ICC announces 'ICC Player of the Month'

[MenInG]

The International Cricket Council (ICC) today announced the introduction of the ICC Player of the Month awards which will recognise and celebrate the best performances of both male and female cricketers across all forms of international cricket throughout the year.

Fans are invited to vote online every month to award their favourite male and female cricketers across all formats of international cricket played in that month

An independent ICC Voting Academy comprising former players, broadcasters, and journalists from around the world, will team up with fans to vote for the ICC Men’s Player of the Month and ICC Women’s Player of the Month.

Fans have been treated to some sensational cricketing performances during the month of January making the inaugural player of the month awards a highly competitive affair. From performances from youngsters such as Mohammed Siraj (IN), Washington Sundar (IN), T. Natarajan (IN), Rishabh Pant (IN), Rahmanullah Gurbaz (AFG) to established players such as Ravichandran Ashwin (IN), Joe Root (ENG), Steve Smith (AUS), Marizanne Kapp (SA), Nadine de Klerk (SA), Nida Dar (PAK), there will be no shortage of candidates for the month of January.

Geoff Allardice, ICC General Manager – Cricket said: “The ICC Player of the Month is a great way to connect with fans of the sport and celebrate performances of their favourite players through the year. It gives us all an opportunity to acknowledge world class performances on the field by male and female cricketers and they have been in abundance throughout January.”

The nomination and voting process:

The three nominees for each of the categories will be determined by the ICC Awards Nominations Committee based on on-field performances and overall achievements during the period of that month (the first to the last day of each calendar month.)

This shortlist is then voted for by the independent ICC Voting Academy and fans around the world. The ICC Voting Academy comprising prominent members of the cricket family including senior journalists, former players, and broadcasters.

The Voting Academy will submit their votes by email and will retain a 90% share of the vote. Subsequently, on the 1st day of each month, fans registered with the ICC will be able to submit votes via the ICC website and will have a 10% share of the vote. Winners will be announced every second Monday of the month on the ICC’s digital channels.

[Robert]

Roooooooooooooot

[King_Kohli]

Player of the Month?
seriously?

Lol

[shah_1]

Joe Root deserves to win

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Rishabh Pant should win it.

[hoshiarpurexpress]

What next now play of the fortnight. Don’t fix something which ain’t broken.

[Titan24]

Some tough competition to the Employee of the month concept.

[Captain]

Muhammad Abbas for me

[Forward Defensive Push]

Roooooooooooooot

Fawaaaaaaaaad

[TrentDevil]

Tim Paine & Ravi Ashwin should share this award

[Hyperion66]

One of Root or Pant should win this.

[freelance_cricketer]

Doesn't sound right without a sponsor.

Make it Dilbagh Pan Masala Player of the Month and go full cringey.

[the Great Khan]

Lets be honest. No Pakistani will ever win this so I couldnt care less.

[Gilly]

Lets be honest. No Pakistani will ever win this so I couldnt care less.

fans only contribute %10 of the voting, I think the ICC will share it around similar to the funds distribution model.

[Energy]

Based on fan vote. We know where this is going.

[Gilly]

Based on fan vote. We know where this is going.

Its being promoted as based on fan votes but that only makes up for 10% of the voting, selected voters have 90% of the decision.

[Energy]

Its being promoted as based on fan votes but that only makes up for 10% of the voting, selected voters have 90% of the decision.

That's more fair.

[PakPremi]

Rizwan had a shout with his runs and excellent keeping in tests and that ODI knock.

[Thunderbolt14]

Its being promoted as based on fan votes but that only makes up for 10% of the voting, selected voters have 90% of the decision.

“Only” 10% is a lot. Usually you’ll have marginal calls between players by the selected voters.

35% Pant
40% Root
25% Ashwin

Can easily become

40% Pant
30% Root
30% Ashwin

[the Great Khan]

The only time I can see a Pakistani winning is if the big three are not playing in the same month. Otherwise it will always be dominated by those three..these awards that the ICC create discriminate against Pakistan and have always done so. We have our own awards so thats all i care about.

[MenInG]

The only time I can see a Pakistani winning is if the big three are not playing in the same month. Otherwise it will always be dominated by those three..these awards that the ICC create discriminate against Pakistan and have always done so. We have our own awards so thats all i care about.

You are right.

This seems more like an Employee of the month thing! ICC's best friends win

[Fahdi]

This is such a cringe worthy idea.

Who came up with this and how did this go through!?!?

[the Great Khan]

This is such a cringe worthy idea.

Who came up with this and how did this go through!?!?

the ICC make up is generally full of Indians. So I suspect a typical young Indian whippersnapper trying to promote their cricket further as is their want. The kind of thing I expect from them tbh.

"lets get a player of the month. we'll win that too. india is winning yaayyy, jai hind, ve are theee besth"

[Thunderbolt14]

ICC should partner with Baskin Robbins

[JaDed]

Whats next star performer of qtr?

[IAJ]

LOL funny this, ICC came just 11 years after me:

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/sh...t=of+the+month

[King_Kohli]

Whats next star performer of qtr?

Ravi Shastri will sweep all Quarter Awards.

[Zeshan547]

What next player of the week and then player of the day, even better player of the hour? What a farce.

[Shazzam]

Fawad Alam

[Maher96]

LOL funny this, ICC came just 11 years after me:

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/sh...t=of+the+month

What is a memory sir jee... 10 year old post

Going down memory Lane.

[Saj]

Surprised to see that Dhoni has not been shortlisted.

[Gilly]

The only time I can see a Pakistani winning is if the big three are not playing in the same month. Otherwise it will always be dominated by those three..these awards that the ICC create discriminate against Pakistan and have always done so. We have our own awards so thats all i care about.

How does it discriminate Pakistan players?.

[DeadlyVenom]

It could be a decent idea. In months where the bigger teams aren't playing but say there is a zimb v afg series it can give a welcome boost to a player from a lower ranked team.

[Belawal2014]

This is such a cringe worthy idea.

Who came up with this and how did this go through!?!?

Probably copied from the NBA.

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

LOL funny this, ICC came just 11 years after me:

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/sh...t=of+the+month

Well done. What an idea sir jee.

[MenInG]

ICC PLAYER OF THE MONTH NOMINATIONS FOR JANUARY ANNOUNCED

• The ICC Men’s Player of the Month January Nominees: Rishabh Pant (IND), Joe Root (ENG) and Paul Stirling (IRE)
• ICC Women’s Player of the Month January Nominees: Diana Baig (PAK), Shabnim Ismail (SA) and Marizanne Kapp (SA)

The International Cricket Council (ICC) today announced the nominees for the inaugural ICC Player of the Month Awards which recognise and celebrate the best performances from both male and female cricketers across all forms of international cricket throughout the year.

About the ICC Men’s Player of the Month January Nominees:

Rishabh Pant played two Tests against Australia where he scored a 97 at Sydney to ensure a draw before an unbeaten 89 at Brisbane that led India to a historic series win against arch-rivals Australia. England Captain Joe Root played two Tests against Sri Lanka, where he scored a 228 and 186 and led his team to a 2-0 Test series victory. The third nominee in the category, Ireland’s Paul Stirling played two ODIs v UAE and three ODIs v Afghanistan, where he scored three centuries.

About ICC Women’s Player of the Month January Nominees:

Diana Baig of Pakistan played three ODIs and two T20Is against South Africa, where she led the wicket-takers with nine wickets in the three-match ODI series against South Africa. South Africa’s Shabnim Ismail also played three ODIs and two T20Is against Pakistan and took seven wickets in the victorious ODI series against Pakistan, before taking five wickets in the second T20I against the same opposition. Her compatriot all-rounder Marizanne Kapp who is the third nominee in the category played two ODIs and two T20Is against Pakistan where she made 115 runs at a strike rate of 110.57 and added three wickets in the ODI series against Pakistan.

[Thunderbolt14]

I really don’t see how Pant won’t win this if you’re allowing the general public to be the tie-breaker. I would be surprised if any less than 10/12 months are won by Indians.

Personally speaking, though Pant played excellently, I feel Root deserves it more.

[globalcitizen]

I doubt any player will feel honoured to win player of month.. i just don’t see any value in it

[WhenSultansBowled]

I doubt any player will feel honoured to win player of month.. i just don’t see any value in it

It can be like NBA's player of the month. It might not mean much but it will give lesser known players motivation to perform.

[MenInG]

The International Cricket Council (ICC) today announced the winners of the inaugural ICC Player of the Month Awards which recognize and celebrate the best performances from both male and female cricketers across all forms of international cricket throughout the year.

India’s Rishabh Pant won the ICC Men’s Player of the Month for January 2021 for his performances in the two Tests against Australia where he scored a 97 at Sydney and an unbeaten 89 at Brisbane that led India to a historic series win against arch-rivals Australia. South Africa’s Shabnim Ismail was named the ICC Women’s Player of the Month for January 2021 for her performances across three ODIs and two T20Is during the month. Ismail took seven wickets in the victorious ODI series against Pakistan, before taking five wickets in the second T20I against the same opposition.

Fans were treated to some sensational cricket during the month of January making the inaugural player of the month awards a highly competitive affair.

Commenting on Pant being awarded the inaugural ICC Men’s Player of the Month Award, Ramiz Raja representing the ICC Voting Academy said: “Both times Pant played under pressure in two different sets of challenges: to draw a game and to win a game. He showed his versatility of skills in both knocks, the clincher being his temperament.”

Commenting on Ismail’s inaugural ICC Women’s Player of the Month Award, Mpumelelo Mbangwa representing the ICC Voting Academy said: “Ismail reached a hundred T20I wickets in their series against Pakistan. She leads the way and is the first South African to reach the milestone. With her pace and aggression, she continues to lead the South African women’s team’s bowling attack admirably. She is a joy to watch in action.”

Reacting to her award win, Shabnim Ismail said: “Winning the ICC Women’s Player of the Month in January just shows that all the hard work I put in during the lockdown has paid off for me. This accolade would not have been possible if it were not for my teammates and I am grateful and thankful for all your support. Also, to all my fans and friends all around the world thank you very much for the vote, it really meant a lot to me. And lastly, a special thanks to also my family who have been there for me and supported me all through the way.”

Commenting on his award win Rishabh Pant said: “I am delighted to be receiving the inaugural ICC Men’s Player of the Month Award. For any sportsperson, contributing to a team win is the ultimate reward but such initiatives help motivate youngsters such as myself to do better each time. I dedicate this award to every member of Team India that contributed to our victory in Australia and also thank all my fans who voted for me.”

[Thunderbolt14]

I really don’t see how Pant won’t win this if you’re allowing the general public to be the tie-breaker. I would be surprised if any less than 10/12 months are won by Indians.

Personally speaking, though Pant played excellently, I feel Root deserves it more.

[Saj]

The International Cricket Council (ICC) today announced the nominees for the ICC Player of the Month Awards for the month of February to recognise the best performances from both male and female cricketers across all forms of international cricket. Fans have been treated to some fantastic cricket the last few months.

About the ICC Men’s Player of the Month February Nominees:

Ravichandran Ashwin played 3 tests against England as part of India’s ongoing series against them. In these Tests he scored a 106 in the second innings of India’s second Test victory over England at Chennai and took his 400th Test wicket in the third Test victory at Ahmedabad. Scoring a total of 176 runs across these games with taking a total of 24 wickets, Ashwin is the deserving candidate to be nominated in the Men’s category for Feb. England Test captain Joe Root makes it to the list of nominations again this month for his outstanding performance with the bat and the ball. He scored a total of 333 runs and took 6 wickets overall in the 3 Tests that he played against India. In the first Test against India, Root scored a 218 to lead England to victory. From the West Indies, Test debutant Kyle Mayers played 2 Tests against Bangladesh and scored a match-winning 210 to help the West Indies successfully chase 395 and win the first Test against Bangladesh. This performance alone is deserving of this nomination.

About ICC Women’s Player of the Month February Nominees:

Tammy Beaumont’s unbeaten 72 helped England to a comfortable seven-wicket win against New Zealand. She played 3 ODIs and passed fifty in each of these against New Zealand, totaling 231 runs. Brooke Halliday of New Zealand also played 3 ODIs against England and scored a total of 110 runs and took a total of 2 wickets in these games. Brooke also went on to become just the fourth woman to score half-centuries in each of her first two ODI matches. England’s Nat Sciver went on to take 5 wickets and score a total of 96 runs in the 3 ODIs she played against New Zealand. Nat was the leading wicket-taker in the ODI series between New Zealand and England, and added an innings of 63 in the second match that they won.

[NoBallZombie]

The International Cricket Council (ICC) today announced the nominees for the ICC Player of the Month Awards for the month of February to recognise the best performances from both male and female cricketers across all forms of international cricket. Fans have been treated to some fantastic cricket the last few months.

About the ICC Men’s Player of the Month February Nominees:

Ravichandran Ashwin played 3 tests against England as part of India’s ongoing series against them. In these Tests he scored a 106 in the second innings of India’s second Test victory over England at Chennai and took his 400th Test wicket in the third Test victory at Ahmedabad. Scoring a total of 176 runs across these games with taking a total of 24 wickets, Ashwin is the deserving candidate to be nominated in the Men’s category for Feb. England Test captain Joe Root makes it to the list of nominations again this month for his outstanding performance with the bat and the ball. He scored a total of 333 runs and took 6 wickets overall in the 3 Tests that he played against India. In the first Test against India, Root scored a 218 to lead England to victory. From the West Indies, Test debutant Kyle Mayers played 2 Tests against Bangladesh and scored a match-winning 210 to help the West Indies successfully chase 395 and win the first Test against Bangladesh. This performance alone is deserving of this nomination.

About ICC Women’s Player of the Month February Nominees:

Tammy Beaumont’s unbeaten 72 helped England to a comfortable seven-wicket win against New Zealand. She played 3 ODIs and passed fifty in each of these against New Zealand, totaling 231 runs. Brooke Halliday of New Zealand also played 3 ODIs against England and scored a total of 110 runs and took a total of 2 wickets in these games. Brooke also went on to become just the fourth woman to score half-centuries in each of her first two ODI matches. England’s Nat Sciver went on to take 5 wickets and score a total of 96 runs in the 3 ODIs she played against New Zealand. Nat was the leading wicket-taker in the ODI series between New Zealand and England, and added an innings of 63 in the second match that they won.

No recognition for Hassan's fantastic 10fer against SA? That was high quality bowling.

[Thunderbolt14]

I would give it to Kyle Mayers but unfortunately he’s not Indian nor was he involved in a series against India. Let’s see who gets it.

[Rajdeep]

Ashwin is having a terrific series with both bat and ball against England. He deserve to win the player of the month award.

[Thunderbolt14]

Ashwin is having a terrific series with both bat and ball against England. He deserve to win the player of the month award.

Even from the players listed, he does not deserve it. Root had a far better series than Ashwin who was overshadowed by Axar Patel, and better than those two was an ATG knock by Kyle Mayers who made a double century on debut to chase 395 in the fourth innings in Asia against a very decent bowling attack.

Mind you I am not even taking the names of Pakistani players like Hassan Ali who recorded a beautiful 10-fer or Rizwan who scored his first Test century and first T20I century in the same week, and within the span of a couple days became part of the “hundreds in all formats” club. Also won man of the series in Tests as well as man of the series in the T20Is against South Africa.

Kyle Mayers’ performance is the greatest of all these players. Unfortunately, he wishes he was an Indian making his debut against Bangladesh.

[street cricketer]

I joined the forum six years ago, old posters have gone, some still there. Some posters have come and gone and some new posters have joined.

But if there's one rhetoric that has remained constant, it's the BCCI=ICC siege mentality from the Pakistanis lel.

[Thunderbolt14]

I joined the forum six years ago, old posters have gone, some still there. Some posters have come and gone and some new posters have joined.

But if there's one rhetoric that has remained constant, it's the BCCI=ICC siege mentality from the Pakistanis lel.

So according to you Pant deserved it more than Root last month? And Ashwin deserves it more than Rizwan this month? I’m waiting for the actual winner to be announced because I have a feeling the chances are 50% Ashwin, 40% Root, and 10% Mayers whereas really those odds need to be reversed.

The kind of knock that Mayers had, if he was an Indian, he’d be given player of the month without a second thought.

I’m just giving my opinion. I don’t think the ICC is particularly biased towards India but in this case they’ve opened the voting to fans who act as the tie breaker. Mathematically speaking, we all know what happens once you open the voting to the general public on any cricket-related phenomenon and what the demographic breakdown is.

In other words, a simple majority in favor of Mayers at the ICC is unlikely to be enough, and if there is a 3 way split at the ICC (let’s say 40% Mayers, 40% Ashwin, 20% Root) then the tie breaker will award it to Ashwin.

I am criticizing the methodology for being open to bias, not the ICC itself for being biased. Although that is indeed an argument I might make some claims on, considering the IPL XI released as the “T20I team of the decade”.

[ChTab]

This is really a stupid award from ICC. It's not football where almost everyone is playing at the same time.

[jeeteshssaxena]

Even from the players listed, he does not deserve it. Root had a far better series than Ashwin who was overshadowed by Axar Patel, and better than those two was an ATG knock by Kyle Mayers who made a double century on debut to chase 395 in the fourth innings in Asia against a very decent bowling attack.

Mind you I am not even taking the names of Pakistani players like Hassan Ali who recorded a beautiful 10-fer or Rizwan who scored his first Test century and first T20I century in the same week, and within the span of a couple days became part of the “hundreds in all formats” club. Also won man of the series in Tests as well as man of the series in the T20Is against South Africa.

Kyle Mayers’ performance is the greatest of all these players. Unfortunately, he wishes he was an Indian making his debut against Bangladesh.

First of all please explain me how Root had a better series than Ashwin.

Ashwin in this series
Wkts 24, runs 190

Root in this series
Wkts 6, runs 360 (most of them came on the flat patta on day 1 but leave it)

Ashwin's performance is atleast a level above root.

Secondly Kyle Mayers played a historic innings but it hardly means that he should get the player of the month award, Rizwan has a better chance to win coz he was consistent throughout the month.

Also i think there's a group of some officials who select the winner and fan votes account only to 10% of the total score.
This is just another conspiracy theory.

If Bcci decided who wins icc awards i am damn sure Rohit Sharma would have received the player of the tourney in wc 19.

[cricketjoshila]

So according to you Pant deserved it more than Root last month? And Ashwin deserves it more than Rizwan this month? I’m waiting for the actual winner to be announced because I have a feeling the chances are 50% Ashwin, 40% Root, and 10% Mayers whereas really those odds need to be reversed.

The kind of knock that Mayers had, if he was an Indian, he’d be given player of the month without a second thought.

I’m just giving my opinion. I don’t think the ICC is particularly biased towards India but in this case they’ve opened the voting to fans who act as the tie breaker. Mathematically speaking, we all know what happens once you open the voting to the general public on any cricket-related phenomenon and what the demographic breakdown is.

In other words, a simple majority in favor of Mayers at the ICC is unlikely to be enough, and if there is a 3 way split at the ICC (let’s say 40% Mayers, 40% Ashwin, 20% Root) then the tie breaker will award it to Ashwin.

I am criticizing the methodology for being open to bias, not the ICC itself for being biased. Although that is indeed an argument I might make some claims on, considering the IPL XI released as the “T20I team of the decade”.

Yes Pant deserved it more than Root. He helped India win a series in Aus, beating them at Brisbane. No team had beaten Australia at Brisbane in three decades. Oh and he did it against Cummins Hazlewood and Starc.

Ashwin: 3 tests 24 wickets, thats 8 wickets a match. A century in the third innings on a turning track.

Whining ICC BCCI Indian etc wont change facts.

[jeeteshssaxena]

In other words, a simple majority in favor of Mayers at the ICC is unlikely to be enough, and if there is a 3 way split at the ICC (let’s say 40% Mayers, 40% Ashwin, 20% Root) then the tie breaker will award it to Ashwin.
.

How is this not fair? .
In this case
Both Ashwin and Mayers have 40% votes which basically means both were deemed equally good by the unbiased icc panelists.

[Thunderbolt14]

First of all please explain me how Root had a better series than Ashwin.

Ashwin in this series
Wkts 24, runs 190

Root in this series
Wkts 6, runs 360 (most of them came on the flat patta on day 1 but leave it)

Ashwin's performance is atleast a level above root.

Secondly Kyle Mayers played a historic innings but it hardly means that he should get the player of the month award, Rizwan has a better chance to win coz he was consistent throughout the month.

Also i think there's a group of some officials who select the winner and fan votes account only to 10% of the total score.
This is just another conspiracy theory.

If Bcci decided who wins icc awards i am damn sure Rohit Sharma would have received the player of the tourney in wc 19.

Rohit Sharma was robbed because Kane Williamson also got robbed. Williamson should have won the world cup, but because New Zealand got robbed, they needed to give him a conciliatory player of the tournament. I am sure if the final wasn’t so controversial, Rohit would have won. Or if India had reached the final, Rohit would have won. You and I both know this.

Secondly you are right that a group of ICC officials decides 90% of it with 10% being put to fans as the tie breaker. Forget about what the ICC votes or doesn’t vote, I am not saying ICC is BCCI. I will assume the ICC is 100% fair. Simply by virtue of the methodology, where 10% is put to fans, do you agree with me that every month if there is an Indian player, this player has an automatic head start of roughly 9% out that 10% allocated to fans?

That’s all I’m saying. Even if the ICC officials allocate their 90% as
43% Root
35% Ashwin
12% Mayers
Ashwin will still win because most of the remaining 10 will go to him.

I am saying the methodology is flawed and essentially this is a marketing stunt by the ICC to engage Indian fans and earn cash from them. I see this as equivalent to Shoaib Akhtar making videos about Indian cricket and saying he is heartbroken that he got Sachin out on 98.

Open your eyes my brother.

[Thunderbolt14]

How is this not fair? .
In this case
Both Ashwin and Mayers have 40% votes which basically means both were deemed equally good by the unbiased icc panelists.

43% Root
35% Ashwin

What now? Every Indian player starts with a 10% headstart in these player of the month “calculations”.

[street cricketer]

So according to you Pant deserved it more than Root last month? And Ashwin deserves it more than Rizwan this month? I’m waiting for the actual winner to be announced because I have a feeling the chances are 50% Ashwin, 40% Root, and 10% Mayers whereas really those odds need to be reversed.

The kind of knock that Mayers had, if he was an Indian, he’d be given player of the month without a second thought.

I’m just giving my opinion. I don’t think the ICC is particularly biased towards India but in this case they’ve opened the voting to fans who act as the tie breaker. Mathematically speaking, we all know what happens once you open the voting to the general public on any cricket-related phenomenon and what the demographic breakdown is.

In other words, a simple majority in favor of Mayers at the ICC is unlikely to be enough, and if there is a 3 way split at the ICC (let’s say 40% Mayers, 40% Ashwin, 20% Root) then the tie breaker will award it to Ashwin.

I am criticizing the methodology for being open to bias, not the ICC itself for being biased. Although that is indeed an argument I might make some claims on, considering the IPL XI released as the “T20I team of the decade”.

This is the methodology of deciding the award (as posted in the OP):

The three nominees for each of the categories will be determined by the ICC Awards Nominations Committee based on on-field performances and overall achievements during the period of that month (the first to the last day of each calendar month.)

This shortlist is then voted for by the independent ICC Voting Academy and fans around the world. The ICC Voting Academy comprising prominent members of the cricket family including senior journalists, former players, and broadcasters.

The Voting Academy will submit their votes by email and will retain a 90% share of the vote. Subsequently, on the 1st day of each month, fans registered with the ICC will be able to submit votes via the ICC website and will have a 10% share of the vote. Winners will be announced every second Monday of the month on the ICC’s digital channels.

So fans (only those who are registered with the ICC) have just 10% share of the vote and 90% of the vote is decided by the ICC Voting Academy comprised of respected cricket players and pundits all over the world. It would be stupid of the ICC to let the award be open for voting from public which would mean only Indian players would win. This is more similar to the Ballon d'Or voting procedure except the fan voting part.

And not just me, anyone who is worth his salt as a cricket pundit would only give Pant the award for last month's performances. His innings at the SCG was incredible enough that it changed the entire complexion of the match with people wondering how long Australia would take to bowl India out to thinking "Are India going to win this" in the span of one session (morning session). Only that innings was good enough for him to being nominated, but his knock at the Gabba on the last day shattering Australia's 32 year unbeaten streak at their fortress made sure that others didn't have a prayer in that poll. Root's double was good but it was against Sri Lanka and nobody's going to remember that double a few years afterwards and think I watched that innings live. Stokes' innings at Headingley, Pant's at Sydney and Gabba, Kusal Perera's knock at Durban are the sort of innings that will be remembered for decades afterwards.

Coming to this month's award, if it were to me, I would undoubtedly give it to Kyle Meyers given the context (similar to Pant's case) what he achieved. But I don't think he's going to win, as it's the player of the month award rather than the performance of the month, I don't think Meyers followed that up with any decent innings. I think it's going to between Ashwin (got a 5fer in 1st test, 8fer and a century in 2nd test, 7fer in 3rd test) and Root (double ton in 1st test and 5fer in 3rd test), most probably Ashwin because he had a performance in all three tests.

[street cricketer]

P.S.: I think the fan voting element needs to be removed, even if it's only 10%. It should be done only by ex players and pundits who know and understand the game in an objective fashion and not in a chauvinistic manner done by fans generally.

[Thunderbolt14]

P.S.: I think the fan voting element needs to be removed, even if it's only 10%. It should be done only by ex players and pundits who know and understand the game in an objective fashion and not in a chauvinistic manner done by fans generally.

This is my only real qualm. I would have no problem if the voting was 100% ICC affiliates (pundits, ex players) and they felt that Ashwin is the most deserving this month. I would say fair enough, I agree to disagree, but you guys are more knowledgeable than me and therefore I am very happy for Ashwin (who by the way, is one of my favorite active players).

However, with 10% open to fans, it really feels as if every Indian player in these Player of the Month awards starts with a 9% headstart given the size of the Indian fan base.

The methodology is my real issue — I wholeheartedly agree with your point that the fan voting element needs to be removed.

[street cricketer]

This is my only real qualm. I would have no problem if the voting was 100% ICC affiliates (pundits, ex players) and they felt that Ashwin is the most deserving this month. I would say fair enough, I agree to disagree, but you guys are more knowledgeable than me and therefore I am very happy for Ashwin (who by the way, is one of my favorite active players).

However, with 10% open to fans, it really feels as if every Indian player in these Player of the Month awards starts with a 9% headstart given the size of the Indian fan base.

The methodology is my real issue — I wholeheartedly agree with your point that the fan voting element needs to be removed.

Agree with you. Involving the fans makes no sense in awards like the Ballon d'Or or similar awards and makes it more look like the popular player of the month award.

[Ab Fan]

Completely fair by all standards. Root performed only in one inning, Ash did in all three.

[PakPremi]

No recognition for Hassan's fantastic 10fer against SA? That was high quality bowling.

Or Rizwan brilliant keeping and continued good batting.

[Thunderbolt14]

Unrelated to my above argument about the 10% voting for fans, I raise another concern - I really can’t see a world in which if there was an India vs South Africa series going on and an Indian batsman brought up hundreds in all three formats in the span of a week, including two man of the series awards, that too in winning contributions, and that too with some fabulous takes as wicket keeper, he wouldn’t be nominated for player of the month.

Really, if Rizwan was Indian and Ashwin was Pakistani, I am very, very, very sure that Ashwin would not be nominated and Rizwan would be. I’m not saying there is some conspiracy, and I do think Ashwin deserved to be nominated, but I also think there is a subconscious bias present.

Look at how the teams of the decade were chosen.

Look at how the ICC Twitter handle has yet to post anything about the Afghanistan vs Zimbabwe Test series, but this morning they posted a tweet congratulating Virat on 100 million Instagram followers.

Again, I am not saying the ICC is on some Indian payroll or that there is a larger conspiracy, but I am saying that if cricket is a solar system then India is the sun. It is hard to see any of the planets and distant stars during the day. I really can’t substantiate this argument much further, and I also don’t mean to cause any offense to any resident India fans. However there does seem to be a sense of the odds stacked against anyone who isn’t Indian.

[RyanRyan10]

Unrelated to my above argument about the 10% voting for fans, I raise another concern - I really can’t see a world in which if there was an India vs South Africa series going on and an Indian batsman brought up hundreds in all three formats in the span of a week, including two man of the series awards, that too in winning contributions, and that too with some fabulous takes as wicket keeper, he wouldn’t be nominated for player of the month.

Really, if Rizwan was Indian and Ashwin was Pakistani, I am very, very, very sure that Ashwin would not be nominated and Rizwan would be. I’m not saying there is some conspiracy, and I do think Ashwin deserved to be nominated, but I also think there is a subconscious bias present.

Look at how the teams of the decade were chosen.

Look at how the ICC Twitter handle has yet to post anything about the Afghanistan vs Zimbabwe Test series, but this morning they posted a tweet congratulating Virat on 100 million Instagram followers.

Again, I am not saying the ICC is on some Indian payroll or that there is a larger conspiracy, but I am saying that if cricket is a solar system then India is the sun. It is hard to see any of the planets and distant stars during the day. I really can’t substantiate this argument much further, and I also don’t mean to cause any offense to any resident India fans. However there does seem to be a sense of the odds stacked against anyone who isn’t Indian.

Both Ashwin and Rizwan scored 1 test 100

Ashwin'a 24 test wickets > Rizwan's MoS performance in T20Is against 2nd string side.


Rashid Khan won T20I player of the decade ahead of Virat Kohli, who had 2 PoTs in T20 WC. But we didn't whine?

[Hasan123]

Kyle Mayers should win it for the innings of his life.

[NoBallZombie]

I would be terribly disappointed if Mayers doesnt win it. That innings was the stuff of legends.

Lets admit it , a Pakistani would never win this award. If a 10-fer, 2 cross format centuries, 2 MoS awards cant win this silly award, nothing else will. Even if it were the 2017 Champ trophy, Bumrah might have won it for setting up the final match.

[sensible-indian-fan]

So according to you Pant deserved it more than Root last month? And Ashwin deserves it more than Rizwan this month? I’m waiting for the actual winner to be announced because I have a feeling the chances are 50% Ashwin, 40% Root, and 10% Mayers whereas really those odds need to be reversed.

The kind of knock that Mayers had, if he was an Indian, he’d be given player of the month without a second thought.

I’m just giving my opinion. I don’t think the ICC is particularly biased towards India but in this case they’ve opened the voting to fans who act as the tie breaker. Mathematically speaking, we all know what happens once you open the voting to the general public on any cricket-related phenomenon and what the demographic breakdown is.

In other words, a simple majority in favor of Mayers at the ICC is unlikely to be enough, and if there is a 3 way split at the ICC (let’s say 40% Mayers, 40% Ashwin, 20% Root) then the tie breaker will award it to Ashwin.

I am criticizing the methodology for being open to bias, not the ICC itself for being biased. Although that is indeed an argument I might make some claims on, considering the IPL XI released as the “T20I team of the decade”.

Yes pant deserved it more than root lol.

2 incredible once in a lifetime knocks in an overseas series at the most clutch moments.

[Thunderbolt14]

Yes pant deserved it more than root lol.

2 incredible once in a lifetime knocks in an overseas series at the most clutch moments.

You’re isolating parts of my post. It doesn’t particularly matter whether Pant deserved it or not — I’m trying to illustrate a larger phenomenon of bias prevalent.

My question was more rhetorical because I’m prodding at the fact that there’s really no real rankings system and methodology by which ICC affiliates vote. You might feel it was worthy, I might feel it was 50/50, and the pundits can feel one way or another depending on how many Indian eyeballs they’re trying to lure. The only real method to the process is that there is a 10% extra headstart to any Indian in contention, and that’s a fact. Fair enough, ICC is free to market the game to whom they want to. I might disagree but that’s their marketing strategy much like Shoaib akhtar is doing, and it’s a strategy that works.

And I’m not even accounting for the affiliates’ own biases (these days most pundits are heavy IPL diehards).

[sensible-indian-fan]

You’re isolating parts of my post. It doesn’t particularly matter whether Pant deserved it or not — I’m trying to illustrate a larger phenomenon of bias prevalent.

My question was more rhetorical because I’m prodding at the fact that there’s really no real rankings system and methodology by which ICC affiliates vote. You might feel it was worthy, I might feel it was 50/50, and the pundits can feel one way or another depending on how many Indian eyeballs they’re trying to lure. The only real method to the process is that there is a 10% extra headstart to any Indian in contention, and that’s a fact. Fair enough, ICC is free to market the game to whom they want to. I might disagree but that’s their marketing strategy much like Shoaib akhtar is doing, and it’s a strategy that works.

And I’m not even accounting for the affiliates’ own biases (these days most pundits are heavy IPL diehards).

Yeah fair points.

Agreed.

Almost everything ICC does is a joke.

Drs umpires call.

Wtc rules.

Super over rules that made WC final a bit of a farce.

Ambiguity on pitch rating.

[BunnyRabbit]

Lol what's the need for this?

Even if they are going to do it, just announce the player rather than releasing the nominees and then voting.