Cricket match prediction discussions

[Vaskiy]

ICC clearly has no intentions of taking cricket to larger levels like Olympics. Let more countries join in and play the cricket that's the only way associate counties can improve there crikcet.

ICC is turned into ICP (International cricket politics) Where conspiracies are hatched against small teams.

This is true, and in particular few countries are in dominance. Why this is happening? All are due to the revenue generated out of cricket. If cricket is taken to Olympics and to other World level meets, automatically there'll be more countries participation. This will make ICC loss its control. Another important thing, few countries that are into dominance will also suffer as more countries make fast progress.

[Sithara007]

This is true, and in particular few countries are in dominance. Why this is happening? All are due to the revenue generated out of cricket. If cricket is taken to Olympics and to other World level meets, automatically there'll be more countries participation. This will make ICC loss its control. Another important thing, few countries that are into dominance will also suffer as more countries make fast progress.

As far as I understand, these are the concerns raised by the BCCI and ICC on Olympic inclusion:

1. Foreigners won't be allowed to represent. Olympics and Commonwealth Games can be participated only by citizens of a particular country
2. Stringent testing against performance enhancing drugs.
3. Cricket board need to report to the national Olympic association for matters related to Olympic Games
4. No automatic qualification. All the teams need to participate in qualifier tournament
5. For the duration of Olympics, the cricket calendar maybe blocked due to unavailability of players
6. Revenue distribution will be decided by the Olympic committee.

[doomloop]

ICC clearly has no intentions of taking cricket to larger levels like Olympics. Let more countries join in and play the cricket that's the only way associate counties can improve there crikcet.

ICC is turned into ICP (International cricket politics) Where conspiracies are hatched against small teams.

Here I agree with @CryptoYar now we can call this ICC as ICP because of their hypocrite political behavior and poor management they need to review about this all constitution if they want to alive in this era which is bringing some strong methods for growing your own things in huge way and can earn big profit, but they are still doing politics which is not helpful for anyone.

For second question why Commonwealth included men cricket brother they have done this, but ICC refuse this which is wired, and I am unable to provide any solid reply about this because if they consult then surely we have many ways to handle this situation but brainless ICC management have no enough time for this all.

[Sithara007]

Here I agree with @CryptoYar now we can call this ICC as ICP because of their hypocrite political behavior and poor management they need to review about this all constitution if they want to alive in this era which is bringing some strong methods for growing your own things in huge way and can earn big profit, but they are still doing politics which is not helpful for anyone.

For second question why Commonwealth included men cricket brother they have done this, but ICC refuse this which is wired, and I am unable to provide any solid reply about this because if they consult then surely we have many ways to handle this situation but brainless ICC management have no enough time for this all.

The Commonwealth guys doesn't have balls and that's why it happened. Look at what happened during the Asian Games. The BCCI and ICC told Asian Games Committee that they will not allow cricket to be a part of the Asian Games in 2014. But the latter told them that they don't care about the permission and went ahead with the inclusion of cricket. India refused to send a cricket team, but the tournament was still a success. All the four test nations from Asia (apart from India) participated in the tournament, along with 7 associate nations.

[CryptoYar]

This is true, and in particular few countries are in dominance. Why this is happening? All are due to the revenue generated out of cricket. If cricket is taken to Olympics and to other World level meets, automatically there'll be more countries participation. This will make ICC loss its control. [..]

90% of the revenue of the International Cricket Council goes from India, which is why the Indian Cricket Board holds the highest dominance over other boards.

The only solution is; There should be maximum number of bilateral series so that other boards should also stand on their feet and not be ruled by only one board.

Here I agree with @CryptoYar now we can call this ICC as ICP

Bro, it's pity that cricket is being used as a political weapon. whereas it was a gentleman's game.

[romero121]

This is true, and in particular few countries are in dominance. Why this is happening? All are due to the revenue generated out of cricket. If cricket is taken to Olympics and to other World level meets, automatically there'll be more countries participation. This will make ICC loss its control. [..]

90% of the revenue of the International Cricket Council goes from India, which is why the Indian Cricket Board holds the highest dominance over other boards.

The only solution is; There should be maximum number of bilateral series so that other boards should also stand on their feet and not be ruled by only one board.

Every cricketing nation needs to be given equally space. India have got more audience for cricket and that's the reason why ICC is dominated by India. When we talk of bilateral series, low ranked teams need to be given opportunity to play against the top teams. Only such match schedules can help in the improvement of the low bottom team's performance.

[vennali]

Every cricketing nation needs to be given equally space. India have got more audience for cricket and that's the reason why ICC is dominated by India. When we talk of bilateral series, low ranked teams need to be given opportunity to play against the top teams. Only such match schedules can help in the improvement of the low bottom team's performance.

Bilateral series do happen and with much more frequency than before. There are a lot more teams playing cricket now and even the smaller teams are playing each other far more than ever. Cricket is flourishing, at least compared to the past but the question is. Is ICC doing enough for the game to be more wide spread and popular? or are the just content with it and just manage the current teams involved and just hope the sport grows organically.

[wiss19]

For me this all is totally useless and waste of time because if you are accepting pressure from ICC about men event and having only 8 women teams even you can arrange more than stop this all and just go ahead with your crap policies don't waste time with this all.

If ICC is ever having any positive attitude through this game then surely they try to work with them and arrange under 19 or under 23 teams from men as well which bring some good and interesting matches with only native players allowed to participate because this is also very important right now, but they are pressuring for no men and only eight women which mean they are never having any solid policy for these games and trying to follow their own agenda.

This is something that I don't understand. In case of football, the governing body has allowed a U-23 competition for Commonwealth Games and Olympics. This serves two purposes at the same time. Emerging and young players get a chance to represent their country, and at the same time the star players can continue playing for their clubs. I am at a loss to understand why the ICC is against this idea? Even a U-19 competition would be mutually beneficial. It will give good exposure to a lot of young players who will represent the senior team in the future.

Surely these questions are creating serious question mark on ICC mindset why they are not encouraging these teams which can bring some good quality and chance for new generation players for having good platform which can help them in future as well, and it's not had any side effects because Olympics and Commonwealth both are allowing these teams with star players able to serve in their clubs and countries can bring their new talent.

I personally check many things for these replies but have nothing positive why ICC is having this dual face for the improvement of this game who is having problem and why we need answers but no one available for this all.

[fuguebtc]

Here I agree with @CryptoYar now we can call this ICC as ICP because of their hypocrite political behavior and poor management they need to review about this all constitution if they want to alive in this era which is bringing some strong methods for growing your own things in huge way and can earn big profit, but they are still doing politics which is not helpful for anyone.
For second question why Commonwealth included men cricket brother they have done this, but ICC refuse this which is wired, and I am unable to provide any solid reply about this because if they consult then surely we have many ways to handle this situation but brainless ICC management have no enough time for this all.

The Commonwealth guys doesn't have balls and that's why it happened. Look at what happened during the Asian Games. The BCCI and ICC told Asian Games Committee that they will not allow cricket to be a part of the Asian Games in 2014. But the latter told them that they don't care about the permission and went ahead with the inclusion of cricket. India refused to send a cricket team, but the tournament was still a success. All the four test nations from Asia (apart from India) participated in the tournament, along with 7 associate nations.

We can find a very good link between ICC and India. ICC said no and India also did not send their team but it was still a success. And this is not only the case in India. I think the four big countries which are playing cricket regularly are very much responsible for cricket not being a popular game worldwide. But this could obviously change if ICC had the balls to take their decisions alone and not depend on others. ICC is the culprit here along with the big four. There is a reason why almost everyone started hating the top 4 cricket-playing nations and this is not going to end well for cricket and also ICC if cricket is not popularized soon enough.

[BobK71]

This is true, and in particular few countries are in dominance. Why this is happening? All are due to the revenue generated out of cricket. If cricket is taken to Olympics and to other World level meets, automatically there'll be more countries participation. This will make ICC loss its control. [..]

90% of the revenue of the International Cricket Council goes from India, which is why the Indian Cricket Board holds the highest dominance over other boards.

The only solution is; There should be maximum number of bilateral series so that other boards should also stand on their feet and not be ruled by only one board.

Every cricketing nation needs to be given equally space. India have got more audience for cricket and that's the reason why ICC is dominated by India. When we talk of bilateral series, low ranked teams need to be given opportunity to play against the top teams. Only such match schedules can help in the improvement of the low bottom team's performance.

I agree with you. The big problem for small teams in cricket is that they do not get chance to play with big teams. That is why big teams are always on top. I think ICC should take action in this regard and create a fixture of the whole countries. Otherwise, it is not possible to expect the progress of cricket. They have to make strict rules that there must be strong and week team series. Otherwise they will not be able to take part in the World Cup. I think if there were such strict rules implemented everyone would agree to play with a small team.

[lixer]

90% of the revenue of the International Cricket Council goes from India, which is why the Indian Cricket Board holds the highest dominance over other boards.

The only solution is; There should be maximum number of bilateral series so that other boards should also stand on their feet and not be ruled by only one board.

Here you need some correction it's not 90% it's about 70% to 75% and just because of cricket is having very limited market India is the biggest country so BCCI is taking advantage of this all which is surely killing many good things.

Even I am in favor that ICC needs to give India big part of profit but still they need to do some good work for other things as well now recently they are asking for 2 to 3 months window for IPL which is surely never been ideal thing but most chances they will have this because B-4 all having big profit from this IPL as they are providing many players now with increase of teams their profit is also going to increase, so there is nothing wrong if they completely favor this suggestion from BCCI in ICC meeting.

Surely cricket is using as political weapon, and it's working in just 3 or 4 countries which is colonial mindset hopefully we will have some positive changes if they want to increase their market and have any positiveness about cricket to spread around the glob.

[Sithara007]

We can find a very good link between ICC and India. ICC said no and India also did not send their team but it was still a success. And this is not only the case in India. I think the four big countries which are playing cricket regularly are very much responsible for cricket not being a popular game worldwide. But this could obviously change if ICC had the balls to take their decisions alone and not depend on others. ICC is the culprit here along with the big four. There is a reason why almost everyone started hating the top 4 cricket-playing nations and this is not going to end well for cricket and also ICC if cricket is not popularized soon enough.

The ICC is currently under the control of the big-4. When Shashank Manohar was the chairman, he was very supportive of the smaller boards. But then, the big-4 managed to install their nominee (a businessmen called Greg Barclay) as the chairman. As soon as he became the chairman, the process for inclusion of cricket in 2028 Olympics got stuck and the application was not made on time. Now it is clear that cricket won't be a part of the 2028 Olympics. Barclay came up with a statement, claiming that he is interested in the inclusion of cricket for the 2032 Olympics. As we all know, he will find some excuse to delay it further.

[Juggy777]

This is true, and in particular few countries are in dominance. Why this is happening? All are due to the revenue generated out of cricket. If cricket is taken to Olympics and to other World level meets, automatically there'll be more countries participation. This will make ICC loss its control. [..]

90% of the revenue of the International Cricket Council goes from India, which is why the Indian Cricket Board holds the highest dominance over other boards.

The only solution is; There should be maximum number of bilateral series so that other boards should also stand on their feet and not be ruled by only one board.

Every cricketing nation needs to be given equally space. India have got more audience for cricket and that's the reason why ICC is dominated by India. When we talk of bilateral series, low ranked teams need to be given opportunity to play against the top teams. Only such match schedules can help in the improvement of the low bottom team's performance.

I agree with you. The big problem for small teams in cricket is that they do not get chance to play with big teams. That is why big teams are always on top. I think ICC should take action in this regard and create a fixture of the whole countries. Otherwise, it is not possible to expect the progress of cricket. They have to make strict rules that there must be strong and week team series. Otherwise they will not be able to take part in the World Cup. I think if there were such strict rules implemented everyone would agree to play with a small team.

I have stopped expecting that ICC will be free from the clutches of the top 3 boards i.e. India, Australia, and England and from ICC point of view these 3 alone contribute a lot to their revenues hence they can’t afford to piss them off. However ICC alone can’t be blamed because boards like WI, SA indulged in corruption and in the process destroyed their reputation and thus lost their power in ICC, plus fans prefer more big 3 matches then watching small teams play hence the big 3 have grown more powerful.

[Sithara007]

I have stopped expecting that ICC will be free from the clutches of the top 3 boards i.e. India, Australia, and England and from ICC point of view these 3 alone contribute a lot to their revenues hence they can’t afford to piss them off. However ICC alone can’t be blamed because boards like WI, SA indulged in corruption and in the process destroyed their reputation and thus lost their power in ICC, plus fans prefer more big 3 matches then watching small teams play hence the big 3 have grown more powerful.

Out of the 20 votes in ICC, the pig-4 controls only around 40%. If the smaller boards unite, then it will be possible for them to stand up to the pig-4. But the problem is that the smaller boards themselves are corrupt and the pig-4 easily manipulate them with offers of bilateral tours. A good example is what happened during the chairman elections. The pig-4 managed to make their candidate the chairman, with help from some of the smaller boards. A deserving candidate and former international player ended up losing to a pig-4 nominated businessman.

[CryptoYar]

Every cricketing nation needs to be given equally space.

The purpose of this organization was to ensure that all cricket teams have equal rights, but quite literally they've failed to do so.

Here you need some correction it's not 90% it's about 70% to 75% and just because of cricket is having very limited market India is the biggest country so BCCI is taking advantage of this all which is surely killing many good things.

Rameez Raja had told in one of his statements that 90% of the International Cricket Council's revenue come from India.

"ICC Is Funded 90% By BCCI, "-- PCB Chairman Ramiz Raja

[Sithara007]

The purpose of this organization was to ensure that all cricket teams have equal rights, but quite literally they've failed to do so.

LOL... that will never happen. Take FIFA for example. All the 211 national associations are having equal votes. World champions Brazil and Argentina have the same voting rights as tiny pacific island of Nauru. But in case of ICC, the voting rights are not equal. The 90 plus associate nations have combined 3 votes, while each of the test nations are having 1 vote each. And the pig4 nations have more than 4 votes combined, because usually the chairman and some other voting members are their proxies.

[fuguebtc]

-.-

The ICC is currently under the control of the big-4. When Shashank Manohar was the chairman, he was very supportive of the smaller boards. But then, the big-4 managed to install their nominee (a businessmen called Greg Barclay) as the chairman. As soon as he became the chairman, the process for inclusion of cricket in 2028 Olympics got stuck and the application was not made on time. Now it is clear that cricket won't be a part of the 2028 Olympics. Barclay came up with a statement, claiming that he is interested in the inclusion of cricket for the 2032 Olympics. As we all know, he will find some excuse to delay it further.

The problem with ICC is that they don't have any balls, to be honest.  They cannot do what they are supposed to because they don't have the authority over all the teams that they should have as a cricket sports body. And that is not going to change for a long time because if you give them the power that you should have had, they are not going to give that power back to you anytime soon. 

This will be a big problem for the smaller teams which are trying to get better and more popular in the world because of cricket.

The bigger teams are certainly not going to allow that to happen. Because they would want to stay in power, if the teams which are not very big are trying to get better, they will eventually get better and it will cause a lot of problems for the teams that are in power. There will be too much competition and the system that the big four adore, is going to fail.

[Webetcoins]

The purpose of this organization was to ensure that all cricket teams have equal rights, but quite literally they've failed to do so.

LOL... that will never happen. Take FIFA for example. All the 211 national associations are having equal votes. World champions Brazil and Argentina have the same voting rights as tiny pacific island of Nauru. But in case of ICC, the voting rights are not equal. The 90 plus associate nations have combined 3 votes, while each of the test nations are having 1 vote each. And the pig4 nations have more than 4 votes combined, because usually the chairman and some other voting members are their proxies.

With due respect I read many pages here on this thread and also check few other things as well now understanding main problem is ICC and B-4 in progress of cricket if these settled and have same rights like associates then surely we can bring some revolutionary changes otherwise it's going to be more troubles in near future and nothing positive can happen with current situation.

ICC need to be like FIFA or any other sports authority which giving equal rights to all nations and if India wants big share then surely they can give them in financial not in any other case because for me, it's their right with having more than 75% revenue coming from their territory. ICC's B-4 also need to understand this all and bring some better changes which will help them as well.

[CryptoBuds]

The purpose of this organization was to ensure that all cricket teams have equal rights, but quite literally they've failed to do so.

LOL... that will never happen. Take FIFA for example. All the 211 national associations are having equal votes. World champions Brazil and Argentina have the same voting rights as tiny pacific island of Nauru. But in case of ICC, the voting rights are not equal. The 90 plus associate nations have combined 3 votes, while each of the test nations are having 1 vote each. And the pig4 nations have more than 4 votes combined, because usually the chairman and some other voting members are their proxies.

With due respect I read many pages here on this thread and also check few other things as well now understanding main problem is ICC and B-4 in progress of cricket if these settled and have same rights like associates then surely we can bring some revolutionary changes otherwise it's going to be more troubles in near future and nothing positive can happen with current situation.

ICC need to be like FIFA or any other sports authority which giving equal rights to all nations and if India wants big share then surely they can give them in financial not in any other case because for me, it's their right with having more than 75% revenue coming from their territory. ICC's B-4 also need to understand this all and bring some better changes which will help them as well.

^^ ICC is absolutely the opposite of FIFA. FIFA always tries to make all the teams feel important and they try to make sure that every team has their say in whatever is happening, they are also trying to get better and eventually get better really quick. 

But in the case of ICC, it is absolutely the opposite. They just care about what is happening in the top 10 and especially abide by every word of the top four, or should I say big 4?  ICC leaves no stone unturned to make the smaller teams feel inferior compared to the other big teams.

[Sithara007]

^^ ICC is absolutely the opposite of FIFA. FIFA always tries to make all the teams feel important and they try to make sure that every team has their say in whatever is happening, they are also trying to get better and eventually get better really quick. 

But in the case of ICC, it is absolutely the opposite. They just care about what is happening in the top 10 and especially abide by every word of the top four, or should I say big 4?  ICC leaves no stone unturned to make the smaller teams feel inferior compared to the other big teams.

FIFA is mostly managed by former players. In case of the ICC, and for most of the national boards, they are being managed by people with hardly any connection with cricket. For around 10-15 years, the BCCI was dominated by businessman N Srinivasan and politician Sharad Pawar. These two were the first to propose the big-3 system to distribute revenues. Now the system has improved slightly, because Sourav Ganguly is the head of BCCI. But many of the state associations in India are still being managed by politicians.