Time for cricket to split?

[Fusion]

Absolutely opposed to the split as well. It would mean the eventual irrelevance of cricket for either block. I remember similar sentiments being expressed after Ovalgate. Cricket would not survive a split. In today's global economy and mass media, sports thrive via expansion, not by segregation. The young children growing up will lose interest in cricket if it's not a global sport that's being broadcast on sports channel and being staged as a "world" event. Instead, they would gravitate more towards Football (both versions), Rugby, Basketball, Baseball etc. In any case, you can't solve problems by building a wall. We need to address the issues, talk about them, and come to a consensus. It can't be that hard.

 

[sledger]

against, would be terrible in the long and short term.

 

[Engle]

There can never be a split for the simple reason that while those belonging in the same group may get along harmoniously with one another, it will only be a matter of time before boredom sets in and a yearning to take on teams from the other group for the sake of asserting superiority, variety, crowd-attractiveness and the pursuit of the almighty $$$

 

[steds]

Couldn't care less tbh. Cricket's completely stale at the moment. Absolutely nothing happening on the pitch to come close to stepping out of the shadow of complete farce, such as the world cup final, and controversies mainly caused by Asians and their "us against them, and if it doesn't go our way we'll pull a strop, burn some effigies and such" mentality. I'm rather disillusioned with the whole thing.

Depends who would join an indian led block, but I don't think I'd miss anyone from it

Agreed.

Football (both versions)

I count 6.

 

[andruid]

No!!!

I think this row is yet another indictment of how the fact that the ICC, which is supposed to be a body for the management of global cricket is basically still subject to the whims of a core group of persons who's central concern may not necessarily be the success of cricket beyond the realms of the nations they represent. Until the ICC's central governing structures are opened up and made more democratic so they are not controlled solely by a clique of nations be it based on geographical location, imperial heritage, or some sacred yet unjustified right to play cricket of a certain length then these dramas will continue.

In any case splitting the ICC will only serve to further entrench the suspicions that the two warring factions have against one another and will leave both resultant bodies struggling for dictatorial control of the game,and everything it represents at the expense of everybody else.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think a split would be bad for cricket in financial terms, but I don't think the ICC can continue as it is and retain any credibility at all. Such is India's financial clout and such is their determination to use it to get their own way (witness the rhetoric used in public concerning the Harbhajan appeal, hardly the language of compromise & one shudders to imagine what was said behind closed doors) the governing of the world game would be better in the hands of the BCCI. We would at least have some transparency in governance then.

 

[silentstriker]

I think a split would be bad for cricket in financial terms, but I don't think the ICC can continue as it is and retain any credibility at all. Such is India's financial clout and such is their determination to use it to get their own way (witness the rhetoric used in public concerning the Harbhajan appeal, hardly the language of compromise & one shudders to imagine what was said behind closed doors) the governing of the world game would be better in the hands of the BCCI. We would at least have some transparency in governance then.

I don't think I have ever heard two words that were more contradictory than BCCI and transparency. Maybe 'Torquemada' and 'Religious freedom' comes close.

 

[Richard]

Would be interesting to see what would happen if The BCCI (and maybe the PCB and BCCSL) played for themselves.

Then we'd find-out exactly how the other countries would cope without the India TV influence that is talked so much about.

If they wouldn't, is there any point continuing to play cricket? A way would be found, I'm sure. And if it wouldn't, it's simply speeding-up the inevitable.

It'd obviously be catastrophic for cricket, though, as the Packer Schism was.

 

[silentstriker]

Would be interesting to see what would happen if The BCCI (and maybe the PCB and BCCSL) played for themselves.

Then we'd find-out exactly how the other countries would cope without the India TV influence that is talked so much about.

If they wouldn't, is there any point continuing to play cricket? A way would be found, I'm sure. And if it wouldn't, it's simply speeding-up the inevitable.

It'd obviously be catastrophic for cricket, though, as the Packer Schism was.

ECB and CA would find a way without a doubt. Cricket is popular enough and generates solid income.

The point is, would BCCI find a way? Something that gets lost in all this is that none of the Asian countries, besides India, are big money makers. Why do you think they want to play 7 ODIs against England? England and Australia are huge for India, and absolutely essential if they want to make money.

It's not a one way relationship. BCCI is corrupt and useless, but they are not stupid when it comes to finding a way to make money - there is no way they'd even contemplate a split.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

ECB and CA would find a way without a doubt. Cricket is popular enough and generates solid income.

The point is, would BCCI find a way? Something that gets lost in all this is that none of the Asian countries, besides India, are big money makers. Why do you think they want to play 7 ODIs against England? England and Australia are huge for India, and absolutely essential if they want to make money.

It's not a one way relationship. BCCI is corrupt and useless, but they are not stupid when it comes to finding a way to make money - there is no way they'd even contemplate a split.

Could form and fund their own puppy-governing bodies in Australia and England. Buy some grounds, buy some players, live off the interest in 4-6 years until people have forgotten there was once someone called Ricky Ponting.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Could form and fund their own puppy-governing bodies in Australia and England. Buy some grounds, buy some players, live off the interest in 4-6 years until people have forgotten there was once someone called Ricky Ponting.

Fair point, actually. Given the readiness of English fringe-players to sign up for the ICL (that is the unofficial one, right?) & the rebel tours to SA in the past I don't think the BCCI/ICC would struggle to get a quorum.

 

[Richard]

How long before TV companies would get tired and stop paying these vast sums for meaningless cricket?

It's an impossible question to know the answer to - we'd only find-out if it happened. The Packer case shows quite clearly that such a thing happening could easily go either way, and it could depend on the turn of just a few cards.

 

[BoyBrumby]

How long before TV companies would get tired and stop paying these vast sums for meaningless cricket?

It's an impossible question to know the answer to - we'd only find-out if it happened. The Packer case shows quite clearly that such a thing happening could easily go either way, and it could depend on the turn of just a few cards.

To play devil's advocate slightly, I don't think a split would necessarily increase the level of meaningless cricket for England at least.

Assuming it was England, Australia & NZ who went their own way (with the Windies a vaguer chance too) it would just mean The Ashes became annual rather than bi-annual and also that NZ would get to play some test cricket too.

In England we've always been slightly sniffy about one-day stuff and there's also a perception that all tests lead towards The Ashes, especially now the Windies star has waned so much, so would this be so horrible for the tv execs to sell?

 

[steds]

Would get a little repetitive.

 

[Richard]

To play devil's advocate slightly, I don't think a split would necessarily increase the level of meaningless cricket for England at least.

Assuming it was England, Australia & NZ who went their own way (with the Windies a vaguer chance too) it would just mean The Ashes became annual rather than bi-annual and also that NZ would get to play some test cricket too.

In England we've always been slightly sniffy about one-day stuff and there's also a perception that all tests lead towards The Ashes, especially now the Windies star has waned so much, so would this be so horrible for the tv execs to sell?

No, no - was meaning TV stations in India.

We might get some sort of guesstimated answer when we see how this ICL (and possibly IPL too) pans-out.

 

[shortpitched713]

Anything involving the Indian cricket team proper would get good TV ratings imo, especially more so if they were dominating, which is much more likely if a schism were to occur.

 

[Dasa]

Couldn't care less tbh. Cricket's completely stale at the moment. Absolutely nothing happening on the pitch to come close to stepping out of the shadow of complete farce, such as the world cup final, and controversies mainly caused by Asians and their "us against them, and if it doesn't go our way we'll pull a strop, burn some effigies and such" mentality. I'm rather disillusioned with the whole thing.

Don't generalise like that. It's offensive.

 

[Richard]

Thought you'd be less than happy with that TBH.

A "some" goes a long way.

 

[steds]

Maybe it is, but we've had the Pakistan team spitting the dummy out at the Oval, and then, although the Australian team were no better than the Indians this time around, the BCCI and some idiots make it worse by producing scenes like this

and it's bloody annoying.

I honestly can't think of any other nation where a significant amount of people would react to a few decisions not going their way by people going out into the streets and burning stuff.

 

[Richard]

But your original post basically suggested Asians do that by default, when in reality it's never more than a fraction of the population.

The vast majority of Asians would never really even consider doing that.