IPL criticisms

[silentstriker]

In one game ALL 6 foreign players dont have to play. Selection can be flexible throughout the qualifying stage. But if a side gets to the semi's or final, they have the luxury then of using maximising the rule.

Look at the semi-final with Delhi & Deccan chargers. No doubt they would have wanted to pick Vettori, but they couldn't because of stupid restrictions.

It's an Indian domestic competition. If the majority isn't Indian, then Indian players aren't benefiting, and I don't see the point.

The Champions League is the international tournament that you want.

 

[GIMH]

I don't buy this argument about the CL being the tournament that aussie is looking for. It won't have all of the stars in it by virtue of the fact that you only get to play if one of your teams qualify and there is the abysmal ruling preventing new players from playing for you in it. So whilst I know what you are trying to say, I don't think it's really what he's looking for.

I don't really see the need for such a tournament, mind you, given that we have international T20s to see all the stars in one tournament - like, um, the WC next week!

 

[silentstriker]

I don't buy this argument about the CL being the tournament that aussie is looking for. It won't have all of the stars in it by virtue of the fact that you only get to play if one of your teams qualify and there is the abysmal ruling preventing new players from playing for you in it. So whilst I know what you are trying to say, I don't think it's really what he's looking for.

Frankly, that's to protect non-IPL sides. How would people feel if the IPL teams started throwing millions around getting every single superstar right before the CL even though they never played for them? The two IPL teams could easily buy all the stars from the rest of the IPL teams, say Warne, Hayden, Gilchrist , Yusuf Pathan, etc all in one team even though they never played for that team. It would be unfair and would basically be who can buy the most replacements.

 

[Furball]

Pro 40 is the main problem. Players want to ousted, so it just can be the Championship, FPT & T20.

The whole idea of that P20 is crazy, because they want to push the FC start of April, WTF. Who plays cricket over here so early geeez. Plus potentially merge counties into one team i.e Lancashire/Yorkshire or Middlesex/Sussex (not 100% sure if they are still going to do this BTW).

They're not, the P20 is essentially the same format as the Pro40, except matches are 20, not 40 overs a side.

Which is madness. The way forward for the P20 should have been 8 city based franchises based at the biggest venues:

Leeds - Headingley
Manchester - Old Trafford
Birmingham - Edgbaston
Nottingham - Trent Bridge
London North* - Lord's
London South* - The Oval
Cardiff - Sophia Gardens
Southampton - The Rose Bowl

* I'm ignorant of London's geography, so I may have gotten those 2 the wrong way round, point still stands though.

Each team gets the cream of local English talent - eg a London side could have Key, Denly, Napier, Bopara, Cook, Foster, Morgan all playing for them, allow the same foreigner rules as the IPL. You don't have to faff around creating an international window either, the English domestic season pretty much operates in a window of its own.

That idea above would be a winner. Sadly, the Counties and the ECB are too stuck in their ridiculous ways, which is why English cricket is going down the toilet.

 

[aussie]

Haa, holdddd up the CWers, travelling, flag up off-side. This is not an argument on what i prefer - but rather what is in the best for the global cricket community....

It's an Indian domestic competition. If the majority isn't Indian, then Indian players aren't benefiting, and I don't see the point.

The Champions League is the international tournament that you want.

Come on man, dont lets have to go this from scratch again...

The EPL, La Liga, Serie A are all local domestic football tournaments. The local players benefit? (of course one can say the influx of foreign players & lack of an academy has affected local english talent, but thats a whole different story).

The basis of the problems againts the IPL is this:

- The ICC is faulty that is an unfortunate fact.

- Instead of ther IPL being created as an Indian brand & being fronted as a major international T20 league. Lead by the BCCI, the other boards it should have been created as the global brand.

That was not made possible, since all the nations acted in excitement after the T20 WC in SA & did not act responsibility & look at the long term effects of T20.


Tournaments like the ICL (thank god it seems to be resolved) & Stanford (although one can say it helped to bring back a bit of entuhsiam to WI cricket). Should never have occured.

Adding the Champions League to the equations doesn't make sense, because the problems of player burn-out comes into the equation.

The T20 WC every 2 years & one MAJOR T20 tournament annualy like the IPL is enough.

 

[Furball]

The T20 WC every 2 years & one MAJOR T20 tournament annualy like the IPL is enough.

Like it or not, major domestic T20 leagues are the way forward for cricket.

One thing needs to change though, players should only be able to play for 1 T20 side in 1 particular league, be that the Indian league, the English league or whatever.

This doesn't have to mean the end of Test Cricket, indeed, Test Cricket can be enhanced by being alongside the T20 Leagues.

For a start, the players are rewarded very handsomely for their participation in the IPL. Hopefully the success of the IPL, along with any future success of T20 leagues in the Southern Hemisphere and England will cut down on the number of needless ODI series that the major boards host in order to boost revenue.

This could potentially clear more room in the calendar for proper Test series and tours to take place.

 

[aussie]

They're not, the P20 is essentially the same format as the Pro40, except matches are 20, not 40 overs a side.



Which is madness. The way forward for the P20 should have been 8 city based franchises based at the biggest venues:

Leeds - Headingley
Manchester - Old Trafford
Birmingham - Edgbaston
Nottingham - Trent Bridge
London North* - Lord's
London South* - The Oval
Cardiff - Sophia Gardens
Southampton - The Rose Bowl

* I'm ignorant of London's geography, so I may have gotten those 2 the wrong way round, point still stands though.

Each team gets the cream of local English talent - eg a London side could have Key, Denly, Napier, Bopara, Cook, Foster, Morgan all playing for them, allow the same foreigner rules as the IPL. You don't have to faff around creating an international window either, the English domestic season pretty much operates in a window of its own.

That idea above would be a winner. Sadly, the Counties and the ECB are too stuck in their ridiculous ways, which is why English cricket is going down the toilet.

They dont want to abolish Pro40 because its too much cricket. So adding P20 as its replacement just because its 3 hrs less time on the field, plus starting the FC season in April.

I think they are doing that 8 team thing (see here). ButUnfortunately all this is irrelevant. ECB just want a another big money tournament like the IPL which just as i've said before, shows how the T20 explosion is not under control due the ICC not being the real governing body.

Like it or not, major domestic T20 leagues are the way forward for cricket..

T20s yea, not necessarily a whole set of leagues. Player burnout needs to be considered here.

One thing needs to change though, players should only be able to play for 1 T20 side in 1 particular league, be that the Indian league, the English league or whatever.

Exactly. The IPL suits more than anywhere esle in the cricket globe, because Indian is like the hollywood of cricket, they will pack the stadiums & the players will get big money like football stars.

Plus with how well the IPL 2 went in SA. The IPL could probably go to every nation every other year as well.

India will still benefit as hosts/inventors & its basically the one official T20 competition of the world.

Hopefully the success of the IPL, along with any future success of T20 leagues in the Southern Hemisphere and England will cut down on the number of needless ODI series that the major boards host in order to boost revenue.

Yea ODI's should be cut down. The Champions trophy should surely go now along with 7 match ODI series.

But all 3 formats can still exist.

 

[ret]

- Instead of ther IPL being created as an Indian brand & being fronted as a major international T20 league. Lead by the BCCI, the other boards it should have been created as the global brand.

So are you implying that it's up to BCCI to come up w/ global brands? You can further that and say that SA or OZ domestic leagues should be created as a global brand too.

For Indians, it's exciting to see a bunch of domestic players play in front of a national audience [majority of whom would not have got a chance to see them in action]. Instead of reading in papers or internet how good some of the domestic players are, it's good to see them in action, playing with the best, to make a wise opinion

I don't feel as excited abt the T20 WC as I did for IPL. Mainly because I have only one team to follow, i.e. India. in IPL, I had 8 teams to follow with so many of the Indian players I like playing [rather than just 11 in international tourneys]. It was good to see likes of Nehra, Mishra bowl so regularly [instead of seeing them sit out and watch Zak and Bhajji bowling most of the time]. It was exciting to see whether Uthappa would do something in the tourney or not [he would'nt have been in an Indian 11], It was nice to see Karthik deliver under pressure on so many occasions, Ojha turning things around was a revelation, watching Kumble bowl after his retirement was fun, watching Panday beat the crap out of so many bowlers was entertaining and so was Harmeet take that catch in the final. It was also fun to see Kamran Khan bowl and Munaf bowling that over against MI

this is what makes IPL interesting and every game worth following because every game has something in it for Indian fans. It is nice to see 50 of the top Indian cricketers battle it out, along with a bunch of upcoming players and youngsters

PS some of the things that I wrote are an extension to my earlier post and may not necessarily be a comment on your post

 

[zaremba]

They're not, the P20 is essentially the same format as the Pro40, except matches are 20, not 40 overs a side.

Which is madness. The way forward for the P20 should have been 8 city based franchises based at the biggest venues:

Leeds - Headingley
Manchester - Old Trafford
Birmingham - Edgbaston
Nottingham - Trent Bridge
London North* - Lord's
London South* - The Oval
Cardiff - Sophia Gardens
Southampton - The Rose Bowl

* I'm ignorant of London's geography, so I may have gotten those 2 the wrong way round, point still stands though.

Each team gets the cream of local English talent - eg a London side could have Key, Denly, Napier, Bopara, Cook, Foster, Morgan all playing for them, allow the same foreigner rules as the IPL. You don't have to faff around creating an international window either, the English domestic season pretty much operates in a window of its own.

That idea above would be a winner. Sadly, the Counties and the ECB are too stuck in their ridiculous ways, which is why English cricket is going down the toilet.

Your proposal would mean it's bye-bye to T20 cricket for my team altogether. I'm delighted that my county will vote to block such a move.

 

[four_or_six]

They shouldn't be increasing the number of foreign players in IPL teams, they should be decreasing the number of foreign players in the squad. That would be much more sensible. It's ridiculous at the moment, and a waste of money for the teams.

And as for the P20, no idea why they think they need two domestic T20 competitions like that. I hope the T20 cup becomes just that - an FA-cup style knockout. You could even start it at lower levels and have the counties come in later, just like the FA cup. That would be cool. I think the P20 will be good though - once there's an international window for the IPL, there will only be enough space in the teams for the big players. Hopefully in P20 we could see a lot more younger guys, which is always fun.

 

[GIMH]

Frankly, that's to protect non-IPL sides. How would people feel if the IPL teams started throwing millions around getting every single superstar right before the CL even though they never played for them? The two IPL teams could easily buy all the stars from the rest of the IPL teams, say Warne, Hayden, Gilchrist , Yusuf Pathan, etc all in one team even though they never played for that team. It would be unfair and would basically be who can buy the most replacements.

Disagree, as what happens to domestic teams, who lose a player to an IPL side, they then can't replace him?

 

[four_or_six]

Disagree, as what happens to domestic teams, who lose a player to an IPL side, they then can't replace him?

Will be a bit farcical, too, that this time round NSW will be able to play McCullum and not Watson. It's within the letter of the law, but actually within the spirit of the law it should be the other way round.

 

[silentstriker]

Disagree, as what happens to domestic teams, who lose a player to an IPL side, they then can't replace him?

So do you allow sides to sign anyone they want?

 

[GIMH]

If you've signed a player for the following season (or current season as it may be for some of the teams) then they should be allowed to play, yeah. I wouldn't allow special loans just for the tournament.

 

[aussie]

So are you implying that it's up to BCCI to come up w/ global brands? You can further that and say that SA or OZ domestic leagues should be created as a global brand too.

No. How the ICC is structure or rather poorly structure - in that the ICC is not the solid governing body over all the decisions. The BCCI has a big influence unfortunately especially over the Asian constituents when its came to voting in the approval of the IPL initially in 2008.

 

[Smith]

No. How the ICC is structure or rather poorly structure - in that the ICC is not the solid governing body over all the decisions. The BCCI has a big influence unfortunately especially over the Asian constituents when its came to voting in the approval of the IPL initially in 2008.

The world is like that mate. It is the US of A that leads the world and determines the foreign poliy of the majority of nations. Unfair but that's the way money speaks.

 

[silentstriker]

No. How the ICC is structure or rather poorly structure - in that the ICC is not the solid governing body over all the decisions. The BCCI has a big influence unfortunately especially over the Asian constituents when its came to voting in the approval of the IPL initially in 2008.

Who had to vote for the IPL? It's an internal tournament - there was no vote.

 

[aussie]

The world is like that mate. It is the US of A that leads the world and determines the foreign poliy of the majority of nations. Unfair but that's the way money speaks.

'

Haa. Thats not the right way to look at it. America is the beacon of ideals of the true Democratic state in the world, but the are also the righest. So via helping other nations financially etc, they help to spread the idea & minimize/eradicators left-wing communist & right-wing fascist/dictators from the world.

But wait....WTH does that have do with the fact that the ICC being structured that way is bad form the game?. Why are you blokes struggling to admit that?.

No other major sporting body i.e FIFA or IOC is structured that way.

Has i have repeatedly said the IPL in football, would be like one of the Arabian oil men saying one day they are organising a football tournament in the UAE & they paying 20 times more than any major club - thus attracting all the top players. Nonsense.

I wont repeat myself again, since i am tired making this point over & over.

silentstriker Who had to vote for the IPL? It's an internal tournament - there was no vote.

Didn't the ICC have to sanction the tournament yo?. So clearly all the respective votes had to have some sort of vote...

 

[silentstriker]

Didn't the ICC have to sanction the tournament yo?

No

 

[howardj]

I don't know one person in Australia who supports a particular IPL team, or who was engrossed in the IPL.

I really think it's being forced fed to the public rather than, as the IPL promoters claim, the public embracing it.