baundule bhai, I'm really sorry if I came across as arrogant, it was not my intention. long day and all that, but no excuses.
I apologise sincerely.
-----------------------------
coming back to the discussion, well, I still fail to understand any relation between monopoly and dictatorship, they are not equivalent which is what your post conveys.
again, ICC may be controlled by bcci (though I fail to see how and you haven't told me that yet) and that is bad if true.
I'm yet to be convinced that this is true. I've explained the ICL issue I think, the home boards surely didn't want a competing cricket body anymore than ICC/bcci wanted but they had the opportunity to use the bcci and ICC's shoulders to do the unpleasant bit of firing.
I'm sorry that you are also apprehensive about my honest question about the ICC rules. thanks a lot for that document !!
two things I want to know,
a) when was the proposed BD tour to ind ? the document only gives FTP from 2006 (I've already mentioned elsewhere that I didn't follow cricket during that time and didn't know of BC !)
b) there's a clause that requires offending members to pay a hefty fine if they don't reciprocate a series(ind had two tours in BD ?) can we get it from some BCB guy if BCCi ever paid that fine ? it sounds really odd if BCCI canceled a series and didn't pay a fine and no one raises a question on that !
even bcci doesn't have that kind of power, to stop a bangali's voice !!
btw, you remember what we started off with ? that bcci is responsible for cricket not spreading. my last word on that, bcci
at worst doesn't care if cricket is spread or not (I really don't think that's true, more viewers mean more revenue for bcci)
in practice I can't find a single reason why bcci will want to stop spread of cricket.
also, I do think cricket is spreading much more rapidly in the last few years with countries like afg, namibia and holland coming up. at the end of the day, I can't agree with that statement of yours !
regards !