scenario would be revamp of ICC sharing revenue but then there is a slight possibility of BCCI pulling out from ICC completely and if by any chance it happens then i can guarantee you ICC is dead for good.

Dada why removing bcci from ICC?, it's ICC that is part of BCCI cricket ecosystem not the other way. Do you think its possible to remove BCCI from ICC and ICC can still function. Cricket is badly centered in Pakistan, Bangladesh, India and Srilanka. ICC can't remove the other three small boards also since that will effect cricket viewership.

[JSRAW]

Like i said if they are not coming up with any self sustaining plan then there is no hope whatsoever.

Another scenario would be revamp of ICC sharing revenue but then there is a slight possibility of BCCI pulling out from ICC completely and if by any chance it happens then i can guarantee you ICC is dead for good.

yeah, that is true.

ICC is a lot dependent on the BCCI. And not having the BCCI on their side can cause a lot of problems for them. But, I think a complete change of Personnel in the ICC is not going to be that bad, right?
I believe they also might be offered bribery.

Changes are part of the process and we can't predict outcome so it could go both ways. I'm not aware about bribery culture in ICC management but we can't rule that out. Having said that i would say most of the time their crappy decisions are influenced by hard realities (dependency on BCCI). 

Ganging up is only going to help with the votings, like we witnessed couple of times. Otherwise i don't see anything substantial coming out from any rebellion grouping. But yeah if they can become self sufficient then it's completely different story.

Just to give others one example how WICB, CSA etc are completely dependent on BIG-3 for bilateral series, specially BCCI. Single bilateral tour which last for max 1 month generate minimum $80-90 Millions easily, not sure if these boards are going to upset BIG-3 in any drastic way.

---
Actual figures are more than $100 millions according to WICB's recent interview.

What is the need for the smaller boards to appease BCCI? As per the schedule, BCCI needs to reciprocate the tours. The case with Pakistan is understandable. But they can't refuse to tour other countries such as Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, West Indies or South Africa. Now it may be true that if the boards are hostile then the BCCI may agree only to a bare minimum of matches. Then it is up to the opposite side to decide, whether they want to go for monetary gain or self respect. And once again, the real reason why revenues are so concentrated in India is due to the fact that ICC refused to popularize the game.

It's a give or take relationship instead of Appeasement.

In my experience BCCI hardly play hardballs with smaller boards in context of bilateral series (unless their plans are clashing with IPL), mainly Ban + SL + WI + SA. One of the reason their relationship with the BCCI are very friendly in comparison to Aus and Eng ( Ex: Aus cancelling the SA's tour and ENG pulling out)

Like i said if they are not coming up with any self sustaining plan then there is no hope whatsoever.

Another scenario would be revamp of ICC sharing revenue but then there is a slight possibility of BCCI pulling out from ICC completely and if by any chance it happens then i can guarantee you ICC is dead for good.

Dada why removing bcci from ICC?, it's ICC that is part of BCCI cricket ecosystem not the other way. Do you think its possible to remove BCCI from ICC and ICC can still function. Cricket is badly centered in Pakistan, Bangladesh, India and Srilanka. ICC can't remove the other three small boards also since that will effect cricket viewership.

Latter part was completely hypothetical.
 

[galambo]

Latter part was completely hypothetical.

Well I don't think that financial stats matter only, though Pakistan, Bangladesh and Srilanka are weak in terms of money still they attract lots of cricket and not to forget due to these small boards we have big 3. Hypothetical was saying that bcci will leave icc, which didn't make any sense to me.

[Minor Miner]

Changes are part of the process and we can't predict outcome so it could go both ways. I'm not aware about bribery culture in ICC management but we can't rule that out. Having said that i would say most of the time their crappy decisions are influenced by hard realities (dependency on BCCI). 

But that is not the right way and I believe everybody knows that. It is the international cricket council, not the Indian cricket council. So, ICC should think about all the other teams equally as they do about the big four. That will be the greatest step taken for the better future of cricket. I hope that ICC is able to understand that. This is a major reason why I think the number of teams that play cricket regularly is not increasing. Obviously, the big four do not want their power to go away.

[Minecache]

What is the need for the smaller boards to appease BCCI? As per the schedule, BCCI needs to reciprocate the tours. The case with Pakistan is understandable. But they can't refuse to tour other countries such as Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, West Indies or South Africa. Now it may be true that if the boards are hostile then the BCCI may agree only to a bare minimum of matches. Then it is up to the opposite side to decide, whether they want to go for monetary gain or self respect. And once again, the real reason why revenues are so concentrated in India is due to the fact that ICC refused to popularize the game.

It's a give or take relationship instead of Appeasement.
In my experience BCCI hardly play hardballs with smaller boards in context of bilateral series (unless their plans are clashing with IPL), mainly Ban + SL + WI + SA. One of the reason their relationship with the BCCI are very friendly in comparison to Aus and Eng ( Ex: Aus cancelling the SA's tour and ENG pulling out)

As a sports body, I don't think ICC should have any favorites. But ICC is doing the absolute opposite. As a sports body ICC should have favored the countries that are really struggling and not those countries which have better money. To be honest I think India knows very well how to please the ICC. But it should not be anything like that. And we all know that ICC is also corrupted and they just want money. If they actually care about cricket itself I think they would have increased the number of teams that are playing cricket regularly by now. At least there have been 20 teams playing in the world cup.

[JSRAW]

If they actually care about cricket itself I think they would have increased the number of teams that are playing cricket regularly by now. At least there have been 20 teams playing in the world cup.

They already tried this once in past and burned their hands badly (Big teams got knocked out early). It was epic financial disaster for the ICC that they dropped this idea for good. I am in favour of 16-20 teams WC competition. It has many challenges as well which we already discussed many time in every cricketing thread.