***Official*** Stanford Super Series

[Uppercut]

Court in Lausanne has ruled that Stanford Series now has exactly the same standing as the ICL

Really? Where'd you hear that?

 

[GIMH]

Not entirely sure how courts in Lausanne can impact on matters relating to the USA, UK, India and Caribbean TBH.

Nor how anyone bar the BCCI can rule on the "standing" of the ICL - whatever that means.

It's the court for abritration in sport or whatever, though

 

[Richard]

Even so it can only rule on legal-related matters. No-one can decide the ICL is an official competition except cricket boards.

 

[GIMH]

Probably true, still lends much greater credibility to the ICL's noble fight that they've received a sort of backing from such an authority, though

 

[Uppercut]

Has it though? The first result from googling "Lausanne ICL Stanford" is social's post.

 

[Goughy]

The court ruled that it without Digicel sponsorship then it cant be a WICB sanctioned event.

Therefore if it goes ahead, it is the same as ICL as it is an event involving a team/s that isnt sanctioned by the board from its region.

The clasification is the same, it is the animosity that is different. The BCCI could accept the ICL if they wanted to. They just believe that it is in their interests to deny the ICL a market.

The WICB will allow Stanford to go ahead and be passive even if they dont endorse it. If their reaction was to oppose the event then it would be the same as ICL in classification and reaction, and England would certainly not tour.

 

[JackPot]

20 mils :dollars:

 

[Richard]

The court ruled that it without Digicel sponsorship then it cant be a WICB sanctioned event.

Therefore if it goes ahead, it is the same as ICL as it is an event involving a team/s that isnt sanctioned by the board from its region.

The clasification is the same, it is the animosity that is different. The BCCI could accept the ICL if they wanted to. They just believe that it is in their interests to deny the ICL a market.

The WICB will allow Stanford to go ahead and be passive even if they dont endorse it. If their reaction was to oppose the event then it would be the same as ICL in classification and reaction, and England would certainly not tour.

I think the best description, then, would be that the WICB passively endorsed or sanctioned the event.

IOW, no-one in cricket cares what the Lausanne court classifies it as. Allen Stanford certainly won't.

 

[Uppercut]

The court ruled that it without Digicel sponsorship then it cant be a WICB sanctioned event.

Therefore if it goes ahead, it is the same as ICL as it is an event involving a team/s that isnt sanctioned by the board from its region.

The clasification is the same, it is the animosity that is different. The BCCI could accept the ICL if they wanted to. They just believe that it is in their interests to deny the ICL a market.

The WICB will allow Stanford to go ahead and be passive even if they dont endorse it. If their reaction was to oppose the event then it would be the same as ICL in classification and reaction, and England would certainly not tour.

I see, but does it set any legal precedent if the BCCI/ICC don't oppose in the way they do the ICL?

In any case, there's no way the match is being cancelled. That serves noone's interests at all.

 

[Richard]

Merge?

 

[Richard]

not long to go now for the twenty20 tournament - will anyone actually be watching?
if we're england fans, should we actually be supporting our team like its any other game, or respect the fact this is nothing about international cricket but a money fueld clash between two teams with surely only one thing on their minds!

I couldn't care less under normal circumstances what happens in an England Twenty20 game, but with the amount of money available obviously I hope England get it because the funds will certainly come in useful (if well used).

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, Luke Wright could do with a new yacht

 

[FBU]

I have a feeling that KP will go for the two spin option, Swann and Patel. That would probably leave Cook, Bopara, Anderson and Sidebottom on the sidelines. He has a thing for Ashes winning players and I feel sure Harmison will play but really Sidebottom would be a better bet. Harmison has only played two 20/20 internationals and has 1 wicket.

 

[GIMH]

If I was one of the other players, I'd be pissed off at the thought of Cook being selected.

 

[Richard]

Luke Wright > Alastair Cook.

 

[GIMH]

I'm a huge fan of Cook, but not in T20

 

[Richard]

Me too. And when you get paid £500,000 for being good at Twenty20 (and playing 1 game of it) and comparatively speaking next to nothing for being good at Tests for 10-15 years (as we hope Cook will)... well, as I've said before, it's a considerable worry for 30 years' time.

Heck, it's possible that it's a worry for now. Would Alastair Cook be human if he didn't think "I wish I was a better Twenty20 player, even if I was less good at First-Class batting"?

 

[Uppercut]

The one cricket match of the year i can guarantee 100% i will not watch.

 

[GIMH]

Me too. And when you get paid £500,000 for being good at Twenty20 (and playing 1 game of it) and comparatively speaking next to nothing for being good at Tests for 10-15 years (as we hope Cook will)... well, as I've said before, it's a considerable worry for 30 years' time.

Heck, it's possible that it's a worry for now. Would Alastair Cook be human if he didn't think "I wish I was a better Twenty20 player, even if I was less good at First-Class batting"?

I'd hardly say you get nothing for Tests...English players are on a reasonable enough six-figure wedge!!!

 

[Richard]

How much is that per Test then?

For a year of Tests you get, say, 120,000? That's an average of probably about 10,000 per Test.

Compared to 40 overs where you net £500,000.