India, Australia and England in attempt to take control of cricket

1.Who said there isnt black money in India?

Point is posters claimed that pre 2005 notes wont be exchanged after 6 months.A Lie.

BCCI launders black money.When Bcci makes money from sponsors team rights telecast deals.All with big corporates via legal agreements.This money is not black money

2.Any cash transaction over 50k in India in banks requires you to give your PAN no. And so you cant just walk into a bank and exchange millions.

3.What has gangsters and their links to banks got to do anything about the big 3 proposal?

 

Some thick skulls think every Indian note is black money.People can exchange their notes for as long as they want.

Expect some bitter brit pakistani to make predictions about India and Indian economy almost all of them to be lies.

 

I was talking in general, not about BCCI.

 

Remarkably, some Indians posting in this thread cannot read English.

 

8 february is the next meeting. Everything will be crystal clear by then. Now it's up to the evil triangle if they can create any crack up on the PCB-SAC-SLC-BCB bond. SLC looks to be a bit political right now. They may shift. So it's necessary to somehow pull out AC or ECB. They won't make that much! WI is making a huge mistake. The fact is Cricket is dying and they don't care. Like basketball they want just moolah. Shame.

 

Don't you know they talk Indian English! Dude... must know that!

 

Bcb dar gaya

 

BCB is gone. Pro-Indian govt. did it. They will be the first to be kicked out Test Cricket. Shame!

 

Now they're probably pressuring SLC behind the curtains.

 

Well BCB has folded. Looks like SLC will be next

I am still proud that we didn't give in

 

They still have time before the next meeting. A lot of lollipops will be offered. CSA, PCB, SL need to hold firm.

 

I think the big 3 will still want a unanimous agreement. once SLC folds, they might then go back to the other guys, and say look, the vote will go against you anyways. We will give you a chance to atleast save face.

This is good business and probably happens.

 

BCB's sudden betrayal caused us immense damage. It's really sad that even though they wanted to fold they should have folded so late that the 3 thieves can't make any step towards Sri Lanka. In that way Bangladesh would have been safe and so are Lankans. It also proves that we were not playing as a team and they caught us unprepared. Not to mention India lobbied for this for almost 6 months. No wonder they stole the WC same way! Everything is opening up right now. This is what they meant to Haroon Largat when they threatened him 3-4 months ago.

 

this is an article from MArch 2006. I'm surprised ICC didn't see this coming.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/236007.html

For two decades now, ever since the bitter wrangling for the 1987 World Cup, there has been one recurring battle in the boardrooms of international cricket: BCCI versus ICC. As the rising cricket economy, India - rather, the Board of Control for Cricket in India - has wanted a greater voice in the ICC.

The contours of this conflict are well known. India fought for the right to stage the 1987 and 1996 World Cups, pressed the ICC to award every third World Cup to Asia, and insisted the ICC presidency couldn't stay an Anglo-Australian preserve. This led to, eventually, Jagmohan Dalmiya becoming ICC chief, and the policy of rotating the presidency between the various member countries taking hold. As such, the ICC today has a Pakistani president, Ehsan Mani, something unimaginable in, say, 1986.

Modern diplomacy is increasingly driven by economic compulsions such as trade. Cricket has not been immune to this. In recent years the BCCI's differences with the ICC have tended to focus less on emotional and interpersonal issues and more on money. This manifested itself, most famously, right before the 2003 World Cup in South Africa, when individual sponsorship deals signed by Indian players clashed with those signed by tournament organisers. What was a skirmish then is today a full-fledged war.

In January 2006, the new management at the BCCI - particularly Shashank Manohar, Inderjit Singh Bindra and the pugnacious Lalit Modi - began cricket's second World War. They essentially told the ICC that they weren't interested in the Champions Trophy - a month-long waste of time that, for the most part, sees such meaningless contests as India versus Ireland or Scotland - and wanted a more equitable cricket calendar that gave India more home games. Simultaneously Modi also began outlining a more aggressive marketing agenda for the BCCI's own properties - such as television rights for all cricket played in India. This was not entirely delinked from the screaming match with the ICC.

What Modi was saying was that he wanted changes in the ICC calendar to accommodate India's need to play more matches at home.

To the uninitiated, cricket's endless backroom cloak-and-dagger deals must seem infuriatingly complex. This need not be so. In effect, it comes down to the primary motivation of wanting to make more money. Breaking up the current controversy into its three ingredient capsules will help us understand it better.

From council to cartel
In a sense, what Modi is proposing is the evolution of the ICC from cricket's United Nations General Assembly to its World Trade Organisation. In the 1990s, with Dalmiya in the thick of things, the battle lines in the ICC were, roughly, influenced by colour: white England and Australia versus brown/coloured India and Pakistan. This led to rhetoric about "imperialism" and, equally bogus, "Asian solidarity". In 1996, when Australia refused to play in Sri Lanka during the World Cup - they cited terrorism fears - India and Pakistan sent a joint team to Colombo for an exhibition match, and made a political statement.

The desire to sideline the Anglo-Australian twosome and win Dalmiya and the Asian contingent more allies was all-consuming. It caused, for instance, the ICC to award full Test rights to Bangladesh well before that country was ready for it. Since the men who ran Indian and Bangladeshi cricket at that point were close buddies, it was agreed that India would play Bangladesh practically every year, all for the cause of "developing cricket". The Asia Cup was promoted as a sort of alternative world Championship - the only regional tournament featuring three World Cup winners.

Now that era is over. As one official puts it, "This is no longer about the ICC vote bank." Cricket's stakeholders have refined their perceptions, learning to differentiate between valuable matches and cut-price ones. The 2004 India tour of Bangladesh was a drain for sportscaster ESPN-Star. The Asia Cup - which was due to be played in January-February 2006 but which the new BCCI got postponed, more or less calling it a waste of time - is hardly a big-ticket event. The buzz, the sponsors and the television audiences come only when India plays the top guns.

As such, from the old "black versus white" war zone, the ICC is moving towards a cartelisation of cricket's "mature markets" - India, Australia and England. Again, turn to a diplomatic analogy. With Non-Alignment, South-South cooperation and third world-ism, India finds itself burdened by the legacies of history. It realises its natural seat at the high table is not compatible with endless engagement with lesser powers. As in diplomacy, so in cricket: the BCCI wants to play Australia and England more often than it does Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. It sees this as a mutually-enriching, profitable enterprise, the old "Asian alliances" be damned.

The calendar wars
One of Dalmiya's gifts to cricket was the five-year international cricket calendar. Till the early 1990s, cricket matches were negotiated bilaterally. The Indian cricket board met the Pakistani board and agreed to tour in month X; then it met the New Zealand board and agreed to host their team in month Y. Gaps were filled in with ad hoc tournaments, and tours conceived or cancelled at short notice. A certainly hierarchy was built into this. England, for instance, toured the subcontinent on sufferance. Australia gave India a series down under once a decade - 1967-68, 1977-78, 1985-86. The ICC calendar changed all that. It made it incumbent for every team to play every other at regular intervals, home and away.

Now the power wheel has done a full circle. It is India that finds the ICC calendar stifling and unable to meet its aspirations. As a report in the London Observer in January pointed out, India generates over 50 per cent of cricket's business but gets only a seventh of its home games. Home games are vital because this is where the host board can make most of its money, hawking sponsorship rights, doing television deals. On an overseas tour, the visiting board is fobbed off with guarantee money.

Just how unfair the ICC calendar could be became clear when the draft fixtures schedule for 2006-12 was presented to the ICC in Melbourne in October 2005. Australia was promised 124 weeks of home internationals, England 110. India got only 69, Pakistan merely 62. Admittedly this schedule has since been amended but it is still short of the wholesale change the BCCI has demanded. India has objected on two counts essentially: the number of weeks India gets to play at home is way too little. Two, it wants more matches and more regular tours by Australia and England so as to ramp up the value of its television rights.

Australia and England always seem to have their domestic seasons undisturbed. May to August is sacrosanct for the grandees at Lord's, just as November to January is for Cricket Australia. Yet India's (and Pakistan's) peak season (October-February) is perennially disturbed. The BCCI sees the lopsided calendar as harming the cricket business. In particular, it objects to the month long Champions Trophy - usually played in September-October and eating into India's home season - as a long-drawn affair, a tournament in which interest plummets in case India is knocked out early.

In any case, the Champion's Trophy - like the World Cup - is a property "owned" by the ICC. The bulk of the earnings from it go to the ICC. This was Dalmiya's idea and it suited the BCCI fine as long as Jagguda ran the Indian board and his friends managed the ICC. Now Modi and his friends see no reason why Indian sponsors should subsidise the ICC. They want to stem this "drain of wealth".

So what will replace the Champions Trophy? Since matches involving India generate more money, logically, says the BCCI, a disproportionate number of matches should be Indian commercial properties. Nor should undue concessions be made to smaller teams if matches - Tests or preliminary games in multilateral tournaments - featuring them don't make money.

In effect, the "Asia versus the Rest" paradigm is dead; market forces must rule cricket. "Indeed," says one industry insider, "Modi doesn't see himself as an Asian businessman - in his eyes, he's a world player."

The mind of the marketing man
The BCCI's new business approach has a domestic component and also a strategy for the rest of the world. Both have a common DNA - selling disaggregated properties rather than doing one blockbuster deal, whether for television or sponsorship. As the Sharad Pawar-run board perceives it, since the cream of cricket-related advertising and sponsorship comes from India, the BCCI should, in a sense, be the marketing arm of Global Cricket Inc. After erasing the Champions Trophy and frequent bilateral series against minor opponents, it wants India and Pakistan - with Australia and England thrown in now and then - to play each other in limited-overs games in the subcontinent and abroad, in Sharjah or San Francisco, wherever the crowds lie.

The BCCI will market the television and sponsorship rights of these tournaments, thus keeping the lion's share for itself. Ironically, Dalmiya provided the model for this by masterminding the India-Pakistan-Australia tri-series in Holland in 2004. That tournament fetched $8 million, a sum later discounted because of rain interruptions.

Second, when the BCCI plays, for example, a CBFS tournament in Tangiers or travels to England as guest of the England board, it will demand top dollar as the star team on view. In a sense, it wants a profit-sharing arrangement each time it sends its team to play in another location. Each tour, each series will be negotiated separately.

At home the same principle is being followed. The Indian team now has not one sponsor but a plethora - one for the forearm of the players' uniforms, the other for hospitality and so on. As for television rights, as Modi plans it, the BCCI will hire a camera crew and commentators. It will then sell the visuals and audio, case by case, series by series, to separate television stations in separate geographical markets. Surprisingly, not all television channel executives are unhappy. "This is very sensible," says one such, "it will make life easier for the broadcasters, allowing productions to be planned further in advance. It should also allow Lalit Modi to announce a much higher rights offer because the broadcaster doesn't need to deduct production costs."

Modi takes the Brand BCCI project further. Like Manchester United, he wants to control the television pictures. Like FIFA, he is mooting the idea of allowing accredited press photographers to use a limited number of visuals they shoot at matches and, while not paying a fee, acknowledging the BCCI's contribution to the making of the image - perhaps in the form of a logo.

That final idea seems a trifle radical. Taken to its logical absurdity, it could mean cricket reporters being asked to write a limited number of words in match dispatches and putting the BCCI logo right next to their bylines.

It would be perilous to play the futures market in a monopoly commodity.

 

BCCI minions proving the fact that this is not about money, it's about colonial payback.

This whole proposal is about revenge – nothing else.

Weak, backward, and insecure tools.

 

Black-market in India intensifies this week.

- Indian 10yr bond yields are up.
- Interest rates in India have moved up this week.
- Inflation in India is heading for 10%
- INR heading for toilet paper status.

BCCI are planning to swap their toilet paper for sand paper.

Believe it or not, no one wants to hold INR in BCCI, they just want to get rid of INR for $/£s.

BCCI is in financial trouble because every day they are losing Millions in INR value.

 

Inflation in India is well below 10%.

INR is holding stable between 61 -63 levels for sometime now.Far ahead of Pakistan.If INR is toilet paper i wonder what PKR is.

Posters trying to frighten poster regarding bonds since PP days.Nothing has happened.

BCCI has just declared record profits.Some posters here work in the households of BCCI office bearers so know what they are thinking.

Some people just cant stop lying.Freedom of speech i believe.

 

Do you understand English?

I said "Inflation in India is heading for 10%"

The average inflation of India in 2013: 11.08 %

http://www.inflation.eu/inflation-rates/india/historic-inflation/cpi-inflation-india.aspx

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25923743

Inflation in India is *well below* 10% is it?

Read it and weep.

You are the one who is not ready to face up to the facts, plucking numbers from the sky.

You keep bringing up PP cos my threads on the Indian economy still haunt you - because I was spot on!

Now go do your Math and English homework cos I am tired of skooling you own your own economy.

 

Every year, BCCI's so called wealth is being erroded by around 10%. This is a mathimatical fact.

 

Your on a different trip, arent you ? ( like always ), he said indian rupees, not Pak RPS or AED. read and think before you type

 

You dont understand things do you?Pakistani saying INR is toilet paper needs to look at PKR.

 

Liars Liars Liars!!!!

Inflation in India was recorded @ 6.16 %. in Dec 2013.Is expected to fall further with the recent rate hike by RBI.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/india/inflation-cpi

Now tell me about Pakistan.What is the growth rate and inflation?What is the FDI influx?

You were banned from PP for spreading lies.Talking nonsense.Making baseless claims.Thats what you were banned for.Thats what your credentials are.You can hide behind the curtain of Freedom of speech for only so long.

Regarding my homework and schooling,i am very highly educated.far more than liars like you can imagine.Now keep lying and try to be happy.

 

LOL! So according to the two most insecure Indians (one who doesn't understand economics of his own country, while the other has squat clue about Democracy and Communism), the BBC, the IMF, and the Mahabharat Government are wrong. Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Only Indians would deny official figures for the sake of mental security.

Figures released by the INDIAN GOVERNMENT prove these two Indian trolls wrong.

 

CPI was 9.87% in December, this is the measure most countries use to measure inflation.

 

They are intellectually bankrupt which is why users like s2k and his ilk must resort to something woefully irrelevant just to pretend they have some counter argument.

 

I bet s2k is looking up CPI on Google right now.

Hopefully he will realise he is talking nonsense and doesn't have a clue.

 

Bottom line : India's economy has been imploding since 2009/10, while wealth has been eroding at cool rate of about 10% per year for many years.

BCCI has lost it's wealth - it's purchasing power. A $Million contract in the IPL costs more in INR today than it did in 2007/8. This is why IPL franchises are going bankrupt. This is why BCCI is desperate for their communist proposal to go ahead, because every second in delay means wealth is eroded thanks to chronic inflation in India.

The communist proposal will ensure BCCI deals in foreign currency for the next decade whilst abandoning their indigenous toilet paper the INR in hope - the INR - will become stronger in the future (not a freaking chance).

And for the Indian parosees who question Pakistan's economy, once again the KSE out performs markets around the world in 2013 (extending it's record to 13 years this millennium).

Top ten markets performers in the world in 2013 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...10-best-performing-stock-markets-of-2013.html

Oh look, India not even in the footnote.

Stick this in your silly BCCI Bharat pipe and smoke it.

 

KSE is a puny stock exchange compared to BSE so the comparision is invalid.

Indian economy is miles ahead of Pakistani economy and INR miles ahead of PKR.

BCCI isnt you mr Namak who ran away from Pakistan to live in UK to earn pounds.Tells about your confidence in your country and economy.Patriotism is something that is beyond you so dont bother.

BCCI is bankrupt yet it has the power to kick almost every board and is the wealthiest board in the world.

Talk about Indian economy when Pakistani economy is anywhere near it.Btw has PKR come below 100 for a $ yet.

Namak and his ilk taking shots at Indian economy is like a street beggar telling a bike rider that the bike rider cant afford a car and is poor hence.

 

Salt_pure,

If India and BCCI are in such bad shape, why do you care if BCCI pulls all its revenue out of ICC?

 

He talked about Inflation rate and not consumer priced index.There is a difference between them.

 

Now that is going to leave a scar...

 

I dont know why neighbors fight

This is what the whites have done to us, they turn us against each other. Isnt it obvious. Its how they got the slaves in Africa to hand each other over.

Aussies and English are just using Indians, when they have what they want, they too will cast the indians aside.

 

Quit blaming others for your poor decisions.

 

are you the same guy called Shahrukh ?

 

dude its irrelevant arguing with S2K, H will always argue the other way, ive said before he has ADD issues, ignore him, He's talking about India where 50% population is under poverty line. dont waste your energy on him.

 

dude its irrelevant arguing with S2K, H will always argue the other way, ive said before he has ADD issues, ignore him, He's talking about India where 50% population is under poverty line. dont waste your energy on him.

 

I would like to share this interesting article from Dawn :

In September of 2011, Jose Maria del Nido, the president of Sevilla FC at the time, decided that enough was enough. The distribution of the TV rights deal was to be decided. What was on the table was this: 16 La Liga clubs would get 45% of the share; Atletico Madrid and Valencia would share 11% between them; meanwhile Real Madrid and Barcelona would get 35% of the money. The inequality was to be institutionalised; Spain, as fans of everyone outside of the 'Big Two' feared, was to become Scotland with better weather.
And so del Nido had had it. Only four years earlier, Sevilla had competed for the title – they had probably been the best team in the league that season, but a combination of inexperience and fighting on too many fronts caught with them. They managed to win the Cup and the UEFA Cup, but fell just one win short of their first league title in over fifty years. The team was young and exciting. In another country, maybe in another era, that would have been the start of a dynasty. Instead, within twelve months, their best player was in Barcelona, their coach was in London and the team was outside the Champions League spots. And despite returning to the Champions League the following season they have never come close to challenging Madrid and Barcelona since. The fact that they were forced to sell their two best players to Manchester City last summer means that any resurgence looks unlikely.
Thus, in 2011, del Nido decided to call for a resistance, he even compared it to the French Revolution at one stage. Representatives of 12 of the 18 other league clubs (i.e. apart from Madrid and Barca) turned up to a meeting in Seville a week before the official meeting at the league headquarters. They agreed to be part of the resistance. A week later only Villareal and Sevilla stood up, the rest had wilted under the pressure from the ‘Big Two’ – the revolution was dead before it had begun.
The argument from Madrid and Barcelona was simple: we are the ones earning the dough, it’s because of us that the TV companies pay so much. But what they failed to acknowledge was that in trying to stay ahead financially of the other clubs in Europe they would need to grab bigger and bigger pieces of the pie as time went on, as relatively speaking, the La Liga rights would be worth less as the league became a less attractive proposition compared to Germany, Italy and particularly England. There’s only so much lack of competition the casual fan can handle. It is no surprise that the two the biggest sporting leagues in the world (The Premier League and the NFL) are almost socialist when it comes to their TV rights deals – especially when it compares to La Liga.
International cricket is not club football. The difference in finances purely from TV rights does not have as big an effect on performance; and you can’t “buy” success in international cricket (apart from when you are fixing matches that is) as easily as you can in club football. Money isn’t the elixir of all problems - otherwise BCCI would have found a decent pace bowler in a billion people. But it does help. It helps in providing the best facilities and coaches from the national team down to the lowest levels, it helps with keeping the players focused and professional, it helps with attracting the best foreign talent for development of your lot and it helps (supposedly) with keeping them away from nefarious dealings.
And it’s what the other nine boards are signing on for. The meetings in Dubai on 28th and 29th of January started off with calls for revolution from the ‘Small Seven’. The ‘Small Seven’ ended up being the ‘Spineless Seven’ – with all due to respect to Pakistan, South Africa and Sri Lanka. Carrots were dangled and they jumped on them like hungry rabbits. Turkeys voted for Christmas because they were told that chicken would be on the dinner table. Much like del Nido and his allies, the revolution wilted even before it had gotten off the ground. In trying to protect their narrow short term interests, the boards (particularly Bangladesh) have given up all power and sense of equality they could ever hope to achieve. If at any time over the next decade a board complains about Test cricket not being “financially suitable” or cancels/rearranges tours because of its coffers, then one can always point to these series of meetings where they decided they would be happy to get less money because they didn’t have the courage or unity to stand up. Every time another domestic T20 league is launched, every time the board members complain about not having the money to invest in grass roots cricket, every time they talk about not being able to play bilateral series against the ‘Big Three’, they’ll have to be reminded of this era when they decided to relinquish the initiative.
So, the immediate future for cricket is pretty clear. Pakistan might tour India or it might not; Australia, India and England will keep playing each other; South Africa get no respect despite being the best in the world; and the inequality will be formalised. Pakistan fans can look forward to some more series against South Africa, and a lot more against Sri Lanka. 2013 will be repeated ad infinitum. I guess we’ll get used to

 

You're right, there has been no substantive counter; just cries of help and ignorance.

I would add though 600M do not have a toilet in India, yet 1.2 Billion have toilet paper - the INR.

The irony he amazing.

 

And Pakistan the poverty rate is slightly better with drones bombing and suicide attacks and secterian attacks and some of the worlds most wanted terrorists found there.Set your own house in order before pointing fingers at others.

Do you know what is ADD?Any idea?What are the symptoms and how it is diagonosed?If no then keep your mouth shut on such matters.ADD is a serious thing not something to be made fun of.