Quote:
Originally Posted by Cricket4All
We should consider cricketers salary in relation to per-capita-income (PCI) of a country in order to get better perspective about it.
imageupload
Ideally, I reckon, top cricketers should earn 11 to 15 times of PCI of a country. Australia, Pakistan, South Africa & Sri Lanka are hitting the right note in this regard. Top cricketers from Bangladesh, West Indies and Zimbabwe do not earn as much as they should have got whereas English and Indian top cricketers earn disproportionately more.
|
This is great stuff. Very interesting to see how three nations (Pk,SA,and SL) coverge around the same ratio of salary to PCI, i.e., 11. Which might be a clue to what the right ratio should be. I can argue, that along with Eng and Ind, Aus is also pretty generous. 11 to 14 is a high jump.
Bd, WI, and Zim are at 8. And we do hear complaints from Zim and WI players all the time about how they deserve more. We never hear any such complaints from the Bd players though.
And what about NZ? The have the lowest ratio, 5. I think they have a real case to ask for higher salary, provided the NZ cricket board rakes up enough revenue. Thought what they already get seems decent enough, but is it really fair when their closest neighbors have a greater PCI, AND ON TOP OF THAT have a ratio of pay to PCI of 14, to their 5?