• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Why India won the world cup bid?

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Bindra said he was questioned by the ICC members at the executive board meeting in Dubai earlier this week "for half an hour" when he told them the 2011 World Cup, if held in the subcontinent, would generate USD 400 million more. "I told them that the ICC makes USD two million from a match day whereas we make USD 8.77 million, which is more than four times. The ICC sold the television rights [of 2003 WC] to India for USD 250 million and for seven-eight million USD to Australia."
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Well, I am not suprised that the decision was about money...it was more a suprise at the amount of difference in money.
 

Armadillo

State Vice-Captain
There seems to be a flaw in your question. India didn't win the world cup, the subcontinent did...now open your mind to the world outside.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Armadillo said:
There seems to be a flaw in your question. India didn't win the world cup, the subcontinent did...now open your mind to the world outside.

If you think India weren't the dominant player in this bid and weren't the reason that the subcontinent won the rights, then you are kidding yourself. 42% of the games will be played in India, and a larger percentage of funds will come from India.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Doesn't matter if India were the dominant player, it still is a fact that it was the subcontinent that won the WC hosting rights. India are getting 42 % only because they have a bigger fanbase to cover as simple as that.

As far as I am concerned, India and Pak (and SL to some extent) are equal contenders for hosting the World Cup finals.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Sanz said:
Doesn't matter if India were the dominant player, it still is a fact that it was the subcontinent that won the WC hosting rights. India are getting 42 % only because they have a bigger fanbase to cover as simple as that.

As far as I am concerned, India and Pak (and SL to some extent) are equal contenders for hosting the World Cup finals.

*SIGH*, did I say they were not? When did the finals even come into play? I am simply stating that India are the biggest draw and were clearly the driving force in getting the WC. Thats a fact. I'm not putting down Pakistan, SL or Bangladesh. I don't care if the final is in Dhaka, Colombo, Karachi or Mumbai and I'm sure all four countries could do a great job of providing facilities and grounds to make it a success. Really, thats outside the scope of the thread.
 

Jungle Jumbo

International Vice-Captain
silentstriker said:
*SIGH*, did I say they were not? When did the finals even come into play? I am simply stating that India are the biggest draw and were clearly the driving force in getting the WC. Thats a fact. I'm not putting down Pakistan, SL or Bangladesh. I don't care if the final is in Dhaka, Colombo, Karachi or Mumbai and I'm sure all four countries could do a great job of providing facilities and grounds to make it a success. Really, thats outside the scope of the thread.
Spot on. BCCSL and BCB yield next to no power in cricketing terms, and PCB don't do a lot other than whinge to the ICC.

EDIT: Not going to happen because of the above, but a final in Dhaka would be absolutely electric.

EDIT II: BCB are likely to secure the use of the Bangabhandu for the World Cup (Source: CricBD)
 
Last edited:

Top