How exactly is it irrelevant.C_C said:That is quite irrelevant.
Yes but that is not relevant to the discussion of who had more impact for what you state is simply a matter of chronology and espouses the view that chronological precedence equals to higher impact. By that logic, the guy who invented the see-saw is a bigger genuis than the guy who invented a car, the guy who invented the wheel is a bigger genius than anyone else after him, etc etc.marc71178 said:How exactly is it irrelevant.
Without Packer's actions, Dalmiya's wouldn't have been able to even happen.
You can argue the same with Grace and Bradman can't you?marc71178 said:How exactly is it irrelevant.
Without Packer's actions, Dalmiya's wouldn't have been able to even happen.
HK, Sing Sharjah were set up years ago and successful tournaments have been run in those countries for almost as long.C_C said:On a strictly amatuer level- and i dont recall the british EVER introducing cricket at Sharjah.
Dalmiya made them not only into commercially sustainable venues but also helped set up the basic governance of cricket in an organised fashion there.
Sharjah isnt lost-its just blackballed currently due to matchfixing controversy. Suffice to say, cricket will be back there.
Cricket is ICC, just as football is FIFA, hockey is NHL and tennis is ATP/WTA.
Yeah. They just play on the beach.
![]()
The setup and logistics of which, FYI, was done by Dalmiya. He was the organiser for it- and organisers are the one who deserve most of the credit.
Again- half truths. The stadium at Bassejeur was helped largely by the BCCI in logistics.
Categorically false. Most of the funding in infrastructure construction has come from the ICC- which gets it from India and the it was set up by -you guessed it - Dalmiya.
Both Brian Lara stadium and the new stadium in Guyana are being helped logistically by BCCI and funded by Indian construction companies- a shotlist put together by Dalmiya no less.
You know f-all about PPP if you think real-estate market is the benchmark for it. And no, prices of most other items in the consumer market have not gone up 1000% in the last 30 years in the western world.
No- cricketers have Packer to thank for making them merely self sufficient. They have Dalmiya to thank for commercialising cricket- Packer didnt commercialise cricket- that is a myth. He just hijacked cricket and made a lotta dosh out of it. But players were NOT millionaires or having endorsements left right and center for long after Packer was gone.
That was facilitated by Dalmiya.
Not really, because they were both starting from the same sort of base level.Jono said:You can argue the same with Grace and Bradman can't you?
Quite correct- they were set up years ago- in the 80s and early 90s - under Dalmiya's initiative. His work didnt just begin in the mid 90s when he became ICC head.HK, Sing Sharjah were set up years ago and successful tournaments have been run in those countries for almost as long.
I do and i have. And i find Packer's reputation to be massively inflated due to nationalistic and ethnic pride. Otherwise, he is nothing more than a Don King - a promoter who did nothing substantial for the game, its players and its development beyond mostly cosmetic facelifts and its insulting to Dalmiya to rate Packer ahead- given that Dalmiya's contribution is far more substantial at all levels - developmental, player support and finance of cricket.Packer/Dalmiya, whatever - I suggest that you do your homework on the prevailing circumstances in the 70s as you might then begin to grasp the significance of the events that took place at that time.
HKCC Kowloon CC and Sing CC have been around for decades longer than that and their fortunes have been secure since day dot as they flourished initially under colonial largesse and then from expat company fundingC_C said:Quite correct- they were set up years ago- in the 80s and early 90s - under Dalmiya's initiative. His work didnt just begin in the mid 90s when he became ICC head.
I do and i have. And i find Packer's reputation to be massively inflated due to nationalistic and ethnic pride. Otherwise, he is nothing more than a Don King - a promoter who did nothing substantial for the game, its players and its development beyond mostly cosmetic facelifts and its insulting to Dalmiya to rate Packer ahead- given that Dalmiya's contribution is far more substantial at all levels - developmental, player support and finance of cricket.
Poker Boy said:One day cricket was popular in India BEFORE Dalmiya - since they won the 1983 WC. And if I'm right it was when SA came to India in 1991 that the Indian TV boom started - when SA TV offered the Indian board money for the TV rights. Before that (and if I'm wrong I'm sure I'll be told) did India's equivalent of the BBC not pay the Indian board even one rupee to cover cricket? My point is that Dalmiya took advantage of a situation - had he been around in the 1980s he couldn't have. And I still say his spell at ther ICC was a disaster.
C_C said:Did you read the article i posted ?
Dalmiya was involved with the ICC and BCCI since the 80s- right from the reliance world cup. He didnt just pop into existance as the chief of ICC.