Cricket match prediction discussions

[Sithara007]

@Sithara007 Srinivasan is obviously going to do a terrible job and there will be a lot of corruption no doubt about that. If he is selected again, there is not going to be any improvement for cricket in my opinion. We will be back in the old days again.

BCCI is quite desperate to get the chairman post this time. Ganguly and Shah are not interested, since they can continue with their respective posts in BCCI for another three years. That leaves just 4 eligible candidates - Sharad Pawar, Narayanaswami Srinivasan, Shashank Manohar and Anurag Thakur. We can rule out Pawar due to ill health and Thakur as a result of his ministerial commitments. That leaves Srinivasan and Manohar. And BCCI has quite stormy relations with Manohar. So who is left? Just Srinivasan.

[JSRAW]

Virtually no debate on Srinivasan's dodgy history as everybody is well aware of it.

But you are implying that BCCI was directly responsible for the Associate's suffering. This might surprise you, it was ICC that reduced the fund for associates when they dismantled the BIG-3 system and added Ireland and Afghanistan.

And another fun fact about the 2 board's names you mentioned. In a recent ICC meeting (regarding media rights auction) one of the board was very keen to push for 8 year deal only instead of 4 years. No cookies for any guess that which board and why the focus was on a longer deal.  

Associate funding for 2015-23 cycle was originally set at $62.5 million per year, before Srinivasan with help from Giles Clarke and Wally Edwards reduced it to $26.25 million per year. After Srinivasan was kicked out, the amount was increased to $35 million by Shashank Manohar. But after a deal was reached with the BCCI, it was further reduced to $20 million per year, as Ireland and Afghanistan both walked away with an addition of $5 million each. More details can be found here, in the tweet from Bertus de Jong:

https://twitter.com/BdJcricket/status/962007153169985536

I remember reading an article couple of years back, which used precisely the same data, don't know if this guy was the writer. While I agree this data is accurate but it misses some details.

- Additional funds for Afghanistan and Ireland came from the associate nation's pot. Which means Hamam mein sab nange they (Full members).
- Remember the Tax drama between ICC and BCCI, during the same cycle BCCI paid close to $50-80 Million in taxes and it was directly connected to the same old dispute, hence the monkey balancing from the ICC.

~snip~
Virtually no debate on Srinivasan's dodgy history as everybody is well aware of it.

But you are implying that BCCI was directly responsible for the Associate's suffering. This might surprise you, it was ICC that reduced the fund for associates when they dismantled the BIG-3 system and added Ireland and Afghanistan.

And another fun fact about the 2 board's names you mentioned. In a recent ICC meeting (regarding media rights auction) one of the board was very keen to push for 8 year deal only instead of 4 years. No cookies for any guess that which board and why the focus was on a longer deal. 

@JSRAW I would like to ask a question. Why do we have to choose between two shit? Why do we always have to make a choice between which one is less snitty or which one is more snitty? There are times when we know that none of them are going to be of any use to us in the future. Is it not possible to bring another candidate forward? Is there no one else eligible for this position of work? If any of the individuals you are being suggested for nomination are nominated, I don't see any improvement for cricket.

@Sithara007 Srinivasan is obviously going to do a terrible job and there will be a lot of corruption no doubt about that. If he is selected again, there is not going to be any improvement for cricket in my opinion. We will be back in the old days again.

Because we hear shit, speak shit, and are surrounded by shit. We don't know how to turn shit into fertilizer. Also, fans have no say whatsoever as it's a game of a bunch of guys who wear suits and ties.

So it's all come down to which shit stinks more.

[Sithara007]

~~~~
I remember reading an article couple of years back, which used precisely the same data, don't know if this guy was the writer. While I agree this data is accurate but it misses some details.

- Additional funds for Afghanistan and Ireland came from the associate nation's pot. Which means Hamam mein sab nange they (Full members).
- Remember the Tax drama between ICC and BCCI, during the same cycle BCCI paid close to $50-80 Million in taxes and it was directly connected to the same old dispute, hence the monkey balancing from the ICC.
~~~~

Out of the $15 million deducted from the associate pot, $5 million each went to Ireland and Afghanistan, while $5 million went to BCCI. And this is why I don't side with BCCI so often. This was an open case of the richest member of the association stealing from the poorer members. Ideally, this amount could have come from the funds allotted to ECB or ZC. But why allot extra funds to BCCI from the associate pot? And apart from all this, the funding distribution within the associate pot changed drastically. ICC's new formula favors teams such as UAE and Oman, while being detrimental to teams such as Nepal and PNG.

[JSRAW]

~~~~
I remember reading an article couple of years back, which used precisely the same data, don't know if this guy was the writer. While I agree this data is accurate but it misses some details.

- Additional funds for Afghanistan and Ireland came from the associate nation's pot. Which means Hamam mein sab nange they (Full members).
- Remember the Tax drama between ICC and BCCI, during the same cycle BCCI paid close to $50-80 Million in taxes and it was directly connected to the same old dispute, hence the monkey balancing from the ICC.
~~~~

Out of the $15 million deducted from the associate pot, $5 million each went to Ireland and Afghanistan, while $5 million went to BCCI. And this is why I don't side with BCCI so often. This was an open case of the richest member of the association stealing from the poorer members. Ideally, this amount could have come from the funds allotted to ECB or ZC. But why allot extra funds to BCCI from the associate pot? And apart from all this, the funding distribution within the associate pot changed drastically. ICC's new formula favors teams such as UAE and Oman, while being detrimental to teams such as Nepal and PNG.

So you are saying that BCCI took a hit of $170 Million in revenue funds when BIG-3 got dismantled by Manohar and agreed to take peanuts at cost of Associate members?

I doubt if anyone would buy this argument.

[Sithara007]

So you are saying that BCCI took a hit of $170 Million in revenue funds when BIG-3 got dismantled by Manohar and agreed to take peanuts at cost of Associate members?

I doubt if anyone would buy this argument.

Srinivasan's hatred towards associate members is no secret. This was the first model proposed by Srinivasan and the BCCI:

BCCI wanted to reduce associate funding to ZERO and transfer all those funds to the BCCI. Under their proposal, both Ireland and Afghanistan would receive no funds from the ICC. Shashank Manohar and others wanted to reach a compromise and got something in between. The mindset of the BCCI is very clear from this proposal and I don't think that anyone can defend them.

[Swordsoffreedom]

@Swordsoffreedom I don’t see any other strong candidate to challenge Srinivasan if he’s eligible to contest, and I also doubt that those team’s will unite behind a single candidate. Furthermore do you’ll actually believe that Srinivasan will repeat his old tricks this time too?, because I felt that even if he returned he would be under heavy scrutiny from the media and fans and therefore he would have to strictly follow the rules.

Srinivasan is someone who will find his way around the rules. He has a history and with a person like him, there is always a chance of that history being repeated. I was talking about some new candidate who does not have any kind of history. Obviously, there is no candidate like that. Sadly we have to choose between what we have right now. Even if the media and fans put Srinivasan on, he is not likely to actually be someone who will stick to the rules. Yes, he might follow the rules for a little while, but whenever he gets the chance he will find his way to do all the corruption he wants.

@Sithara007 Srinivasan is obviously going to do a terrible job and there will be a lot of corruption no doubt about that. If he is selected again, there is not going to be any improvement for cricket in my opinion. We will be back in the old days again.

BCCI is quite desperate to get the chairman post this time. Ganguly and Shah are not interested, since they can continue with their respective posts in BCCI for another three years. That leaves just 4 eligible candidates - Sharad Pawar, Narayanaswami Srinivasan, Shashank Manohar and Anurag Thakur. We can rule out Pawar due to ill health and Thakur as a result of his ministerial commitments. That leaves Srinivasan and Manohar. And BCCI has quite stormy relations with Manohar. So who is left? Just Srinivasan.

That's the problem I was talking about. Because of the lack of viable candidates, BCCI is planning to try to make Srinivasan the chairman.  BCCI is obviously obligated to think about their profit. Currently, this is the only way they can ensure the chairman post. I am also quite sure that the BCCI is going to get a lot of help if this ends up happening. But the associate countries are going to be the ones to suffer as usual.

[JSRAW]

So you are saying that BCCI took a hit of $170 Million in revenue funds when BIG-3 got dismantled by Manohar and agreed to take peanuts at cost of Associate members?

I doubt if anyone would buy this argument.

Srinivasan's hatred towards associate members is no secret. This was the first model proposed by Srinivasan and the BCCI:

BCCI wanted to reduce associate funding to ZERO and transfer all those funds to the BCCI. Under their proposal, both Ireland and Afghanistan would receive no funds from the ICC. Shashank Manohar and others wanted to reach a compromise and got something in between. The mindset of the BCCI is very clear from this proposal and I don't think that anyone can defend them.

We are going around in circles now.

You are making point on Pre Shashank Manohar era, which is related to Srinivasan and there is no dispute whatsoever about his wrongdoings, it could be debatable but not forgivable.

And I talked about Post BIG-3 deal in my previous post.

[Sithara007]

We are going around in circles now.

You are making point on Pre Shashank Manohar era, which is related to Srinivasan and there is no dispute whatsoever about his wrongdoings, it could be debatable but not forgivable.

And I talked about Post BIG-3 deal in my previous post.

OK.. let's move on. The funding for 2024-27 cycle will be decided only by mid-2023. But as I pointed out, the ICC chairman election is going to be very important. A few months, there were elections for the three associate representatives. Equilibrium has changed with the election of Pankaj Khimji from Oman. He defeated Mahinda Vallipuram (from Malaysia, who was very vocal about associate rights). This further increases the chances of the BCCI nominee (irrespective of who that is going to be).

[JSRAW]

We are going around in circles now.

You are making point on Pre Shashank Manohar era, which is related to Srinivasan and there is no dispute whatsoever about his wrongdoings, it could be debatable but not forgivable.

And I talked about Post BIG-3 deal in my previous post.

OK.. let's move on. The funding for 2024-27 cycle will be decided only by mid-2023. But as I pointed out, the ICC chairman election is going to be very important. A few months, there were elections for the three associate representatives. Equilibrium has changed with the election of Pankaj Khimji from Oman. He defeated Mahinda Vallipuram (from Malaysia, who was very vocal about associate rights). This further increases the chances of the BCCI nominee (irrespective of who that is going to be).

ICC Chairman election is going to be important for sure.

Having said that I think in the next term whole narrative is going to be dictated by ICC media's right outcome, once it gets public. I have a feeling that lots of people in BCCI going to raise this issue.

[Sithara007]

ICC Chairman election is going to be important for sure.

Having said that I think in the next term whole narrative is going to be dictated by ICC media's right outcome, once it gets public. I have a feeling that lots of people in BCCI going to raise this issue.

Back in 2018, the WICB raised a few important issues during the ICC conference, such as fair distribution of ICC revenues, pooled broadcast rights, distribution of revenues from bilateral series between both the participating boards and more wider distribution of hosting rights. Apart from the WICB, some of the other smaller boards such as PCB and SLCB are also quite vocal on this aspect. But the problem is that they never managed to get the required majority support, as some of the smaller boards always side with the BCCI (Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Oman.etc).

[JSRAW]

ICC Chairman election is going to be important for sure.

Having said that I think in the next term whole narrative is going to be dictated by ICC media's right outcome, once it gets public. I have a feeling that lots of people in BCCI going to raise this issue.

Back in 2018, the WICB raised a few important issues during the ICC conference, such as fair distribution of ICC revenues, pooled broadcast rights, distribution of revenues from bilateral series between both the participating boards and more wider distribution of hosting rights. Apart from the WICB, some of the other smaller boards such as PCB and SLCB are also quite vocal on this aspect. But the problem is that they never managed to get the required majority support, as some of the smaller boards always side with the BCCI (Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Oman.etc).

Kinda amazing everyone wants fair distribution but no stakeholders talk about how to bring a fair amount of money to the table from broadcasting deals be it from ICC tournaments or Bilateral. Only reason BCCI opposes every such proposal. In their point of view, this all seems to be predatory behavior.

I can't even blame them if we look at numbers. They are contributing close to 70%-80% and receive 15%-18% money back. In contrast, its 3 neighboring countries contribute 1-2% at best and walk away with almost 20-ish% of revenue combined and everyone still shit on BCCI constantly.

The kind of money ICC raised from India in a recent media right auction is way too big and could dictate the drama. My fear is if by any chance in this cycle BCCI's contribution to the ICC revenue pot increases by 10% more (80+10 =90%) then this is going to be a problem for everyone. This will give BCCI immense bargaining power again and what if they decide to boycott ICC tournament? Every Broadcaster will %uck the ICC without any doubt.

[og kush420]

.

The kind of money ICC raised from India in a recent media right auction is way too big and could dictate the drama. My fear is if by any chance in this cycle BCCI's contribution to the ICC revenue pot increases by 10% more (80+10 =90%) then this is going to be a problem for everyone. This will give BCCI immense bargaining power again and what if they decide to boycott ICC tournament? Every Broadcaster will %uck the ICC without any doubt.

Pakistan and england are having a great series after 17 years England team has arrived in Pakistan
Pakistani Cricket board Chairman Rameez Raja has been shown  incredible performance in his career and now as a professiona and has done a great work for the Pakistani cricket

[Sithara007]

Kinda amazing everyone wants fair distribution but no stakeholders talk about how to bring a fair amount of money to the table from broadcasting deals be it from ICC tournaments or Bilateral. Only reason BCCI opposes every such proposal. In their point of view, this all seems to be predatory behavior.

I can't even blame them if we look at numbers. They are contributing close to 70%-80% and receive 15%-18% money back. In contrast, its 3 neighboring countries contribute 1-2% at best and walk away with almost 20-ish% of revenue combined and everyone still shit on BCCI constantly.

The kind of money ICC raised from India in a recent media right auction is way too big and could dictate the drama. My fear is if by any chance in this cycle BCCI's contribution to the ICC revenue pot increases by 10% more (80+10 =90%) then this is going to be a problem for everyone. This will give BCCI immense bargaining power again and what if they decide to boycott ICC tournament? Every Broadcaster will %uck the ICC without any doubt.

BCCI contribute to around 70% of the TV broadcasting revenues, and they get 23% of the ICC funding in return ($405 million out of $1,774 million). ECB receives just 8% and the other tier 1 test nations receive just 7.2% each. In short, they receive almost 3x the revenues when compared to the second placed association. On top of that, ICC has blocked 2.5 months every year from it's calendar for the IPL. IMO, this looks fair for me. If the BCCI asks for more, then obviously the associate nation funding will be decreased even further.

[JSRAW]

Kinda amazing everyone wants fair distribution but no stakeholders talk about how to bring a fair amount of money to the table from broadcasting deals be it from ICC tournaments or Bilateral. Only reason BCCI opposes every such proposal. In their point of view, this all seems to be predatory behavior.

I can't even blame them if we look at numbers. They are contributing close to 70%-80% and receive 15%-18% money back. In contrast, its 3 neighboring countries contribute 1-2% at best and walk away with almost 20-ish% of revenue combined and everyone still shit on BCCI constantly.

The kind of money ICC raised from India in a recent media right auction is way too big and could dictate the drama. My fear is if by any chance in this cycle BCCI's contribution to the ICC revenue pot increases by 10% more (80+10 =90%) then this is going to be a problem for everyone. This will give BCCI immense bargaining power again and what if they decide to boycott ICC tournament? Every Broadcaster will %uck the ICC without any doubt.

BCCI contribute to around 70% of the TV broadcasting revenues, and they get 23% of the ICC funding in return ($405 million out of $1,774 million). ECB receives just 8% and the other tier 1 test nations receive just 7.2% each. In short, they receive almost 3x the revenues when compared to the second placed association. On top of that, ICC has blocked 2.5 months every year from it's calendar for the IPL. IMO, this looks fair for me. If the BCCI asks for more, then obviously the associate nation funding will be decreased even further.

Now you are calling the system fair, on the other hand, all debate revolves around how BCCI is taking all the money.

Your argument is BCCI is taking 3x amount but at the same time they are contributing 70% and You also pointed out ECB and tier 1 test nation's numbers but what about their % of contribution?

Btw 70% is a conservative number as ICC never revealed accurate figures, remember this is the first time they auctioned media rights on basis of region, earlier it was global bid. This time we'll have the correct numbers.

[keyscore44]

.

The kind of money ICC raised from India in a recent media right auction is way too big and could dictate the drama. My fear is if by any chance in this cycle BCCI's contribution to the ICC revenue pot increases by 10% more (80+10 =90%) then this is going to be a problem for everyone. This will give BCCI immense bargaining power again and what if they decide to boycott ICC tournament? Every Broadcaster will %uck the ICC without any doubt.

Pakistan and england are having a great series after 17 years England team has arrived in Pakistan
Pakistani Cricket board Chairman Rameez Raja has been shown  incredible performance in his career and now as a professiona and has done a great work for the Pakistani cricket

It is true that when playing Pakistan team, the big teams of the world worry about how they will beat Pakistan. Pakistan's board president must be applauded for reaching this stage. He managed his team beautifully. Due to which Pakistan cricket has reached a good stage in the world.

[rojan]

.

The kind of money ICC raised from India in a recent media right auction is way too big and could dictate the drama. My fear is if by any chance in this cycle BCCI's contribution to the ICC revenue pot increases by 10% more (80+10 =90%) then this is going to be a problem for everyone. This will give BCCI immense bargaining power again and what if they decide to boycott ICC tournament? Every Broadcaster will %uck the ICC without any doubt.

Pakistan and england are having a great series after 17 years England team has arrived in Pakistan
Pakistani Cricket board Chairman Rameez Raja has been shown  incredible performance in his career and now as a professiona and has done a great work for the Pakistani cricket

It is true that when playing Pakistan team, the big teams of the world worry about how they will beat Pakistan. Pakistan's board president must be applauded for reaching this stage. He managed his team beautifully. Due to which Pakistan cricket has reached a good stage in the world.

Pakistan is in a good position now. Pakistan is a very good team they have built. I think Pakistan has some players who play very well in every match.  But if we talk about Pakistan bowlers, they are fine in terms of bowling. They are very strong in terms of Pakistan bowling.  They will not lose batting.  I think overall they have been a very good team Pakistan.

[Ayers]

Kinda amazing everyone wants fair distribution but no stakeholders talk about how to bring a fair amount of money to the table from broadcasting deals be it from ICC tournaments or Bilateral. Only reason BCCI opposes every such proposal. In their point of view, this all seems to be predatory behavior.

I can't even blame them if we look at numbers. They are contributing close to 70%-80% and receive 15%-18% money back. In contrast, its 3 neighboring countries contribute 1-2% at best and walk away with almost 20-ish% of revenue combined and everyone still shit on BCCI constantly.

The kind of money ICC raised from India in a recent media right auction is way too big and could dictate the drama. My fear is if by any chance in this cycle BCCI's contribution to the ICC revenue pot increases by 10% more (80+10 =90%) then this is going to be a problem for everyone. This will give BCCI immense bargaining power again and what if they decide to boycott ICC tournament? Every Broadcaster will %uck the ICC without any doubt.

BCCI contribute to around 70% of the TV broadcasting revenues, and they get 23% of the ICC funding in return ($405 million out of $1,774 million). ECB receives just 8% and the other tier 1 test nations receive just 7.2% each. In short, they receive almost 3x the revenues when compared to the second placed association. On top of that, ICC has blocked 2.5 months every year from it's calendar for the IPL. IMO, this looks fair for me. If the BCCI asks for more, then obviously the associate nation funding will be decreased even further.

as a matter of fact, i agree with you that this is fair. the question is, to what extent?
in my opinion, this is a fair deal for BCCI. it is likely that this is also fair to the teams at the top of the pyramid. do you think this is a fair thing to do for everyone?
when i say everyone, i mean the associate countries. in the long run, ICC will be unable to improve the situation of associated countries if they do not care about them. at some point, the revenue for the ICC is not going to improve for the foreseeable future. it is true that ICC may be forced to run as a non-profit project for some time if it gives more funds to the associate countries than it has been doing. after that, it will be worth it in the end.

[YinShuiSiYuan]

Pakistan is in a good position now. Pakistan is a very good team they have built. I think Pakistan has some players who play very well in every match.  But if we talk about Pakistan bowlers, they are fine in terms of bowling. They are very strong in terms of Pakistan bowling.  They will not lose batting.  I think overall they have been a very good team Pakistan.

Really it's only me or is there someone else alone who doesn't know what you are trying to say? Yes we are all here for post count of our bounties but our posts should make some sense.
Meanwhile, Pakistan hasn't played ODI and test cricket for quite a while so it's difficult to say how they are in ODI format.

[eaLiTy]

~
Meanwhile, Pakistan hasn't played ODI and test cricket for quite a while so it's difficult to say how they are in ODI format.

The last Test series Pakistan played was their tour to Sri Lanka and Pakistan won the first match and Sri Lanka won the second one and tied the series and it was in July. Pakistan toured Netherlands in August and played 3 ODI, even though it was not high scoring matches the bowlers were good enough to defeat Netherlands. With every team focusing on T20 World Cup there is not much Test and ODI until that time.

[YinShuiSiYuan]

~
Meanwhile, Pakistan hasn't played ODI and test cricket for quite a while so it's difficult to say how they are in ODI format.

The last Test series Pakistan played was their tour to Sri Lanka and Pakistan won the first match and Sri Lanka won the second one and tied the series and it was in July. Pakistan toured Netherlands in August and played 3 ODI, even though it was not high scoring matches the bowlers were good enough to defeat Netherlands. With every team focusing on T20 World Cup there is not much Test and ODI until that time.

You are right. There was a game between Netherlands and Pakistan in which Pakistan just scored 206 runs and it was bowlers that saved the day for Pakistan. From both these tour of Srilanka and Netherlands its very much clear that Pakistan is not a good test and odi side.