View Full Version : Retire the n-tier

February 14, 2005, 03:09 PM
Cricket's governing body, ICC has been acting more and more like a corporate giant than just a sport council. Hungrier than ever for revenue and warry of losses. It takes no shame in promoting cricket in terms of profit than it's sporting spirit and value. Targeting the lucrative US 'market' in a way that readily takes us way back to the colonial ages.

Thanks to the prying eyes of media, nothing if anything escapes the public scrutiny in the information era. People can come up to a closer conclusion much quicker than that were unimaginable only a decade or two ago. The ICC can no longer hide the ugly side of its face.

They want Bangladesh to make money for them. Previously they publicly announced that they will be satisfied with either a Test win or an ODI series win. Now that Bangladesh achieved both way ahead of the stated deadline, the ICC started to show it's real self. Did Bangladesh Cricket Board received any congratulatory letter on the historic wins from ICC? Hardly a surprise.

How did ICC handled the recent Zimbabwe crisis? Simply brilliant, from their perspective. They staged the trial and returned a verdict without a single testimony. The staging was so perfect that they didn't had to take any responsibility yet they got what they wanted all along. They neither had to prove the ill motives from the ZC nor did they had to support the aging so-called rebels. Only those fine cricketers knew, they had no one to lend a shoulder to hug to. Zimbabwe is no Australia, how could they improve dramatically within just six months? Well, the ICC didn't had to answer that, their plan worked and they got Zimbabwe. After all, the presence of those unlucky fine cricketers would have made it difficult if not impossible.

Bangladesh alone is not enough, ICC needed another test playing country to rebrand the Test cricket slowly but surely.

Ever since Bangladesh gained the elite status and more so in the last 2/3 years, she has been under tremendous threat from the ICC and some elitists. Instead of being patient and supportive, the way they had been throughout the history of Test to most nations, the ICC continued to maintain pressure and dirty trick of sending mixed signals. At one time they say they were being wrong in withdrawing support prematurely while at the other times they hardly helds back their true guns. They setup the target yet continue to undermine the achievements. They talk of improvements yet continue to backstab from the comfort of their own ball rooms.

ICC claims of losing money from Bangladesh away tours. Let's take a break to look at the allegation. Generally speaking, a board makes money from three major fronts, gate-money, media rights and advertisement-sponsorship.

Was it a failure in terms of gate money when Bangladesh played in Darwin or Cairns or caribbeans or Zimbabwe or even in Pakistan? Talking about Pakistan, Indo-Pak serieses are urguably the most sought after of all, yet in the last series, how many spectators really showed up in the test matches? While the tickets were sold out for the one day matches, the test matches virtually had more player-officials than spectators. Is it just a coincidence that the tickets are sold out for the upcoming Bangladesh tour to England which is still months away?

Advertisement-sponsorship is something that most would agree to be dependant largely on marketing. Now, does Bangladesh has to take marketing experts with each tour as a part of her cricket commitments? Besides, who doesn't know, loss and profit may look different from different perspectives?

By far, the media right yields the highest revenue in most if not all cases. Interestingly, most of the board already sold it's media rights and collected the money one way or the other. How could a board claims to lose money then is beyond me. The media moguls have the perfect knowledge of what they are geting into by buying the rights to begin with.

Does the ICC consider the little fact that BCB will lose substantial amount of money if it is restricted to play in home grounds, let alone the progress?

In the light of recent achievements, ICC should be happy to keep its faith and be patient on Bangladesh. Apart from the double series win against Zimbabwe and competative showing against mighty India, Bangladesh showed huge progress in enriching the pool of emerging players. Enormously successful 'Pacer hunt' was a milestone in the quest for progress. Domestic league is begining to see the day light. World class coaches continue to work their sweat out in making 'stars'. Yet ICC from the safe distance keeps on flexing biceps. Instead of being supportive and protective, they act like a giant devil to the young cricket nation. How could a cricket nation make its mark if the ICC keeps on threatening?

Just when the likes of Bashar, Rafique, Rajin, Nafees, Aftab, Rana, Enam, Ashraful, Mashrafe at el make the point that they deserve no less respect, ICC quickly takes the limelight away to its negative campaign. It is truely alerming that it comes from a body that is supposed to help promote cricket and upheld its spirit.

ICC and the boards ofcourse need money to run and advance cricket. But what good is the money for if it comes at the expense of an established cricket nation? If history is of any lesson, Bangladesh is sure to make money tomorrow for itself and the ICC alike if it can survive to thrive today. Rushing it will only delay the cause.

Edited on, February 15, 2005, 12:32 AM GMT, by chinaman.
Reason: edit, edit and more edits

February 14, 2005, 03:50 PM
Completely agree with you. The "tier talks" are so disgusting :mad:

February 14, 2005, 03:54 PM
chinaman: is this your own write up or is it from some other source. just wondering - since you said that references and more will come later.

February 14, 2005, 04:02 PM
My very own. References (links) to published ICC comments, claims etc.

February 14, 2005, 04:29 PM
I totaly agree with u Chinaman:bravo:

February 14, 2005, 04:36 PM
cm, you need to send it to ICC, or at least to cricinfo to publish it. if we do not let our voice to be heard, there is not much point discussing it here.

February 14, 2005, 04:58 PM
yeah. it's more like middle age ppl discussing BD politics at a party in some distant land although they know that those discussions will result in nothing.

February 14, 2005, 05:03 PM
Couple of comments:

First useful link: http://cricket.indiatimes.com/articleshow/42572.cms


Targeting the lucrative US 'market' in a way that readily takes us way back to the colonial ages.

This is a strong comment and needs to be validated by examples.


There were news reports emanating from both Australia and the Caribbean that they lost money (net and no gross) after the BD tour.

February 14, 2005, 05:21 PM
Thanks for the link and comments.

Please note that US is lucrative not because people are crazy about it to that extent but because of its market potential. Holland, Scotland, Namibia and many other countries love cricket as much as we do but they are not just lucrative enough for ICC. They are targeting the "market" not players.

As I said, loss and profit may look different from different perspectives. Did it include the money from selling the media rights earlier? Did it include the cost of establishing new venues? Was the marketing justified and customised to the merit of a particular opponent? Anyway, partial picture has more potential to hide rather than expose the truth when it comes to money.

Food for thoughts.

Edited on, February 14, 2005, 10:35 PM GMT, by chinaman.

February 15, 2005, 10:03 AM
This topic and specially the article written by Chinaman deserves lot more attention than it's getting. This n-tier system only shows the dark side of the ICC. When ICC say they want to promote cricket in the world I think what they really mean is - ICC want cricket to be played in other countries but they don't want those countries to become as good as those 8 test playing nations. More countries becoming as good as the other countries will only threat their century old reputation.

Anyway, Chinaman your wrote an excellent article but this article needs to be promoted. We need to voice our opinion strongly to all the channels available. Can we have this article published on the BBC site? Can we at least try?

February 15, 2005, 10:14 AM
Chinaman, I couldn't have said it better.

All my other threads are actually based on against the idea of n-tier system (2-tier/3-tier/4-tier - whatever) but all my investigative statistics have done is to increase some of our fans' support towards this n-tier system rather than against it.

February 15, 2005, 11:51 AM
Chinaman bhai mail this article to ICC and and post it in the front....

and CC it to all the test captains and coaches and boards....

I agree with you... all the broadcasting stuff is already, so sold how r they losing money? and boards can ask the media to buy all or none in that way they will be able to sell the so called unprofit matches....

Edited on, February 15, 2005, 4:53 PM GMT, by akabir77.

February 15, 2005, 12:06 PM
Zimbabwe arrive in Johannesburg

Simmons: 'Two-tier Tests won't help us'

Cricinfo staff

February 15, 2005

Phil Simmons, Zimbabwe's coach, has said that plans to restrict the amount of Test cricket played by Zimbabwe and Bangladesh would harm the game in the two countries.

Last week, the ICC announced that it was considering reviewing its long-term fixture list as the pressure of almost non-stop cricket were became increasingly clear for all to see. One option ?and probably the least financially painful to the major Test-playing countries and one which would avoid too many one-sided contests ?would be to limit the number of series played against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

"The ability to produce big innings is the main problem," Simmons told reporters on Zimbabwe's arrival in Johannesburg at the start of their tour of South Africa. "There's talent there, but the batsmen need to understand how to score big hundreds. That only comes from playing over and over again, which is why two tiers would be a backward step."

Tatenda Taibu, Zimbabwe's captain, told reporters that he remained positive despite the "disappointing" results in Bangladesh. "If you look at the team over the last five months, we have been improving, and that improvement excites me," he said. "Our number one objective is to keep improving on this tour, but obviously we want to start winning games. We do play to win."

Asked whether he thought South Africa would rest key players against Zimbabwe, Taibu replied that he was not at all interested what was happening in the South African camp. "From our point of view we are only concerned about playing South Africa," he said. "We've got a lot of aspects to sort out in our changing-room, so we are not worrying about what's happening in theirs."

© Cricinfo

February 16, 2005, 05:56 AM
A very good writeup by chinaman bhai. A complete compilation of information, views, analysis and background study.

It is probably about time that BD media and the BCB and all other forums start coming up with protests of such strong nature challenging ICC about this sort of decisions. But we sure need to find ways to hit the appropriate exposure with these compilations.

February 16, 2005, 01:12 PM
<b>Mani’s no to two-tier Tests</b>

World cricket chief Ehsan Mani has opposed two-tier Test cricket because weaker countries should not be ‘marginalised’ or ‘put on one side’ on the basis of their performances alone.

<b>‘To talk about a two-tier system, I think, is wrong,’ International Cricket Council (ICC) president Ehsan Mani told IANS in an interview in New Delhi.</b>

There has been intense lobbying by a section of the Test countries that since Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, for various reasons, are unable to match established teams like Australia and India, the 10 Test nations should split into two divisions.
Some experts have suggested that Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, as also Kenya that currently has only one-day international status, be grouped in the lower division and promoted when they improve considerably.
<b>But Mani was determined not to let the split occur, at least during his tenure that ends in June.</b> source (http://www.newagebd.com/spt.html)


So cricket chief Ehsan Mani is against two-tier system. There will be an election to select World cricket chief around June timeframe. Can Mani run for the 2nd term? This election is very important for Bangladesh and Zim.

Edited on, February 16, 2005, 6:13 PM GMT, by Fazal.

February 16, 2005, 01:14 PM
who is in favor of 2 tier. Aus who else India? anybody knows

February 16, 2005, 01:21 PM
Its all about Money.

8-test playing nations wont make money by hosting Zim and Bangladesh.
On the other hand, they dont mind playing in ZIM and Bangladesh because it wont cost them money but hosts ZIM and Bangladesh will still make money.

I understand their point. Although there will be negative impact on ZIM and Bangladesh, ICC will do it to save itself from loss of millions of dollars.

February 16, 2005, 02:20 PM
mani for president :fanflag:

i dont care if "mani" causes "money" problems for the icc - let's start "lobby"-ing for him! :)

February 16, 2005, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by dawah.tabligh
I understand their point. Although there will be negative impact on ZIM and Bangladesh, ICC will do it to save itself from loss of millions of dollars.
Good that u understand ICC's poin Ahead ofBD/ZIM's point!:duh:
COMMENDABLE... I must say!

February 18, 2005, 05:59 PM
Ha Ha ... Its not only us who are worried about 2-tier system. Other underperforming nations also feeling the pressure. An example:

<i>"From the results achieved since the home loss to India, it is clear that Pakistan cricket is managed by a weak organizational structure. Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) chief Shaharyar Khan appeared to be looking the other way allowing Pakistan to continue being annihilated on the field and eventually demoted to the proposed ICC second tier of cricketing nations." Salahuddin Ahmed, former Test player and ex-chief selector</i> DailyDawn (http://www.dawn.com/2005/02/18/spt3.htm)