1. Maybe, but I dont see the relevance of credits being given here. Organizing the tournament is still BCCI responsibility.
2. Disagree, I was in the UAE at the time, and I'd know. While Dubai had relaxed most of the restrictions, Abu Dhabi had strict regulations on incoming visitors. Not to mention zero crowds for matches. And these were being changed on a daily basis.
3. Irrelevant really. A good administration will use relevant control measures including adopting a carrot stick approach to get the job done.
4. Again ignorance speaking. Having lived in UAE for a decade, I do agree there is a section of labour who are treated as bonded labour, in construction and all. But hospitality sector.is far removed from this.
UAE govt did not oversee the implementation of these hotel wide bubbles, BCCI did. BCCI stuck agreements with the hotels and ensured they implemented these bio bubbles.
We just saw the UAE Ireland matches being put on hold because a few members of the UAE team were found positive. Surely it would be much easier to implement these bubbles for a bilateral series ?
5. I understand it is optional to permit spectators in Aus and not mandated by law to adhere to a certain requirement isn't it ?
It's obviously relevant that the UAE economy would be crippled without these events and that they aren't even enforcing a local lockdown. It why the BCCI were able to secure all the permissions they needed. To ignore this context when comparing with Australia is disingenuous.
Yes Abu Dhabi had strict regulations on incoming visitors, but people in Abu Dhabi were not living in a lockdown. The players in the IPL had more restricted movement than the normal populace, which is the whole point of a bubble.
The reason the IPL bubble was better than the Border-Gavaskar one is partly down to different attitudes from the local governments (as mentioned many times), but also the size and scale of the IPL. The BCCI had the franchises to manage the individuals involved and actually
paid for a 3rd party company to develop the bubble for them - the same people who did it first for the ECB. This makes the job of those in the BCCI significantly easier, and which is why you trying to use this as an example of the BCCI being 'superior administrators' doesn't sit quite right. They had so much more money to play with and a much more co-operative local govt. The circumstances around the Border Gavaskar trophy are so much more different.
It is also why the lack of labour protection laws + the low cost of labour in the UAE is relevant. It would be significantly harder to make hotel employees, ground staff and logistics staff all live within a bubble in a place like Australia.
Also there is a big difference between the UAE government (who were involved heavily with the IPL) and the Emirates Cricket Board (who are organizing the UAE vs Ireland ODI series on a much smaller budget). Same as the difference between the Australian state government and Cricket Australia. India is probably the only place where the cricket board could feasibly have power over a state government. It does not work like that in most other parts of the world.