Neutral Venues

[Dasa]

India look to play at neutral venues

Today India, tomorrow the world

Cricinfo staff

March 29, 2006

The Indian cricket board (BCCI) has announced that India could soon be playing home matches at a number of overseas venues as far a field as the USA, Malaysia and England.

The BCCI said that various venues had been looked at. In north America, New York, Houston, Chicago and Toronto were possibilities, as were Birmingham and London in England, as well as grounds in Holland, Sharjah, Abu Dhabi, Singapore, Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur. The thing all these locations have in common is that they are in areas with a large number of expats from the Indian subcontinent.

The BCCI raised the possibility of playing overseas while announcing a tender for global media rights for five years for all matches that India play on neutral grounds. The rights comprise all television, radio and internet, and will include the two-match India-Pakistan series in Abu Dhabi April 18 and 19.

"The global media rights tender is intended to streamline the process of match telecasting wherever the Indian team is playing," said Lalit Modi, BCCI vice-president and chairman of its marketing sub-committee. "With the number and quality of matches growing, this streamlining becomes increasingly important."

Modi added that where matches were played in Full Member countries, the broadcasting rights will fall under the jurisdiction of the home board.

© Cricinfo

__________________________________________________________________________

What do people think of this, if it happens? They haven't said whether this will only be ODIs or Tests as well....personally, I don't have any problems with it. It'd be good for the development of the game as well, if there were more matches played in Holland, Malaysia etc.

 

[Dick Rockett]

What do people think of this, if it happens? They haven't said whether this will only be ODIs or Tests as well....personally, I don't have any problems with it. It'd be good for the development of the game as well, if there were more matches played in Holland, Malaysia etc.

Well, at least they're not trying to pretend they're doing this for the good of the game.

 

[Dasa]

Well, at least they're not trying to pretend they're doing this for the good of the game.

The BCCI are fairly upfront that they're interested in only one thing - money.

 

[Goughy]

Sounds like good promo work and business practice.

They would be neglectful if they ignored these revenue streams and the opportunity to bring more people into the Indian fanbase.

The Indian expat community is massive and it seems to make sense even if people will gripe that it is just about money, I mean so what if it is.

 

[Dick Rockett]

The BCCI are fairly upfront that they're interested in only one thing - money.

I know

I suppose the only point in their defence is that this a malaise that currently affects many, many governing bodies of sports the world over.

 

[Dick Rockett]

The Indian expat community is massive and it seems to make sense even if people will gripe that it is just about money, I mean so what if it is.

There's nothing wrong with it, if you take it at face value.

The problem is that they are already the most powerful board in world cricket, and their lust for cash can and does have a negative impact on others. I suppose, being from NZ, I'm especially sensitive to that. The Indian board makes no secret of its desire to play more and more series against the bigger teams because that's where the money is - the problem being that countries like little old us get left out in the cold.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no socialist. I do feel that in sport, however, this relentless drive for profit is a destructive influence. I don't want the Indian board to be poor, but I also wish they were not as powerful as they are.

 

[Sanz]

Don't get me wrong, I'm no socialist. I do feel that in sport, however, this relentless drive for profit is a destructive influence. I don't want the Indian board to be poor, but I also wish they were not as powerful as they are.

Dude,I live in USA and we are so starved for cricket that we would flock to see a match between India and anyone. If we want to watch cricket here in USA, we have to pay ridiculous amount, stay up allnight, bear those stupid ads.

 

[Goughy]

The problem is that they are already the most powerful board in world cricket, and their lust for cash can and does have a negative impact on others. I suppose, being from NZ, I'm especially sensitive to that. The Indian board makes no secret of its desire to play more and more series against the bigger teams because that's where the money is - the problem being that countries like little old us get left out in the cold.

Ah, but that is a different issue to the one above. What you mention is Indian Cricket pushing its weight around in a way that if it had been England there would rivers of tears and angry letters. Your quote is about a situation that is negative to the game.

However, the original post should not effect anyone else and if the Indian authorities can make as much money as possible without hurting the others they should do it.

Just because both involve money does not make both wrong or right. They cannot be lumped together but must be assessed on their own virtues.

I think good luck to them on this venture but for what they are doing in other areas.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Dude,I live in USA and we are so starved for cricket that we would flock to see a match between India and anyone. If we want to watch cricket here in USA, we have to pay ridiculous amount, stay up allnight, bear those stupid ads.

Not too dissimilar to what we have to put up with here in NZ, either.

Ah, but that is a different issue to the one above. What you mention is Indian Cricket pushing its weight around in a way that if it had been England there would rivers of tears and angry letters. Your quote is about a situation that is negative to the game.

However, the original post should not effect anyone else and if the Indian authorities can make as much money as possible without hurting the others they should do it.

Just because both involve money does not make both wrong or right. They cannot be lumped together but must be assessed on their own virtues.

I think good look to them on this venture but for what they are doing in other areas.

For sure, but my essential point is that they are doing this for the cash, not because they're altruistic and want to bring the game to the fans. I have no problem with the concept, only the motive.

 

[adharcric]

Dude,I live in USA and we are so starved for cricket that we would flock to see a match between India and anyone. If we want to watch cricket here in USA, we have to pay ridiculous amount, stay up allnight, bear those stupid ads.

Well we're getting our best chance next year in the Caribbean. I'm surely flying out to watch India vs Sri Lanka and India vs SA/AUS.

 

[Sanz]

Well we're getting our best chance next year in the Caribbean. I'm surely flying out to watch India vs Sri Lanka and India vs SA/AUS.

Right With two little ones at home, I will be in a great situation to visit Carribean.

Lucky You !! Have you booked your tickets already ? Do you know any travel agent who has been selling packaged tours to WI ? May be I can take the whole family along

 

[Fusion]

The BCCI are fairly upfront that they're interested in only one thing - money.

Why is that necessarily wrong? If you can generate money for your board, then why not? And keep in mind that they will generate money as long as there is interest, so if their "money grabbing" ways are putting off fans, BCCI will start losing money. I know that a cricket board shouldn't ONLY be concerned with money, but I don't get why people fault BCCI all the time on the money issue. Like it or not, it's a business, and they're good at it!

 

[Dasa]

Why is that necessarily wrong? If you can generate money for your board, then why not? And keep in mind that they will generate money as long as there is interest, so if their "money grabbing" ways are putting off fans, BCCI will start losing money. I know that a cricket board shouldn't ONLY be concerned with money, but I don't get why people fault BCCI all the time on the money issue. Like it or not, it's a business, and they're good at it!

Oh I don't think there's anything wrong with it (except when they go overboard playing too many ODIs for the revenue). I'm just pointing out that they've never tried to cover up what they're interested in.

 

[Craig]

It would be nice to see an ODI match in the US, I mean we have had them in Canada, so why not in America. I suppose they will kick this off with a Twenty/20 match as well?

I don't know but I quite like the idea of playing Test matches in a neutral venue unless say there was sercurity concerns (eg when Pakistan played in Sharjah post 9/11 although NZ did travel there) which is understandable.

 

[albo97056]

Oh I don't think there's anything wrong with it (except when they go overboard playing too many ODIs for the revenue). I'm just pointing out that they've never tried to cover up what they're interested in.

These days transparency is a priceless commodity, especially where international cricket is concerned

 

[Dick Rockett]

Why is that necessarily wrong? If you can generate money for your board, then why not? And keep in mind that they will generate money as long as there is interest, so if their "money grabbing" ways are putting off fans, BCCI will start losing money. I know that a cricket board shouldn't ONLY be concerned with money, but I don't get why people fault BCCI all the time on the money issue. Like it or not, it's a business, and they're good at it!

If you use the "like it or not" defence, you may as well not debate anything.

My main problem with the Indian board is that they seem more interested in money and power, and not really at all interested in the grass roots. Perhaps if they paid more attention to development instead of "business", India might be on top of the world.

I also feel that people are so hard on the BCCI because they feel that they are a threat to the game in other, smaller countries.

 

[vic_orthdox]

My main problem with the Indian board is that they seem more interested in money and power, and not really at all interested in the grass roots. Perhaps if they paid more attention to development instead of "business", India might be on top of the world

I guess when you have 1 billion people, and such a fanatical support for cricket, then you don't really need to worry about attracting kids to the sport in the first place, unlike NZ, Eng or Aus

 

[Dick Rockett]

I guess when you have 1 billion people, and such a fanatical support for cricket, then you don't really need to worry about attracting kids to the sport in the first place, unlike NZ, Eng or Aus

Haha, that's true.

They could be a lot better though, considering the potential resources.

 

[Sanz]

My main problem with the Indian board is that they seem more interested in money and power, and not really at all interested in the grass roots. Perhaps if they paid more attention to development instead of "business", India might be on top of the world.

I also feel that people are so hard on the BCCI because they feel that they are a threat to the game in other, smaller countries.

I 100 % agree with you on BCCI not doing enough at the grass root level, most of our International grounds do not have international class facilities, Most stadiums are not maintained properly. The grounds used for domestic games are pathetic. I dont even know what they are going to do with all that money. There is no system in place, most cricketers make it big despite the system not because of it. BCCI has plans to make money but no plans to utilize that money for Indian cricketers and Indian domestic cricket.

That said I dont agree with you at all that BCCI are a threat to game of cricket in other smaller countries, It is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard about BCCI.

 

[Dick Rockett]

That said I dont agree with you at all that BCCI are a threat to game of cricket in other smaller countries, It is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard about BCCI.

That's coming from an Indian fan. Look at it from our perspective. When the Indian board comes out and says it wants more and mores series against the big countries (ie. Pakistan, Australia, England), then obviously that means that countries like NZ will play them less.

If we can't get the big names to play us because they're too busy playing India, where does that leave us? Smaller crowds, smaller TV audiences, which means less sponsorship, which means less money, which means we can't afford to pay our players or develop our youth, which means slow death.

So no, the Indian board isn't out to finish off the weaker countries, but their relentless lust for cash can potentially have a huge impact.