20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by wisde » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:27:59


It is a mistake for the ICC to think that they can tap the huge Indian
market for cricket revenues only through the BCCI. If the BCCI is not
interested in fielding an Indian team for a 20-20 world cup, let it be!
The ICC should still go ahead and organize the tournament; I am
absolutely confident that there will be a huge television audience in
India and Pakistan (from which the ICC can make enormous profits
through television rights) even if these countries do not participate.
India has never participated in World Cup soccer (it is not even an
Asian soccer power), yet millions and millions of people in the
subcontinent are known to stay up all night to watch World cup soccer
(there is also a huge captive audience in the subcontinent for lesser
tournaments like European Cup Soccer, Italian and English Club soccer,
etc). Thus, there is absolutely no reason why people in the
subcontinent will not watch 20-20 cricket matches even if India and
Pakistan do not participate.
The ICC should ofcourse market the tournament well in the subcontinent.
Maybe kickstart the marketing campaign with an intense 1-week
triangular 20-20 tournament involving England/Australia/South Africa in
four locations (Kolkata/Karachi/Colombo/Dacca?)!
The BCCI would obviously like to keep India as a protected market in
cricket where it will have a monopoly. However the ICC will do well if
it opens up the Indian cricket economy by introducing new cricket
products like 20-20 tournaments, etc (bypassing the BCCI). IMO, it will
be a win for world cricket as well as for the Indian domestic cricket
consumer (who will get more choices about what they can watch instead
having to depend on the BCCI) if the ICC takes such an initiative.

-----------------
Report: Pak doctor builds 20-20 stadium

Rohan Vyavaharkar

Wednesday, February 8, 2006 (Karachi):

The subcontinent may not have a Kerry Packer or an Abdul Rehman
Bukhatir but there are admirers of the game making meaningful
contributions.

They don't always find a place in the record books but their efforts
are only adding to the popularity of the sport.

A doctor in Karachi has built a cricket stadium which mostly hosts
20-20 matches.

Passion for the game

For Dr Syed Mohammed Ali Shah, cricket is more than just a hobby.

Cricket has been Dr Shah's childhood obsession and that resulted in him
building the Dr Asghar Ali Shah Stadium in 1993.

It's an effort dedicated to his father, a judge in pre-Independence
India.

"This ground is named after my father who was a judge and had also
worked in India for a number of years. I made the stadium in his
memory. Slowly it became an international venue. It is also listed in
ICC's panel," said Dr Shah.

The doctor has already spent Rs 4 crore on the stadium. It may be
small, but it certainly isn't inconsequential.

Fully-equipped stadium

The dressing rooms were inaugurated by the likes of Jonty Rhodes and
Wasim Akram, and it has a commentary box and its own camera set-up,
which broadcasts on a local cable network.

The floodlit ground is listed on the ICC panel of venues and is
becoming popular as a venue for 20-20 cricket.

And just to prove its suitability, Dr Shah also hosted a game between
Indian and Pakistani journalists.

"That Britishers' claim to have started 20-20 cricket is not right. I
had started it together with my friend Mehtab Ahmed in 1978. It turned
out to be a popular format.

"We play during Ramzan and it has a huge following. Even the test
cricketers come here to play 20-20 matches. They have been doing it
since 1978," he added.

That claim might lack evidence but his efforts to popularise cricket
are indeed laudable.

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by ColinKynoc » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:56:52


that the world would be a better place for knowing the following:

Quote:
>It is a mistake for the ICC to think that they can tap the huge Indian
>market for cricket revenues only through the BCCI. If the BCCI is not
>interested in fielding an Indian team for a 20-20 world cup, let it be!
>The ICC should still go ahead and organize the tournament; I am
>absolutely confident that there will be a huge television audience in
>India and Pakistan (from which the ICC can make enormous profits
>through television rights) even if these countries do not participate.
>India has never participated in World Cup soccer (it is not even an
>Asian soccer power), yet millions and millions of people in the
>subcontinent are known to stay up all night to watch World cup soccer
>(there is also a huge captive audience in the subcontinent for lesser
>tournaments like European Cup Soccer, Italian and English Club soccer,
>etc). Thus, there is absolutely no reason why people in the
>subcontinent will not watch 20-20 cricket matches even if India and
>Pakistan do not participate.
>The ICC should ofcourse market the tournament well in the subcontinent.
>Maybe kickstart the marketing campaign with an intense 1-week
>triangular 20-20 tournament involving England/Australia/South Africa in
>four locations (Kolkata/Karachi/Colombo/Dacca?)!
>The BCCI would obviously like to keep India as a protected market in
>cricket where it will have a monopoly. However the ICC will do well if
>it opens up the Indian cricket economy by introducing new cricket
>products like 20-20 tournaments, etc (bypassing the BCCI). IMO, it will
>be a win for world cricket as well as for the Indian domestic cricket
>consumer (who will get more choices about what they can watch instead
>having to depend on the BCCI) if the ICC takes such an initiative.

dp wouldn't like that idea, it goes against his One World Order of the
BCCI

I think it would be great if it happened.

Can you imagine it, BCCI says we don't want to play, so the ICC goes
ahead without the BCCI and ends up making millions that BCCI could
have had some share in.

It would be poetic justice.

Colin Kynoch

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by dp » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:59:28

Quote:


> that the world would be a better place for knowing the following:

> >It is a mistake for the ICC to think that they can tap the huge Indian
> >market for cricket revenues only through the BCCI. If the BCCI is not
> >interested in fielding an Indian team for a 20-20 world cup, let it be!
> >The ICC should still go ahead and organize the tournament; I am
> >absolutely confident that there will be a huge television audience in
> >India and Pakistan (from which the ICC can make enormous profits
> >through television rights) even if these countries do not participate.
> >India has never participated in World Cup soccer (it is not even an
> >Asian soccer power), yet millions and millions of people in the
> >subcontinent are known to stay up all night to watch World cup soccer
> >(there is also a huge captive audience in the subcontinent for lesser
> >tournaments like European Cup Soccer, Italian and English Club soccer,
> >etc). Thus, there is absolutely no reason why people in the
> >subcontinent will not watch 20-20 cricket matches even if India and
> >Pakistan do not participate.
> >The ICC should ofcourse market the tournament well in the subcontinent.
> >Maybe kickstart the marketing campaign with an intense 1-week
> >triangular 20-20 tournament involving England/Australia/South Africa in
> >four locations (Kolkata/Karachi/Colombo/Dacca?)!
> >The BCCI would obviously like to keep India as a protected market in
> >cricket where it will have a monopoly. However the ICC will do well if
> >it opens up the Indian cricket economy by introducing new cricket
> >products like 20-20 tournaments, etc (bypassing the BCCI). IMO, it will
> >be a win for world cricket as well as for the Indian domestic cricket
> >consumer (who will get more choices about what they can watch instead
> >having to depend on the BCCI) if the ICC takes such an initiative.

> dp wouldn't like that idea, it goes against his One World Order of the
> BCCI

I actually love the idea. More competition is what cricket desperately
needs, doesn't matter where it comes from.

Quote:
> I think it would be great if it happened.

I think so too.

Quote:
> Can you imagine it, BCCI says we don't want to play, so the ICC goes
> ahead without the BCCI and ends up making millions that BCCI could
> have had some share in.

Interesting though that you think the idea is going to succeed. I
thought the teams represent their country and people watch cricket to
support their national team etc. Why would Indians watch this 20-20 if
Indian team isn't participating?

dp

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> It would be poetic justice.

> Colin Kynoch


 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by Phil » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:22:06

Quote:


> that the world would be a better place for knowing the following:

> >It is a mistake for the ICC to think that they can tap the huge Indian
> >market for cricket revenues only through the BCCI. If the BCCI is not
> >interested in fielding an Indian team for a 20-20 world cup, let it be!
> >The ICC should still go ahead and organize the tournament; I am
> >absolutely confident that there will be a huge television audience in
> >India and Pakistan (from which the ICC can make enormous profits
> >through television rights) even if these countries do not participate.
> >India has never participated in World Cup soccer (it is not even an
> >Asian soccer power), yet millions and millions of people in the
> >subcontinent are known to stay up all night to watch World cup soccer
> >(there is also a huge captive audience in the subcontinent for lesser
> >tournaments like European Cup Soccer, Italian and English Club soccer,
> >etc). Thus, there is absolutely no reason why people in the
> >subcontinent will not watch 20-20 cricket matches even if India and
> >Pakistan do not participate.
> >The ICC should ofcourse market the tournament well in the subcontinent.
> >Maybe kickstart the marketing campaign with an intense 1-week
> >triangular 20-20 tournament involving England/Australia/South Africa in
> >four locations (Kolkata/Karachi/Colombo/Dacca?)!
> >The BCCI would obviously like to keep India as a protected market in
> >cricket where it will have a monopoly. However the ICC will do well if
> >it opens up the Indian cricket economy by introducing new cricket
> >products like 20-20 tournaments, etc (bypassing the BCCI). IMO, it will
> >be a win for world cricket as well as for the Indian domestic cricket
> >consumer (who will get more choices about what they can watch instead
> >having to depend on the BCCI) if the ICC takes such an initiative.

> dp wouldn't like that idea, it goes against his One World Order of the
> BCCI

> I think it would be great if it happened.

> Can you imagine it, BCCI says we don't want to play, so the ICC goes
> ahead without the BCCI and ends up making millions that BCCI could
> have had some share in.

> It would be poetic justice.

Which is probably why India wants to get some other votes on their side
so this can't happen!

Phil.

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by kshatriya4l.. » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:29:40

Quote:
> > Can you imagine it, BCCI says we don't want to play, so the ICC goes
> > ahead without the BCCI and ends up making millions that BCCI could
> > have had some share in.

> Interesting though that you think the idea is going to succeed. I
> thought the teams represent their country and people watch cricket to
> support their national team etc. Why would Indians watch this 20-20 if
> Indian team isn't participating?

> dp

Why not ? The original poster stated that Indians watch World cup
soccer, even though India sucks in soccer. Same logic
 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by ColinKynoc » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:30:15


the world would be a better place for knowing the following:

Quote:


>> that the world would be a better place for knowing the following:

>> >It is a mistake for the ICC to think that they can tap the huge Indian
>> >market for cricket revenues only through the BCCI. If the BCCI is not
>> >interested in fielding an Indian team for a 20-20 world cup, let it be!
>> >The ICC should still go ahead and organize the tournament; I am
>> >absolutely confident that there will be a huge television audience in
>> >India and Pakistan (from which the ICC can make enormous profits
>> >through television rights) even if these countries do not participate.
>> >India has never participated in World Cup soccer (it is not even an
>> >Asian soccer power), yet millions and millions of people in the
>> >subcontinent are known to stay up all night to watch World cup soccer
>> >(there is also a huge captive audience in the subcontinent for lesser
>> >tournaments like European Cup Soccer, Italian and English Club soccer,
>> >etc). Thus, there is absolutely no reason why people in the
>> >subcontinent will not watch 20-20 cricket matches even if India and
>> >Pakistan do not participate.
>> >The ICC should ofcourse market the tournament well in the subcontinent.
>> >Maybe kickstart the marketing campaign with an intense 1-week
>> >triangular 20-20 tournament involving England/Australia/South Africa in
>> >four locations (Kolkata/Karachi/Colombo/Dacca?)!
>> >The BCCI would obviously like to keep India as a protected market in
>> >cricket where it will have a monopoly. However the ICC will do well if
>> >it opens up the Indian cricket economy by introducing new cricket
>> >products like 20-20 tournaments, etc (bypassing the BCCI). IMO, it will
>> >be a win for world cricket as well as for the Indian domestic cricket
>> >consumer (who will get more choices about what they can watch instead
>> >having to depend on the BCCI) if the ICC takes such an initiative.

>> dp wouldn't like that idea, it goes against his One World Order of the
>> BCCI

>I actually love the idea. More competition is what cricket desperately
>needs, doesn't matter where it comes from.

There is more than enough competition from other sports.

Quote:
>> I think it would be great if it happened.

>I think so too.

>> Can you imagine it, BCCI says we don't want to play, so the ICC goes
>> ahead without the BCCI and ends up making millions that BCCI could
>> have had some share in.

>Interesting though that you think the idea is going to succeed.

Where did I say it would succeed?

Quote:
>I thought the teams represent their country and people watch cricket to
>support their national team etc.

They do.

But a lot of cricket fans, (not that you would be in that group) watch
other countries play.

I for one quite enjoy watching the cricket in other countries even if
Australia is not playing.

In fact one of my more enjoyable moments in cricket was when Pakistan
got beaten by England despite slowing the over rate to an
unbelieveable degree then appealing to the umpires for the light and
getting turned down.

Quote:
>Why would Indians watch this 20-20 if
>Indian team isn't participating?

Maybe the BCCI is wrong and Indian fans would be interested in 20/20.
And that is the thing I would really enjoy, is the BCCI being made
look like the fools they are.

Colin Kynoch

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by dp » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:44:20

Quote:

> > > Can you imagine it, BCCI says we don't want to play, so the ICC goes
> > > ahead without the BCCI and ends up making millions that BCCI could
> > > have had some share in.

> > Interesting though that you think the idea is going to succeed. I
> > thought the teams represent their country and people watch cricket to
> > support their national team etc. Why would Indians watch this 20-20 if
> > Indian team isn't participating?

> > dp

> Why not ? The original poster stated that Indians watch World cup
> soccer, even though India sucks in soccer. Same logic

I don't deny that. I was talking about other posters who argue that
people mainly watch cricket for national pride and if we move to a
format where teams aren't based on nationality people will stop
watching cricket. By that logic, Indians should not be interested in
20-20 if Indian team doesn't participate.

dp

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by kshatriya4l.. » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:04:17

Lot of Indians watched the Ashes even though India was not
participating.
Also, 20/20 is being based on national teams, not privately owned teams
 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by dp » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:08:19

Quote:

> Lot of Indians watched the Ashes even though India was not
> participating.
> Also, 20/20 is being based on national teams, not privately owned teams

But what difference does it make to Indian audience? As far as they are
concerned it is some two teams, not their national team.

dp

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by kshatriya4l.. » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:17:31

No one is talking about national vs private teams other than you. 20/20
is not moving into such a format. And who knows maybe Indians will
still watch it if it is just any two competitive teams. I know I would
 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by dp » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:19:48

Quote:

> No one is talking about national vs private teams other than you. 20/20
> is not moving into such a format.

When did I say it is?

Quote:
> And who knows maybe Indians will
> still watch it if it is just any two competitive teams. I know I would

So why aren't teams not based on nationality uncompetitive?

dp

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by dp » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:21:29

Quote:


> > No one is talking about national vs private teams other than you. 20/20
> > is not moving into such a format.

> When did I say it is?

> > And who knows maybe Indians will
> > still watch it if it is just any two competitive teams. I know I would

> So why aren't teams not based on nationality uncompetitive?

Oops one negative too many. Should be "Why aren't teams not based on
nationality competitive?"

dp

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by Rodney Hampso » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:26:57


Quote:



>> that the world would be a better place for knowing the following:

>> >It is a mistake for the ICC to think that they can tap the huge Indian
>> >market for cricket revenues only through the BCCI. If the BCCI is not
>> >interested in fielding an Indian team for a 20-20 world cup, let it be!
>> >The ICC should still go ahead and organize the tournament; I am
>> >absolutely confident that there will be a huge television audience in
>> >India and Pakistan (from which the ICC can make enormous profits
>> >through television rights) even if these countries do not participate.
>> >India has never participated in World Cup soccer (it is not even an
>> >Asian soccer power), yet millions and millions of people in the
>> >subcontinent are known to stay up all night to watch World cup soccer
>> >(there is also a huge captive audience in the subcontinent for lesser
>> >tournaments like European Cup Soccer, Italian and English Club soccer,
>> >etc). Thus, there is absolutely no reason why people in the
>> >subcontinent will not watch 20-20 cricket matches even if India and
>> >Pakistan do not participate.
>> >The ICC should ofcourse market the tournament well in the subcontinent.
>> >Maybe kickstart the marketing campaign with an intense 1-week
>> >triangular 20-20 tournament involving England/Australia/South Africa in
>> >four locations (Kolkata/Karachi/Colombo/Dacca?)!
>> >The BCCI would obviously like to keep India as a protected market in
>> >cricket where it will have a monopoly. However the ICC will do well if
>> >it opens up the Indian cricket economy by introducing new cricket
>> >products like 20-20 tournaments, etc (bypassing the BCCI). IMO, it will
>> >be a win for world cricket as well as for the Indian domestic cricket
>> >consumer (who will get more choices about what they can watch instead
>> >having to depend on the BCCI) if the ICC takes such an initiative.

>> dp wouldn't like that idea, it goes against his One World Order of the
>> BCCI

>> I think it would be great if it happened.

>> Can you imagine it, BCCI says we don't want to play, so the ICC goes
>> ahead without the BCCI and ends up making millions that BCCI could
>> have had some share in.

>> It would be poetic justice.

> Which is probably why India wants to get some other votes on their side
> so this can't happen!

> Phil.

Yeah that seems ridiculous. If they don't want to play, then don't, why do
they want other teams not to play.
 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by dp » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:28:36

Quote:





> >> that the world would be a better place for knowing the following:

> >> >It is a mistake for the ICC to think that they can tap the huge Indian
> >> >market for cricket revenues only through the BCCI. If the BCCI is not
> >> >interested in fielding an Indian team for a 20-20 world cup, let it be!
> >> >The ICC should still go ahead and organize the tournament; I am
> >> >absolutely confident that there will be a huge television audience in
> >> >India and Pakistan (from which the ICC can make enormous profits
> >> >through television rights) even if these countries do not participate.
> >> >India has never participated in World Cup soccer (it is not even an
> >> >Asian soccer power), yet millions and millions of people in the
> >> >subcontinent are known to stay up all night to watch World cup soccer
> >> >(there is also a huge captive audience in the subcontinent for lesser
> >> >tournaments like European Cup Soccer, Italian and English Club soccer,
> >> >etc). Thus, there is absolutely no reason why people in the
> >> >subcontinent will not watch 20-20 cricket matches even if India and
> >> >Pakistan do not participate.
> >> >The ICC should ofcourse market the tournament well in the subcontinent.
> >> >Maybe kickstart the marketing campaign with an intense 1-week
> >> >triangular 20-20 tournament involving England/Australia/South Africa in
> >> >four locations (Kolkata/Karachi/Colombo/Dacca?)!
> >> >The BCCI would obviously like to keep India as a protected market in
> >> >cricket where it will have a monopoly. However the ICC will do well if
> >> >it opens up the Indian cricket economy by introducing new cricket
> >> >products like 20-20 tournaments, etc (bypassing the BCCI). IMO, it will
> >> >be a win for world cricket as well as for the Indian domestic cricket
> >> >consumer (who will get more choices about what they can watch instead
> >> >having to depend on the BCCI) if the ICC takes such an initiative.

> >> dp wouldn't like that idea, it goes against his One World Order of the
> >> BCCI

> >> I think it would be great if it happened.

> >> Can you imagine it, BCCI says we don't want to play, so the ICC goes
> >> ahead without the BCCI and ends up making millions that BCCI could
> >> have had some share in.

> >> It would be poetic justice.

> > Which is probably why India wants to get some other votes on their side
> > so this can't happen!

> > Phil.

> Yeah that seems ridiculous. If they don't want to play, then don't, why do
> they want other teams not to play.

So that the tournament itself gets scrapped rather than BCCI having to
pay a penalty.

dp

 
 
 

20-20 World Cup: What the ICC should do!

Post by kshatriya4l.. » Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:40:04

"I was talking about other posters who argue that
people mainly watch cricket for national pride and if we move to a
format where teams aren't based on nationality people will stop
watching cricket. "
Not sure where else you read about introduction of pvt teams.

"Why aren't teams not based on nationality competitive?"
Which teams are these ? County teams? Ranji teams ?