-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
India, Australia, England attempt to take control of Cricket
- Thread starter Fusion
- Start date
My guess: The one unarguable success the ICC has had, the WCL, is likely to be scrapped.
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
What I meant to ask was - If the development committee which apparently handles financial matters for the associates has no authority and can merely make recommendations to the F&CA, will the associates be affected significantly by it? I mean the F&CA is still under the ICC right?
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I don't know about that actually. None of the proposed changes would affect that as such - obviously they're not dependant on the FTP for matches, and the WCL and IC are in the budget as ICC expenses; it's not a revenue sharing issue because it's subtracted from the revenue before it's shared.
Unless they change all that, Zimbabwe would actually be far better off being an associate than a full member as the ICC would then organise and pay for their games rather than giving ZC a really tiny share of the surplus and expecting them to organise viable bilateral series themselves. Probably true for Bangladesh as well although I know less about their financial situation.
Last edited:
salman85
International Debutant
Just wondering, could this result in a 'rebel' cricket commitee where boards who get the snub here refuse to play with India, Australia, England and organize a seperare platform where they play exclusivley among themselves?
Because this move by the BCCI, ECB and ACB will have reprecussions.
Because this move by the BCCI, ECB and ACB will have reprecussions.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
There'd be nothing stopping them from doing so as such, however..
1. I don't think such a thing would be very profitable, certainly not in Test cricket. Which is why we've got ourselves into this situation. They could just go ahead and play a stack of one dayers and T20s against each other and then use the revenue raised from that to play a Test or two every season at a loss, but that's probably what they're going to have to do now anyway with likely no FTP.
2. I don't think India, Australia and England would even mind that much. Not having to play against the less profitable sides would just give them big windows to play their domestic T20 competitions with all their players available, and regular big ticket international series.
3. The big three would still hold the money so they'd presumably sign up a lot of the 'rebel' players to play franchise domestic cricket in India, England and Australia.
Last edited:
NasserFan207
International Vice-Captain
Yes they can, but unfortunately the entire reason why ECB, ACB and BCCI is doing this is that they have the money and the other countries don't, the other countries rely on these three.
The whole thing is ****ing disgusting. Bunch of money grubbing ****s.
cricketrulez
Cricket Spectator
Assuming they have jurisdiction. What exactly is the recourse if the three blow of COA of sports?
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
A Pak India series always generates a lot of money, so there is potential in that for Pak.
Probably not much. It would however justify the respective countries, England, India and Australia to reprimand their cricket boards - if they thought so to be wise.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Dude, the indian winter Olympics team is competing as independents because the indian Olympic committee couldn't hold an election 2 days earlier. Nothing will be done.
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
Could be the end of test cricket for all.
With Aus, Eng and India mainly playing each other, the other boards will have to rely on LOI's to survive so test cricket won't be played by them. India will eventually stop playing tests because they will never win matches overseas and their market prefers LOI's. So the only test cricket will be played in the long run will be the Ashes, and will that even last if it's the same 2 teams always playing each other with only 1 winning all the time (Australia)?
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
Australia will win most of the time.
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
Compared to Aus, England have never been a great team in the last few decades. Their greatest period didn't last very long and only because Aus were rubbish and were in a rebuilding phase.
salman85
International Debutant
The premise is here the exclusivity of the most competetive test cricket being limited to 3 countries.But what if the countries getting the snub end up boycotting limited over competitions too?Like the WC for example?
With all the attempts by England, India and Australia to seize most powers,having a situation where the other countries refuse to play major limited overs tournaments is not something that they would want.The other countries could organize their own limited over competitions.
Whether this is possible financially is another question though.Im just talking from a reactionary angle.
Last edited:
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
It won't work.
Sri Lanka, West Indies and Pakistan will be the first to fall in line because they are poor. South Africa and New Zealand will complain but that won't last for very long.
Sri Lanka, West Indies and Pakistan will be the first to fall in line because they are poor. South Africa and New Zealand will complain but that won't last for very long.
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
We have all seen how India made South Africa their bitch because of money and South Africa has more power than Pak, Sri Lanka and West Indies, so the unexpected won't happen.