• 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.

Question on ban announcements

R

RossTaylorsBox

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Prince EWS said:
We should probably avoid continuining the massive pile on post-ban but I did want to say that this is the post that really got me:



He'd spent a bunch of posts arguing none of them were Cambodian even though he actually had no ****ing idea who they were at all. He was 100% just basing it off what they looked like in the photo and wasn't even hiding that.
Click to expand...
The topic of how to grow the game in emerging nations without necessarily needing to poach a bunch of ex-pats is actually an interesting one, but, as with every other topic, the guy just took the most ridiculous stance possible.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Yeah, the issue of sides getting ringers to get some ICC prize money etc for what will most likely be corrupt cricket boards is a topic for discussion. BS is actually apt initials for his take on it, though.
 
Athlai

Athlai

Not Terrible
honestbharani said:
Yeah, the issue of sides getting ringers to get some ICC prize money etc for what will most likely be corrupt cricket boards is a topic for discussion. BS is actually apt initials for his take on it, though.
Click to expand...
You don't know what you're talking about.

- are ex-patriates overrepresented in associate teams? obviously
- is there any real evidence they are "ringers" involved in corruption to win $$$? no

The money on the table is barely anything, and while I'm sure many of these players may be quite close to the wire in terms of qualifying to play (3 years residence or a passport) for associate countries. That is almost certainly going to be so they can have an opportunity to play other national teams.

There are easier and more lucrative ways of making cricket than "taking" advantage of associates that don't actually have much money at all for players and who primarily put funding towards getting players to tournaments, setting up facilities and youth cricket systems.

It's just a rubbish argument.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Athlai said:
You don't know what you're talking about.

- are ex-patriates overrepresented in associate teams? obviously
- is there any real evidence they are "ringers" involved in corruption to win $$$? no

The money on the table is barely anything, and while I'm sure many of these players may be quite close to the wire in terms of qualifying to play (3 years residence or a passport) for associate countries. That is almost certainly going to be so they can have an opportunity to play other national teams.

There are easier and more lucrative ways of making cricket than "taking" advantage of associates that don't actually have much money at all for players and who primarily put funding towards getting players to tournaments, setting up facilities and youth cricket systems.

It's just a rubbish argument.
Click to expand...

I am not sure of other associates like Cambodia but wasn't this the issue about the US Cricket Board?

And you are easily glossing over the corrupt part. A corrupt board official will find it easier to cough up some money for ringers, esp. some place with exchange value like US v India/Pak to make their share of the ICC pie and leave office.
 
Athlai

Athlai

Not Terrible
US Cricket is a far different beast to any other associate for fairly obvious reasons. Where they're seeking to leverage lucrative television rights for one of the world's largest expatriate populations in the world's richest country.

I don't think you realise how little funding the ICC provides overall. It's unlikely prior to the last year or two, Cambodian cricket received more than $10k per year, and even now they may make little more than that.

No one is making a living off playing cricket for an associate country*

*well establish associate countries with ODI status like Hong Kong might be an exception to this, but they also receive 40x the funding of the newest and smallest associate countries.
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
honestbharani said:
I am not sure of other associates like Cambodia but wasn't this the issue about the US Cricket Board?

And you are easily glossing over the corrupt part. A corrupt board official will find it easier to cough up some money for ringers, esp. some place with exchange value like US v India/Pak to make their share of the ICC pie and leave office.
Click to expand...
I think the US belongs in its own special case. The level of corruption and mismanagement it's taken to bring US cricket to where it is is truly spectacular; they are sitting on a giant pile of money if they get their house in order. A SA20 style IPL clone in the US, designed and marketed properly, could make loads of money.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Spark said:
I think the US belongs in its own special case. The level of corruption and mismanagement it's taken to bring US cricket to where it is is truly spectacular; they are sitting on a giant pile of money if they get their house in order. A SA20 style IPL clone in the US, designed and marketed properly, could make loads of money.
Click to expand...
Yeah i meant such stuff is possible. So a discussion is probably worth on the topic, just not from the racist way BS was coming at it.
 
Athlai

Athlai

Not Terrible
It's just absurd to speculate that new associates are some kind of lucrative market for cricketers seeking to take advantage of the system. Frankly there just isn't any money in cricket outside of ODI playing countries, and even then you'd be better off playing for some crap English club than pretty much any associate team.

Ex-patriates or not, they're in it for the love of the game.

It's definitely an interesting wider topic, particularly in terms of ICC funding infrastructure and if these investments do see cricket organically grow in the wider population, or even if a relatively small portion of the population is still large enough to sustain a fairly strong team. What we had seen in this thread was the great success of the Cambodian team, perhaps indicating they may be on a similar accelerated path to Singapore in becoming a stronger associate over the next decade.

But everything BS said was ****ing ridiculous and deserves a kicking.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I am not arguing ur last line. I just meant the aspect of associates possibly using basically ringers deserves some discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top