World Cricket Lives Off India's Money

[Turbinator]

Hmmm... Pretty interesting!

http://cricket.indiatimes.com/articleshow/763605.cms

 

[silentstriker]

Eh, we already knew that. I wished that it didn't. BCCI stinks.

 

[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. 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.

 

[silentstriker]

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.

 

[LA ICE-E]

no big deal india is the power house for cricket like usa is the power house for baseball

 

[shortpitched713]

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.

 

[adharcric]

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.

 

[silentstriker]

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?

 

[silentstriker]

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.

 

[Dravid]

Dude, India PAID the Aussies and WI $1,000,000 per match in the DLF Cup. That's ridiculous.

Hahah thats so stupid.

 

[shortpitched713]

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.

 

[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.

 

[silentstriker]

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.

 

[silentstriker]

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.

 

[Matt79]

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.

 

[C_C]

Well if you think this is bad now, imagine this 'ticking time bomb' 10-15 years down the road, when India starts looking distinctly modern in several urban hubs and its interaction with the west increases significantly. ( by the way, there are about 250,000 western professionals - including engineers, accountants, etc. working in India currently- dont know if many people know this) It will start looking 'less alien' and offer closes the gap to living standards with the west. And if India just happens to be the top dawg then - enjoying even half the status the Aussies today have (ie, lets say Aussies in the early-mid 90s) it'd be in an extremely good condition to deal from position of power.
Not to mention, a rebel league will not only attract several 'stars' (especially if they are fading, dont care that much about their record and just wanna make a killing for a year or two before bowing out), they will also attract several middle rung players internationally and several first class stalwarts from the world over. Even if they just made India XI, Africa XI, Oceania XI, Rest of Subcontinent, Rest of the world teams just to retain quality, they could still have a Test championship and an ODI championship easily spread out through a calendar year while not sacrificing quality of cricket or being spread too thin. Hell, players will then even get their demand for 2-3 month 'vacation' at the end of the year and you'd be seeing a soccer-style 'tourney and league' championships for ODIs and Tests.

Undoubtedly, it will not last though- this sort of a situation is untenable in the long run barring a significant decline in cricket's popularity outside of India or India attaining overwhelming economic superiority akin to the States in the recent times. For one way or another, a compromise would be made with rest of the world's 'official' boards for deprived of their stars, their cricket would just turn into 'satellite version' of cricket, ie what the 'European hockey league' is to the NHL- its female dog.

Hmmm. Enough plans of world takeover from my sinister brain for the morning. Time to go about my business in enac...ahem i mean..my day.