Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: World Cricket Lives Off India's Money

  1. #1
    Cricketer Of The Year Turbinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,558

    World Cricket Lives Off India's Money


  2. #2
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,812
    Eh, we already knew that. I wished that it didn't. BCCI stinks.
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  3. #3
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,083
    TBH that TV deal is just for ICC sponsored multi-national events.

    Places like England do fine with their domestic Test and ODI series and have good domestic and International TV deals. ECB have domestic broadcast media deals that total approx $400 million over 4 years.

    Its not like the ESPN/Star money is the revenue on which the ECB survives and it is certainly not bankrolled by Indian advertising revenue.

    No doubt, it is nice and beneficial but it is a stretch to say the world lives of India's money.

    I would, however, be interested in seeing how the ICC earmarks this money. May be the move to Dubai will be worthwhile for taxreasons on deals like this.
    Last edited by Goughy; 10-12-2006 at 03:56 PM.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net

  4. #4
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,812
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy
    TBH that TV deal is just for ICC sponsored multi-national events.

    Places like England do fine with their domestic Test and ODI series and have good domestic and International TV deals.

    Its not like that money is the the revenue on which the ECB survives and it is certainly not bankrolled by Indian advertising revenue.

    No doubt, it is nice and beneficial but it is a stretch to say the world lives of India's money.

    I would, however, be interested in seeing how the ICC earmarks this money. May be the move to Dubai will be worthwhile for taxreasons on deals like this.
    Yea, I will try to find the stats but the ECB and the ACB would not be able to function at the level they do now without the international revenue generated from Indian rights. However, without India, Australia, England and South Africa would still be able to function just fine (maybe not at current levels)...its the others that are overly reliant.

    Its never a good thing to rely on one thing. With the exception of the Ashes, a series between any two nations nets about $100,000 - $200,000 per match. An Indian ODI gets $2,000,000.
    Last edited by silentstriker; 10-12-2006 at 03:59 PM.


  5. #5
    State Captain LA ICE-E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    1,973
    no big deal india is the power house for cricket like usa is the power house for baseball

  6. #6
    International Regular shortpitched713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker
    However, without India, Australia, England and South Africa would still be able to function just fine (maybe not at current levels)...its the others that are overly reliant.

    Its never a good thing to rely on one thing. With the exception of the Ashes, a series between any two nations nets about $100,000 - $200,000 per match. An Indian ODI gets $2,000,000.
    Pakistan probably nets quite a bit for their ODIs. Would like to think they could at least break even or be better off on their own. Don't have the figures though.

  7. #7
    International Coach adharcric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Posts
    10,898
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker
    Yea, I will try to find the stats but the ECB and the ACB would not be able to function at the level they do now without the international revenue generated from Indian rights. However, without India, Australia, England and South Africa would still be able to function just fine (maybe not at current levels)...its the others that are overly reliant.

    Its never a good thing to rely on one thing. With the exception of the Ashes, a series between any two nations nets about $100,000 - $200,000 per match. An Indian ODI gets $2,000,000.
    Dude, India PAID the Aussies and WI $1,000,000 per match in the DLF Cup. That's ridiculous.

  8. #8
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,812
    Quote Originally Posted by adharcric
    Dude, India PAID the Aussies and WI $1,000,000 per match in the DLF Cup. That's ridiculous.
    Wonder how much they would have gotten without India?

  9. #9
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,812
    Quote Originally Posted by shortpitched713
    Pakistan probably nets quite a bit for their ODIs. Would like to think they could at least break even or be better off on their own. Don't have the figures though.
    I heard they relied on the Indian tour to Pakistan to break even, and before they were in a pretty bad situation. Just what I heard though.

  10. #10
    International Captain Dravid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    New Jersey, United States
    Posts
    5,096
    Quote Originally Posted by adharcric
    Dude, India PAID the Aussies and WI $1,000,000 per match in the DLF Cup. That's ridiculous.
    Hahah thats so stupid.

  11. #11
    International Regular shortpitched713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker
    I heard they relied on the Indian tour to Pakistan to break even, and before they were in a pretty bad situation. Just what I heard though.
    I would assume that ODI series against non-Indian teams would be profitable, as attendacne is usually very good. Probably lose a fair bit of money on Tests though. ******* FTP!

    A lot of corruption and mismanagement though, so I'm not surprised that Pakistan cricket doesn't get as much benefit from what should be a very profitable sport in Pakistan.

  12. #12
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Its a bit of a ticking timebomb I reckon - not because of any evil subcontinental conspiracy to take over the game or anything (don't want to get drawn into that stupid discussion), but because its just fundamentally unhealthy to have such a preponderance of financial clout with any one team, or nation, in a sport. Its entirely likely that over the years, any one country is going to get severely upset over a decision by the governing body, but generally, if the majority is in favour, you have to take your lumps and deal with it or take your bat and ball and go home.

    But if we are in a situation where one country, and it doesn't matter if its India, Australia, England, whatever, generates a significant absolute majority of the revenue of the sport as a whole, they're likely to feel they deserve more input into how the game is run. If they don't get it, they may well reach a point where they decide they'd be better to start their own comp. Then we're in a situation like World Series Cricket. Consider, if for some reason India withdrew or was thrown out of the ICC, similar to what happened to South Africa, they'd do what the Saffies did, and start organising their own matches and paying players from around the world to attend, instead of playing in ICC sanctioned matches. Given the depth of BCCI's pockets, its reasonable to think they'd easily secure the majority of players. Not a happy scenario really for those of us who love the game in its current form, warts and all.

    I don't know what the solution to the general situation is - obviously the size, passion, and wealth of the Indian market is unique and impossible to replicate. Lets hope all involved can manage the inevitable tensions in a way where Indian cricket still feels like its getting a fair shake, and the other countries don't feel like they've had to sell out.
    Quote Originally Posted by Irfan
    We may not like you, your filthy rich coffers or your ratbag scum of supporters but by god do we respect you as a football team
    GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010

    Is Cam White, Is Good.

  13. #13
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,812
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79
    Its a bit of a ticking timebomb I reckon - not because of any evil subcontinental conspiracy to take over the game or anything (don't want to get drawn into that stupid discussion), but because its just fundamentally unhealthy to have such a preponderance of financial clout with any one team, or nation, in a sport. Its entirely likely that over the years, any one country is going to get severely upset over a decision by the governing body, but generally, if the majority is in favour, you have to take your lumps and deal with it or take your bat and ball and go home.

    But if we are in a situation where one country, and it doesn't matter if its India, Australia, England, whatever, generates a significant absolute majority of the revenue of the sport as a whole, they're likely to feel they deserve more input into how the game is run. If they don't get it, they may well reach a point where they decide they'd be better to start their own comp. Then we're in a situation like World Series Cricket. Consider, if for some reason India withdrew or was thrown out of the ICC, similar to what happened to South Africa, they'd do what the Saffies did, and start organising their own matches and paying players from around the world to attend, instead of playing in ICC sanctioned matches. Given the depth of BCCI's pockets, its reasonable to think they'd easily secure the majority of players. Not a happy scenario really for those of us who love the game in its current form, warts and all.

    I don't know what the solution to the general situation is - obviously the size, passion, and wealth of the Indian market is unique and impossible to replicate. Lets hope all involved can manage the inevitable tensions in a way where Indian cricket still feels like its getting a fair shake, and the other countries don't feel like they've had to sell out.
    Agreed with everything you said. Its not a healthy situation. The leverage is that the BCCI can't play against itself, so it will always need to convince other sides to join it.

  14. #14
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,812
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79
    Its a bit of a ticking timebomb I reckon - not because of any evil subcontinental conspiracy to take over the game or anything (don't want to get drawn into that stupid discussion), but because its just fundamentally unhealthy to have such a preponderance of financial clout with any one team, or nation, in a sport. Its entirely likely that over the years, any one country is going to get severely upset over a decision by the governing body, but generally, if the majority is in favour, you have to take your lumps and deal with it or take your bat and ball and go home.

    But if we are in a situation where one country, and it doesn't matter if its India, Australia, England, whatever, generates a significant absolute majority of the revenue of the sport as a whole, they're likely to feel they deserve more input into how the game is run. If they don't get it, they may well reach a point where they decide they'd be better to start their own comp. Then we're in a situation like World Series Cricket. Consider, if for some reason India withdrew or was thrown out of the ICC, similar to what happened to South Africa, they'd do what the Saffies did, and start organising their own matches and paying players from around the world to attend, instead of playing in ICC sanctioned matches. Given the depth of BCCI's pockets, its reasonable to think they'd easily secure the majority of players. Not a happy scenario really for those of us who love the game in its current form, warts and all.

    I don't know what the solution to the general situation is - obviously the size, passion, and wealth of the Indian market is unique and impossible to replicate. Lets hope all involved can manage the inevitable tensions in a way where Indian cricket still feels like its getting a fair shake, and the other countries don't feel like they've had to sell out.
    Agreed with everything you said. Its not a healthy situation. The leverage is that the BCCI can't play against itself, so it will always need to convince other sides to join it.

  15. #15
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    But those teams need not be the ICC sanctioned teams of the respective boards of the other member countries. They could well be rebel national teams, or "best of the world XIs" drawn by a chequebook that their countries couldn't hope to match.

    Seriously, if India decided to recruit a team to come and play matches against the Indian team, and offered Ponting, Murali, Warne, Flintoff, Ntini, Lara, Gayle, Brett Lee, Bond, Kallis, Sangakara and Pietersen each three times what they are currently being paid, as well as facilitated deals with Indian companies for sponsorship deals, you don't think those players would go to play a season in India rather than stick with the establishment? I think it would be a 50-50 proposition, particularly if those players' salaries had taken a cut because their boards weren't getting Indian money any more. While it would be great for Indian fans, it would rather suck for the rest of the world, and would be unimaginably damaging to the fabric of the game - like WSC all over again, but bigger.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Future of Cricket, suggestion to the ICC
    By LA ICE-E in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 170
    Last Post: 01-12-2011, 03:16 PM
  2. A World Cup of Test match cricket.
    By Binit in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 04:26 PM
  3. controversial
    By sledger in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 09-07-2006, 01:23 PM
  4. Cricket Web Competiton in Association with World Cricket Store
    By James in forum Cricket Web Forum Announcements
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-02-2006, 03:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •