T20 and T20I cricket prediction and discussion

[GbitG]

India has a population of 1.3-1.4 billion, which is almost 8 times that of Pakistan. It automatically means that the market for cricket there is much larger than that in any other country. Even if the PCB had launched PSL at an earlier date (which I really doubt whether they could have done, given the lack of interest from SENA players to visit that country), I don't think that it could have overtaken IPL at any point. IPL is entirely another level, compared to the other leagues such as BBL, Hundred, BPL, PSL, CPL and SLPL.

I once saw an Indian spectator holding a board saying " indians have three Gods. Cricket, Cinema and Bhagvan". Indians are two much crazy for cricket and when when 1.3 billion people get crazy for something it's market automatically go up. You can see craze of cricket in Pakistan in recent WI series. There is hardly any spectator in the ground.

Even right now no one can compete with Indian craze but sometime quality also matters in West Indies series mostly peoples were already predicting this series is going to be whitewashed so just because of this there were no interest and secondly Covid-19 restrictions are still having some big impact just because of these factors we have very fewer fans, but peoples still love cricket and enjoying. In Pakistan now mostly peoples love to enjoy at home with family which is also now very good way of enjoying and having some good time with family, hopefully in near future things could be better and more peoples will be able to watch games in stadiums.

[Sithara007]

@Sithara007 IPL is no longer just about cricket it’s about selling ad spaces at the highest rate, merchandise products and earn solid revenues etc and I don’t think Pakistan could have managed that even if they started earlier. Furthermore the reason IPL was and is successful is because they created additional revenue for all the participating boards and player’s, and I doubt that any other board could have managed to do it so well.

Old Link but explains how other board’s earn from IPL:

https://www.crictracker.com/ipl-increase-in-international-cricket-boards-share-to-cost-24-64-crores/

Foreign boards earning money from IPL is a good thing, as it keeps them afloat financially. However, this share is not uniformly distributed. From the link posted by Juggy777 above, it is clear that out of the ₹246.4 million ($3.28 million), some ₹191.3 million ($2.55 million) in 2018 season was paid to the Australian board. Other boards are just getting the bread crumbs. For example, Cricket Nepal received ₹400,000 ($5,000). Ideally the IPL share should go to the ICC and should be distributed in a more even way.

[galambo]

Even right now no one can compete with Indian craze but sometime quality also matters in West Indies series mostly peoples were already predicting this series is going to be whitewashed so just because of this there were no interest and secondly Covid-19 restrictions are still having some big impact just because of these factors we have very fewer fans, but peoples still love cricket and enjoying. In Pakistan now mostly peoples love to enjoy at home with family which is also now very good way of enjoying and having some good time with family, hopefully in near future things could be better and more peoples will be able to watch games in stadiums.

In India film industry is so successful because people goes to cinema halls to see the movies. Same for cricket, people loves to go to cricket grounds to see the match. This attracts sponsors and revenue generation goes up. In India even matches of domestic level has more crowd then what Pakistan wee in International matches. Had this WI series in India, we will still see a jam pack stadium.

[teosanru]

@Sithara007 IPL is no longer just about cricket it’s about selling ad spaces at the highest rate, merchandise products and earn solid revenues etc and I don’t think Pakistan could have managed that even if they started earlier. Furthermore the reason IPL was and is successful is because they created additional revenue for all the participating boards and player’s, and I doubt that any other board could have managed to do it so well.

Old Link but explains how other board’s earn from IPL:

https://www.crictracker.com/ipl-increase-in-international-cricket-boards-share-to-cost-24-64-crores/

Foreign boards earning money from IPL is a good thing, as it keeps them afloat financially. However, this share is not uniformly distributed. From the link posted by Juggy777 above, it is clear that out of the ₹246.4 million ($3.28 million), some ₹191.3 million ($2.55 million) in 2018 season was paid to the Australian board. Other boards are just getting the bread crumbs. For example, Cricket Nepal received ₹400,000 ($5,000). Ideally the IPL share should go to the ICC and should be distributed in a more even way.

Revenues around the world of cricket are split entirely based on the viewership and popularity, in this case, also it's basically the proportion of salaries of players that the boards are earning, as we all know it's primarily the Australian and English players who dominate IPL it's obvious that they are going to get a much larger chunk as compared to others, Nepal board is lucky that they are having that one player because of which they are getting even this much amount because there are many boards which aren't really getting anything. But this type of revenue sharing with boards would ensure one thing that the boards would avoid keeping any international fixtures at the time of IPL to ensure that their players play in IPL.

[galambo]

Revenues around the world of cricket are split entirely based on the viewership and popularity, in this case, also it's basically the proportion of salaries of players that the boards are earning, as we all know it's primarily the Australian and English players who dominate IPL it's obvious that they are going to get a much larger chunk as compared to others, Nepal board is lucky that they are having that one player because of which they are getting even this much amount because there are many boards which aren't really getting anything. But this type of revenue sharing with boards would ensure one thing that the boards would avoid keeping any international fixtures at the time of IPL to ensure that their players play in IPL.

Sandeep Lamichhane of Nepal remain unsold in ipl 2021 and that makes no associate country in ipl for the first time in 5 years. Cricket is not regulated like other sports football, basketball. Its big 3 that decides most of cricketing matters. It's ICC that closes its calender for ipl, so he must check how it's governed.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/emergingcricket.com/news/lamichhane-and-others-go-unsold-in-ipl-auction/amp/

[JSRAW]

~snip~

Foreign boards earning money from IPL is a good thing, as it keeps them afloat financially. However, this share is not uniformly distributed. From the link posted by Juggy777 above, it is clear that out of the ₹246.4 million ($3.28 million), some ₹191.3 million ($2.55 million) in 2018 season was paid to the Australian board. Other boards are just getting the bread crumbs. For example, Cricket Nepal received ₹400,000 ($5,000). Ideally the IPL share should go to the ICC and should be distributed in a more even way.

Just for more clarity. Its not IPL revenue sharing model but based on every sold foreign players. For example if player A gets 2 million in auction then his respective board will receive 15-20% fees.

Speaking of ICC, they did requested IPL share from the BCCI (actual revenue share) but BCCI politely told them to fuck off.

[mm2543363580]

Just for more clarity. Its not IPL revenue sharing model but based on every sold foreign players. For example if player A gets 2 million in auction then his respective board will receive 15-20% fees.

Speaking of ICC, they did requested IPL share from the BCCI (actual revenue share) but BCCI politely told them to fuck off.

That's why boards are willingly sacrificing there players for IPL over bilateral series. IPL is a win-win situation for players, boards, officials, commentators, TV rights and much more. The way IPL is going I am sure BCCI control over the cricket will further tighten. ICC is under the complete control of Big3 and as long as Big3 are happy ICC wont interfere in IPL.

[pakhitheboss]

Just for more clarity. Its not IPL revenue sharing model but based on every sold foreign players. For example if player A gets 2 million in auction then his respective board will receive 15-20% fees.

Speaking of ICC, they did requested IPL share from the BCCI (actual revenue share) but BCCI politely told them to fuck off.

That's why boards are willingly sacrificing there players for IPL over bilateral series. IPL is a win-win situation for players, boards, officials, commentators, TV rights and much more. The way IPL is going I am sure BCCI control over the cricket will further tighten. ICC is under the complete control of Big3 and as long as Big3 are happy ICC wont interfere in IPL.

Obviously, ICC would not interfere as the Big 3 is the biggest revenue generator for ICC and especially BCCI. IPL is the biggest revenue generator for BCCI and therefore they are willing to sacrifice bilateral matches. If everyone is getting benefited then why will they move to something else? To date, the viewership of IPL has not decreased it has been increasing every year.

[Sithara007]

Just for more clarity. Its not IPL revenue sharing model but based on every sold foreign players. For example if player A gets 2 million in auction then his respective board will receive 15-20% fees.

Speaking of ICC, they did requested IPL share from the BCCI (actual revenue share) but BCCI politely told them to fuck off.

Yes.. true. And since the players are mostly from countries such as Australia, West Indies and South Africa, the respective boards benefit the most. Personally I believe that the ICC should come up with a law stating that 10% of the players salaries should go to them. They can then distribute this amount more evenly. ICC is blocking two months of international calendar just for the IPL, so they have valid reasons in case they make such a demand. How the BCCI will react to it is entirely another topic.

[JSRAW]

Just for more clarity. Its not IPL revenue sharing model but based on every sold foreign players. For example if player A gets 2 million in auction then his respective board will receive 15-20% fees.

Speaking of ICC, they did requested IPL share from the BCCI (actual revenue share) but BCCI politely told them to fuck off.

Yes.. true. And since the players are mostly from countries such as Australia, West Indies and South Africa, the respective boards benefit the most. Personally I believe that the ICC should come up with a law stating that 10% of the players salaries should go to them. They can then distribute this amount more evenly. ICC is blocking two months of international calendar just for the IPL, so they have valid reasons in case they make such a demand. How the BCCI will react to it is entirely another topic.

ICC already slashed BCCI's share by 30-40% and I believe if by any chance ICC tries to dictate terms on IPL then its not going to sit well with the BCCI. What if BCCI feel threaten and decided to retaliate by ignoring ICC tournament. If it happens then all major brands also going to pull out, the best ICC could do is ban BCCI but we all know what would happen after that.

 

[teosanru]

Revenues around the world of cricket are split entirely based on the viewership and popularity, in this case, also it's basically the proportion of salaries of players that the boards are earning, as we all know it's primarily the Australian and English players who dominate IPL it's obvious that they are going to get a much larger chunk as compared to others, Nepal board is lucky that they are having that one player because of which they are getting even this much amount because there are many boards which aren't really getting anything. But this type of revenue sharing with boards would ensure one thing that the boards would avoid keeping any international fixtures at the time of IPL to ensure that their players play in IPL.

Sandeep Lamichhane of Nepal remain unsold in ipl 2021 and that makes no associate country in ipl for the first time in 5 years. Cricket is not regulated like other sports football, basketball. Its big 3 that decides most of cricketing matters. It's ICC that closes its calender for ipl, so he must check how it's governed.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/emergingcricket.com/news/lamichhane-and-others-go-unsold-in-ipl-auction/amp/

Football is regulated? Who said this? It's just that there is no single superpower in Football, the Barclays is equally popular as la liga and la liga is just about equally popular to copa America. This ensures that there is no power disputes among the countries, moreover football is much much more commercial than cricket, international tours are a rarity in football, it's all about the franchisee leagues and because all franchise leagues run at same time the scheduling thing rarely matters.

[Theones]

Football is regulated? Who said this? It's just that there is no single superpower in Football, the Barclays is equally popular as la liga and la liga is just about equally popular to copa America. This ensures that there is no power disputes among the countries, moreover football is much much more commercial than cricket, international tours are a rarity in football, it's all about the franchisee leagues and because all franchise leagues run at same time the scheduling thing rarely matters.

Slowly but steadily cricket will move to leagues as well. I don't think there is future of bilateral series anymore as players and boards are more interested in money rich leagues. But in cricket leagues only IPL is big fish rest of leagues are not that big. So even if cricket moves to leagues we will still see supremacy of bcci.

[teosanru]

Football is regulated? Who said this? It's just that there is no single superpower in Football, the Barclays is equally popular as la liga and la liga is just about equally popular to copa America. This ensures that there is no power disputes among the countries, moreover football is much much more commercial than cricket, international tours are a rarity in football, it's all about the franchisee leagues and because all franchise leagues run at same time the scheduling thing rarely matters.

Slowly but steadily cricket will move to leagues as well. I don't think there is future of bilateral series anymore as players and boards are more interested in money rich leagues. But in cricket leagues only IPL is big fish rest of leagues are not that big. So even if cricket moves to leagues we will still see supremacy of bcci.

I agree with you on this, except for some major cricketing rivalries there is absolutely no comparison between the viewership that these leagues get and what these bilateral series get, even the bilateral T20 series don't get a lot of viewership if you do a direct comparison of it with any IPL match, same is the case with other countries and their leagues as well, so eventually this would happen for sure. International league tournaments like champions league might also become interesting if every country has good level teams.

[eaLiTy]

~
Slowly but steadily cricket will move to leagues as well. I don't think there is future of bilateral series anymore as players and boards are more interested in money rich leagues. But in cricket leagues only IPL is big fish rest of leagues are not that big. So even if cricket moves to leagues we will still see supremacy of bcci.

Since we are having discussions about how BCCI is controlling cricket, it was not given that power in a golden platter. It was earned strategically the moment BCCI was not able to secure two tickets to watch the 1983 World Cup finals and even though there were many empty seats reserved for elites.

England was having complete power over cricket and India along with Pakistan started the movement to bring the World Cup out of England and with no money to conduct the World Cup in 1987 they took the help of Ambani and that too with the help of political involvement who sponsored the entire event in return of advertisement rights and hence it is called the Reliance Cup in 1987 and other negotiations and that is how changes started to happen in Cricket.

I am seeing these discussions about how BCCI control Cricket for a long time and hence thought of letting everyone know how these changes happened and it was not bestowed upon one fine morning. It was a huge political struggle and canvasing and the politicians including Indira Gandhi who roped in Ambani to sponsor the tournament.

Cricket leagues will have their positions but International cricket will have its value.

[Sithara007]

ICC already slashed BCCI's share by 30-40% and I believe if by any chance ICC tries to dictate terms on IPL then its not going to sit well with the BCCI. What if BCCI feel threaten and decided to retaliate by ignoring ICC tournament. If it happens then all major brands also going to pull out, the best ICC could do is ban BCCI but we all know what would happen after that.

What you have posted is definitely true, but I don't think that it will be very ethical from the part of the BCCI to do so. They are receiving billions of USD from the IPL, and there is no justification to ask for a larger share from the ICC funds as well. Those funds should be evenly distributed (i.e equal amounts for all the test nations and a significant portion should go to the associate nations). There will be damage for the ICC if India pulls out of the ICC tournaments. But financial loss will be there for the BCCI as well.

[og kush420]

Since we are having discussions about how BCCI is controlling cricket, it was not given that power in a golden platter. It was earned strategically the moment BCCI was not able to secure two tickets to watch the 1983 World Cup finals and even though there were many empty seats reserved for elites.

England was having complete power over cricket and India along with Pakistan started the movement to bring the World Cup out of England and with no money to conduct the World Cup in 1987 they took the help of Ambani and that too with the help of political involvement who sponsored the entire event in return of advertisement rights and hence it is called the Reliance Cup in 1987 and other negotiations and that is how changes started to happen in Cricket.

I am seeing these discussions about how BCCI control Cricket for a long time and hence thought of letting everyone know how these changes happened and it was not bestowed upon one fine morning. It was a huge political struggle and canvasing and the politicians including Indira Gandhi who roped in Ambani to sponsor the tournament.

Cricket leagues will have their positions but International cricket will have its value.

It doesn't matter how BCCI has earned it, the discussion is now bcci is using it for its own political gains. They are doing what England and Australia do with small boards previously. As you said bcci and pcb both started moment together but bcci now has zero tolerance towards PCB because of political reasons.

[JSRAW]

ICC already slashed BCCI's share by 30-40% and I believe if by any chance ICC tries to dictate terms on IPL then its not going to sit well with the BCCI. What if BCCI feel threaten and decided to retaliate by ignoring ICC tournament. If it happens then all major brands also going to pull out, the best ICC could do is ban BCCI but we all know what would happen after that.

What you have posted is definitely true, but I don't think that it will be very ethical from the part of the BCCI to do so. They are receiving billions of USD from the IPL, and there is no justification to ask for a larger share from the ICC funds as well. Those funds should be evenly distributed (i.e equal amounts for all the test nations and a significant portion should go to the associate nations). There will be damage for the ICC if India pulls out of the ICC tournaments. But financial loss will be there for the BCCI as well.

Let's say ICC gives nod to another structural reforms on revenue model and every one is entitled (Test playing nation) to receive equal amount of money. for example $120 Million each.

Ireland's population = 5 million    Revenue contribution = 0.00001%  
India's population = 1.35 Billion   Revenue contribution = More than 70%  

Does that look logical at all? I don't buy this argument of "Equal amount" anymore. BCCI contribute 70%-80% of revenue and after collapse of BIG-3 model they gets 20%-28% of amount back, if you reduce BCCI share now then it would turn into modern version of colonisation in cricket. Where everyone sucking out resources from only one cricketing nation. BTW BCCI is only reason ICC is able to subsidise every associate nation atm and you really want to kill the golden goose?

[Theones]

What you have posted is definitely true, but I don't think that it will be very ethical from the part of the BCCI to do so. They are receiving billions of USD from the IPL, and there is no justification to ask for a larger share from the ICC funds as well. Those funds should be evenly distributed (i.e equal amounts for all the test nations and a significant portion should go to the associate nations). There will be damage for the ICC if India pulls out of the ICC tournaments. But financial loss will be there for the BCCI as well.

ICC knows exactly whats the financial worth of every board they talk with them accordingly. ICC and BCCI both goes hand in hand, since its ICC who stops cricket for two months for IPL. If India want more share from ICC then ICC need more cricket and new countries joining in. Its best in interest of Big 3 that new countries wont join the cricket eco system.

[teosanru]

ICC already slashed BCCI's share by 30-40% and I believe if by any chance ICC tries to dictate terms on IPL then its not going to sit well with the BCCI. What if BCCI feel threaten and decided to retaliate by ignoring ICC tournament. If it happens then all major brands also going to pull out, the best ICC could do is ban BCCI but we all know what would happen after that.

What you have posted is definitely true, but I don't think that it will be very ethical from the part of the BCCI to do so. They are receiving billions of USD from the IPL, and there is no justification to ask for a larger share from the ICC funds as well. Those funds should be evenly distributed (i.e equal amounts for all the test nations and a significant portion should go to the associate nations). There will be damage for the ICC if India pulls out of the ICC tournaments. But financial loss will be there for the BCCI as well.

Let's say ICC gives nod to another structural reforms on revenue model and every one is entitled (Test playing nation) to receive equal amount of money. for example $120 Million each.

Ireland's population = 5 million    Revenue contribution = 0.00001%  
India's population = 1.35 Billion   Revenue contribution = More than 70%  

Does that look logical at all? I don't buy this argument of "Equal amount" anymore. BCCI contribute 70%-80% of revenue and after collapse of BIG-3 model they gets 20%-28% of amount back, if you reduce BCCI share now then it would turn into modern version of colonisation in cricket. Where everyone sucking out resources from only one cricketing nation. BTW BCCI is only reason ICC is able to subsidise every associate nation atm and you really want to kill the golden goose?

Exactly the point! I have seen a lot of people criticizing how BCCI earns so much while other boards have to sustain with so little, the truth is BCCI helps ICC earns so much which is why it gets more, and if you compare the contribution it gives, it still isn't getting the equitable share.

What you have posted is definitely true, but I don't think that it will be very ethical from the part of the BCCI to do so. They are receiving billions of USD from the IPL, and there is no justification to ask for a larger share from the ICC funds as well. Those funds should be evenly distributed (i.e equal amounts for all the test nations and a significant portion should go to the associate nations). There will be damage for the ICC if India pulls out of the ICC tournaments. But financial loss will be there for the BCCI as well.

ICC knows exactly whats the financial worth of every board they talk with them accordingly. ICC and BCCI both goes hand in hand, since its ICC who stops cricket for two months for IPL. If India want more share from ICC then ICC need more cricket and new countries joining in. Its best in interest of Big 3 that new countries wont join the cricket eco system.

The problem is adding any country to the cricketing ecosystem isn't an easy task, reasons are
1. Cricket is not an individual sport which means if a player in any country no matter how fond he is of cricket wants to play at the international level, he just can't without the help of his cricket board
2. Let's say he is from some American country and joins team America, he will never be able to play at that level of cricket where the legends play therefore won't be able to improve up to that level.
3. Let's say if ICC keeps matches of Associate nations with Cricketing giants, they are not going to get much revenue, so matches would be non-profitable in longer-term making the whole point of cricketing business useless.

[mm2543363580]

What you have posted is definitely true, but I don't think that it will be very ethical from the part of the BCCI to do so. They are receiving billions of USD from the IPL, and there is no justification to ask for a larger share from the ICC funds as well. Those funds should be evenly distributed (i.e equal amounts for all the test nations and a significant portion should go to the associate nations). There will be damage for the ICC if India pulls out of the ICC tournaments. But financial loss will be there for the BCCI as well.

ICC must cut funding's of big boards that are getting too much money from IPL and spend that on under developed countries where there is great potential for cricket like Afghanistan and Nepal. Cricket is not involving more countries in its ecosystem, last time we have a new test nation was Bangladesh in 1999. Since then there is no country getting test status, this clearly tells what ICC is doing.