Cricket match prediction discussions

[laurenB7742]

Even BCCI is claimed as one of the richest and well set organization but sadly too much political influence is having many troubles around them as well which is never been ideal for them because as they have resources and democracy system they need to bring few former players in front which work for them and have good positive changes in this all set up which is surely brought more success and money but rather than work on this here too much political influence and personal likes and dislikes creating every day new headache with the mostly we have big decisions from Supreme Court of India.
Right now they have too many good and potentially strong cricketers those can lead this organization and India can manage things quickly and development can go fast and better with this all just like things working in the USA.

In India, one issue is that the former players themselves are not much interested in administration role. On the other hand, the politicians and businessmen are more than ready to fill that vacuum. And not everyone has the ability to combine sports with business sense. Sachin Tendulkar was a big failure, when he was given such a responsibility earlier. Players such as Rahul Dravid and Javagal Srinath don't want to get involved. Ganguly is one of the few who was willing to take this responsibility and that is why he is the president of the BCCI as of now.

In India, there is a problem in the sense that politicians have a lot of power. A lot of times those politicians are not someone who are well-educated. When it comes to money, they can do almost anything for it. It is a fact that the Indian cricketers are very well aware of. I think that is a big reason why a lot of Indian players do not want to get into any kind of administrative role for the BCCI.

The players are generally well-behaved individuals. And they know that if they are going to be in the administrative role of BCCI it is obvious that they are not going to have the same thought process as a lot of other people/politicians are going to have. That is going to be very problematic for them, to say the least, and their lives may even be at risk as a result. This is due to the fact that Ganguly played his cards well, which is why he is the current President of the BCCI.

[1715487056]

1715487056

[Naficopa]

In India, one issue is that the former players themselves are not much interested in administration role. On the other hand, the politicians and businessmen are more than ready to fill that vacuum. And not everyone has the ability to combine sports with business sense. Sachin Tendulkar was a big failure, when he was given such a responsibility earlier. Players such as Rahul Dravid and Javagal Srinath don't want to get involved. Ganguly is one of the few who was willing to take this responsibility and that is why he is the president of the BCCI as of now.
[/quote]

I think head of any board is purely an administrative role and you don't need former cricketers to fill this role. We see icc select businessmen to be ICC head. BCCI has so far done quite a good job and the credit definitely goes to all of there chairman's.

[kro55]

This is really unbelievable. There is no way any foreign player should even be able to play for the country when he is not a citizen. It is obviously very unfair for any team which cannot afford to bring in foreign players to play for themselves. That's why right now we are watching a huge decline in performance for the teams which are trying to make a team out of native players.

That is why teams such as Kenya and Denmark, which showed a lot of promise earlier died out completely. Including one or two foreigners is still OK (although that is not allowed in other sports). But building a team with 100% foreigners doesn't make any sense. Then how can this team be called as a "national team". I am more surprised that no one is complaining about it. The ICC doesn't care about countries such as Kenya and Nepal, and the test nations are not very supportive as well.

I think I will not even worry about having 5 foreign players on the team. I can let that slide. In spite of that, having 11 out of 11 players be from another country is absolutely unbelievable. It is quite surprising that ICC is not doing anything about this. Why are they not doing anything about this? Is it just money?

There are two things at play here. In the first place, the ICC wants money only. Cricket is not important to them. In addition, the big four do not want too much competition in cricket. To some extent, they control the ICC.

These are the reasons why associate teams are always neglected in cricket, regardless of how much improvement they show in their performance. In the world of cricket, Kenya, Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, and a number of other countries are quite neglected and underachieved.

[Sithara007]

I think I will not even worry about having 5 foreign players on the team. I can let that slide. In spite of that, having 11 out of 11 players be from another country is absolutely unbelievable. It is quite surprising that ICC is not doing anything about this. Why are they not doing anything about this? Is it just money?

There are two things at play here. In the first place, the ICC wants money only. Cricket is not important to them. In addition, the big four do not want too much competition in cricket. To some extent, they control the ICC.

These are the reasons why associate teams are always neglected in cricket, regardless of how much improvement they show in their performance. In the world of cricket, Kenya, Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, and a number of other countries are quite neglected and underachieved.

Ideally there should not be any foreigners in a national team. If there are foreigners, then we can no longer call that team as "national". The ICC just want to show that more countries are playing cricket. They are just trying to fool others, as in 80% of the cases these new teams are comprised of players from India or Pakistan. The ICC claims to have 100 plus countries playing cricket. In reality, the number maybe less than three dozen. All the other teams are completely comprised of foreigners and can't be considered as "national" teams.

[|MINER|]

This is really unbelievable. There is no way any foreign player should even be able to play for the country when he is not a citizen. It is obviously very unfair for any team which cannot afford to bring in foreign players to play for themselves. That's why right now we are watching a huge decline in performance for the teams which are trying to make a team out of native players.

That is why teams such as Kenya and Denmark, which showed a lot of promise earlier died out completely. Including one or two foreigners is still OK (although that is not allowed in other sports). But building a team with 100% foreigners doesn't make any sense. Then how can this team be called as a "national team". I am more surprised that no one is complaining about it. The ICC doesn't care about countries such as Kenya and Nepal, and the test nations are not very supportive as well.

I think I will not even worry about having 5 foreign players on the team. I can let that slide. In spite of that, having 11 out of 11 players be from another country is absolutely unbelievable. It is quite surprising that ICC is not doing anything about this. Why are they not doing anything about this? Is it just money?

There are two things at play here. In the first place, the ICC wants money only. Cricket is not important to them. In addition, the big four do not want too much competition in cricket. To some extent, they control the ICC.

These are the reasons why associate teams are always neglected in cricket, regardless of how much improvement they show in their performance. In the world of cricket, Kenya, Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, and a number of other countries are quite neglected and underachieved.

Because of this, the attitude of ICC become questionable. But according to the name of ICC it was established in 1987. But even after all these years, the limit of corruption here has not decreased but has increased more than before.
A country should have a limit on external players. If all the players are taken from outside then what is the need of that country to play? And it is surprising to think that there is no ICC regulation in this matter.

[justdimin]

Ideally there should not be any foreigners in a national team. If there are foreigners, then we can no longer call that team as "national". The ICC just want to show that more countries are playing cricket. They are just trying to fool others, as in 80% of the cases these new teams are comprised of players from India or Pakistan. The ICC claims to have 100 plus countries playing cricket. In reality, the number maybe less than three dozen. All the other teams are completely comprised of foreigners and can't be considered as "national" teams.

Realities are completely different from ICC claims because they are having no fairness and positive things in this sport which is surely going to be the worst thing which is happening around the world under ICC because I was reading on different sports and their rules which are applying mostly needs a player only can represent adopted country if he plays or stay for around 5 to 10 years or in few cases they have few soft stances but still these are not as we have in ICC.
 
First this was controlled by Australia and England, so they were doing all things which were beneficial for them now it's all under control of Indian influence, so they are using this platform for their own benefit which is surely not favourable for cricket we need a powerful board where all have equal rights and can do positive things for the game.

[Sithara007]

~~~
First this was controlled by Australia and England, so they were doing all things which were beneficial for them now it's all under control of Indian influence, so they are using this platform for their own benefit which is surely not favourable for cricket we need a powerful board where all have equal rights and can do positive things for the game.

The ICC was never fully under the control of BCCI. For a limited period, the mafia cabal led by Srinivasan and Pawar dominated the ICC, but even in this case they were somewhat dependent on support from CA and ECB. And since two-thirds majority was required for important decisions, they had to appease at least some of the tier-2 test nations (especially Zimbabwe and West Indies). On multiple occasions, the BCCI had to bribe some of the smaller boards with offer of tours from the Indian national team.

[kro55]

-snip

Ideally there should not be any foreigners in a national team. If there are foreigners, then we can no longer call that team as "national". The ICC just want to show that more countries are playing cricket. They are just trying to fool others, as in 80% of the cases these new teams are comprised of players from India or Pakistan. The ICC claims to have 100 plus countries playing cricket. In reality, the number maybe less than three dozen. All the other teams are completely comprised of foreigners and can't be considered as "national" teams.

I also agree with @Sithara007 that there should not be any players from another country. That defeats the purpose of a national team. But this problem is not likely to be solved quickly. That's why I think ICC will have to take things slow.

Suddenly decide not to have any foreign players on the team will make the teams which are made up of foreign players lose interest in cricket.

So, I think the ICC can take some action by restricting the number of foreign players to 4-5 players in every team. And that's if ICC actually wants that to happen.

Realities are completely different from ICC claims because they are having no fairness and positive things in this sport which is surely going to be the worst thing which is happening around the world under ICC because I was reading on different sports and their rules which are applying mostly needs a player only can represent adopted country if he plays or stay for around 5 to 10 years or in few cases they have few soft stances but still these are not as we have in ICC.
 
First this was controlled by Australia and England, so they were doing all things which were beneficial for them now it's all under control of Indian influence, so they are using this platform for their own benefit which is surely not favourable for cricket we need a powerful board where all have equal rights and can do positive things for the game.

I think this conversation about having foreign players on the team has been dragged on for quite a long time. Honestly, nothing is going to happen unless the ICC actually wants something to change. I doubt that the ICC will take any action regarding this matter soon. It will obviously be better if they just somehow manage to not have any foreign players in a national team. This would be great for the future of cricket.

[Sithara007]

I think this conversation about having foreign players on the team has been dragged on for quite a long time. Honestly, nothing is going to happen unless the ICC actually wants something to change. I doubt that the ICC will take any action regarding this matter soon. It will obviously be better if they just somehow manage to not have any foreign players in a national team. This would be great for the future of cricket.

ICC is moving in the opposite direction. They were even considering giving test status to teams such as UAE and Oman. Imagine this, UAE and Oman receiving $16 million per year from the ICC, while Nepal and Kenya receiving just $200,000 per year. And they will use these millions to purchase even more players from India and Pakistan, which will force teams with native players such as Nepal to stop competing in international competitions. Rather than any other rule, the eligibility criteria has negatively impacted the associate nations and destroyed the game in their territories.

[BobK71]

I think this conversation about having foreign players on the team has been dragged on for quite a long time. Honestly, nothing is going to happen unless the ICC actually wants something to change. I doubt that the ICC will take any action regarding this matter soon. It will obviously be better if they just somehow manage to not have any foreign players in a national team. This would be great for the future of cricket.

ICC is moving in the opposite direction. They were even considering giving test status to teams such as UAE and Oman. Imagine this, UAE and Oman receiving $16 million per year from the ICC, while Nepal and Kenya receiving just $200,000 per year. And they will use these millions to purchase even more players from India and Pakistan, which will force teams with native players such as Nepal to stop competing in international competitions. Rather than any other rule, the eligibility criteria has negatively impacted the associate nations and destroyed the game in their territories.

Such activities do not only affect the domestic players but can also have a major impact on the cricket fans of that country. I think ICC's initiative is like when a patient is kept artificially alive with oxygen like ICC keeps cricket alive in these countries. As long as this cricket organization would not be responsible, cricket will remain in the stagnancy.

[Juggy777]

I think this conversation about having foreign players on the team has been dragged on for quite a long time. Honestly, nothing is going to happen unless the ICC actually wants something to change. I doubt that the ICC will take any action regarding this matter soon. It will obviously be better if they just somehow manage to not have any foreign players in a national team. This would be great for the future of cricket.

ICC is moving in the opposite direction. They were even considering giving test status to teams such as UAE and Oman. Imagine this, UAE and Oman receiving $16 million per year from the ICC, while Nepal and Kenya receiving just $200,000 per year. And they will use these millions to purchase even more players from India and Pakistan, which will force teams with native players such as Nepal to stop competing in international competitions. Rather than any other rule, the eligibility criteria has negatively impacted the associate nations and destroyed the game in their territories.

Such activities do not only affect the domestic players but can also have a major impact on the cricket fans of that country. I think ICC's initiative is like when a patient is kept artificially alive with oxygen like ICC keeps cricket alive in these countries. As long as this cricket organization would not be responsible, cricket will remain in the stagnancy.

@Sithara007 if ICC had given UAE test status then it would have been a real disaster, and they would have completely lost their credibility. Lastly I’m not totally opposed with country’s outsourcing player’s because it’s extremely difficult to get into India or Pakistan team, and there’re so many talented player’s who’ll never be able to show their talents if ICC scraps this policy.

[JSRAW]

Ganguly is about to resign from the BCCI. Roger Binny is the favorite to replace him soon.

Interestingly BCCI also said that they are not backing Ganguly for ICC chairmanship atm. I don't know what's cooking there.

[|MINER|]

Ganguly is about to resign from the BCCI. Roger Binny is the favorite to replace him soon.

Interestingly BCCI also said that they are not backing Ganguly for ICC chairmanship atm. I don't know what's cooking there.

Clearly visible that Ganguly will not tolerate any corruption. For this reason he is forced to move out of that position. He may actually have difficulty in their corruption for which BCCI does not want Ganguly to come back to that position like ICC chairman. It is generally a matter of giving legality to illegal activities.

[JSRAW]

Ganguly is about to resign from the BCCI. Roger Binny is the favorite to replace him soon.

Interestingly BCCI also said that they are not backing Ganguly for ICC chairmanship atm. I don't know what's cooking there.

Clearly visible that Ganguly will not tolerate any corruption. For this reason he is forced to move out of that position. He may actually have difficulty in their corruption for which BCCI does not want Ganguly to come back to that position like ICC chairman. It is generally a matter of giving legality to illegal activities.

You are reading something else into this ruling, that's not the case here.

His tenure is over. Actually, he overstayed at the BCCI's presidency due to some loopholes or covid delay and change was about to happen anyway.

[Sithara007]

Ganguly is about to resign from the BCCI. Roger Binny is the favorite to replace him soon.

Interestingly BCCI also said that they are not backing Ganguly for ICC chairmanship atm. I don't know what's cooking there.

I understand that Ganguly's performance as the BCCI head was less than satisfactory. But who will be a better choice? I don't think that Jay Shah or Anurag Thakur would be any better than Ganguly. Anyway, it is their headache. But then I don't understand their problem in backing Ganguly for the post of ICC chairman. Now things look a bit more clear for me. A deal has been reached between Jay Shah-Anurag Thakur cabal and the Srinivasan-Sharad Pawar mafia. Jay Shah will replace Ganguly and Srinivasan will replace Barclay.

[JSRAW]

Ganguly is about to resign from the BCCI. Roger Binny is the favorite to replace him soon.

Interestingly BCCI also said that they are not backing Ganguly for ICC chairmanship atm. I don't know what's cooking there.

I understand that Ganguly's performance as the BCCI head was less than satisfactory. But who will be a better choice? I don't think that Jay Shah or Anurag Thakur would be any better than Ganguly. Anyway, it is their headache. But then I don't understand their problem in backing Ganguly for the post of ICC chairman. Now things look a bit more clear for me. A deal has been reached between Jay Shah-Anurag Thakur cabal and the Srinivasan-Sharad Pawar mafia. Jay Shah will replace Ganguly and Srinivasan will replace Barclay.

Roger Binny has some nice reputation, he is considered honest, strict and at the same the polite individual and he gets along with everyone so he's the replacement of Dada.

Not sure about ICC chairmanship backing as I didn't hear anything so far but I guess it's going to be interesting and i won't rule out anyone except Srinivasan-Pawar.

[Vaskiy]

Ganguly is about to resign from the BCCI. Roger Binny is the favorite to replace him soon.

Interestingly BCCI also said that they are not backing Ganguly for ICC chairmanship atm. I don't know what's cooking there.

I understand that Ganguly's performance as the BCCI head was less than satisfactory. But who will be a better choice? I don't think that Jay Shah or Anurag Thakur would be any better than Ganguly. Anyway, it is their headache. But then I don't understand their problem in backing Ganguly for the post of ICC chairman. Now things look a bit more clear for me. A deal has been reached between Jay Shah-Anurag Thakur cabal and the Srinivasan-Sharad Pawar mafia. Jay Shah will replace Ganguly and Srinivasan will replace Barclay.

I don't know how far this is true, but it looks like some sort of issue is their for Ganguly. The ruling government is weak on Ganguly's State West Bengal and they need Ganguly as a key. Here Ganguly isn't supportive and hadn't joined the Ruling government party. This is into discussion for not backing Ganguly.

[Sithara007]

Roger Binny has some nice reputation, he is considered honest, strict and at the same the polite individual and he gets along with everyone so he's the replacement of Dada.

Not sure about ICC chairmanship backing as I didn't hear anything so far but I guess it's going to be interesting and i won't rule out anyone except Srinivasan-Pawar.

I am surprised, because Binny is considered as someone who is close to Sharad Pawar (opposite camp of Shah-Thakur). But then, he is also from the state of Karnataka, which wields a disproportionate influence on the BCCI administration. Jay Shah remains as the secretary, while it is rumored that Arun Singh Dhumal (brother of Anurag Singh Thakur) may become the next chairman of the IPL. BJP leader Ashish Shelar may become the treasurer (which was previously held by Dhumal). And finally for the post of joint secretary, Devajit Saikia is replacing Jayesh George.

[BobK71]

Ganguly is about to resign from the BCCI. Roger Binny is the favorite to replace him soon.

Interestingly BCCI also said that they are not backing Ganguly for ICC chairmanship atm. I don't know what's cooking there.

I understand that Ganguly's performance as the BCCI head was less than satisfactory. But who will be a better choice? I don't think that Jay Shah or Anurag Thakur would be any better than Ganguly. Anyway, it is their headache. But then I don't understand their problem in backing Ganguly for the post of ICC chairman. Now things look a bit more clear for me. A deal has been reached between Jay Shah-Anurag Thakur cabal and the Srinivasan-Sharad Pawar mafia. Jay Shah will replace Ganguly and Srinivasan will replace Barclay.

I don't know how far this is true, but it looks like some sort of issue is their for Ganguly. The ruling government is weak on Ganguly's State West Bengal and they need Ganguly as a key. Here Ganguly isn't supportive and hadn't joined the Ruling government party. This is into discussion for not backing Ganguly.

There is logic in your words. Recent times politics are behaving differently, especially in India. The current government is continuously trying to elect popular celebrities. Moreover, the current government in West Bengal is not getting any support. They may be looking to use Ganguly as that key. Maybe he doesn't agree the proposal and is being forced to step down.

[n0ne]

BCCI New Office Bearers

President: Roger Binny (Karnataka)
Secretary: Jay Shah (Gujarat)
Vice President: Rajeev Shukla (UP)
Treasurer: Ashish Shelar (Maharashtra)
Joint Secretary: Devajit Saikia (Assam)
IPL Chairman: Arun Dhumal (Uttarakhand)

Sourav Ganguly lose board’s trust and below are major reason for being sidelined and his biggest accomplishments was bringing in Rahul Dravid as head coach and VVS Laxman as the NCA director.

There is more to it. Ganguly was close to BJP when he took over from Anurag Thakur.
He was tipped to stand in as BJP’s face in West Bengal elections.
But his refusal to criticise West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee and not joining BJP did not work in his favour.
Despite meetings with BJP top brass besides Home Minister Amit Shah, he kept himself out of politics.

Source : Sourav Ganguly STUMPED & unceremoniously shown the door from BCCI, left completely sidelined in BCCI’s politics

When sports is mixed with politics this is what happens. Just think of Jay Shah, does he know anything about cricket. He's the son of Amit Shah which is the only reason for him being the Secretary. Sports need to be allowed to function independent.