[Neel Here]

Originally Posted by bangladesh_sy
lets just say you are right.

let's not pretend it is something I'm saying for the heck of it. that's intellectual dishonesty. OTOH if you are not aware of it then you have no business discussing this issue in the first place.
the revenue from India is MANY times that from Aus or Eng. India contributes 75-80% of ICC's total revenue. one example. http://contentsutra.com/article/419-...n-star-sports/ who were the title sponsors when Aus or Eng toured ? how many ground hoardings at dhaka stadium were from Aus and Eng ? compare with when India toured. check the zimbabwe tour, who are the title sponsors. what % of ground adverts are from India ? an India tour probably generates as much 4-5 times the revenue for BCB than when Eng or Aus tours.

so why doesn't BCB tell ECB and CA to stop scheduling us to tour their country, instead they can all just visit Bangladesh and we can make money. right? why is India the only exception to your theory? I mean Eng and Aus are big teams right? When they tour Bangladesh BCB makes a whole lot of money. so why doesn't BCB just tell them you guys only come here and play because we make more money that way. why is this only applicable for India and not other teams?

there can be a multitude of reasons,
a) ECB and CA don't care about generating revenue for BCB. they don't have an understanding with BCB as BCCI does.
b) BCB thinks touring in Aus and Eng is much more important from cricketing viewpoint than touring in India, where conditions are more or less similar to BD
c) Eng and Aus are big(revenue-wise) compared to the other cricket playing nations, not Ind. combined, they are worth less than a fourth of Ind.

I make this point again, if it is true, as you allege that BCCI is unfairly not asking BD to tour while touring BD more times than any other major nation, then we would have had BCB complaining about it to the press and ICC. have they ?
find those complaints and I'll admit I was wrong and you were correct.

And please don't BS about Aus hosting us in Darwin. At least Aus did host us right? I mean that's what we are talking about here right?

so why doesn't CA host SA or Eng at darwin ? why only BD and SL ?
mind you, I made the point to illustrate that it is loss making to host smaller teams at a big ground, because then CA or the ground authorities have to pay the city police for security, city administration for electricity etc. if the ticket sales do not cover this expenditure then the ground makes a loss. that's why they chose a ground like darwin where costs would be lower.

Neel Here is really pissing me with his BS theories.

that's because my comments(not theories) are disturbing your cosy little worldview about who is evil and who is good.
what you are experiencing is called cognitive dissonance. google it.