Cricket Player Manager
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 63

Thread: Stanford millions

  1. #1
    U19 Debutant cowboysfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    irving,texas
    Posts
    381

    Stanford millions

    Allen Stanford is ready to give each English player(or a Caribbean all-stars player-LOL @ the name) $1 million for 3 hours of work.I am exicted for West Indies and England as all this money pouring in will help to bring in new talent particularly for west Indian cricket which is in decline for more than a decade now.

    I hope England choose a good side for the game because players like Vaughan will also want a million for 3 hours of work but will doom the team.

  2. #2
    U19 Debutant cowboysfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    irving,texas
    Posts
    381
    I see that a "who's better" or a "best ever thread" is in order.

  3. #3
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,233
    Its very interesting.

    Will the money be kept by the winning players or will other centrally contracted players get a cut? And if so how will the pie be divided?

    If this type of thing becomes common then someone like Luke Wright could be earning far more than the England Test captain.
    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
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,443
    As unfeasible as it might be, I am unsure, but the ICC need to attain control over the national boards so that a large percentage of the income from T20 goes to fund Test match cricket. Rather hypocritally, I believe that T20s should be made to be self sufficient in places such as India and maybe England if Stanford comes through - ie. they should recieve no money from domestic cricket or the boards funds not related to and generated from the T20 competitions whereas the income from domestic cricket should be tapped toward Test cricket directly...

    Or am I being naive?
    The speed at which a fielding team gets through the innings is overrated.


  5. #5
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,201
    Quote Originally Posted by cowboysfan View Post
    I see that a "who's better" or a "best ever thread" is in order.

  6. #6
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Manee View Post
    As unfeasible as it might be, I am unsure, but the ICC need to attain control over the national boards
    Simply 100% unfeasible. There's no way to make it happen.

    In any case, this would assume that I$C$C would do the job properly, which is highly unlikely. I rate the ECB as a far better cricket board than I$C$C and am far happier with them controlling the proceeds.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  7. #7
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Simply 100% unfeasible. There's no way to make it happen.
    Indeed, it would require cooperation, for which there is no motive.

  8. #8
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    44,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Its very interesting.

    Will the money be kept by the winning players or will other centrally contracted players get a cut? And if so how will the pie be divided?

    If this type of thing becomes common then someone like Luke Wright could be earning far more than the England Test captain.
    Yeah, I really hope the money will be divided equally (or at least divided to some extent) between all the centrally contracted players and not just paid out to the XI.

    There are a lot of positives to this Twenty20 money - the main of course being that a career in cricket suddenly becomes a financially very wise decision. However, cricket could end up competiting with itself.. if Michael Vaughan (for example) doesn't get any of this money, that sends the message to the next generation that it's more financially wise to aspire to being Luke Wright than Michael Vaughan. Test match skills will then take a back seat to the development of Twenty20 skills as players look to support themselves.

    IMO, in situations like this Stanford thing, the money should go to the boards - not the players directly - to be divided among the centrally contracted players. What exactly would happen if England selected a non-contracted player for this is another issue though - not to mention the tough decisions on whether to even contract someone like Strauss if he's only going to play about a third of England's games and be responsible for a very small percentage of the revenue raised by the players.
    ~ Cribbertarian ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09

    Quote Originally Posted by John Singleton
    Recognition of Property Rights in material objects is the recognition of a manís right to exist; his right to pursue his own goals in his own manner at his own discretion with what is rightfully his to command. Just as the Right to Life is the right to the property of oneís own person, so the right to own material products is the right to sustain oneís life and to keep the results of oneís own efforts.


  9. #9
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Its very interesting.

    Will the money be kept by the winning players or will other centrally contracted players get a cut? And if so how will the pie be divided?

    If this type of thing becomes common then someone like Luke Wright could be earning far more than the England Test captain.
    But it would be odd if the England Test captain gets a cut of the winnings by a team which does not include him, and for a format in which he hasn't done anything.
    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

  10. #10
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    Yeah, I really hope the money will be divided equally (or at least divided to some extent) between all the centrally contracted players and not just paid out to the XI.
    Why?

  11. #11
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,201
    He explained later on in his post.

  12. #12
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    44,220
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    Why?
    I explained that in my post.

    Luke Wright getting more money than Michael Vaughan will result in more Luke Wrights and less Michael Vaughans. AFAIC, that's horrible for the game.

  13. #13
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,233
    Also Test revenue doesnt go straight to the players. Most goes on subsidising the rest of English cricket such as junior development and the Counties.

    As suggested, this money should go to the kitty of the boards rather than the players themselves.

    The idea of a specialist T20 cricketer getting more money for playing that than the England captain gets for Tests is wrong. Its ok for club cricket, but for International cricket (England at least) Test cricket is the pinacle and must be treated as such.
    Last edited by Goughy; 11-06-2008 at 06:58 AM.

  14. #14
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,233
    Deal agreed. Love the idea but not sure on the breakdown

  15. #15
    Cricketer Of The Year four_or_six's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,189
    I loved the IPL but I think this is a horrific idea. Who cares who wins a game like this?

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. USA interfere in Stanford 20:20
    By HeathDavisSpeed in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 30-01-2008, 04:46 PM
  2. Stanford 20/20 Tournament
    By roseboy64 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 24-08-2006, 04:02 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
  •