Money Talks & review of the present cricket structure

[fwullah]

The first winter series, against Bangladesh last year, resulted in a loss of about $1 million to Cricket Australia, which budgeted for another loss for this winter's two Tests against Sri Lanka.

Source: The Age, Australia

[fwullah]

If Cricket Australia incurs losses for hosting test matches against SL, then who are we kidding?

Sorry, I mean to say is that if by hosting tests vs. SL, CA incurs losses, then its only logical that CA will incur losses hosting BD.

[fwullah]

The ICC took feedback from a long list of national board chiefs, current captains and former players, sponsors, broadcasters and members of associated members.

While there will obviously be less matches to be played, no decision has been made yet on whether to change the time frame of the schedule to either four or six years.

tiscali.sport, UK

I didn't know that the ICC took feedback from the members of associated members, too.

[fwullah]

Expansion on the agenda, BBC, 29 May 2004

[fwullah]

Bangladesh disagree

Speed said that Zimbabwe and Bangladesh did not support the proposal, which, he added, ‘was understandable.’

Both Speed and Mani said the ICC was forced to consider a change in the structure of the game in light of the fact that broadcasters had expressed the apprehension that Test cricket might not be a viable alternative in certain markets around the world.

“They are worried about Test cricket in certain markets, and we also share that concern,” Speed pointed out. “We have to make sure that we take the steps available to sustain the market. To take Test cricket to ten countries is pretty difficult.”

A position on the amended one-day league was not clear, but the options identified that will be explored further before going to the Executive Board are an 8+2 team league (where all teams play an equal number of matches against all other opposition) over 4, 5 and 6 years; an 8+2 team programme (teams can play different numbers of games against different nations) over 4, 5 and 6 years; an 8+4 league over 4, 5 and 6 years; an 8+4 programme over 4, 5 and 6 years; and a 10-team one-day international league.

September 8, 2004: Deccan Herald, India

[fwullah]

“I will be surprised if there is a finality in October. I think it will be back in February-March next year before we get a finality on the issue.”

Source: See above

[bdmoderator]

Originally posted by fwullah
If Cricket Australia incurs losses for hosting test matches against SL, then who are we kidding?

Sorry, I mean to say is that if by hosting tests vs. SL, CA incurs losses, then its only logical that CA will incur losses hosting BD.

ya, you are right.

[fwullah]

The Review of the Structure of Cricket

The Board considered a number of alternatives to the current five year calendar for international cricket including extending the calendar to six year and the option of introducing a modified program for two members.

After considering the proposals, the Board believes that each country needs time to consider the implications of any change with their own stakeholders.

The proposals put forward will now be taken back by each director to their own country for further discussions on the matter. Further discussions will take place at the next Board meetings to take place in March 2005.

Source: ICC Media Center

[fwullah]

Ummm, does the BCB has any 'stakeholder' AT ALL? THIS IS NEWS FOR ME!