• 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.

Future Tour Program

Spark

Global Moderator
If so, why is this such a big deal? After all its not like cricket equipment costs a lot of money. Cricket was played in places like india, pak and SL even when infrastructure wasn't that great and those days are fondly remembered. Granted, salaries for players from the smaller boards will be considerably less compared to Ind, Aus and Eng. But as you said cricket is not defined by making money, right?
Money is necessary to ensure cricket is viable because actually running a good professional cricket setup is expensive these days. But it doesn't exist to make money, it exists on its own terms. It's a necessity rather than the purpose of the whole thing.
 
Last edited:

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Money is necessary to ensure cricket is viable because actually running a good professional cricket setup is expensive these days. But it doesn't exist to make money, it exists on its own terms. It's a necessity rather than the purpose of the whole thing.
Yeah.

Simple way to put it is:

Administrators should raise money in order to serve cricket, they shouldn't play cricket to raise money.

The issue is of course making administrators accountable to that.
 

cricketrulez

Cricket Spectator
Money is necessary to ensure cricket is viable because actually running a good professional cricket setup is expensive these days. But it doesn't exist to make money, it exists on its own terms. It's a necessity rather than the purpose of the whole thing.
Why is it expensive? the salary you fetch in you profession depends on your country's economy. So does he facilities at the stadium etc. Smaller boards should get on with what they can afford.

If these smaller countries love cricket so much, they should convince their government to fund the sport. They just have to sacrifice on other stuff for the sake of the sport they love so much.

Every profession exists to make money.
 

ohnoitsyou

International Regular
Maybe. But the only way to judge popularity of a sport is by crowds and ratings. If people aren't willing to show up or watch, does it deserve to exist and be subsidized by people who are more interested in other formats. Those of us on the forum are in a bubble in some ways, our thoughts and opinions about formats don't really represent most fans.
Thats the standard question regarding subsidisation on any thing. To which i answer, yes it does, because test cricket isn't that heavily subsidized by LO in the first place (sure the smaller nations make losses on it, but the big 3 look like they make a pretty dollar from tests) and test cricket helps promote the shorter formats of the game (most people still see it as the pinnacle of the game even if they might prefer to watch and ODI), ie. with less test cricket, the popularity of LO games might decline.
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Well I feel sorry for you if this is your worldview because this is totally, manifestly wrong.
HUZZAH, Comrade Sparkle!

If it was solely about money, then why do people like Brendon McCullum still bother playing for NZ? He could be over in Australia right now earning money in the BBL. I'm sure plenty of teams over there would take him given how destructive he's been in the past.

Maybe Brendon has looked at his Hierarchy of Needs and has determined that the money he's earning right now from his central contract and potential IPL earnings is enough to meet his security needs and actually wants to challenge himself in the most intense examination of his cricketing ability there is - Test match cricket. Could this be a possibility?
 

Maximas

Cricketer Of The Year
Why is it expensive? the salary you fetch in you profession depends on your country's economy. So does he facilities at the stadium etc. Smaller boards should get on with what they can afford.

If these smaller countries love cricket so much, they should convince their government to fund the sport. They just have to sacrifice on other stuff for the sake of the sport they love so much.

Every profession exists to make money.
In Sri Lanka, the government is getting seriously pissed off with how much money it's costing to maintain the SL cricket board and its needs, so I don't particularly like this idea
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, pretty silly assertion, especially considering sportsman isn't a profession.

Think if cricketrulez thinks about the profession of teaching he'll get his answer.
 

theegyptian

International Vice-Captain
I hope with every ounce of my being that you and Muloghonto are very wrong.

With the future the two of you are predicting then maybe T20 cricket will become a more global game and will attract new followers..........but they will lose their existing ones for sure. Not sure it is a good business model to discard your existing client base and try and start from scratch.

The other thing is surely the players in great demand for T20 across the globe are only in demand for reputations and success obtained in the longer formats?? I do not believe that T20 cricket can or will survive on it's own, it might be where the Dollars are at this point in time but it is standing on the foundations of Tests and One dayers.
Sadly I think there is an inevitability about it now. The horse has bolted from the gate. Players can see the massive amount of money on offer in the IPL and only really the boards of England and Australia can offer competitive contracts to keep their players interested in test cricket. How do Zimbabweans or Sri Lankans or Pakistanis making barely enough to get by put test cricket ahead of a T20 superleague? These countries offer a pittance in comparison to England. In England you can make a decent living playing first class cricket- that's why you get plenty of people turning up from around the world in England to play first class cricket.

Countries are cancelling tests because they can't afford to host them. You've basically got 3 countries in England, Australia and India who could can sustain the current model. And even they struggle. Most of the first class counties are only held up by ECB money made from tours against India, Australian, and World cups.

This bilateral tour agreement thing may seem like a horrow show for the smaller countries but I'm guessing the Sri Lankan or ZImbabwean board is reasonably happy. They won't have to put on tests tours that lose them vast amounts of money. Now clearly this is terrible for the future development of these test playing nations but they are no longer losing massive money.

Cricket will lose some fans but gain a lot more. I'm indifferent about T20 cricket. It is cricket (regardless of what some people say) but I'm in no way engaged by the game in the same way as test or even 50 over cricket. There are little of the intricacies and tactics that are involved in test cricket. The recent SA IND drawn test was incredible but still the ground was far from full on that final day- a game which was between two of the best teams in the world. A game which was played over 5 days and with half an hour left both of the teams could still win, lose or draw. Where else can you get that?
With T20 batting becomes more and more about brute strength. Players are challenged less mentally.

T20 as a game appeals to the masses. It's exciting and short enough that you don't have to waste a day watching it. You can sell it profitably.

If you had more countries like England, Aus and India you could have a sustainable game but you don't - you have countries like Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Countries with massive troubles and big infrastructure and economic problems.
 

straw man

Hall of Fame Member
Look if you want to make money then go find a hedge fund manager. Cricket is defined on its own terms, not through making money. 20/20 is important support for Test cricket in terms of finance and attracting young audiences, sure, but Tests are what cricket are.
Yeah.

Simple way to put it is:

Administrators should raise money in order to serve cricket, they shouldn't play cricket to raise money.

The issue is of course making administrators accountable to that.
Right on
 

Top