T20 and T20I cricket prediction and discussion

[Tipstar]

That's sound like a good option, every board should stand up against BCCI and force ICC to ban India from the international cricket, so what if BCCI generates 70% of revenue and brings more on the table. I am sure all cricket boards and ICC won't mind reduction of funds once BCCI gets kicked out from the Int community.  

The ICC needs BCCI, as much as the BCCI needs ICC. But that doesn't mean that the BCCI should be given lion's share of ICC revenues, at a time when some of the smaller boards are facing bankruptcy. None of the other sports bodies such as FIFA or FIH follows a similar model. They divide the revenues equally, without thinking about from where the revenues are originating.

BCCI share already took a massive hit but anyway what do you propose in new policy, ICC should follow the FIFA's model?

NZ population is 5 million
Ind population is 1.35 Billion

Sure, kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

What we all need to accept is Cricket is a regional sports. And with the franchise league, we have commercialized it much more than most other sports. People are no longer interested in a quadrennial 50 overs world cup. They want quick and entertaining action, that be complemented in the duration as a regular movie.
India generates the most direct and indirect profit for cricket. ICC is BCCI.
Though I still wish they'd spend more on developing and spreading cricket around the world, but it's their choice, people can live without cricket.

[1714687243]

1714687243

[1714687243]

1714687243

[1714687243]

1714687243

[1714687243]

1714687243

[1714687243]

1714687243

[mersal]

BCCI refused the permission in the past but I am not sure BCCI completely banned Indian players from overseas t20 leagues and other other cricket boards too have just kind of need if they want to participate in T20 leagues organized by other boards.

These measures were implemented when N Srinivasan was controlling the BCCI, and I believe that they should remove this ban. It is very unfair from the part of BCCI to ban the Indian players from the other leagues, when all the other boards allow their players to take part in the IPL. Also, two months every year from the international calendar is devoted to the IPL. None of the other boards get such preferential treatment for their leagues. On top of that, despite the revenue redistribution, the BCCI still receives almost 4 times funds from the ICC when compared to some of the smaller boards such as CSA and NZC. The BCCI should not get too greedy and arrogant. If they do that, then the other boards may gang up against them.

If other boards ban their players from playing IPL they will leave their boards because of the money. Indian players are happy with BCCI decision to ban them from playing with other boards because they know which board is capable of generating the highest revenue.

Not every Indian player is going to find a franchise every year so if someone doesn't get a spot then they should be allowed to play on other leagues so they also will get exposure about their talents which could help them to build their international career.

[Haunebu]

The ICC needs BCCI, as much as the BCCI needs ICC. But that doesn't mean that the BCCI should be given lion's share of ICC revenues, at a time when some of the smaller boards are facing bankruptcy. None of the other sports bodies such as FIFA or FIH follows a similar model. They divide the revenues equally, without thinking about from where the revenues are originating.

It's not correct to compare a sport like Cricket to Soccer in the revenue aspect because they follow different systems. The BCCI are a corrupt board and everyone are aware of that, but that doesn't mean that they don't deserve the lion's share of the revenue.

India is probably the top revenue source for the ICC which is why they deserve the lion's share. However, the BCCI needs to utilize that revenue more efficiently.

[MFahad]

The ICC needs BCCI, as much as the BCCI needs ICC. But that doesn't mean that the BCCI should be given lion's share of ICC revenues, at a time when some of the smaller boards are facing bankruptcy. None of the other sports bodies such as FIFA or FIH follows a similar model. They divide the revenues equally, without thinking about from where the revenues are originating.

It's not correct to compare a sport like Cricket to Soccer in the revenue aspect because they follow different systems. The BCCI are a corrupt board and everyone are aware of that, but that doesn't mean that they don't deserve the lion's share of the revenue.

India is probably the top revenue source for the ICC which is why they deserve the lion's share. However, the BCCI needs to utilize that revenue more efficiently.

I understand that BCCI takes most of the revenue from the ICC tornaments etc but what about Australia and England Boards ? Aren't they also considered as main boards like BCCI. I dont think ECB and ACB can settle on any less revenue as compare to BCCI.

[mersal]

I understand that BCCI takes most of the revenue from the ICC tornaments etc but what about Australia and England Boards ? Aren't they also considered as main boards like BCCI. I dont think ECB and ACB can settle on any less revenue as compare to BCCI.

Here is the revenue share model of ICC

Based on current forecasted revenues and costs, BCCI will receive $293m across the eight year cycle, ECB $143m, Zimbabwe Cricket $94m and the remaining seven Full Members $132m each. Associate Members will receive funding of $280m.

I am surprised to see Zimbabwe in the third position, so how the share system actually works?

[pakhitheboss]

BCCI refused the permission in the past but I am not sure BCCI completely banned Indian players from overseas t20 leagues and other other cricket boards too have just kind of need if they want to participate in T20 leagues organized by other boards.

These measures were implemented when N Srinivasan was controlling the BCCI, and I believe that they should remove this ban. It is very unfair from the part of BCCI to ban the Indian players from the other leagues, when all the other boards allow their players to take part in the IPL. Also, two months every year from the international calendar is devoted to the IPL. None of the other boards get such preferential treatment for their leagues. On top of that, despite the revenue redistribution, the BCCI still receives almost 4 times funds from the ICC when compared to some of the smaller boards such as CSA and NZC. The BCCI should not get too greedy and arrogant. If they do that, then the other boards may gang up against them.

If other boards ban their players from playing IPL they will leave their boards because of the money. Indian players are happy with BCCI decision to ban them from playing with other boards because they know which board is capable of generating the highest revenue.

Not every Indian player is going to find a franchise every year so if someone doesn't get a spot then they should be allowed to play on other leagues so they also will get exposure about their talents which could help them to build their international career.

Indian players not only get paid by the IPL franchise but also by the BCCI. If a player does not get selected by any IPL franchise he is still getting paid by BCCI.

https://www.bcci.tv/articles/2020/news/144219/bcci-announces-annual-player-retainership-2019-20-team-india-senior-men-

The amount is far better than what other boards are paying to their players. Therefore I do not think there is still need for them to go and play for other boards.

[JSRAW]

~snip~

~edited out~
.
Though I still wish they'd spend more on developing and spreading cricket around the world, but it's their choice, people can live without cricket.

If ICC is serious about spreading the cricket world wide then they should introduce 24 team world cup tournament for ODI and T-20 instead of 10-12 teams but no they are not interested as they don't want to repeat 2007 like scenario. 

[mersal]

~snip~

~edited out~
.
Though I still wish they'd spend more on developing and spreading cricket around the world, but it's their choice, people can live without cricket.

If ICC is serious about spreading the cricket world wide then they should introduce 24 team world cup tournament for ODI and T-20 instead of 10-12 teams but no they are not interested as they don't want to repeat 2007 like scenario. 

BCCI don't want to distribute the revenue further with more teams and that is the reason why Cricket was not included into the Olympics as well when all other boards are okay to accept it.If the system goes like this for few more years then next generation may not much interested with watching cricket.

[pakhitheboss]

~snip~

~edited out~
.
Though I still wish they'd spend more on developing and spreading cricket around the world, but it's their choice, people can live without cricket.

If ICC is serious about spreading the cricket world wide then they should introduce 24 team world cup tournament for ODI and T-20 instead of 10-12 teams but no they are not interested as they don't want to repeat 2007 like scenario. 

BCCI don't want to distribute the revenue further with more teams and that is the reason why Cricket was not included into the Olympics as well when all other boards are okay to accept it.If the system goes like this for few more years then next generation may not much interested with watching cricket.

BCCI does not distribute the revenue it is done by ICC and already BCCI is paying more and getting less with the new revenue system in place.

The question is if BCCI is able to generate that kind of revenue why cannot other boards do the same? If other boards have issue in generating revenue why blame BCCI for everything.

[Vishnu.Reang]

India is probably the top revenue source for the ICC which is why they deserve the lion's share. However, the BCCI needs to utilize that revenue more efficiently.

No one is going to deny this. Even I agree that Indian market accounts for more than 60% of the ICC revenues. But the question here is, should the ICC given them a disproportionate share of the funds. We are not talking about revenue that originate from the Indian bilateral tours. We are talking about the revenue from ICC tournaments. Take the example of the T20 World Cup. A total of 16 countries participate in the main tournament, and dozens more take part in the qualifiers. Ideally, the revenue should be divided equally between these 16 countries, with another share going to those teams which failed to quality. But the BCCI want half of the revenue from the world cup. Is this fair?

The other boards are already agreeing to a lot of unjust demands made by the BCCI. They allow their players to participate in the IPL, while the BCCI never allows the Indian players to participate in the other leagues. No major tournaments are conducted during the two-month IPL window, while none of the other leagues, such as BBL and CPL enjoy such largesse.

And the BCCI receives more than $1 billion every year from the IPL (sponsorship, TV rights, gate collection.etc), which they don't share with any of the other boards. And the BCCI is not satisfied even after all this and they want a larger share of the revenues from ICC tournaments as well!

[JSRAW]

No one is going to deny this. Even I agree that Indian market accounts for more than 60% of the ICC revenues. But the question here is, should the ICC given them a disproportionate share of the funds. We are not talking about revenue that originate from the Indian bilateral tours. We are talking about the revenue from ICC tournaments. Take the example of the T20 World Cup. A total of 16 countries participate in the main tournament, and dozens more take part in the qualifiers. Ideally, the revenue should be divided equally between these 16 countries, with another share going to those teams which failed to quality. But the BCCI want half of the revenue from the world cup. Is this fair?

You really don't need to make shit up, this is not true even if we go back to BIG 3 revenue model. Back then (ICC tournament) share distribution was 20 ish%, 4ish% and 2ish% for India, England and Australia respectively. On figures for BCCI it was $593 Million but now it come down to $293 Million, deduction is more than $200 Million What else you are complaining or expecting ?

Plz reread my previous reply to you

The other boards are already agreeing to a lot of unjust demands made by the BCCI. They allow their players to participate in the IPL, while the BCCI never allows the Indian players to participate in the other leagues. No major tournaments are conducted during the two-month IPL window, while none of the other leagues, such as BBL and CPL enjoy such largesse.

The so called other boards you are talking about, they take commission (10ish%) from the BCCI if their players gets sold in the IPL Auction, they even take extra 10% from the players too for NOC.

Comparison with other franchise is not fair IMO. just look at average salary and revenue. Is BBL or CPL willing to spend 3 Million on Virat? if not why would he go there ? just to give you one bizarre example Rishabh pant IPL salary is more than million, on the other hand you can entire squad in BBL if you got million dollar in your pocket. Having said that for BCCI Indian players are assets (in some case domestic players too) and rightly so considering the shit load amount of money they draw from BCCI and sponsors.

And the BCCI receives more than $1 billion every year from the IPL (sponsorship, TV rights, gate collection.etc), which they don't share with any of the other boards. And the BCCI is not satisfied even after all this and they want a larger share of the revenues from ICC tournaments as well!

And why should they share the revenue with the others, its local tournament right?

[Haunebu]

Ideally, the revenue should be divided equally between these 16 countries, with another share going to those teams which failed to quality. But the BCCI want half of the revenue from the world cup. Is this fair?

I wouldn't call that ideal. To be fair, it all comes down to which country contributes the most towards the revenue share and we all know that India leads that list. It's simple really. The more you contribute, the higher the revenue share.

The other boards are already agreeing to a lot of unjust demands made by the BCCI. They allow their players to participate in the IPL, while the BCCI never allows the Indian players to participate in the other leagues. No major tournaments are conducted during the two-month IPL window, while none of the other leagues, such as BBL and CPL enjoy such largesse.

Truthfully speaking, IPL is another league when compared to the tournaments that you mentioned in terms of popularity etc which is why they are in the position to make such demands.

[mersal]

The other boards are already agreeing to a lot of unjust demands made by the BCCI. They allow their players to participate in the IPL, while the BCCI never allows the Indian players to participate in the other leagues. No major tournaments are conducted during the two-month IPL window, while none of the other leagues, such as BBL and CPL enjoy such largesse.

Truthfully speaking, IPL is another league when compared to the tournaments that you mentioned in terms of popularity etc which is why they are in the position to make such demands.

More richer the board then more influence you will have that is applied to this, and IPL mainly designed to cover the summer holidays in India where the younger generation is more compared to other countries that is how IPL got more successful and made people to engage into cricket even if they are not a cricket fan earlier due to local patriotism.

[MFahad]

~snip~

~edited out~
.
Though I still wish they'd spend more on developing and spreading cricket around the world, but it's their choice, people can live without cricket.

If ICC is serious about spreading the cricket world wide then they should introduce 24 team world cup tournament for ODI and T-20 instead of 10-12 teams but no they are not interested as they don't want to repeat 2007 like scenario. 

There are no world class 24 countries who play cricket professionally and if they include 24 teams, don't you think the first round of the world cup will be very boring as it will only be played to eliminate the weak 10-15 teams from the tournament.
Secondly what was the 2007 scenario ?

[JSRAW]

If ICC is serious about spreading the cricket world wide then they should introduce 24 team world cup tournament for ODI and T-20 instead of 10-12 teams but no they are not interested as they don't want to repeat 2007 like scenario.  

There are no world class 24 countries who play cricket professionally and if they include 24 teams, don't you think the first round of the world cup will be very boring as it will only be played to eliminate the weak 10-15 teams from the tournament.
Secondly what was the 2007 scenario ?

We discuss this scenario before " boring play off in case of 20+ team World Cup". Yeah it would be boring may be 1-2 upset here n there but that's the only way to encourage accociate members, forget about test match, just focus on the shorter format.

2007 wc has 16 teams, India and Pakistan got kicked out early, Which resulted economic disaster for ICC and host West Indies.

[BitSat19]

If ICC is serious about spreading the cricket world wide then they should introduce 24 team world cup tournament for ODI and T-20 instead of 10-12 teams but no they are not interested as they don't want to repeat 2007 like scenario.  

There are no world class 24 countries who play cricket professionally and if they include 24 teams, don't you think the first round of the world cup will be very boring as it will only be played to eliminate the weak 10-15 teams from the tournament.
Secondly what was the 2007 scenario ?

We discuss this scenario before " boring play off in case of 20+ team World Cup". Yeah it would be boring may be 1-2 upset here n there but that's the only way to encourage accociate members, forget about test match, just focus on the shorter format.

2007 wc has 16 teams, India and Pakistan got kicked out early, Which resulted economic disaster for ICC and host West Indies.

Now for change of subject can we talk about IPL we have less then 20 hours and after checking few things now I am feeling tomorrow MI are going to win this match as they have some better players and CSK is feeling some pressure after losing two player Raina and Bhaji so what your thoughts about this guys.

[suvo05]

Now for change of subject can we talk about IPL we have less then 20 hours and after checking few things now I am feeling tomorrow MI are going to win this match as they have some better players and CSK is feeling some pressure after losing two player Raina and Bhaji so what your thoughts about this guys.

Both are experienced and key player for their sides. Raina is just 33 now, though he have retired from the international cricket we can hope to see him playing IPL in the next years also. But it could be the last IPL for Bhaji as he will turn 41 next year.
Mumbai Indians will also has lose one of his gem this year. Malinga will not playing for them. Till both the teams has very good players in their benches.

[AB de Royse777]

*Attention*

So, we have a free spot donated by efialtis. Who wants to take it? Quote this post. I will send the link to join.

As you read, please visit the topic and follow the instruction to claim the free spot.

The pool has now 0.093+ BTC! Over 18 participants. It's only 0.001 to join us and enjoy your IPL. Still we have time. So, hurry up!

Prize pot

|

[UmerIdrees]

Ben Dunk, other foreign players ready to play for Lahore Qalandars and we would love to see him in action again. Although there will be only one or two remaining matches for him in this PSL season but still it will be worth waiting the moment.

This is a bad idea to resume the PSL after a long interval of six months. Now for just 2-3 matches, they need to arrange the logistics and bio-bubbles once again. IMO, they should abandon the remaining matches and prepare for next year's tournament. Even the viewership is going to get affected, as the matches will take place at the same time as the IPL.

Not much people other than Pakistan is going to watch PSL if they conduct their remaining tournament at the time of IPL because both have lot of difference and audience.Bio bubble created by IPL team looks good until now and we are just few days away from watching the biggest cricket tournament.

Also it will not effect the much because there will be only 3 to 4 matches in PSL only and people would watch them as they will decide the winner of this year's PSL. Cricket lovers can watch and follow both PSL and IPL at the same time. 

[bryant.coleman]

Also it will not effect the much because there will be only 3 to 4 matches in PSL only and people would watch them as they will decide the winner of this year's PSL. Cricket lovers can watch and follow both PSL and IPL at the same time. 

If the matches go ahead, then there will be significant viewership in Pakistan. But it will end up as a loss making exercise for the PCB. I would like them to cancel the remaining matches and to concentrate on PSL 2021. Else it will create a logistical nightmare. All the players (especially the overseas players) need to be brought in, quarantined and bubbles need to be set up.