Your solution to the BCCI - ICL standoff?

[aussie]

How do you think IPL would exist in the first place had ICC had all power?.

Wouldn't they have disallowed it on the premise of it hampering the International tour schedule?

Nope. The ICC where very astute to start up the 20/20 world cup at a time when the cricketening world wasn't really feeling it. Even on this site there was a big 20/20 is boring society thread somewhere.

So India being the only country who could have run this competition which such glamour & massive income for the players. Would have been the perfect hub for 20/20 league under a proper ICC administration.

And your last point contradicts your main point. Sri Lanka tour of England was decided outside the scope of FTP programme. And most of SLC had no idea about it, since it was Ranatunga's personal thing.

That series should never, ever have been scheduled ITFP. It was utter carelessness on the part of everyone involved that it was.

I seem to remember that series behind scheduled after Zimbabwe's tour was cancelled on whatever grounds.

No doubt it was scheduled wild & wildly and under a proper structure it may not have happened ITFP. But the fact the tour was cancelled that way is unaccpetable.

Who's the other one apart from Mohammad Yousuf and Bond?

Gramatical error, you know me son..

Basically aussie's point is that this big bully India has no right to make money off its own market.

Thats right. Given that given the foolish power they have in the game, in this small global cricketening community. The IPL should not have worked along with the other boards & set-up proper regulars so that the its benefits everyone and not themselves.

I'm beginning to see sense in the insularity of the Americans when it comes to team sports. Why put up with the whinging of the outside world when you can just have your own national leagues and keep your money within the country?.

No why in god's name, in this small cricket community would you want to do that??. This is not statement, that a serious cricket fan should be making at all.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Thats right. Given that given the foolish power they have in the game, in this small global cricketening community. The IPL should not have worked along with the other boards & set-up proper regulars so that the its benefits everyone and not themselves.

Serious question. Why is it a given that it should benefit everyone? Do England share the proceeds of their county cricket with the other boards? Why should the BCCI making a profit like any other board be a bad thing?

No why in god's name, in this small cricket community would you want to do that??. This is not statement, that a serious cricket fan should be making at all.

Which is why the other boards see common sense and are working along with the BCCI instead of trying to quash it and end up with exactly that scenario.

 

[Richard]

I seem to remember that series behind scheduled after Zimbabwe's tour was cancelled on whatever grounds.

No doubt it was scheduled wild & wildly and under a proper structure it may not have happened ITFP. But the fact the tour was cancelled that way is unaccpetable.

I don't know that it was. I find it difficult to brand the cancellation of something unacceptable when the fact was it shouldn't have been scheduled. It was only cancelled because it shouldn't have been scheduled. Someone should have realised what was going to happen.

 

[aussie]

Serious question. Why is it a given that it should benefit everyone? Do England share the proceeds of their county cricket with the other boards? Why should the BCCI making a profit like any other board be a bad thing?.

Totally irrelevant. What kind of comparison is that?

20/20 is a revolutionary aspect to the game of cricket. Similar to the packer revolution with ODI cricket in the late 70s, the LBW rule change, increase in bat size etc etc.

So the IPL should be a benefit to the entire cricket community, and not just be a massive profit earner to Indian cricket.

Which is why the other boards see common sense and are working along with the BCCI instead of trying to quash it and end up with exactly that scenario.

I don't understand this. How has India worked with common sense with other boards i.e NZ & PAK with the handling of Bond & MoYo then??.

 

[susudear]

Ridiculous

Totally irrelevant. What kind of comparison is that?

20/20 is a revolutionary aspect to the game of cricket. Similar to the packer revolution with ODI cricket in the late 70s, the LBW rule change, increase in bat size etc etc.

So the IPL should be a benefit to the entire cricket community, and not just be a massive profit earner to Indian cricket.

Either you know you are bluffing or you are a socialist.

IPL is completely conceived, spent and organised by BCCI, and it is a ****ing business governed by the ****ing laws of ****ing capitalism.

So profits should go to the investors who have taken the initiative and not to by-standers who spelt doom for the entire thing because they were ****ing jealous, and now whingeing because it is a ****ing success.

And I can't believe this rant can come from an Aussie supporter because so many Aussie cricketers have earned billions from the IPL, not to mention Cricket Australia who stands to earn millions from IPL's sibling the Champions League.

This is kind of ****ing saying the English Premier League should be brought under control of FIFA and the profits shared among the member nations of FIFA.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

so many Aussie cricketers have earned billions from the IPL

 

[susudear]

Weak as I know, I meant billions of those ruppees.

 

[aussie]

Either you know you are bluffing or you are a socialist..

IPL is completely conceived, spent and organised by BCCI, and it is a ****ing business governed by the ****ing laws of ****ing capitalism.

. Thats a cool diss. But i don't have political views yo.

I am not debating whether IPL is a legitimate buisness or not. Of course it is. The point i have been making is that, given the ICC is structured so so poorly, with the BCCI having all this shocking power in the modern game.

Before starting up the BCCI clearly should not have commenced the IPL as an Indian brand at all. It had to be a brand for the entire cricket community to benefit off, since the revolution of 20/20 cricket is going to influence & affect the entire cricketening world & how the game is played in the coming years, how is this not obvious??

The BCCI would still gain massive financial benefits from if it was structured that way anyway.

So profits should go to the investors who have taken the initiative and not to by-standers who spelt doom for the entire thing because they were ****ing jealous, and now whingeing because it is a ****ing success.

When has the cricketening world showed any jealously towards the IPL?. The BCCI clearly took advantage of the sudden excitement the global cricket community, had gained after the buzz of the World 20/20 in South Africa.

No-one was really thinking about the future implications. Every country was well behind the tournament, with pretty much every major player in the world (except England's major players) involved in either the auction or the action.

And I can't believe this rant can come from an Aussie supporter because so many Aussie cricketers have earned billions from the IPL, not to mention Cricket Australia who stands to earn millions from IPL's sibling the Champions League.

No rant. Call it a genuine & legitimate concern about the game, from a serious fan & student of this wonderful sport.

This is kind of ****ing saying the English Premier League should be brought under control of FIFA and the profits shared among the member nations of FIFA.

Totally irrelevant to the IPL circumstances.

For starters, the EPL is already under FIFA control, so the earning they make due to it being the most exciting & most watched league in the world is 100% legitimate.

The IPL was a big mistake.

 

[susudear]

No

The IPL was a big mistake.

My mistake.

 

[Richard]

20/20 is a revolutionary aspect to the game of cricket. Similar to the packer revolution with ODI cricket in the late 70s, the LBW rule change, increase in bat size etc etc.

I'm really not sure how any of these 4 things can have a line drawn between them. They're all completely different and unrelated things.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Totally irrelevant. What kind of comparison is that?

20/20 is a revolutionary aspect to the game of cricket. Similar to the packer revolution with ODI cricket in the late 70s, the LBW rule change, increase in bat size etc etc.

So the IPL should be a benefit to the entire cricket community, and not just be a massive profit earner to Indian cricket.

Horse manure. That is the most pathetic argument in the entire thread.

I hope you do know that the IPL isn't the first competition featuring the 'revolutionary twenty20 format' ? England had their T20 competiton for years before the IPL existed. Australia had their KFC Bash. The moment India comes up with their own domestic competition, they're suddenly expected to become philanthropists?

I don't understand this. How has India worked with common sense with other boards i.e NZ & PAK with the handling of Bond & MoYo then??.

I'm pretty sure the BCCI would have had no problem had the PCB and NZC convinced MoYo and Bond to give up their ICL contracts and play for their countries instead. The fact that the BCCI and the PCB waited almost a year for MoYo to come back into the international fold attests to that. That is common sense. If MoYo and Bond found the lure of money too strong to return to playing for their countries, it speaks poorly of their priorities. Contracts do not bind cricketers into slavery.

 

[Richard]

Horse manure. That is the most pathetic argument in the entire thread.

I hope you do know that the IPL isn't the first competition featuring the 'revolutionary twenty20 format' ? England had their T20 competiton for years before the IPL existed. Australia had their KFC Bash. The moment India comes up with their own domestic competition, they're suddenly expected to become philanthropists?

Although I don't think the BCCI have any obligation to "share" the IPL with the rest of the cricket World profit-wise - it was their idea and they've organised most of it - you surely can't be arguing that the IPL is comparable to the Twenty20 Cup, the Pro20 or the KFC Big Bash? The IPL's franchise nature makes it a World away from other domestic Twenty20 competitions.

 

[susudear]

How so?

Although I don't think the BCCI have any obligation to "share" the IPL with the rest of the cricket World profit-wise - it was their idea and they've organised most of it - you surely can't be arguing that the IPL is comparable to the Twenty20 Cup, the Pro20 or the KFC Big Bash? The IPL's franchise nature makes it a World away from other domestic Twenty20 competitions.

KFC 20-20 teams too can have investors, and so does IPL. The matches, the owners and the venues are all Indian. So IPL is as Indian as KFC big bash is Australian competition.

 

[Richard]

Eh? The IPL is a franchise competition involving teams specifically created for the competition which do not take part in other competitions; the KFC Big Bash (and Twenty20 Cup, and Pro20) are played by the teams who take part in the competitions of the other game-forms (First-Class and one-day) in the country.

 

[susudear]

Only in form

Eh? The IPL is a franchise competition involving teams specifically created for the competition which do not take part in other competitions; the KFC Big Bash (and Twenty20 Cup, and Pro20) are played by the teams who take part in the competitions of the other game-forms (First-Class and one-day) in the country.

Only in form. Do not link the KFC big bash to FC competitions. Take both IPL and Big Bash and you have more similarities than differences.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Although I don't think the BCCI have any obligation to "share" the IPL with the rest of the cricket World profit-wise - it was their idea and they've organised most of it - you surely can't be arguing that the IPL is comparable to the Twenty20 Cup, the Pro20 or the KFC Big Bash? The IPL's franchise nature makes it a World away from other domestic Twenty20 competitions.

The involvement of franchises doesn't make it different enough though. The franchises were sold on the basis of them being allowed to represent Indian cities, which has nothing to do with the other cricket boards and the overseas players. If anything, franchise involvement has made the argument for spreading the spoils even more irrelevant. The players are paid well enough and this has an indirect benefit for the other cricket boards in that the likelihood of their contracted players demanding pay hikes from them is lessened considerably. We're already seeing this in case of Sri Lanka. The only reason they have a full strength test team on the field right now in spite of them not being paid by the SLC for ages, is ironically the very IPL Ranatunga hates so much. The other cricket boards realise how a financially sound IPL actually benefits them indirectly (and sometimes directly too, as in the case of its offspring - the Champions League). Cricketing economics doesn't just involve the boards, it is also about the players themselves.

 

[Richard]

Only in form. Do not link the KFC big bash to FC competitions. Take both IPL and Big Bash and you have more similarities than differences.

Eh? I don't have the foggiest idea what you're on about. The KFC Big Bash in Australia is exactly the same as the Twenty20 Cup over here and Pro20 in South Africa. The IPL is notably different from all these. The only thing in common between them is that they're domestic Twenty20 competitions.

 

[Richard]

The involvement of franchises doesn't make it different enough though. The franchises were sold on the basis of them being allowed to represent Indian cities, which has nothing to do with the other cricket boards and the overseas players. If anything, franchise involvement has made the argument for spreading the spoils even more irrelevant. The players are paid well enough and this has an indirect benefit for the other cricket boards in that the likelihood of their contracted players demanding pay hikes from them is lessened considerably. We're already seeing this in case of Sri Lanka. The only reason they have a full strength test team on the field right now in spite of them not being paid by the SLC for ages, is ironically the very IPL Ranatunga hates so much. The other cricket boards realise how a financially sound IPL actually benefits them indirectly (and sometimes directly too, as in the case of its offspring - the Champions League). Cricketing economics doesn't just involve the boards, it is also about the players themselves.

I wasn't really disputing any of this. Just that the fact that the IPL is a franchise league means it is completely different from domestic Twenty20 anywhere else.

 

[Uppercut]

Horse manure. That is the most pathetic argument in the entire thread.

I hope you do know that the IPL isn't the first competition featuring the 'revolutionary twenty20 format' ? England had their T20 competiton for years before the IPL existed. Australia had their KFC Bash. The moment India comes up with their own domestic competition, they're suddenly expected to become philanthropists?

To be fair, the IPL is a lot less profitable without overseas players, and other boards deserve at least some share of the humungus cash cow if they're going to let their members play in it.

 

[silentstriker]

To be fair, the IPL is a lot less profitable without overseas players,

I don't buy that. Maybe a little less, but I am not sure if the return on investment on overseas players is at all worth it, consideing how much more they cost compared to local players. We'll see in a few years once the business settles down and the owners think about optimizing their product. Would the profitability be any less if they just had one overseas mega star per team? I would doubt it.

and other boards deserve at least some share of the humungus cash cow if they're going to let their members play in it.

That's ridiculous. I wasn't aware of any checks counties sent out to national boards for playing in county cricket. If they tried it and IPL barred overseas players, players from every country would be pretty pissed, and rightly so.