Should India lose ICC test ranking points for refusing to play Pakistan?

[Xuhaib]

The latest news going around is BCCI has once again given cold shoulder to PCB regarding the resumption of billaterial ties and the March-Aprail 2012 series looks unlikely as the GOI looks unlikely to give clearance to BCCI for any future series.

Now if my memory is not playing tricks with me didn't England refuse to play Zimbabwe during the 03 WC they had to forfeit their game and the points were awarded to Zimbabwe now how is the situation different to that and should not the same rules apply over here?

Would like to get some perspective from both sides and more importantly from the neutral. I know this is a sensitive topic but still lets try and keep discussion civil over here.

 

[Neil Pickup]

It's a completely different situation to Eng/Zim as that was part of the WC, a fixed ICC tournament, and not a bilateral series.

No different to India's refusal to host Bangladesh for Tests.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

No.

Different scenarios, I fully backed England's stance in the World Cup and thought it was more important than the potential of 2 points. Some things are bigger than sport.

As for the current situation India need to fully explain it if it is true as to why they are unwilling to play the matches. Though after the Mumbai terrorist attacks I can sympathise with the authorities as to why they would be reluctant to give the matches the go ahead.

A very difficult situation which sadly will see sport lose out I think.

 

[ganeshran]

India isnt refusing to play Pakistan in multi nation ICC organized tournaments where refusal would mean forfeiture. The BCCI (on orders from GoI) isnt scheduling a bilateral series with the PCB and there are no other parties impacted by the decision. The ICC doesnt have any jurisdiction to dock ranking points for this.

AFAIK The FTP isnt a binding document, rather more of a guideline.

 

[Contra]

It's a completely different situation to Eng/Zim as that was part of the WC, a fixed ICC tournament, and not a bilateral series.

No different to India's refusal to host Bangladesh for Tests.

I've always wondered why B-desh never toured India but we toured there like 3-4 times already. Why have India refused to host B-desh?

 

[Agent Nationaux]

How can Pakistan have a chance of gaining points if they can't play a better ranked team like India.

 

[ganeshran]

I've always wondered why B-desh never toured India but we toured there like 3-4 times already. Why have India refused to host B-desh?

IMO its for economic reasons. A B-desh tour to India wont generate much interest here. Plus matches are more likely to be one -sided at home rather than in Bangladesh.

So BCCI converts its home series with Bangers to an away series so that BCB can also earn some money in the process and BCCI has an additional vote in the ICC.

 

[Xuhaib]

imo ICC should do a better job enforcing the member nations to follow up the FTP otherwise the ICC test rankings loose a lot of its credibility if international sides pick and choose their future tours.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

If India doesn't want to have a series then that's up to them, but Pakistan should then get to have more points for beating a lesser ranked team.

 

[BoyBrumby]

India and Pakistan's buisness IMHO. India are denying themselves the chance to win more points so it's as broad as it's long.

I must admit I've hitherto been under the impression that the FTP was mandatory though. If it isn't, it does seem a nonsense we ever both hosting Bangladesh.

 

[ganeshran]

If India doesn't want to have a series then that's up to them, but Pakistan should then get to have more points for beating a lesser ranked team.

Pakistan are playing England and stand to gain more points by beating them than they would be by playing India. The system you suggest would be impractical to implement and also unfair to other teams.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Well it's unfair to Pakistan if they are denied a chance to gain points. Plus India would be easier to beat than England.

 

[Garson007]

FTP is useless anyways. It's about time they enforce a league structure, where every team is forced* to tour another team in a four year cycle, in which 3 to 5 (4?) tests will be played.

*Under certain terms, like safety.

Edit: It would mean hosting two teams each year while touring twice a year. That's between 12 and 20 matches. How can they not see reason like this? If the concerns are that some teams are too weak, then force anyone outside the top eight to form a second league.

 

[G.I.Joe]

There is no way to avoid bringing politics into this if we are to look for the right answers. Otherwise it'd be like bemoaning the loss to South African cricket during apartheid without considering the non-cricketing reasons behind the boycott.

 

[ganeshran]

Well it's unfair to Pakistan if they are denied a chance to gain points. Plus India would be easier to beat than England.

At home we are quite hard to beat too, and the BCCI wont agree to a series at a neutral venue.

The tour would only happen when the GoI gives the go ahead, and I dont see the ICC penalizing BCCI because of its clout.

 

[Xuhaib]

At home we are quite hard to beat too, and the BCCI wont agree to a series at a neutral venue.

The tour would only happen when the GoI gives the go ahead, and I dont see the ICC penalizing BCCI because of its clout.

and why should the BCI have issue with this when other test nations have none.

 

[G.I.Joe]

and why should the BCI have issue with this when other test nations have none.

Clearly the issue is the team and the context, not the venue.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

So what was all that crap about in the WC, with Gilani and Dr Singh.

 

[Furball]

India and Pakistan's buisness IMHO. India are denying themselves the chance to win more points so it's as broad as it's long.

I must admit I've hitherto been under the impression that the FTP was mandatory though. If it isn't, it does seem a nonsense we ever both hosting Bangladesh.

Well, neither England or India are scheduled to host Bangladesh in the FTP, which runs until April 2020, and Australia still owe Bangladesh 2 Tests from 2008 - they played a 3 match ODI series in August, which was when Symonds' fishing trip happened.

 

[ganeshran]

and why should the BCI have issue with this when other test nations have none.

The disagreement (if a series is given political clearance) is on the cards regarding the venue. A neutral venue would be decided only if its a home series for Pakistan.

A home series for PCB was scheduled in 2009, which was cancelled because of the 26/11 attacks. Now PCB wants the 2009 home series to be postponed to 2012 which means it can be held on neutral venues. But BCCI says that the 2009 series stands cancelled and now its India's turn to host the series which would make it a home series.

IMO PCB would also accept a India home series held on Indian soil, as it still allows them very high profits, but the limiting factor is the political clearance from the government which isnt forthcoming. If the GoI allows it, all other issues will be amicably ironed out given the earning potential of an India-Pak series.