ICC revamp

BCCI's demand for more revenue justified - Patel

ESPNcricinfo staff

January 30, 2014

Comments: 66 | Text size: A | A

BCCI secretary Sanjay Patel at the Pataudi lecture, Mumbai, November 13, 2013
Sanjay Patel said that most Full Members had accepted the suggested revamp proposal © BCCI
Enlarge

Sanjay Patel, the BCCI secretary, has said that the BCCI's demands for a larger share of the ICC's revenue are justified given India's commercial pull in world cricket.

The BCCI, along with Cricket Australia and the ECB, had drafted a "position paper" that stressed on a new revenue distribution model favourable to the Big Three boards. The "position paper" also suggested a new model of governance and changes to the existing Future Tours Programme (FTP) structure.

"(One) who is contributing more should get more than what they get," Patel told reporters on the sidelines of the Ranji Trophy final in Hyderabad. "Earlier we used to get only 4%, though we were responsible for generating more than 60-70% of the total revenue. So in that aspect, it is absolutely fair (to demand more) and by taking the governance model and joined with that, we are expecting the overall gross revenue will more than double within this cycle (2015-2023). The cricket part can be taken care of by utilising the well-generated revenue with good governance."

According to the proposed system, prepared by the three boards under ICC president Alan Isaac's instructions, the BCCI is expected to get nearly a third of the ICC's revenues. The Full Members were presented with the position paper at an ICC Board meeting on January 9 and the Big Three had hoped the proposal would be cleared during the meeting on January 28 and 29.

The members, however, failed to arrive at a conclusion on January 28, although the ICC announced that the key principles of the draft had "unanimous support" of the Full Members. In spite of the criticism generated after the original draft was leaked, Patel termed the paper and its recommendations as "positive" and said it had nothing to do with power games.

"We are quite okay with the position paper. There were a lot of misconceptions about the paper and it was a very good position paper whereby we were considering the Indian position in a real perspective rather than what has come out," Patel said. "I would like to say one thing - it has been mentioned that it is a power game that we are playing, but it was absolutely nothing regarding power. The role of leadership required at the ICC is to be provided by three big contributors, India, England and Australia. Since ours is a major contribution, in terms of cricket and financial things, it has been agreed by almost all of us [Full Members] regarding the financial concept of what we are claiming."

The proposed governance model resulted in opposition from various quarters, including many former ICC executives. It also meant that the rest of the Full Members entered the meeting on January 28 without clarity on several issues, including the two-tier Test system, the conversion of the FTP into bilateral arrangements and revenue distribution. Cricket South Africa, that was not a part of the proposed Test fund in the original draft, demanded the withdrawal of the suggested restructure. Patel, however, denied that any of the members registered their protest over the proposal.

"It was not a protest. Do not call it a protest. It is a deliberation they required, so complete freedom was provided to all members to discuss and learn," Patel said, adding that all topics were discussed in detail in Dubai. "There were two different meetings ranging between five-six hours and later at least some members preferred to go back to their Board and inform them about the reality. But, principally the entire issue of financial models, leadership and the governance has been accepted by all of them."

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by cric_roch on (February 2, 2014, 11:56 GMT)

If AUS cant win india, ENG cant win in AUS, SA cant win in UAE, SL cant win in UAE its all fine , but if india fails abroad......then its problem for every one

This is called jealousy , No other team has achieved half of what india could do in last five years...We were No 1 in tests , Won ODI,t20 world cups and champions trophy...T20 WC was in SA and Champions trophy was in ENG. Ofcourse foreign test series has been a problem in last season, that going to improved ,they did better than expected in SA?

Posted by RashidKhanGee on (February 1, 2014, 19:43 GMT)

Well its OK to say that BBCI and the other 2 contribute bigger revenue share in the ICC and you can argue that they should get a bigger slice but they have no right to ASK for executive control of the the ICC. Who will police them? what about the International Governance Code? Doest that apply to the ICC? Ethically it will be a disaster unless they are told..

"The Sensible 3" i.e SA,Pak & SL should seek a legal advice to see if after the revamp will it effect the ICC responsibility to the stakeholders at large i.e the affiliate members and the fans

Posted by TheTrueView on (February 1, 2014, 19:39 GMT)

How is BBCI's demand which is, yes the capitalistic view, related to the destroying of Taj Mahal? No logic here. @ stromy 16 - comments are the best and logical.

Posted by SrinR on (February 1, 2014, 5:50 GMT)

I'm with cricraz (January 31, 2014, 1:05 GMT) on this: "If they utilize this extra money to improve the stadium facilities for the fans and improve the salaries and facilities for local players, then it is worth demanding their share of the revenue."

If the BCCI administrators had come out with a clear set of proposals for how they would utilise this extra money they're demanding, they would not have antagonised so many people. Now, they've made themselves look greedy and arrogant. Very poor communicators they are!

It is the truth that among test cricket playing countries, population-wise, India is so large that it can fit all of these countries in itself and still have numbers left over. It is also afflicted with unimaginable levels of poverty.

If the BCCI can start a massive investment program in all corners of the country, remunerate every ground maintenance worker and local-level player - especially start nutrition supplementary programs for young players, will be worthwhile.

Posted by Arshad_786 on (February 1, 2014, 4:52 GMT)

Mr. Patel BCCI is already the richest. With Power comes responsibility. I guess India is too immature to practice responsibility and is throwing a tantrum. Greed kills. India along with British and the Australians will destroy Cricket if Pakistan, Sri Lanka and South Africa don't stop this out of control train.

Posted by Greatest_Game on (January 31, 2014, 19:24 GMT)

@ Narayanan_Iyer writes "I just don't understand why ... fans, expect BCCI, CA & ECB, to pay for the development of Cricket in their countries! Your expectation is like wanting the neighbors to pay for your credit card bills!"

ICC income is NOT derived from bilateral tours, but from ICC competitions. When fans purchase the "product" called "ICC Cricket," it goes on their credit cards. It does not go on any country's cricket board's credit card.

When consumers make a purchase, what right do they have have to ask for the money back? The consumer makes the choice, is delivered the "product," & has no "right" to refund. Do Indian consumers get back money they "spend' watching American football or Bollywood movies?

The BCCI has no mandate to represent the Indian consumer. Until ALL Indians can vote directly in BCCI elections, the BCCI has not that right. If BCCI elections were held so, a cricketer like Dravid etc would be in charge, & nonsense like this would never occur. NEVER!

Posted by warneneverchuck on (January 31, 2014, 18:50 GMT)

They r generating more revenue which is require for survival of any game so nothing wrong in asking for power and money

Posted by Cricksajjad on (January 31, 2014, 15:14 GMT)

Future of only three is IPL Future of cricket only three Future of Big three is Only three

Posted by stonk on (January 31, 2014, 12:06 GMT)

India claims to derive 80% of iCC income. Who did the sums? This means any side touring India does not give any Value Added to the series. India's touring record in recent times is dreadful, to say the least.

Posted by GlobalCricketLover on (January 31, 2014, 11:40 GMT)

asking for more money is ok, why are you asking for more power/decision making? What is the justification for that??

Posted by stormy16 on (January 31, 2014, 11:28 GMT)

I think there is merit in discussing proportion of revenue taken by a board in relation to the proportion earned for the ICC but I dont see how this discussion needs to extend to two tiers, selective playing of test cricket, mandatory hosting of ICC events, inability to relegate the greedy 3 and the list goes on. All these other factors should not form a basis for the reveue allocation. The notion that the richer board by virtue of their financial might should lead the ICC is nothing short of nonsense! More money doesnt mean your better at leading and it certainly doesnt mean your better at cricket - as India just found out in SA and NZ. Any leader from the member nations is capable of leading the ICC for a term - surely! What ever discussion takes place the essense of 'sport' should not be compromised which calls for a level playing for competitors. You cannot just pick and chose who you play and then claim to be the best or worst, that is simply not sport.

Posted by kentjones on (January 31, 2014, 11:24 GMT)

It is clear that although the proposal speaks of three, meaning an oligopoly, in reality it is one, a monopoly, which is India. The worrying aspect of such an arrangement, is that the one often seeks its own benefit at the expense of the others. Words like dictator, tyrant, despot, autocrat, come to mind at this point. None of the aforementioned words are associated with kind, caring, compassionate or generous. If the proposal is accepted, I forecast that there will be many battles among the top three, as India rises to finally assert its authority over the other two, A ad E and ultimately over the game itself. This proposal announces that cricket is now crafted and developed in the boardroom rather on the field of play. Thus the major decisions may not have anything to do with the game's interest but rather the administrators' interest. This is a cause for major concern for all cricket lovers around the world, we must voice our disapproval! What are you doing about it?

Posted by reality_check on (January 31, 2014, 11:14 GMT)

Ok Mr. Patel. BCCI can keep all the money it deserves BUT leave the power in the hands of ICC and try to fix FTP and not abolish it and make an effort to play with ALL the full member teams and not just whom you want to play with.

BCCI will never agree to this because it's not about money ... BCCI already has enough of it, it's about power over cricket.

Posted by Vikram_Rathore on (January 31, 2014, 11:03 GMT)

I just don't understand why SL, PAK & BCB fans, expect BCCI, CA & ECB, to pay for the development of Cricket in their countries! Your expectation is like wanting the neighbors to pay for your credit card bills! Had you alluded to ICC spending money to develop cricket in countries such as Ethiopia, Brazil, Indonesia, Afghanistan etc., then there is some merit. Pak, SL & BCB are already test playing nations, full-members of the ICC! Why should ECB, CA & BCCI generate money from our country to fund you? You ask your government for funding. If you still feel there is logic in your apprehension on the Big 3 move, please have FIFA fund for the development of football in India or IRB to sponsor building Rugby stadiums in Coorg.

Posted by SanjivAwesome on (January 31, 2014, 10:36 GMT)

I see the begging bowls are clanging for more Indian money! If (some! based on posts here) of the smaller Board's administrators had as much self-respect as their fans have in these columns, they would learn self- sufficiency! As it is, they appear too lazy to work for their fan's self esteem, preferring to grovel for un-earned money.

Posted by Cricket_Master_Mind on (January 31, 2014, 10:31 GMT)

I really can't understand this WHY they think like that. ICC is not inherited Property of BCCI or Big 3. It was an organization made and run by all countries. For instance: Kohli perform better than all in indian team now if he says i am contributing more in team give me Indian team, I will be capitine, i will select players who will play. And i will decide who goona make $ what huh..?? is that OK

That is what Big three doing. ICC is team its not individual game like tennis. All countries round the world made ICC looks nice. Just like a parts of body every body have their own importance. This Big Three Plan is Full of Foolish things and nothing else. They destroying cricket. 90% viewers against it. If they stop watching cricket than what. This Game is going no where because of this Childish claim by big 3. i iwll stop following cricket if they succeeded.

Posted by Attractivue on (January 31, 2014, 10:26 GMT)

Greed certainly has no limit! They don't care about the glory and prestige of the cricket! I say, the other 5 boards should say, keep your revenues, us little 5 will play with each other, we will have our own world cup and share revenue equally!

Posted by android_user on (January 31, 2014, 10:13 GMT)

Very evident BCCI is put money before cricket! The last two series in SA and NZ I.e. two second tier teams according to BCCI clearly shows that money does not play in the field. Waiting for the day where they will only play the IPL

Posted by Ausmani on (January 31, 2014, 9:30 GMT)

It is quite obvious that this so called giant of cricket is trying to control the ICC management, imperialism what these 3 biggies are trying to impose on cricket world, say them tata and give them what they deserve, a nice FAREWELL so they can play with each other and can keep the 100% of the share, rather BCCI can keep all the share by playing themselves.

Posted by blairfitz on (January 31, 2014, 9:22 GMT)

Yes good to see BCCI worried about how much money they get when they have been easily beaten by the kiwi's who have a far less cricketing population. They really have their priorities a little backwards. The whole not being demoted is rubbish as right now teams ranked below England and India are playing far better cricket

Posted by Samar_Singh on (January 31, 2014, 9:19 GMT)

This revamp is not just about big share of pie they are looking for but the centralization of power to 3 boards which is never good for the game. How much revenue BCCI generates from their first class cricket ?Not a single penny so revenue are generated in international games only for that two team is required and both the team cannot be India. So it is the joint contribution of two teams which helps BCCI generated revenue.

Posted by Suresh.C on (January 31, 2014, 8:29 GMT)

BCCI should stop focusing on money and start grooming palyers for the future. They have to realise without cricket there is no money. The way the Indians perform abroad soon cricket will die.

Posted by A.Sarkar17 on (January 31, 2014, 7:42 GMT)

Interesting logic by BCCI. So those paying the highest taxes should be entitled to the maximum share of subsidies while the non tax payers should be asked to fend for themselves!

Posted by parvinder7 on (January 31, 2014, 7:27 GMT)

look cricket fans the only thing i agree with here is how come india is giving 80per cent of its revenue to icc. Why cant south africa, england and australia give icc 80per cent of their money. Its shocking and very bad that india is paying that much money to icc. I never imagined cricket boards around the world are living of indias money. Your right Patel india should give the same amount as england, australia and the rest. India is not gonna be powerful forever, so its better to stock up now before the hard times hit. Let the other cricket boards contribute to icc. India you should be very proud that your money has kept everybody from going broke.

Posted by Abhijeth_Manohar on (January 31, 2014, 7:14 GMT)

4% of 60-70% of the revenue - seriously. And when BCCI ask for 30% of that, you have a problem. What if your money was being taken away??

About time BCCI and India claimed what is really their contribution to the ICC pile. Australia and England can keep playing all the ashes they want and think they contribute to world cricket more than India.

Posted by crickluv on (January 31, 2014, 6:41 GMT)

You know what, Mr Patel? Have all the money you want! But with this money, you:

- pay all female professional cricketers properly (or pay them at all!) - support young cricketers WORLDWIDE - organize 5-Test-series between e.g. New Zealand and the West Indies - set up a proper anti-corruption agency - bring back cricket to terrestrial TV - promote several associate countries to full members - finance first-class competitions in all countries

Because the money has to go back into cricket !!! And without proper competition, even the great BCCI will be soon forgotten.

Posted by indi_army on (January 31, 2014, 6:28 GMT)

BCCI is looking to draw more money on the point, it is India who is earning ICC 80% of the total revenue.But look at the performance of Indian Players past six months or so.It's dismal and it's below 20% to say the least. BCCI think about improving your players performance first and then get back to your money thing. How about telling /warning Indian players it would create a hole on your IPL budget if you fail to perform for India.See how the performance shoots up. :P

Posted by keptalittlelow on (January 31, 2014, 6:20 GMT)

India was given a very large share than they deserved for fifty years, which helped them survive and grow, now they dont want to share the money, time is never the same, world will remember them.

Posted by espncricinfomobile on (January 31, 2014, 5:35 GMT)

It's unfortunate that the players would miss out here but South Africa should withdraw their players from IPL and champions league , these are not ICC events and we should play a maximum of 2 test in India. Everybody wants to play the number 1, we won't struggle for competition.

Posted by stonk on (January 31, 2014, 3:22 GMT)

India thinks it can use it's supposed financial muscle at the ICC. They are the worst tourists going by their recent record and having 1.2 billion cricket mad citizens does not entitle it to the lions share of anything. The rest of the test playing nations should band together and isolate India by not touring there and not having them as tourists. Then they can have the lions share which amounts to nothing as 100% of nothing is still nothing. Get Haroon Lorgat back to the ICC where he belongs as CEO of CSA and he will sort out the likes of Srinivasan and Patel who imagines ICC democracy is dependent on BCCI, ECB and CA.The ICC used to be known as the Imperial Cricket Council and these three are trying to bring back imperialism. The development of cricket worldwide is more important than the bruised Egos of individual administrators. Show the BCCI the door before it gets too big for it;s boots.

Posted by tanweeralam on (January 31, 2014, 1:55 GMT)

Till the point it is in terms of finance its fine get more cash no problem. Problen is when you demand more autocratic power and start hurting cricket

Posted by Big_3_kills_Cricket on (January 31, 2014, 1:41 GMT)

The ancestors had a broad sense to expand cricket as a sport & popularize all around the world like Football. Now what these guys are doing?. Cricket will no longer be a sport after these proposals come in to action. Countries except this so called "Big 3' will slowly die as it wont get much payment for its players and they might opt for doing a full time job instead wasting time in cricket. Fans will no longer turn up to see cricket as there wont be much talented players around in the future. Diversity of cricket will die and fans will be bored as there will be only 3 nations playing each other all around the year. Finally the cricket BUSINESS will also collapsed as fans does not want to see boring cricket (Specially shorter formats ) without SA/PAK/SL.

Posted by ODI_BestFormOfCricket on (January 31, 2014, 1:36 GMT)

India is a huge country with thoushands of professional cricketters. Only national players and ranji players getting decent salary, other district, zonal players are not. India's total professional cricketters will outnumber world's other total cricketting nation's player. So asking more share by BCCI is not wrong bcz i want bcci to feed every professional players in india. BUT I COMPLETELY AGAINST TOP 3 CONCEPT.

Posted by cricraz on (January 31, 2014, 1:05 GMT)

India is a large country and needs to improve the facilities for Ranji players in all the states.They also need to improve the stadium facilities for the fans all over India. If they utilize this extra money to improve the stadium facilities for the fans and improve the salaries and facilities for local players, then it is worth demanding their share of the revenue. The National players and administrators are making a boatload of money and dont deserve any extra money.

Posted by Little_Aussie_Battler on (January 31, 2014, 0:43 GMT)

Maybe cricket needs to concentrate more on developing cricket in nations with strong economies. Places like Ireland, Canada, Scotland, Holland etc.. and cut back the number of these third world states cricket seems to be overflowing with.

Posted by   on (January 31, 2014, 0:35 GMT)

Patel says: "Those who contribute more should get back more".

A Malayalam proverb from yesteryears says: "What you give by the right hand should not be taken back by the left hand"

Another one: "What the right hand gives as charity; the left hand need not even know"

Modern Management theories, have almost killed both those beautiful old proverbs.

Capital Investment theory says. "Don't put capital in anything unless the ROI (Return on Investment) covers not only the Cost of Capital, but also covers reward for taking entrepreneurial risk. Enterprise is also one of the factors of production. And all factors of production should bring in returns."

The second proverb has also been crushed and thrown out of the window, when we teach all the concepts tools & techniques for Advertising, Promotion & Public Relations".

What kind of Frankenstein Monsters have been created by the apparent success of modern capitalism & from the demise of egalitarianism. Oh good Lord, forgive us!

Posted by KingOwl on (January 30, 2014, 23:52 GMT)

There is a fundamental flaw in this argument. India does not contribute more. In fact, the best and most entertaining teams and players contribute the most. One could say that South Africa and Sri Lanka (part of the have nots) contribute more to the game of cricket than many. SL are the T20 table leaders (and a constant in all big ICC tournaments) and SA are the test leaders. Some of the most sought after cricketers come from the 'have nots' as well. Sure, India are a strong team, albeit helped a lot by 'India friendly' wickets prepared by most countries these days. But let us not confuse who 'contributes'. Those who contribute are the nations with the biggest stars. And they are certainly not predominantly Indians (except for Kohli and Dhoni). Indian fans are attracted to cricket due to the mega international stars. Indian fans are certainly valuable as customers. But the value is generated by the international stars, not by the fans. Let us not destroy those who create value.

Posted by Shaun_G on (January 30, 2014, 23:43 GMT)

Has no one heard of the English premier league? Considered the best football league in the world they generate ridiculous amount of tv sponsorship money, but they distribute it evenly to all 20 premier league teams. No matter if your man united, Chelsea or Swansea! This ensures that all have money to compete and the teams are free to make as much money as they can from their own sponsorship deals... There needs to be a fair system where money generated go to building and improving the game worldwide eg. The associate nations! Instead of killing them off we need more ODI and T20I eligible teams to help develop worldwide and encourage teams through experience to gain test status. I'm already losing interest in watching asu v eng, and aus v ind over and over again.... Kinda of loses importance for me who have been a huge cricket fan for 30 years!!! I'm more interested in who is going to qualify for this coming World Cup

Posted by ifti71 on (January 30, 2014, 23:31 GMT)

I wish and hope the Cricket boards around the world were run and managed by People who love this game rather than people who love Dollars & Pounds.

I am extremely dissapointed that apart from Sir Jeffery & Mike Atherton none of the past & present Cricketing icons came forward to save the game from these Businessmen.

Perhaps the Past & present cricketers are waiting for their share in the future ICC (Imperial cricket conference) Empire.

Posted by sentb4u on (January 30, 2014, 21:40 GMT)

I support BCCI decision. I just want to know how many grounds/cricket facilities they have built as of today across india for younger generation.

Posted by Chris_P on (January 30, 2014, 21:36 GMT)

Wow, Gordon Gheko's "greed is good" philosophy has been taken as the BCCI logo. What about developing other nations in your area? What's wrong with incorporating BD teams within your current FC structure to allow them vital experience in preparing to be test players of note? What about giving some sponsorship to grass level sports to get all eligible kids interested in playing this great game? Why do some players get 10's of million of dollars while kids can't play the game in some areas? Way to go, Gordon, I mean Sanjay.

Posted by mzm149 on (January 30, 2014, 20:50 GMT)

When you violate FTPs, play most of the games at home, play 7 games ODI and 5 games test series most of the time, you sure are bound to generate more revenue. BTW in all those games there is always an opposition. Money is not coming just because of you. What's the logic on that if you are bringing more money, you should try to control admins traffics affairs. This is totally rubbish.

Posted by asim229 on (January 30, 2014, 20:50 GMT)

If BCCI just want more revenue then they could request ICC and don't need to change whole structure. If it is only revenue then why you need veto power, big 3, two-tier,and administrative posts only shared between big3. I think BCCI already make a lot more money than other boards and they are not having any financial issues then why not share this money for the global development of game.

Posted by Greatest_Game on (January 30, 2014, 20:39 GMT)

Simple fact: the BCCI does not bring in any ICC money. Fans pay the ICC to see the competitions. The fans pay for the product - they don't expect to get the money back. The BCCI should not expect it either. They have no legitimate claim to the money. It was never theirs, or generated by them. If no Indian team plays, and a billion Indians watch a game, should the BCCI get the money too? Should the BCCI get back the money Indian viewers pay to watch the Winter Olympics, or World Cup soccer, or American football, or Rugby?

There is no legitimate basis for the BCCI's claim. Period.

Cricinfo - 6 times you have refused to post a post of mine in which I state this fairly simple truth. If you can publish Andy Zaltsman's version, why will you not publish mine?

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (January 30, 2014, 20:13 GMT)

Cricket has NEVER been a 'gentleman game'. Why ? Because it has always been plagued by racism, nationalism, ethnic differences, quota systems etc. Those of you who equate India's domination to that of England and Australia back in the old days simply have no clue. While I don't endorse or support the BCCI in any way, I do however recognize their rightful claim over netting back the most profit share from the sport. Back in the old days, England and Australia virtually discriminated against the 'non white' nations by not willing to accept bilateral tours on the grounds of personal safety, hygiene, cultural phobia etc. Have India done the same ? No. Some Pakistani fans will remember how England and Australia used to call off originally agreed upon tours to the country. Sri Lankans will also remember how all the 'white' countries refused to play in Sri Lanka during the world cup in 1996 due to domestic violence. The BCCI are not half bad coming to think of it.

Posted by Rahulbose on (January 30, 2014, 20:12 GMT)

If you are the leader and you want to grow your share of the pie. Then you should try to grow the size of the pie and not focus on how big a cut you get. When the game grows bigger everyone benefits, when you marginalize and focus on your share its likely the pie will shrink.

Posted by espncricinfomobile on (January 30, 2014, 19:44 GMT)

There is no point in commenting! These boards make money by the fans but they don't care anything further ! If BCCI think they are bigger than ICC then they can be out of ICC and let everyone else play ICC cricket within it means. The question is how much BCCI will make if it's not a ICC member?

Posted by   on (January 30, 2014, 19:23 GMT)

Indians always has performed in home conditions. They have proved that they are the best in the world by playing only in India. Out of India their performance is so poor. The current tour to New Zealand proves that. What they have done is they've turned the attention out of their defeats in Kiwi Land. Coward Indians always wanted to show that they are the best. Now they want the 1/3 of power & revenue share for them. This is ridiculous. Why ICC don't promote cricket in USA, China & Russia? Simply Indians don't want more opponents & they don't want to waste their super energy & super money to other nations. If this Big 3 gets green flag, then we can say RIP cricket.....!

Posted by Nuxxy on (January 30, 2014, 18:54 GMT)

@cricket-spoiled-me: "We definitely need more." Why? If the BCCI was in dire financial straights, sure. But they are not. None of the big 3 are. This is part of the problem. The money shouldn't be going to deep pockets. It should be going to countries that need it.

Posted by IndiaRulesEverybody on (January 30, 2014, 18:46 GMT)

Mr. Patel no need to justify to anybody why India needs to have their share of the revenues. What is ours is ours, no justifications needed.

Posted by cricket-spoiled-me on (January 30, 2014, 18:38 GMT)

Generating 60-70% income and getting back only 4%. We definitely need more. This is fair.

Posted by Sameer-hbk on (January 30, 2014, 18:35 GMT)

It is amazing how Cricket fans in general think money is so trivial when it concerns the game. But when each of us is offered more in a foreign country, we are glad to take it. Yet, players can't play in IPL leaving national duty! There was a time when foreign players would not want to get aboard that ship to India. Once money came in, now those same people as commentators say "we always loved Indian culture, blah blah". Legends who would not even set foot outside a docked ship cabin, let alone tour India. And yes IT IS all about money. If anyone has a doubt about it, ask WICB about the fate of the 2007 WC... India's importance is well earned. If Aus, SA, Pak and Eng fans want their own boards and teams to get same importance at the ICC table, start going to grounds, watch matches and support them by spending your money. Complaining about BCCI will not change a thing. This is not supporting BCCI, just the reality.

Posted by cricket-spoiled-me on (January 30, 2014, 18:34 GMT)

@Shabeeb: because every IPL team pays equal taxes.

Posted by fijindu on (January 30, 2014, 17:53 GMT)

Tonyton, please don't bring the past into the equation especially ECB and England when it comes to issues regarding India cricket or otherwise. Why go back 25 years. If you want to bring in the past why not 250 years.

Posted by Pippy_the_dog on (January 30, 2014, 17:51 GMT)

Durgesh… Some of us don't see cricket as a business. If some have far greater resources its going to be bad if you want to see competitive cricket matches. Sports become very dull when one team consistently dominates. If you want to follow a business, might I suggest KFC?

Posted by vish2020 on (January 30, 2014, 17:40 GMT)

@tonyton CA and ECB use to take money from teams before they visited so india doest owe anything to return and Has BCCI ever charged like that?? They are only talking about taking more back of what is mostly their pot of money. They provide 3 fourth of cricket revenue and that's just sad to know. How can a world be dependent on only one country for most their cricket revenue? Your counties and fans have to do things or you all are the reason why cricket will die and not India because India is doing its job with more then enough work. Wake up!

Posted by WeldonHosten on (January 30, 2014, 17:37 GMT)

This will end very bad down the road. I see this as the end to the gentleman's sport that was once. As I previously said, the BCCI is not the largest contibutor to cricket. The players and the supporting pulic are. Now the overall numbers in India may be more but as a per capita contribution, India is not contributing more that even the least contributor. It is wrong what is being done to the game. This looks similar to the IPL and the ICL.

Posted by ani_drexel on (January 30, 2014, 17:32 GMT)

Whoever was in their position they would have done the same. Just that these people are much smarter in business, which is not bad for them. Your effort, your money. Let karma (if it exists) bite them later. I have stopped watching cricket, its more of business and entertainment more than a sport. Sad, but true. I feel for other boards, honestly. This is the thing we have to get used to it and I don't want to be a part of it. I have enjoyed watching some of the classic cricket matches (86 born, so I guess you all can imagine) and I know some of those matches (Ind Pak) will never take place the same way it used to.Whatever BCCI. Lets unite and bring their TRP down, maybe we can collectively be karma for them and teach them a lesson. I am doing it, assuming you all will do too. Cheers.

Posted by espncricinfomobile on (January 30, 2014, 17:22 GMT)

why there is no big three in IPL

Posted by Atish_Man on (January 30, 2014, 17:20 GMT)

How much money you want...? I feel like giving my savings to these guyes. Then they will feel happy.

Posted by tonyton on (January 30, 2014, 17:02 GMT)

Interesting, a board now wants bigger share because there is growth in its general contribution. Hmmm IPL without foreign players, Anyone think it will be as successful, same with so called Champions league that has 4 teams from India. Foreign teams boycott, would there be the same success? Go back 25 years, What was India's contribution, hmm did they send back money to CA or ECB for being the biggest contributors, or even WI, which almost assured full stadiums anywhere they played. Greed has it limits, karma will catch up someday

Posted by Ropsh on (January 30, 2014, 16:53 GMT)

And that's not a bad thing.

Posted by Biggus on (January 30, 2014, 16:52 GMT)

I would like to hear his justification for the proposed 'non relegation' clause. Money again I suppose.

Posted by espncricinfomobile on (January 30, 2014, 16:50 GMT)

It is only fair that one who gives in more should get more. After all one cannot do a business when one is incurring loss. BCCI's contribution is more so they should get more.

Posted by IrtizaRizvi on (January 30, 2014, 16:33 GMT)

Its all about money all for India.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
ESPNcricinfo staffClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days