Sri Lankan Cricket Fans

End of supremacy for BCCI: Lost Asia, lost the world

Quote:Fingers might be pointed at Shashank Manohar for not acting in the best interest of Indian cricket. It might even be directed at the Supreme Court for putting the BCCI in a fix, which left them without time to take on the ICC. The old dispensation can fume and can even feel aggrieved. But one look at the mirror will tell how a monster — now cut down to size — has to blame itself for being in a position where it gave others a chance to avenge all the bullying it had subjected them to in the past.

Three years back, when BCCI, Cricket Australia (CA) and England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) came up with the Big 3 model that meant more revenue for them at the expense of the rest, nobody even bothered to stand up. Manohar then came up with an alternative, which meant the BCCI’s share would come down from $570 million to $290 million.

Threatening to pull out of Champions Trophy in protest, the BCCI didn’t pay attention when Manohar offered them an additional $100 million.

The BCCI believed Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and West Indies will side with it. Sadly, it received a sound thrashing when matters came to votes. For the revenue model, the ICC voted 8-2 in favour and for the governance structure, only the BCCI voted against. After Dalmiya’s rise to the top post, this was the first time that the BCCI saw all other members opposing it.

“The ICC has to treat every country as equal and finally, we are seeing encouraging signs on that front. When the BCCI wanted to implement the Big 3 formula, it promised plenty of series against South Africa, Pakistan and even Test tours to Zimbabwe. But they never honoured the MoU and these countries started losing trust.

And by the time Australia and England had new heads running the show, they realised the blunder they had made. Now, every board is united in favour of a revenue model and that’s how it should be. The BCCI doesn’t need so much money. It’s Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Pakistan and Sri Lanka who need the money badly. In a way, BCCI was let down by its own guard,” former ICC president Ehsan Mani told Express on Wednesday.

Soon after the February meeting, where the voting pattern was similar, the BCCI tried to convince West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and even held negotiations a day before the meeting in Dubai. But there was a significant change in the way the likes of Dalmiya or Sharad Pawar managed Asian votes. Dalmiya had brought the Asian bloc together and they remained by and large unified when it came to important decisions. This unity in the Asian bloc is not to be seen anymore, especially after former board president N Srinivasan allied with Australia and England.

“The BCCI has always wanted more money as it generates more revenue. But in the past, during Dalmiya’s period or during my time and even during Malcolm Gray’s period, the BCCI had ensured that even the Asian countries got their share. They in return stood beside India. But, over time, the BCCI has lost the support of its neighbours and that’s why it finds itself isolated. Not even Bangladesh voted for them today, which shows where things stand at the moment,” Mani noted.

(04-27-2017, 03:41 AM)McLovin Wrote: [ -> ]IPL can only provide so much. Sooner or later ppl will get bored of it. India needs international cricket just as much as the rest needs India. BCCI are well and truly backed into a corner now. Their only viable option is to take the $400 mil offer that's on the table. The initial $300 mil offer was unfair for mine but $400 mil I think is a fair deal for all involved.

Are you aware of a breakaway test league that was proposed by one of the IPL owners a few years ago. It was meant to be an alternate international cricketer calendar type of thing.

The issue is ICC events. All or most of the ICC revenue comes from ICC events. The reason broadcasters pay huge $$$ is because India is there. If India pull out of ICC events for the foresable future then the broadcast sponsors will be knocking on the ICC's door. There is no doubt about that. And any changes to the 5 year rights deals ICC signs will all but end the cricketing careers of most nations.

All international tours are bi-laterals anyway - organized between boards. The ICC has nothing to do with this. India can just opt out of all ICC events and organise their own tri-nations and bi-lateral test tours. SLC, BCB, WICB will line up at the door for any of these events without even a thinking about it. Everyone else will do the same. So really India can easily exist without taking part in ICC events, and destroying the money the ICC gets and still come out of it in the positive.

I also don't think India will actually do anything and the 400m seems fair. But the BCCI won't just bend over surely..there will be some drama before this is over I'm sure. It's a good thing guys like Srini are not at the top. I am sure India woulda pulled out officially by now if it had been the case.

Well if India part ways not sure how they'll gain any more than what they will get here?

Btw I understand that BCCI brings home the bacon but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to hold the game, players and fans for ransom. That has been the case for a very long time now. Manohar is a deadset legend!

(04-27-2017, 06:39 AM)McLovin Wrote: [ -> ]Well if India part ways not sure how they'll gain any more than what they will get here?

Nothing to stop BCCI from organising some KO tournaments with all the international teams. Which they can control re: distribution of money...

(04-27-2017, 06:45 AM)McLovin Wrote: [ -> ]Btw I understand that BCCI brings home the bacon but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to hold the game, players and fans for ransom. That has been the case for a very long time now. Manohar is a deadset legend!

Well yea but we are living in a capitalist world. Not a utopia..

(04-27-2017, 07:36 AM)mugatiya Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2017, 06:39 AM)McLovin Wrote: [ -> ]Well if India part ways not sure how they'll gain any more than what they will get here?

Nothing to stop BCCI from organising some KO tournaments with all the international teams. Which they can control re: distribution of money...

You think the top Eng, Oz, Pak, SA (apart from AB who has lost the plot) and NZ players will go for that? Even ours and BD's top players I don't see jumping ship. As for trying to win the other boards over and turning the tables on ICC again that ship has clearly sailed as well. BCCI has only one option now and that is to take the offer that's already on the table. Which is not a bad offer by any means close to four times that of the other top teams.

Key is other boards staying together strongly. Then, India can't do shit. But when $$$ pop up, some boards like SLC, BCB could break quickly.

I was too bored to read all the stuff regarding the issue, but this I can understand.

(04-27-2017, 03:31 AM)mugatiya Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2017, 12:25 AM)The One Wrote: [ -> ]It's a bluff they'll never go through with. IPL may be the cash cow but it needs international cricket to survive.

It needs international cricketers.. IPL could care less about International cricket calendar it self?

Yea but what's the end game?
Is India going to pull out on just WCs or all international cricket?

If it's the former, I think ICC could afford to call the bluff and even go a tournament or two without them. BCCI is rich because of the billion people, and those people want to see how their cricketers in world stage, not just IPL. If the public interest shifts BCCI is *****, so they can't afford that.

If it's the latter, well IPL will do for few years. But what happens when no longer Indian cricketers are seen at the international arena? At the end of the day IPL stars are made at international cricket, hardly ever the other way around.

So my guess is BCCI can't afford to not play international cricket more than ICC can't afford to not have India in it.