Opinion: More money is needed….
I think that the ICC needs to look into their ‘funding prize’ for the elite associates a little bit more. I understand that they keep on comparing it with what they used to give in the past, but they have to take into account that things change. If they gave $20K to the ICC Trophy winner in 1975, it may have been enough, but today even a $1 million for 4 years is not enough. In order to raise the standard of the current associates to the test team level, at least to be competitive, the ICC has to dish out more money.
My estimate was that they need to invest at least $1mil a year, i.e. the prize for the top 6 associates in the ICC trophy has to be about $4mil. That would make it $24mil over a 4 year period, and I seriously dont think the ICC would have that much of a trouble with that. $1mil a year would jumpstart a lot of countries to improve themselves dramatically, and will perhaps jumpstart their cricketing economy so that they start becoming contributers to the game instead of being on the recieving end. Just having 50K people following the game on TV in Ireland or Scotland or Holland is going to bring in a lot of TV revenue for the ICC, and also for Test Countries.
$1mil may sound like a lot of money, but it actually isnt when you think of the fact that Zim gets close to $10-15mil (i think) a year (or maybe 2 years?) from ICCs share of test country revenues. Given that, I think a number 10 to 15 times less for the next few teams is not that much. ICC doesnt have a TV policy either so all of the 4 needed things for associates now cost a lot of money…… i.e. better facilities, pro players, large playing base and esp challenging tours…….
mopase
Nasir M. Khan
Nishadh Rego
Nasir M. Khan\'s Cricket blog 
With the current prize money, the ICC could just be “testing the water”. I think if the associates can convince the ICC that the money is being used wisely, then it’s quite possible that the ICC would release for funds in the future because they know that it’s being used well.
I think it is unfair to demand that a country makes the transition from amateur to pro, hosts better teams, tours better countries, increases player base, improves standards and facilities on the $125K/year that the ICC provides them………..
One needs to look at what it costs WI to be what it is, or NZ for that matter……. if it costs them $20-$30 mil to maintain and imrpove standards, then there is a serious difference in the input……
If the ICC wants to give ‘serious’ oppurtunity to the top 6 elite associates, and expect them to show ‘serious’ results, they also have to spend ‘serious’ money……
I dont think these are feelers……. Which teams will get the funding after next ICC Trophy depends upon the standings from that tournament….. what good is ‘feeling’ for Bermuda or Netherlands if UAE and Namibia may make it in next time instead? Plus the ICC has not annouced any further incentives for the current elite nations, so I doubt these are feelers with greater things to come…….
Its 2 seperate things i.e. to increase countries playing the game, and to improve the standard of the elite teams…….. ICC agrees that their current goal is the latter, not the former………. they annouced that they will increase the funding to $1mil, but I think they need to make it more ($4mil is ideal, but i would settle for $2mil :))
The point is that except for the extremely poor african countries, the current ICC amount is not going to be able to cut it for the associates……
We might only find out in the 2013 tournament, to see whether the ICC
raises the prize money allocation again or not, that’ll probably give the best idea. What might not be a bad idea is a bonus sum if a country re-qualifies for the World Cup.
Personally I prefer your development incentive idea as opposed to just raising the World Cup qualifying prize money so countries won’t just keep importing players in order to grab lucrative sums of money.
Yes, The ICC doesn’t seem to be spending their income the right way….They earnt USD 550 million over the last 7 years through their media rights but have only spent about USD 7 million on their development program annually, which comes to just about 50 million or hardly 10% of their earning…If the ICC is really serious about expanding the game, it should really look at spending a much higher proportion on the developing countries, especially when some of the Test boards get so much money despite having less promise than some of the leading Associates…I think the proportion should be much higher at around 20-25% (of their income) against the current level of
ICC is set to make $65mil from the Champions Trophy alone for its development program …… Now if they are holding this cup every 2 years, as the do, that means they are looking at 130 mil in 4 years, or $32.5 mil/year, only from Champions trophy revenue………
Giving $6mil out of that $32.5mil to the improve the standard of top 6 elite assocaites is quite possible…….. so its not like I am talking impossibilities…….
I think the ICC should sit down and try to see why is it that the top 8 are a class above the elite associates…….. is it a matter of time? I think think so becuase netherlands and Ireland, even Kenya, have been playing the game for a 100 years……. Netherlands in particular have been playing international games since 1905……..
Its a matter of oppurtunity….. and has been a case of money…… and has been a case of playing numbers……… if the playing numbers have not contributed to improvement of standards, it has contributed to higher following, and the regular calender ensured that there was enough to follow consistently……….
Once again, I do not think that a figure of $1mil/year for the elite associates is too big a figure…… the ICC can announce a total grant of $4mil over 4 years, which will be paid in installments of $1mil every year if the audits and the budgets from the preceding year by the associate have been satisfactory……….
As it stands, the process is just too slow…….
I don’t think the fact that various countries have been playing for 100 years is particularly relevant if they haven’t had opportunities to excell or grow the game,
Where we are now I think Scotland and Ireland have a combination of regular first class competition, commercial backing and gradually growing interest that could see them make the leap where others have failed
Ireland has a bit of commercial backing, government backing, good senior team, excellent junior teams (with the U19 team that is decent by test team standards), good crowd backing, decent facilities, a significant number of pro players (which seems to be increasing at a good rate)…….. and pretty good playing numbers
Scotland seems to have a lot of interest, lets see what the govt does, but it does support them well at the junior level….. decent senior team, but weak junior teams, pro players are mostly aging in Hamilton, Brown…… commerical backing seems to be better than Ireland……
But the one thing that both these countries have is the spot in the C&G Trophy….. which gives them 10 games against excellent quality opposition, certainly one better than bangaldesh or Zimbabwe………
I do not think that New Zealand was much better when it started out…… but time in ADDITION to oppurtunity helped them raise their standard….
I think it is very important for associates to ideantify what exactly their problem is……… ICC can fund the top 6 to rectify those problems, as an artificial boost to speed up the process…………
2 countries that need to seriously think about this are Nepal and Ireland, who have excellent U19 teams by test standards……. so their problems should be the easiest to identify………