^^ In ECB vs Player leaving context it's not related to funding or the declining of cricket popularity at all.
In this scenario, it all comes down to the player's contract. Some players get a full year's contract and similarly, some get a 2-3 months deal depending on the white ball series and county's gigs. Jason Roys falls into a White ball contract.
Topic: Cricket match prediction discussions - page 65. (Read 598783 times)
Or maybe it could be that they are not finding good revenue and that's why they are actually not that much interested and also invested in cricket right now. Of course they are also seeing that they are not being able to replicate the type of success that India is getting from the IPL. At the same time, it is also better for England to actually concentrate on football because the English Premier League is doing absolutely wonderfully right now. And with the decreasing popularity of cricket, I will say it is going to be a smart decision.
Two decades ago, the ECB admitted that popularity of cricket was going down at an alarming rate. But then they came up with the T20 format (ECB was the board that first setup a T20 competition in domestic cricket), and this helped them to stem the tide for sometime. But now once again, the popularity seems to be declining and it is being reflected in the media rights auctions. Similar to the case with other countries, cricket in England is transforming to a sport that is primarily being played by the South Asian diaspora. Maybe within the next two decades, the England national side will be majority South Asian.
English player Jason Roy and a couple of other players as well are now entertaining the idea of dropping their central contracts for T-20 Gigs, most of them are white ball cricketers tho.
I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
This was expected after the new ICC revenue distribution model. BCCI now has annual revenues totaling $2 billion (from media rights and ICC allocation). None of the other countries comes close. ECB has an annual revenue equaling to 1/20th of that of the BCCI. It is just a matter of time before the BCCI, with the help from IPL franchises take over global cricket. Anyway, I am glad that the ECB is getting some of their own medicine. Giles Clarke was one of the chief architects of the pig-3 model back in 2015, along with Srinivsan and Wally Edwards. I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
Or maybe it could be that they are not finding good revenue and that's why they are actually not that much interested and also invested in cricket right now. Of course they are also seeing that they are not being able to replicate the type of success that India is getting from the IPL. At the same time, it is also better for England to actually concentrate on football because the English Premier League is doing absolutely wonderfully right now. And with the decreasing popularity of cricket, I will say it is going to be a smart decision.
^^
ECB's revenue almost tripled so i don't think that's a valid argument.
First we have from West Indian players now from English and soon will be others even I am not afraid about Indians because they have enough money from IPL, but changes are never been stoppable by anyone and as we are having few good leagues like in the USA, UAE and few more countries many international players will be on verge of Roy line, and we will have steps for going like soccer and reduction in other formats as well.
It's still a work in progress theory but writing on the wall for everyone to see.
I reckon single format players (white ball) are more vulnerable in this situation, vulnerable from the cricket board's POV not players or franchise. Trent Boult already said no to the central contract btw.
-------------------------
Edit
jason roy's statement on twitter.
https://twitter.com/JasonRoy20/status/1661754570459205634
ECB's revenue almost tripled so i don't think that's a valid argument.
English player Jason Roy and a couple of other players as well are now entertaining the idea of dropping their central contracts for T-20 Gigs, most of them are white ball cricketers tho.
I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
This change was expecting because as things were going in last few years surely many more players will be done this same specially from top boards because now playing for national team is never been profitable for players, so they need to think about this which will bring good changes from boards as well as having legislation about this all. I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
First we have from West Indian players now from English and soon will be others even I am not afraid about Indians because they have enough money from IPL, but changes are never been stoppable by anyone and as we are having few good leagues like in the USA, UAE and few more countries many international players will be on verge of Roy line, and we will have steps for going like soccer and reduction in other formats as well.
I reckon single format players (white ball) are more vulnerable in this situation, vulnerable from the cricket board's POV not players or franchise. Trent Boult already said no to the central contract btw.
-------------------------
Edit
jason roy's statement on twitter.
https://twitter.com/JasonRoy20/status/1661754570459205634
English player Jason Roy and a couple of other players as well are now entertaining the idea of dropping their central contracts for T-20 Gigs, most of them are white ball cricketers tho.
I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
This was expected after the new ICC revenue distribution model. BCCI now has annual revenues totaling $2 billion (from media rights and ICC allocation). None of the other countries comes close. ECB has an annual revenue equaling to 1/20th of that of the BCCI. It is just a matter of time before the BCCI, with the help from IPL franchises take over global cricket. Anyway, I am glad that the ECB is getting some of their own medicine. Giles Clarke was one of the chief architects of the pig-3 model back in 2015, along with Srinivsan and Wally Edwards.
English player Jason Roy and a couple of other players as well are now entertaining the idea of dropping their central contracts for T-20 Gigs, most of them are white ball cricketers tho.
I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
This change was expecting because as things were going in last few years surely many more players will be done this same specially from top boards because now playing for national team is never been profitable for players, so they need to think about this which will bring good changes from boards as well as having legislation about this all. I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
First we have from West Indian players now from English and soon will be others even I am not afraid about Indians because they have enough money from IPL, but changes are never been stoppable by anyone and as we are having few good leagues like in the USA, UAE and few more countries many international players will be on verge of Roy line, and we will have steps for going like soccer and reduction in other formats as well.
English player Jason Roy and a couple of other players as well are now entertaining the idea of dropping their central contracts for T-20 Gigs, most of them are white ball cricketers tho.
I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
I guess in the next few years we'll see many players will take this route. Make sense if they are not making it into national teams or getting old.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-planning-to-terminate-ecb-contract-to-play-major-league-cricket-in-the-us-1378294
Cricket is growing on papers under this ICC management because they want to have better things through sponsors and media rights, so they are doing their tricks which are not helpful for the game and fans with now most chances they have no chance in IOC as well because their current policies are not helpful for allowing them into this event, and they are also having not solid strategy.
If we have 60 to 80 teams which are having adopted players from India and Pakistan with not domestic setup and facilities for their players which is not helpful for the game, but just few players are having better things for themselves as many times mentioned they need to work on minimum 4 or 5 native players can bring better interest but no one going to listen this.
If we have 60 to 80 teams which are having adopted players from India and Pakistan with not domestic setup and facilities for their players which is not helpful for the game, but just few players are having better things for themselves as many times mentioned they need to work on minimum 4 or 5 native players can bring better interest but no one going to listen this.
I am against allowing even a single foreigner in national teams. What is the point in having a "national" team, if the citizens of other countries are allowed to participate? But I agree with your suggestion that having 5-6 native players in the XI would be a good starting point. And regarding inclusion of cricket in Olympics, I guess it is not going to happen for the next 20 years. The ICC guys give an impression that they want that to happen, but in reality they are not taking any steps to realize that objective. A few months back, there was an announcement from the IOC that the ICC hasn't responded to their queries.
Honestly, I understand if you do not have good enough players to play in the national team and that's why you have to get players from another country to play in the national team. But it can be only 3 or 5 players maximum. If it is anything more than that, it isn't a national team in my opinion. But we have a lot of teams that have 11 players from whole other continents playing in the national team. That's the funny and sad part. If that is the case then why don't let franchise cricket teams participate in the world cup?
The intent from ICC is to show that cricket is growing. So they have these 70-80 fake teams entirely consisted of Indian and Pakistani expats. Then they claim that cricket is being played around in 100 plus nations (which is false, obviously). A few weeks ago, I had posted one of my suggestions. My suggestion was to allot additional slots for teams like India and Pakistan. Rather than Indian players faking as UAE or German players, why can't the ICC allow Indian A, Indian U-23 or India U-19 squads in the ICC tournaments? But then their fake story of 100 countries playing cricket will be exposed. That is a great point that you said. ICC is taking full advantage of having good relations with India. ICC is showing that there are a lot of countries playing cricket right now. But when in actuality it is just Indian people looking for a job abroad and taking up cricket as that job. It is really true that they are not passionate at all about cricket. They are just looking for money and they got a chance to play for such countries which is actually a dream for them financially. Because if they wanted to do any other work they would have had to work on a minimum wage. But in cricket, they are getting paid very well. India is also thinking that they already have a population problem. They are not being able to provide employment and that problem is also getting solved.
Honestly, I understand if you do not have good enough players to play in the national team and that's why you have to get players from another country to play in the national team. But it can be only 3 or 5 players maximum. If it is anything more than that, it isn't a national team in my opinion. But we have a lot of teams that have 11 players from whole other continents playing in the national team. That's the funny and sad part. If that is the case then why don't let franchise cricket teams participate in the world cup?
The intent from ICC is to show that cricket is growing. So they have these 70-80 fake teams entirely consisted of Indian and Pakistani expats. Then they claim that cricket is being played around in 100 plus nations (which is false, obviously). A few weeks ago, I had posted one of my suggestions. My suggestion was to allot additional slots for teams like India and Pakistan. Rather than Indian players faking as UAE or German players, why can't the ICC allow Indian A, Indian U-23 or India U-19 squads in the ICC tournaments? But then their fake story of 100 countries playing cricket will be exposed. If we have 60 to 80 teams which are having adopted players from India and Pakistan with not domestic setup and facilities for their players which is not helpful for the game, but just few players are having better things for themselves as many times mentioned they need to work on minimum 4 or 5 native players can bring better interest but no one going to listen this.
Honestly, I understand if you do not have good enough players to play in the national team and that's why you have to get players from another country to play in the national team. But it can be only 3 or 5 players maximum. If it is anything more than that, it isn't a national team in my opinion. But we have a lot of teams that have 11 players from whole other continents playing in the national team. That's the funny and sad part. If that is the case then why don't let franchise cricket teams participate in the world cup?
The intent from ICC is to show that cricket is growing. So they have these 70-80 fake teams entirely consisted of Indian and Pakistani expats. Then they claim that cricket is being played around in 100 plus nations (which is false, obviously). A few weeks ago, I had posted one of my suggestions. My suggestion was to allot additional slots for teams like India and Pakistan. Rather than Indian players faking as UAE or German players, why can't the ICC allow Indian A, Indian U-23 or India U-19 squads in the ICC tournaments? But then their fake story of 100 countries playing cricket will be exposed.
And if this kind of situation continues, maybe after a decade, international matches will have any importance except for a few countries. Gradually, there is a clear perception among everyone that ICC is working to increase the number of countries and not the quality of cricket. The money in cricket is going up but the quality is going down and looks set to get worse in the future. The most surprising thing is that no one has taken any steps to exempt this situation. No one is saying anything. But sometimes many big cricketers and cricket experts or persons raise a storm of protest about any normal issue.
Agreed. Out of the 100 or so associate nations, around 80 are solely comprised of Indian and Pakistani expats. Matches involving these teams doesn't make any sense because it feels like some clubs in Mumbai or Delhi is playing against each other, despite what their jerseys indicate. I still remember once incident where two European teams were playing each other. During the post-match ceremony, some question was asked in the official language of one of the participating countries and none of the players were able to understand that. Honestly, I understand if you do not have good enough players to play in the national team and that's why you have to get players from another country to play in the national team. But it can be only 3 or 5 players maximum. If it is anything more than that, it isn't a national team in my opinion. But we have a lot of teams that have 11 players from whole other continents playing in the national team. That's the funny and sad part. If that is the case then why don't let franchise cricket teams participate in the world cup?
And if this kind of situation continues, maybe after a decade, international matches will have any importance except for a few countries. Gradually, there is a clear perception among everyone that ICC is working to increase the number of countries and not the quality of cricket. The money in cricket is going up but the quality is going down and looks set to get worse in the future. The most surprising thing is that no one has taken any steps to exempt this situation. No one is saying anything. But sometimes many big cricketers and cricket experts or persons raise a storm of protest about any normal issue.
Agreed. Out of the 100 or so associate nations, around 80 are solely comprised of Indian and Pakistani expats. Matches involving these teams doesn't make any sense because it feels like some clubs in Mumbai or Delhi is playing against each other, despite what their jerseys indicate. I still remember once incident where two European teams were playing each other. During the post-match ceremony, some question was asked in the official language of one of the participating countries and none of the players were able to understand that.
@Dimitri94 no big cricketer will raise his voice on this because they all too earn from these matches eg commentary or highlights show etc hence they’re fine with this system. @Sithara007 not surprised to know those player’s didn’t understand the language but I’m sure that the ICC would have buried this news so it reaches less people and less questions are raised.
And if this kind of situation continues, maybe after a decade, international matches will have any importance except for a few countries. Gradually, there is a clear perception among everyone that ICC is working to increase the number of countries and not the quality of cricket. The money in cricket is going up but the quality is going down and looks set to get worse in the future. The most surprising thing is that no one has taken any steps to exempt this situation. No one is saying anything. But sometimes many big cricketers and cricket experts or persons raise a storm of protest about any normal issue.
Agreed. Out of the 100 or so associate nations, around 80 are solely comprised of Indian and Pakistani expats. Matches involving these teams doesn't make any sense because it feels like some clubs in Mumbai or Delhi is playing against each other, despite what their jerseys indicate. I still remember once incident where two European teams were playing each other. During the post-match ceremony, some question was asked in the official language of one of the participating countries and none of the players were able to understand that.
The other solution could be that any country will have to give the player acidity of that respective country. They can use players who come from another country but they will at least have to have citizenship. Without citizenship, a person cannot represent that country. That is actually going to fix most of the problems, to be honest.
Because we all know that the countries are not going to give away citizenship for free. And if the country does actually give citizenship to that player the country is going to be liable for the actions he takes and also the country will have to look after that person as a citizen.
Because we all know that the countries are not going to give away citizenship for free. And if the country does actually give citizenship to that player the country is going to be liable for the actions he takes and also the country will have to look after that person as a citizen.
Cricket is the only sport that allows foreign players in the "national" teams. And in case of teams such as Czech Republic and Cyprus, they never ever had a single citizen in their team. No one will be complaining about teams fielding naturalized citizens (for example UAE including someone who was born in Pakistan, but received the UAE citizenship recently). But in case of cricket, it is possible to have a national team of Norway or Sweden without any citizens from these countries. From what I understand, the ICC want to inflate the number of countries that play cricket. And that is the reason why they came up with this strange idea.
The other solution could be that any country will have to give the player acidity of that respective country. They can use players who come from another country but they will at least have to have citizenship. Without citizenship, a person cannot represent that country. That is actually going to fix most of the problems, to be honest.
Because we all know that the countries are not going to give away citizenship for free. And if the country does actually give citizenship to that player the country is going to be liable for the actions he takes and also the country will have to look after that person as a citizen.
Because we all know that the countries are not going to give away citizenship for free. And if the country does actually give citizenship to that player the country is going to be liable for the actions he takes and also the country will have to look after that person as a citizen.
Cricket is the only sport that allows foreign players in the "national" teams. And in case of teams such as Czech Republic and Cyprus, they never ever had a single citizen in their team. No one will be complaining about teams fielding naturalized citizens (for example UAE including someone who was born in Pakistan, but received the UAE citizenship recently). But in case of cricket, it is possible to have a national team of Norway or Sweden without any citizens from these countries. From what I understand, the ICC want to inflate the number of countries that play cricket. And that is the reason why they came up with this strange idea.
✂
ICC can implement many rules and other things for checking merit, quality and other relative things, but sadly they are not interested with this all if they will do anything then surely they will face consequences as well which will be not good for them so just because of this all is well going here right now and mostly teams with native countries are suffering badly which is surely going to hurt this game as well but who cares.Right now, most beneficiary from these rules are Gulf region countries and few boards in ICC not want to hurt them which is surely helping countries like Romania, Czech Republics and Denmark which having players from Pakistan and India which are staying there just on visit visa.
But, I was minimum from ICC they try to fix a rule with every team must have 4 or 6 native players, surely this will also help this game but most chances they will also not go with this as well.
The other solution could be that any country will have to give the player acidity of that respective country. They can use players who come from another country but they will at least have to have citizenship. Without citizenship, a person cannot represent that country. That is actually going to fix most of the problems, to be honest.
Because we all know that the countries are not going to give away citizenship for free. And if the country does actually give citizenship to that player the country is going to be liable for the actions he takes and also the country will have to look after that person as a citizen.
That is understandable. There are certain associate teams that are happy, with whatever they are getting from the ICC. I am referring about teams such as Czech Republic and Romania, which are entirely consisted of Indian and Pakistani medical students who are temporarily residing in these countries. As per ICC's revenue distribution formula, these teams get the same share of funds as genuine teams such as Argentina or Israel. So they are happy, because they get all the money for themselves and don't need to spend any money for development or any other activity since no one else plays cricket in these countries.
If that is the case and I know that ICC knows that is the case, they should be getting a lot less money compared to what the genuine teams are getting. But I do not believe that the ICC are actually going to do something about it. It's not that they don't know any better. It's just because they simply do not care. The world of the ICC revolves around the top 4 teams. Outside of the top 4, I don't think ICC actually gives a damn about anything. Otherwise, they certainly would have given the teams which are actually made out of native players at least double the money that they are giving to the deals which are made out of foreign players. Is it just me or anyone else think that the money distribution from ICC doesn't make sense at all?
Right now, most beneficiary from these rules are Gulf region countries and few boards in ICC not want to hurt them which is surely helping countries like Romania, Czech Republics and Denmark which having players from Pakistan and India which are staying there just on visit visa.
But, I was minimum from ICC they try to fix a rule with every team must have 4 or 6 native players, surely this will also help this game but most chances they will also not go with this as well.
That is understandable. There are certain associate teams that are happy, with whatever they are getting from the ICC. I am referring about teams such as Czech Republic and Romania, which are entirely consisted of Indian and Pakistani medical students who are temporarily residing in these countries. As per ICC's revenue distribution formula, these teams get the same share of funds as genuine teams such as Argentina or Israel. So they are happy, because they get all the money for themselves and don't need to spend any money for development or any other activity since no one else plays cricket in these countries.
If that is the case and I know that ICC knows that is the case, they should be getting a lot less money compared to what the genuine teams are getting. But I do not believe that the ICC are actually going to do something about it. It's not that they don't know any better. It's just because they simply do not care. The world of the ICC revolves around the top 4 teams. Outside of the top 4, I don't think ICC actually gives a damn about anything. Otherwise, they certainly would have given the teams which are actually made out of native players at least double the money that they are giving to the deals which are made out of foreign players.
Is it just me or anyone else think that the money distribution from ICC doesn't make sense at all?
✂✂✂✂✂
But at the same time, some other associate nations are very happy with what they are getting. So they do not want to make any kind of scene. If all the associate nations actually come forward together I think the ICC will have to take necessary steps about it. But again some associate teams are promised one or two series against the big four. And the associate teams basically do not say anything because they are very happy with only one or two series that they are getting.
But at the same time, some other associate nations are very happy with what they are getting. So they do not want to make any kind of scene. If all the associate nations actually come forward together I think the ICC will have to take necessary steps about it. But again some associate teams are promised one or two series against the big four. And the associate teams basically do not say anything because they are very happy with only one or two series that they are getting.
That is understandable. There are certain associate teams that are happy, with whatever they are getting from the ICC. I am referring about teams such as Czech Republic and Romania, which are entirely consisted of Indian and Pakistani medical students who are temporarily residing in these countries. As per ICC's revenue distribution formula, these teams get the same share of funds as genuine teams such as Argentina or Israel. So they are happy, because they get all the money for themselves and don't need to spend any money for development or any other activity since no one else plays cricket in these countries.
Jump to: