IPL hurting the international game

[swede]

Regardless of standard of domestic competition, it is still possible to watch players relative to their peers and select them based on that, just requires more effort from selectors to actually identify the talent.

why not just make the english county championship the breeding ground for all the smaller nations. Its a more popular game there than its often given credit for with average crowds in the thousands as soon as the sun is out.
The likes of NZ and WI cant afford FC competition. England have too many teams for its own good. It seems an obvious merger. Small nations could pay a minor sum to county cricket in return for getting say a minimum 20-30 players in the competition.

Everyone wins. the different seasons means the smaller boards will not only make great savings while still having players in FC competition, they would also have their own season clear for more profitable cricket such as tests and domestic T20

 

[Shri]

Pay less, work more has never been a good proposition in any field. Isn't going to happen. At least not for the time being.

 

[swede]

What the hell is bozes?

Why wouldn't cricketers need jobs after they retire? They are no longer making money playing cricket, so of course they have to get another job. How ridiculous for you to think otherwise. The majority of international cricketers were making good money before the IPL ever came along, are you that much of a chump to think otherwise?

I never said they shouldn't try to earn more money. I simply agreed with someone who said the IPL could destroy test cricket.

It will rather save cricket.

Without T20 there would be very little money in NZ cricket. Why would any young NZ sporting talent choose cricket in the future? Will he toil in the field for nothing if he can make a better living playing just about every other sport there is.

With T20 cricket would be an attractive choice. without T20 it can offer nothing in places like NZ. the world is globalising. Local players will not just stick to local sport if they get a poor deal.

 

[Flem274*]

It will rather save cricket.

Without T20 there would be very little money in NZ cricket. Why would any young NZ sporting talent choose cricket in the future? Will he toil in the field for nothing if he can make a better living playing just about every other sport there is.

With T20 cricket would be an attractive choice. without T20 it can offer nothing in places like NZ. the world is globalising. Local players will not just stick to local sport if they get a poor deal.

Dude, if you'd used a slightly different argument (i.e. the money will benefit us) you'd have a point. Problem is, we were doing just fine with amount of players and what not before 20/20 was even thought of. Cricket in NZ prior to 20/20 didn't need saving, it only needed saving after the IPL appeared...

And unless you play Rugby, money is hard to find in sport for NZ (and even in rugby it can be tricky). If you want to play soccer or do an individual sport (which screws you even more), you have to take a risk and go overseas, which costs money and you spend a long time paying it back before you can rake in the big bucks. If you're good at a mainstream sport like cricket (even prior to 20/20), life was much easier. You scored an NZ contract or performed well domestically, then used that to get you into county cricket. You also had a back up qualification back in the "real world".

 

[Polo23]

Why they have to? They devoted a large part of their youth playing the game and hence have little other skills to take care of them post retirement. So since they invested so much in cricket, it is only natural that it provide them a near perennial source of income, That is what the humungous salaries offered by the IPL does. In one word "SAVINGS".

Now you really are being stupid. There is nothing to stop a cricketer (or anyone else) from getting a degree or studying in their spare time. There is also nothing stopping a cricketer from giving up cricket and focusing on another career path.

Why does a cricketer have the right to a continual source of income even when they are retired? That is a ridiculous notion.

Yes, the IPL sets them up for life but that's not to say before the IPL that international cricketers didn't have a great lifestyle and werent paid well.

 

[Pigeon]

Now you really are being stupid. There is nothing to stop a cricketer (or anyone else) from getting a degree or studying in their spare time. There is also nothing stopping a cricketer from giving up cricket and focusing on another career path.

Why does a cricketer have the right to a continual source of income even when they are retired? That is a ridiculous notion.

Yes, the IPL sets them up for life but that's not to say before the IPL that international cricketers didn't have a great lifestyle and werent paid well.

You just said the answer as to why test cricket is dying. Congratulations.

 

[Polo23]

It will rather save cricket.

Without T20 there would be very little money in NZ cricket. Why would any young NZ sporting talent choose cricket in the future? Will he toil in the field for nothing if he can make a better living playing just about every other sport there is.

With T20 cricket would be an attractive choice. without T20 it can offer nothing in places like NZ. the world is globalising. Local players will not just stick to local sport if they get a poor deal.

I don't recall NZ cricket needing saving before the IPL turned up, in fact, it only seems now that cricketers are thinking about ditching their country for money, this was never the case before the IPL appeared.

 

[Polo23]

You just said the answer as to why test cricket is dying. Congratulations.

And now you've just agreed with the point i've been making the whole time. Without the IPL no international cricketer would even think about choosing a T20 comp over their country.

Nice way to argue against a point you agree with.

 

[Pigeon]

I don't recall NZ cricket needing saving before the IPL turned up, in fact, it only seems now that cricketers are thinking about ditching their country for money, this was never the case before the IPL appeared.

Ridiculous. You talk as if NZ cricket was brimming with talent before the IPL came along. Wake up and smell the cappuccino.

 

[GIMH]

If cricketers earned more then the problem might not exist either, so it's a moot point

 

[Pigeon]

And now you've just agreed with the point i've been making the whole time. Without the IPL no international cricketer would even think about choosing a T20 comp over their country.

Nice way to argue against a point you agree with.

Yeah, it is just like stuffing up one's payroll with the least efficient workers because they won't ever find another employment. Never mind the quality of output.

 

[Shri]

I don't recall NZ cricket needing saving before the IPL turned up, in fact, it only seems now that cricketers are thinking about ditching their country for money, this was never the case before the IPL appeared.

Packer era?

Everytime a sports person is offered a lot of money for less work, they will take the oppurtunity without missing a heartbeat. And why shouldn't they?

 

[Prince EWS]

Packer era?

Everytime a sports person is offered a lot of money for less work, they will take the oppurtunity without missing a heartbeat. And why shouldn't they?

The fact that it's a reasonable decision to make just exemplifies why it's a problem though. That the ICC are just letting it happen without a fight is rather confusing given the great potential for it to seriously undermine Test cricket. I don't think people are blaming the players as such - most people are doing the exact opposite, in fact, and saying that as the players are likely to opt for financial security in at least some of the cases, something needs to be done to put this venture back in its box.

I was under the impression that national boards could essentially vito players being offered IPL contracts if they declined national contract offers - ie. that McCullum and the likes wouldn't have had the choice they did. Evidently this is not true and puts the game at a much higher risk. What actually happened to this rule? Did it ever exist in any form or did I just imagine it?

 

[Pigeon]

The fact that it's a reasonable decision to make just exemplifies why it's a problem though. That the ICC are just letting it happen without a fight is rather confusing given the great potential for it to seriously undermine Test cricket. I don't think people are blaming the players as such - most people are doing the exact opposite, in fact, and saying that as the players are likely to opt for financial security in at least some of the cases, something needs to be done to put this venture back in its box.

I was under the impression that national boards could essentially vito players being offered IPL contracts if they declined national central contract offers - ie. that McCullum and the likes wouldn't have had the choice they did. Evidently this is not true and puts the game at a much higher risk. What actually happened to this rule? Did it ever exist in any form or did I just imagine it?

The rule exists only on paper I am afraid. National Boards can seldom alienate the BCCI by not allowing players to participate. In fact the Boards are walking a thin line between submission to the BCCI and acting the rebel.

 

[aussie]

Selecting players on the basis of ODIs is as justifiable as selecting them on the basis of T20s, perhaps except for the openers who stand a chance to play for more than 2 hours.

No way ODI form doesn't equal test success. Proven fact with Lee up until 2005/06, Yuvraj, Beavn Jadeja, Robin Singh, Twose, C Harris, Knight the list goes on.

ODI's, Test & T20 can survive together. Just need to reduce the amount of ODI on tours. Maybe 3 ODI's & 3 T20s each.

 

[aussie]

why not just make the english county championship the breeding ground for all the smaller nations. Its a more popular game there than its often given credit for with average crowds in the thousands as soon as the sun is out.
The likes of NZ and WI cant afford FC competition. England have too many teams for its own good. It seems an obvious merger. Small nations could pay a minor sum to county cricket in return for getting say a minimum 20-30 players in the competition.

Everyone wins. the different seasons means the smaller boards will not only make great savings while still having players in FC competition, they would also have their own season clear for more profitable cricket such as tests and domestic T20

This seems a bit too confusing. The best things for the smaller nations is for the ICC is to assit them in building national academies, but this goes back to point o the ICC becoming a TRUE governing body.

 

[aussie]

The fact that it's a reasonable decision to make just exemplifies why it's a problem though. That the ICC are just letting it happen without a fight is rather confusing given the great potential for it to seriously undermine Test cricket. I don't think people are blaming the players as such - most people are doing the exact opposite, in fact, and saying that as the players are likely to opt for financial security in at least some of the cases, something needs to be done to put this venture back in its box.

I was under the impression that national boards could essentially vito players being offered IPL contracts if they declined national contract offers - ie. that McCullum and the likes wouldn't have had the choice they did. Evidently this is not true and puts the game at a much higher risk. What actually happened to this rule? Did it ever exist in any form or did I just imagine it?

The IPL set-up something called NOC contracts which prevents players from retiring from their national teams to IPL. You have to be retired at least 2 years.

But using the NZ situation for eg, McCullum & co dont have to "retire" officially. They could go around the stupid rule & just not play for NZ & IPL teams could still pick them.

Again it all comes back to the point that the ICC needs to becoming a governing body & get control of this sport for the sake of test cricket. While the IPL needs revamping or abolishing.

 

[marc71178]

But using the NZ situation for eg, McCullum & co dont have to "retire" officially. They could go around the stupid rule & just not play for NZ & IPL teams could still pick them.

Not sure they can, because the IPL would still need the NOC, which can only be provided by the player's home board.

 

[Flem274*]

Ridiculous. You talk as if NZ cricket was brimming with talent before the IPL came along. Wake up and smell the cappuccino.

I think the current crop plus the guys coming through were playing cricket before 20/20 turned up, and lots of them are fairly highly rated...

And tbh, we've always gone through pateches where we've had jack all then half a team worth of awesome dudes turn up

 

[GIMH]

No way ODI form doesn't equal test success. Proven fact with Lee up until 2005/06, Yuvraj, Beavn Jadeja, Robin Singh, Twose, C Harris, Knight the list goes on.

ODI's, Test & T20 can survive together. Just need to reduce the amount of ODI on tours. Maybe 3 ODI's & 3 T20s each.

You really need to look up the definition of fact tbh