Debate Mansion

   

Endorsements - Go Team India (Page 7)

Post Reply New Post

Page 7 of 14

Aanandaa

IF-Sizzlerz

Aanandaa

Joined: 07 April 2005

Posts: 13876

Posted: 08 April 2007 at 5:25pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Maya_M

Originally posted by mermaid_QT



Should BCCI take strict action on Indian cricketers and disallow them from engaging in endorsements? concept credit - maya

Thanks QTEmbarrassedEmbarrassed. You know I am still on the fence with 2 diet cokes and no sign of RakshaLOL.

Anyways as I mentioned in the other thread. BCCI should make net practices stricter and may be long hours and there should be performance assessment every month and players should be chosen according to their current form.

What the players do after their practice or at home should be entirely their judgment. If players have time to endorse n number of products then they should. BCCI has no right to invade their private space.

 

Can BCCI board have members with broad perception about the game instead of money minded good for nothing politicians who make lame statements in press? Can we have an Indian coach who would not have loyalty towards another country and also who catches up with players every now and then instead of shutting them off and talk to them through media?  



Yep, me right here...Embarrassed..I dont believe in thest diet things..I want normal cokeTongue...

So many arguments back and forth..I am still on the fence, but may be going to jump into the for side anytime...LOL..I will wait till the coke, chips and the popcorn are overLOLLOLLOL


Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "Endorsements - Go Team India (Page 7)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

sareg

IF-Dazzler

sareg

Joined: 10 January 2006

Posts: 3976

Posted: 08 April 2007 at 5:48pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by chatbuster

Originally posted by sareg

Originally posted by chatbuster

Originally posted by sareg

you can only use that example of banking industry and say similar if you can prove a quid pro quo between endorsements and on field performanceLOL

arre yaar, kya rok laga rakhee hai?LOL intelligence is all about being able to correlate and draw inferences from disparate subjects. Smile

disparate topics need to have a similarity, you havent proved the similarity, you know that

the similarity is in terms of how disparate professions themselves impose restrictions on off-field/ off-the-job behavior. Wink

btw, if you're looking for your kinda similarity, maybe the only thing one can offer is cloningLOLLOL coz anything else will be found to be dissimilarLOL

anyway, here's the hypothesis: endorsements=> lead to time spent on non-cricketing activities/ mental and physical distractions/ lack of hunger at least monetarily=> together affects game performance. remember, so much of peak performance (as in olympics and elsewhere) relates to mind-over-body control, to single-minded focus. fwiw, our team wld be better off without those distractions than with them. even if it's a hypothesis that cannot be proved/ disproved because of small sample sizes, i'd rather err on the side of common sense than give the benefit to players. there are more where they come from, but that's not the case for the team that represents India. there's just one team and the focus should be on the team, not the payoffs to individual players.

and that gets fixed by putting a timeline before the matches, no player can take part in endorsements say 15 days before a match, they already have that provision in placeWink

15 days. another adhoc random number from the bureaucratic stableWink

your similarily again falls tlat there, try better next timeWink

your saying so doesnt make it so. one needs to think more and correlate moreWink

As I said , the only way a sportsman should be disallowed an activity if you prove it is harmful to his athletic ability, doing endorsement is not, unless you tell me while shooting an endorsement a player loses foot speed or his hand-to-eye coordination gets impactedLOL

All your similarities have that trait where performing the side-activity has an impact on their real job

You very well know your similarities are not relevant, that is why you are graspingWink

which is why perhaps the aussies chucked shane warne out for a year because of his off-field activities. and different teams have curfew etc for nite-time (off-field!) activities before matches. 

that was the day of the match, off field activities was drugs, etc, doing drugs and endorsements is similar?

for our guys it seems the opium is ad moneyWink 

incidentally we shld be looking at the highest common factor, not the least common denominator here. aussies and other athletes also train very hard all year long. not so our guys.

ok, so make them train, run training campsLOL, whats the relations with endorsements, if you put in a rule, during training camps no time-off for endorsements, that can work too. But they are not bonded labor, BCCI cannot control what they do in their own time, that is their "personal" time

again, what's wrong with the comp structure i came up with?

B'cos it has nothing to do with the endorsements, you can make payments to players subjective of their performance, great, what the player does in his personal life has no relationship

of course it does. if u're a player who's driving drunk and knocks someone off, that personal behavior will likely have an impact on your game. Winknow before you go citing how this example is an extreme, the point is to first realize that off-field behavior does have bearing on on-field performance. you seem to be denying that unless i am misunderstanding your positionWink

That gets covered under the behaviour clause of any employee contract

you're also beating up the same thing about endorsements, yet ignoring how people in very smart industries choose to compensate people. and that compensation is primarily incentive driven, not perks from other activities. now dont go saying how these fields are not very similar and all that...LOLLOL

But the industry has a right on those, if it was a BCCI endorsement, then yes, they can cover it. If you have not noticed it, the endorsement that BCCI is restricting is for companies not named BCCI

and that infringes on the right of the other company and the player himself

With that I think we are going in circles here, I have no time for that today



Edited by sareg - 08 April 2007 at 5:49pm

chatbuster

IF-Rockerz

chatbuster

Deactivated on request

Joined: 13 January 2006

Posts: 7780

Posted: 08 April 2007 at 6:03pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by sareg

With that I think we are going in circles here, I have no time for that today

arre yaar, mat jao yaar. noone else around to "discuss" things withWinkLOL

fwiw, i believe strongly in incentives. i remember a discussion once in a company where some lawyer-type was telling a big chief that having a certain compensation structure would mean that the employee could walk away with zillions. the big chief replied to the lawyer that he'd be happy to pay that kind of money to the trader if the trader actually delivered. that was the difference in mind-set between the bureaucratic guy and a guy who knew how to motivate and extract top performance.

i am working from that mind-set. make these guys wildly rich if you want for great performance. but if the bulk of their compensation is gonna come from off-field activities and their celebrity/ notoriety, then i think we're missing a lot of that incentive. US athletes work very hard off-season so that they can perfect their game for regular season. they know that so much is riding on that. on the other hand, i see our players working in studios, rather than on their game during off-season.

now if someone brings up a general point about allowing all activities to go through since it's a democracy, then that to me is not a valid reason in itself. first all activities are not actually permissible even in a democracy.... second it does affect performance as i am arguing above.Smile so hope this clarifies where i am coming fromSmile

ani11

IF-Sizzlerz

ani11

Joined: 13 October 2005

Posts: 14996

Posted: 08 April 2007 at 6:08pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by chatbuster

and what is the relationship of a cricketer and a endorsementLOL

my question too......LOL

oh, this was for whoever had suggested that in a democracy, people shld be allowed to pursue their moonlighting interests. not necessarily so is what i am saying with those examples. hope you get the point nowWinkSmile

Well...aren't we mixing the rights of a free citizen with the rights of an employee bound by the rules and regulations of the organisation......LOL.......when i say the rights of a citizen.......it has to be looked in the right perspective and not be mixed up with the rights of a banker......LOL.......If the sportsman all over the world are doing endorsements why are we banning the cricketers.....just because of their dismal performance.....let the public reject the products that they are endorsing.......If there is something done for charity then these celebrities are morally supposed to do it for free then why should they be banned from doing endorsements...and charge money for it....its business after all....not charity......

chatbuster

IF-Rockerz

chatbuster

Deactivated on request

Joined: 13 January 2006

Posts: 7780

Posted: 08 April 2007 at 6:31pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by ani11

Originally posted by chatbuster

and what is the relationship of a cricketer and a endorsementLOL

my question too......LOL

is this some kinda analogy test or wat? relationship is that endorsements affect the game. seedhi see baat haiWink

oh, this was for whoever had suggested that in a democracy, people shld be allowed to pursue their moonlighting interests. not necessarily so is what i am saying with those examples. hope you get the point nowWinkSmile

Well...aren't we mixing the rights of a free citizen with the rights of an employee bound by the rules and regulations of the organisation......LOL.......

there were other examples too. sorry you missed them.Wink these guys are also employees in a sense, bound by contract to BCCI. so maybe the mixup is not at my end?Wink

when i say the rights of a citizen.......it has to be looked in the right perspective and not be mixed up with the rights of a banker......LOL.......If the sportsman all over the world are doing endorsements why are we banning the cricketers.....

just because of their dismal performance.....let the public reject the products that they are endorsing.......If there is something done for charity then these celebrities are morally supposed to do it for free then why should they be banned from doing endorsements...and charge money for it....its business after all....not charity......

i am looking at the problem holistically and talking about overall compensation. if endorsement money is the bulk of their comp, then good acting's gonna drive their performance, not necessarily good cricketing.Wink

incidentally  have already answered what you're bringing up here. dont want to repeatWink

mermaid_QT

IF-Sizzlerz

mermaid_QT

Joined: 25 September 2005

Posts: 11613

Posted: 08 April 2007 at 7:45pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by sareg

Originally posted by mermaid_QT

Originally posted by chatbuster


the key qualifier in all this is "all else equal". the examples you cite of manning and tom brady are not "all else equal". those guys actually go through intensive training/ off-season regimen for months to strengthen their mental/ physical abilities. our guys? fatten up on masala dosas, kheer, cholas, dhoklas and what not.LOL

ROFLROFLROFL  Seriously!! 

also, their total take-home compensation is very bonus-oriented ie. performance-related. Ad money is pocket money for them. Unlike our guys whose main compensation is ad money. which is why i suggested the compensation structure above. if you want good cricketing, pay them for cricketing. if you want good ads, pay them for good acting. gotta tie incentive with the performance you're interested inSmile



Merm1- Now I am totally with you. 
Pay them and renew their contracts based on their CURRENT performance.  Repetetive ducks do not get to be in the team.  Great performers will be paid more based on the performance.  (well, this is a good wicked gate for more politics though Dead
If they perform well, be their fans and let ad companies give them commercials too.   If they fail to perform, give them incentive to improve, but don't reward them. 

Sareg1- now the BCCI is going to dictate to a company to be a fan of a particular player? Dont we allow businesses to have their own brains?

Merm2-  BCCI will not ask them to pick the player ofcourse. BCCI will however prevent them from airing the commercial in the event that the player sub-performs.  This was, companies will ENDORSE ONLY CONSISTENT PLAYERS to begin with.  Companies should use their brains before spending that money Wink and if they cannot, BCCI can assist them and prevent from choosing wrong players.  That is the point I was trying to make.

-------------------------------------

Merm1- I think the endorsements should be allowed such that AD companies will be forced to scrap the ad if the player fails. 

Sareg-1 Now BCCI controls what other businesses do?

Merm2 - Why not? I really think so!  ( I know it is silly, but nothing is more stupid than failing to make it to second round Dead) Over here, when a player is part of NFL, they cannot ride bike without helmet on.  There are restrictions on players.  Similarly, one can make the players sign contracts whereby Ad agencies HAVE TO follow.  After all,  AD agencies are making use of the player's popularity!  And who is responsible in his popularity?  BCCI!  so why not??

-------------------------------------

Merm1- Ad companies make the contract with BCCI, not the player himself & BCCI will decide if the ad stays / is taken off.

Sareg1- you are calling for bonded labor, didnt we spend hundred years to get out people out of that

Merm2- NoEmbarrassed   I am calling for disciplined players.

That way, ad companies will stop throwing money around randomly.   Just pondering. 

Sareg1- it is their money they should be allowed to make their own choices(atleast in a democracyWink), if your employer comes to you and tells you how to spend your money will you accept it?

Merm2- Democracy is a bit over-rated IMHO in this scenario.  When you are a team, there are team rules.  There are agencies that will make sure your career graph makes you better and helps the agency.  There are AD agencies who can look for clients that actually perform well.  This way, endorsements will not have to be banned, instead can be used as a positive incentive.

Only when willing to be disciplined as a team, one should dream of victory.  Else, stick to golfing, tennis singles and chess Wink



Edited by mermaid_QT - 08 April 2007 at 7:57pm

chatbuster

IF-Rockerz

chatbuster

Deactivated on request

Joined: 13 January 2006

Posts: 7780

Posted: 08 April 2007 at 8:33pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by mermaid_QT

Only when willing to be disciplined as a team, one should dream of victory.  Else, stick to golfing, tennis singles and chess Wink

ok ok, good points. always hated tennis and golf anyway. but chess se kya dushmani hai?TongueLOL

mermaid_QT

IF-Sizzlerz

mermaid_QT

Joined: 25 September 2005

Posts: 11613

Posted: 08 April 2007 at 8:46pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by chatbuster

Originally posted by mermaid_QT

Only when willing to be disciplined as a team, one should dream of victory.  Else, stick to golfing, tennis singles and chess Wink

ok ok, good points. always hated tennis and golf anyway. but chess se kya dushmani hai?TongueLOL



Dushmani nahee R,  I was just appropreately listing sports / games that do not require team spirit / team -work what so ever! LOLLOL

(PS  / digress- I love tennis and I do not mind chess Big smile.  Although I am always focussed on saving the queen and this is how I let the king be check-mateCry ..  If i have to win in chess, i'll have to play doubles ..  May be I can join you? LOL
As with golfing.. hmm we both hate golf seems like, but I love mini golf and i play like a kid with too much of competetive spirit. )

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
Dev Team - Congratts Return_To_Hades...

2 3

raj5000 22 1470 02 February 2009 at 2:42pm
By Morgoth
India is not India...it's America...

2

SmarterDesiKid 10 2313 10 August 2007 at 10:59pm
By UDman
Does Endorsements affect Consumers?

2 3

Kool Ahmed 16 1167 26 April 2007 at 9:42am
By mermaid_QT
india vs not-india

2 3 4 5 6

simi1295 40 4757 11 February 2006 at 2:56pm
By heart girl
~celebrity endorsements~ dare_dis_devil 5 494 20 December 2005 at 12:10am
By jasunap

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.