Test Cricket Prediction and Discussion Thread [self - mod]

[JohnBitCo]

Ehsan Mani: 'Healthier' to not have next ICC chairman from 'Big Three'. At least someone is able to speak publicly about this.
Common Bangladesh, South Africa , NZ, WI , Srilanka lets protest against  Big 3 manipulations.

Why this all of a sudden? Currently Colin Graves (of the England and Wales Cricket Board) is being considered as the frontrunner to succeed Shashank Manohar, and I believe Mani has some personal grudge against him. What the ICC needs right now is someone who is qualified for the job, and not someone who is selected solely on the basis of "smaller nations" quota.

We have seen how India wants to influence the ICC . And in many cases they are successful . For example ,this time the ICC t20 world cup was not held but the IPL is will be held  . Many people believe that India had a role to play in not holding the world cup this year. They didn't want the world cup to be held  because it would have made the IPL uncertain. For this type of reason we need someone who is qualified for this post and  no one/country can influence him . If he is impartial then it does not matter that where is he from .

This is past now. We will have IPL and no T20 WC this year. Its fair enough because it wont be practical to gather all the teams in one venue when pandemic is not over yet, however I understand other reasons for this.

BCCI may choose to leave ICC and setup another international cricket body and definitely many nations would follow BCCI if not all. This would technically make ICC useless. So if BCCI can do this it's pretty obvious that ICC will be influenced by them.
 

There are already few teams who play international cricket , around 10 - 12 and we can't afford two separate boards to manage only these 12 teams.
ICC knows this and I hope BCCI won't ever take such a bad decision.

[teosanru]

~snip~

BCCI may choose to leave ICC and setup another international cricket body and definitely many nations would follow BCCI if not all. This would technically make ICC useless. So if BCCI can do this it's pretty obvious that ICC will be influenced by them.
 

There are already few teams who play international cricket , around 10 - 12 and we can't afford two separate boards to manage only these 12 teams.
ICC knows this and I hope BCCI won't ever take such a bad decision.

Yeah such kind of anarchy would obviously destroy cricket but I think ICC and BCCI would definitely come to some sort of ground to resolve their matter. But yes lot of anarchy would obviously mean destruction of cricket.

We have seen how India wants to influence the ICC . And in many cases they are successful . For example ,this time the ICC t20 world cup was not held but the IPL is will be held  . Many people believe that India had a role to play in not holding the world cup this year. They didn't want the world cup to be held  because it would have made the IPL uncertain. For this type of reason we need someone who is qualified for this post and  no one/country can influence him . If he is impartial then it does not matter that where is he from .

There is no doubt that BCCI is causing a lot of damage to the smaller nations, by choking their revenue inflow from the ICC. But why do you think that someone from the smaller nations may be able to do more than what Shashank Manohar has done? Manohar, despite being an Indian national was the mastermind behind the redistribution of the ICC revenues. Without him, the smaller nations would be receiving nothing more than breadcrumbs.

Exactly he was pretty different from previous Chairman Shrinivaasan who was a greedy person, but some people always feel that an Indian would always favour his own home country board but Manohar has gone against all the odds for betterment of cricket.

[bryant.coleman]

Exactly he was pretty different from previous Chairman Shrinivaasan who was a greedy person, but some people always feel that an Indian would always favour his own home country board but Manohar has gone against all the odds for betterment of cricket.

The less talked about Srinivasan, that much better. He was a disgrace. Fellow Indian Jagmohan Dalmiya was the one who did the most for globalizing the sport, when he was the ICC president. The global reach of cricket increased by a great deal during his time. But everything was reversed when people such as Sharad Pawar and David Morgan captured that post. All the good work that was done by Dalmiya was thwarted. People like Pawar and Srinivasan pushed cricket back by at least two decades, for their own selfish and greedy motives.

[Indymoney]

Exactly he was pretty different from previous Chairman Shrinivaasan who was a greedy person, but some people always feel that an Indian would always favour his own home country board but Manohar has gone against all the odds for betterment of cricket.

The less talked about Srinivasan, that much better. He was a disgrace. Fellow Indian Jagmohan Dalmiya was the one who did the most for globalizing the sport, when he was the ICC president. The global reach of cricket increased by a great deal during his time. But everything was reversed when people such as Sharad Pawar and David Morgan captured that post. All the good work that was done by Dalmiya was thwarted. People like Pawar and Srinivasan pushed cricket back by at least two decades, for their own selfish and greedy motives.

Dalmiya was really pioneer person in Cricket management he bring some good things which help too much but sadly after him no one capable to do this all so we lost some good which is not recoverable specailly srinivasan was bring many bad things which hurt too much right now if they feel then surely they can take some good changes and give equal rights to all which could be good for ICC and cricket as well.

[bryant.coleman]

Dalmiya was really pioneer person in Cricket management he bring some good things which help too much but sadly after him no one capable to do this all so we lost some good which is not recoverable specailly srinivasan was bring many bad things which hurt too much right now if they feel then surely they can take some good changes and give equal rights to all which could be good for ICC and cricket as well.

Dalmiya was successful in keeping politics away from cricket. But that changed after he was replaced as the ICC president. It was disgraceful that people such as Sharad Pawar managed to become the ICC president. He is known as one of the most corrupt politicians in India and has zero association with cricket. His term was a big setback for the sports. Hopefully such people will never manage to get to that post again, since the voting structure has been changed.

[pakhitheboss]

We have seen how India wants to influence the ICC . And in many cases they are successful . For example ,this time the ICC t20 world cup was not held but the IPL is will be held  . Many people believe that India had a role to play in not holding the world cup this year. They didn't want the world cup to be held  because it would have made the IPL uncertain. For this type of reason we need someone who is qualified for this post and  no one/country can influence him . If he is impartial then it does not matter that where is he from .

There is no doubt that BCCI is causing a lot of damage to the smaller nations, by choking their revenue inflow from the ICC. But why do you think that someone from the smaller nations may be able to do more than what Shashank Manohar has done? Manohar, despite being an Indian national was the mastermind behind the redistribution of the ICC revenues. Without him, the smaller nations would be receiving nothing more than breadcrumbs.

  still Manohar is the culprit for some members here.

Exactly he was pretty different from previous Chairman Shrinivaasan who was a greedy person, but some people always feel that an Indian would always favour his own home country board but Manohar has gone against all the odds for betterment of cricket.

Shrinivaasan was removed from the BCCI and legally he has been dealt with. So, there is no need to drag him here as he will never come into cricket spotlight in the future.

Dalmiya was successful in keeping politics away from cricket. But that changed after he was replaced as the ICC president. It was disgraceful that people such as Sharad Pawar managed to become the ICC president. He is known as one of the most corrupt politicians in India and has zero association with cricket. His term was a big setback for the sports. Hopefully such people will never manage to get to that post again, since the voting structure has been changed.

He is the reason why Dada and MSD are part of Indian cricket. Do not know a lot about Sharad Pawar but he is known to be the most corrupt politician till date.

[Swordsoffreedom]

Dalmiya was really pioneer person in Cricket management he bring some good things which help too much but sadly after him no one capable to do this all so we lost some good which is not recoverable specailly srinivasan was bring many bad things which hurt too much right now if they feel then surely they can take some good changes and give equal rights to all which could be good for ICC and cricket as well.

Dalmiya was successful in keeping politics away from cricket. But that changed after he was replaced as the ICC president. It was disgraceful that people such as Sharad Pawar managed to become the ICC president. He is known as one of the most corrupt politicians in India and has zero association with cricket. His term was a big setback for the sports. Hopefully such people will never manage to get to that post again, since the voting structure has been changed.

you are right. we will not want to see this type of corrupt people as the president of the ICC. We need some good and neutral person.  Who, will look at all countries in the same way and think of the good of all country.  We don't want to see the impact of BCCI on ICC anymore. We want the ICC work independently.

[BitSat19]

you are right . we will not  want to see this type of corrupt people as the president of the ICC . We need some good and neutral person .  who will look at all countries in the same way and think of the good of all country .  We don't want to see the impact of BCCI on ICC anymore . We want the ICC work independently

It has been more than three months since Shashank Manohar resigned from the post of ICC Chairman. Till now, they are not able to find someone to be his successor. Shashank did a great job, undoing the damage previously done by incompetent and corrupt people such as Srinivasan and Pawar. We need someone to take his work forward. Someone who cares about the sport, and at the same time having a clean background.

BCCI is Gold Mine for Indian Politicians still many involve in through relatives or byself so its not going to stopped in near future because there is no law for this and ICC also have no law that they can prevent any one to become ICC President this need some good deep roots or persons like Ganguly because just with this we can stop corruption and corrupt peoples.

[bryant.coleman]

BCCI is Gold Mine for Indian Politicians still many involve in through relatives or byself so its not going to stopped in near future because there is no law for this and ICC also have no law that they can prevent any one to become ICC President this need some good deep roots or persons like Ganguly because just with this we can stop corruption and corrupt peoples.

Rather than Ganguly, I would like to see Sachin Tendulkar as the chairman of the ICC. Ganguly is already holding a powerful position (as he is the current head of the Board of Control for Cricket in India). I am sure that ex-players such as Sachin and Saurav are a hundred times better than businessmen such as N Srinivasan, Sharad Pawar and Colin Graves.

[JSRAW]

~snip~

Rather than Ganguly, I would like to see Sachin Tendulkar as the chairman of the ICC. Ganguly is already holding a powerful position (as he is the current head of the Board of Control for Cricket in India). I am sure that ex-players such as Sachin and Saurav are a hundred times better than businessmen such as N Srinivasan, Sharad Pawar and Colin Graves.

Sachin is the worst choice and if i dare to say one of the shitty administrator, he can't even make into top 50 contenders list for iCC chief or any administrator post for that matter.

[bryant.coleman]

Sachin is the worst choice and if i dare to say one of the shitty administrator, he can't even make into top 50 contenders list for iCC chief or any administrator post for that matter.

That is surprising. I don't have much information about what he is doing after his retirement. But I read that he served as a member of parliament for sometime and therefore thought that he may be having some administration experience. In case Sachin is not suitable for the job, we still have a number of ex-players who can be considered. First one comes to my mind right now is Kumar Sangakkara.

[JSRAW]

Sachin is the worst choice and if i dare to say one of the shitty administrator, he can't even make into top 50 contenders list for iCC chief or any administrator post for that matter.

That is surprising. I don't have much information about what he is doing after his retirement. But I read that he served as a member of parliament for sometime and therefore thought that he may be having some administration experience. In case Sachin is not suitable for the job, we still have a number of ex-players who can be considered. First one comes to my mind right now is Kumar Sangakkara.

He did but he was not good fit overall, i don't blame him tho. Sangakkara would make excellent chief but its looks like he's not interested right now, there were rumor running around about him applying for ICC presidency but he rejected all the speculations via twitter.

[eaLiTy]

But I read that he served as a member of parliament for sometime and therefore thought that he may be having some administration experience. In case Sachin is not suitable for the job, we still have a number of ex-players who can be considered. First one comes to my mind right now is Kumar Sangakkara.

Sachin was nominated in arts quota and hence became the member of parliament and he never displayed any administrative skills and i do not think that he will be interested in the job, Kumar Sangakkara on the other hand is a lawyer and he will be the right candidate for the post.

[BitSat19]

But I read that he served as a member of parliament for sometime and therefore thought that he may be having some administration experience. In case Sachin is not suitable for the job, we still have a number of ex-players who can be considered. First one comes to my mind right now is Kumar Sangakkara.

Sachin was nominated in arts quota and hence became the member of parliament and he never displayed any administrative skills and i do not think that he will be interested in the job, Kumar Sangakkara on the other hand is a lawyer and he will be the right candidate for the post.

If we have player like Sangakkara then surely this is going to be best for cricket and spirit of game as he is really capable of handling many things but currently he is not interested in this may take some time and then we have person like this in administration.

[MFahad]

BCCI is Gold Mine for Indian Politicians still many involve in through relatives or byself so its not going to stopped in near future because there is no law for this and ICC also have no law that they can prevent any one to become ICC President this need some good deep roots or persons like Ganguly because just with this we can stop corruption and corrupt peoples.

Rather than Ganguly, I would like to see Sachin Tendulkar as the chairman of the ICC. Ganguly is already holding a powerful position (as he is the current head of the Board of Control for Cricket in India). I am sure that ex-players such as Sachin and Saurav are a hundred times better than businessmen such as N Srinivasan, Sharad Pawar and Colin Graves.

How do they select the the chairman of ICC ? Doesn't all the boards have have a say in selecting the chairperson of ICC ?

There should be a mechanism of voting among all the cricket boards so that no one can influence on the decision of selecting the chairman of ICC.

[Ayiranorea]

BCCI is Gold Mine for Indian Politicians still many involve in through relatives or byself so its not going to stopped in near future because there is no law for this and ICC also have no law that they can prevent any one to become ICC President this need some good deep roots or persons like Ganguly because just with this we can stop corruption and corrupt peoples.

Rather than Ganguly, I would like to see Sachin Tendulkar as the chairman of the ICC. Ganguly is already holding a powerful position (as he is the current head of the Board of Control for Cricket in India). I am sure that ex-players such as Sachin and Saurav are a hundred times better than businessmen such as N Srinivasan, Sharad Pawar and Colin Graves.

How do they select the the chairman of ICC ? Doesn't all the boards have have a say in selecting the chairperson of ICC ?

There should be a mechanism of voting among all the cricket boards so that no one can influence on the decision of selecting the chairman of ICC.

This isn't gonna happen now or then. Cricket is complete business, and government is making good revenue out of it. Upon the same the governments hands will be found over it. At least some players are into the position, which is good compared to the past. Surely there'll be some voting procedure, but if everyone is supporting particular person the voting won't be conducted. Ganguly too got selected in such a voting method.

[JSRAW]

~snip~

How do they select the the chairman of ICC ? Doesn't all the boards have have a say in selecting the chairperson of ICC ?

There should be a mechanism of voting among all the cricket boards so that no one can influence on the decision of selecting the chairman of ICC.

As far as i know its goes something like that, i might be missing the details tho..

-Each member of ICC board ( they are called directors) nominates the candidates. Board is made up with 12 Full members+ 3 Associate members.
-The ones who gets the majority of votes (minimum 2) from the Full members goes into election process.

[Vishnu.Reang]

How do they select the the chairman of ICC ? Doesn't all the boards have have a say in selecting the chairperson of ICC ?
There should be a mechanism of voting among all the cricket boards so that no one can influence on the decision of selecting the chairman of ICC.

They are yet to finalize the process. The normal method is to select a candidate with two-thirds majority, but this time some of the member boards want to elect the first candidate who receive a simple majority. There are a total of 17 votes, and if they go for simple majority, then 9 votes are needed. Out of the 17 voters, 12 are from test nations, 3 from Associate nations (Malaysia, Scotland and Singapore) and the other two are Indra Nooyi and Manu Sawhney.

[JSRAW]

~snip~
and the other two are Indra Nooyi and Manu Sawhney.

Do Independent director and chief executive take part in voting process? Not sure about Independent director but Chief executive doesn't has any say in voting. 

[bryant.coleman]

~snip~
and the other two are Indra Nooyi and Manu Sawhney.

Do Independent director and chief executive take part in voting process? Not sure about Independent director but Chief executive doesn't has any say in voting. 

Manu Sawhney doesn't have voting rights as per this article:

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/icc-board-meet-nomination-process-for-next-chairman-is-primary-agenda/story-IlcYdUUj9AdfOS24UQUhYK.html

That means that there are 16 votes available and 9 is needed for a simple majority. The only contenders as of now are Colin Graves of ECB and Dave Cameron of CWI. Although Cameron was the former president of CWI, they have issued a statement saying that the CWI will be favoring Graves for the post. If the election is held now, Graves will be easily elected with a simple majority and that explains the desperation from Ehsan Mani.