-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* Airtel Twenty20 Champions League 2009
- Thread starter James
- Start date
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeh, the above = 'bad'. Bad meaning hard. Hard meaning hard to score quickly on for T20. Was just taking the accepted meaning of the word, of course, for a bowler like myself, it is very much a 'good' pitch.
pasag
RTDAS
Seriously though, NSW's attack is overrated.
Remember this match:
Victoria v New South Wales at Melbourne, Nov 28, 2007 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com
Will do it just as easily this time /troll
Remember this match:
Victoria v New South Wales at Melbourne, Nov 28, 2007 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com
Will do it just as easily this time /troll
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
I wonder where they are going to play it next year and whether they will think about making it an even two sides from every country, and making it three weeks or something?
That'd be interesting to see.
That'd be interesting to see.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Lalit Modi. He is very keen to keep it mostly Indian, and the CL committee didn't want sides that looked significantly differently to the ones that actually won the respective domestic competitions.
pasag
RTDAS
But are they forced to or just put pressure on? If the former it's a bit unfair for them to have these restrictions when others teams don't.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
I don't see why they'd do this really, especially getting rid of one of the Indian teams!
4 groups of 4 could be better though, hopefully with a Pakistan team!
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Forced, part of the rules. BCCI still effectively controls and 'owns' the franchises, and BCCI is the one who participates in the CL, and 'invites' the IPL teams. The owners can be thought to have leased the teams, in a practical sense. That is not to say they don't have say or influence in the BCCI, but BCCI pulls the strings.
With that said, as far as I know, the rules are the same for everyone. I don't think any side can add a player that wasn't on the roster during their domestic campaign.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
I think they added a 3rd Indian team only because one from Pakistan wouldn't be coming. From what I've read, it was supposed to be two from each of the four main countries and one from WI, NZ, SL and PAK.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
You know views on this - the rule is dumb. It looks even more worse when the IPL teams that have played in the CL have clearly had more freedom when they could pick all their best players.
Dont want revist old arguments, but as i've said before in the IPL if Indian players are good enough (whether the regular international, domestic players or young stars) they cant make the respective teams based on merit not via restrictions.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
Presume it's trying to level the playing field - the other sides are limited in their overseas players as well aren't they?
Howsie
International Captain
Yea that's what I thought to, the tournament would be rather boring and one-sided (maybe) if the IPL teams were allowed to play more then the four internationals per game.