BCCI and Cricket Australia plan Twenty20 League

[Scaly piscine]

"Four-nation tournament on the lines of Champions League football"

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/308135.html



Hmm...

 

[brockley]

Would be along the lines of super 14's.
Have trouble seeing it working unless its done in the cricket season.If its done in the off season it will be a flop unless they do it just in india.
Feel they would have to do a lot for it to appeal to the crowds.
I don't see a 20/20 game between mumbai and qld in bribane getting a big crowd.

 

[Richard]

Only needs to appeal to TV audiences, doesn't really matter how it's received at the ground.

Is this exemplar of excellent business-making, in recognising a threat before that threat has even germinated, and moving to attempt to counter it?

 

[Poker Boy]

So they say this has nothing to do with the ICL. Hmmm, why don't I believe them? I don't know if anyone read the book "Anyone but England" but Mike Marquese was suggesting there that there should be international competiton betwen states (I know for a fact that Rugby Union, hockey and basketball have that as well as football). I never thought it would draw in crowds - I don't rmember the Essex v Victoria match (County Champions v Sheffield Shield winners) in 1991 being a big sucsess and it died a death after that year. From what I've read it seems like England would need to add another competiton to a domestic season that some people would say is overcrowded already and as for the international part IMO it would need the top players to be a succsess but how many breaks in the international calendar are they? And without star names it won't appeal to TV viewers...

 

[Richard]

If it means another competition in England, the Twenty20 Cup HAS to be scaled back to what it was originally, and ideally the Pro40 would be abolished (that, of course, is already suggested by the Schofield Report).

I actually don't have a problem with it - provided it's compact, it remains as Twenty20 should be. The danger, as it always has been, is that the golden goose will be cooked rather than kept.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I don't see any need to scale the domestic Twenty20 back in England, it'd be over in 3-4 weeks if they didn't have the big, overlong gaps after the group stages. It'd be hard to reduce the length of it significantly anyway without a large cut in revenue. Pro40 can go no problem, absolutely pointless in its current state.

 

[Poker Boy]

But IMO there doesn't have to be a new competiton in England, SA or Australia as these three countries have their own domestic 20/20 competitions -why not just send the winners of those tournamnets? Mind you I agree about Pro 40 - they say county members want it - well I imagine some of the membership here must be county members and I haven't seen a lot of support for Pro 40 on the forum....

 

[Richard]

I don't see any need to scale the domestic Twenty20 back in England, it'd be over in 3-4 weeks if they didn't have the big, overlong gaps after the group stages. It'd be hard to reduce the length of it significantly anyway without a large cut in revenue. Pro40 can go no problem, absolutely pointless in its current state.

Twenty20 is already played far too much in this country, if another competition is introduced (and that seems unequivocally to be the plan) then some form of cutback is neccessary otherwise Twenty20 just takes over AND risks its own skin.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Twenty20 is already played far too much in this country, if another competition is introduced (and that seems unequivocally to be the plan) then some form of cutback is neccessary otherwise Twenty20 just takes over AND risks its own skin.

It's too early to say anything like that. It could last a week in January in Australia or something for all anyone knows.

As for too many Twenty20 being played that's your opinion, not that of the masses who'll pay to watch it. The winner of the Twenty20 Cup played the same number of games as the awesome winner of the FP Trophy.

 

[Zimdan]

Bad idea, 20/20 looks like its going to take over cricket in general.

Test cricket is true cricket.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Bad idea, 20/20 looks like its going to take over cricket in general.

Test cricket is true cricket.

I doubt that 20-20 will ever overtake Test Cricket tbh, maybe ODIs, but I'm not too bothered about that.

 

[Fusion]

If this helps destroy ICL, I'm all for it.

 

[Perm]

Bad idea, 20/20 looks like its going to take over cricket in general.

Test cricket is true cricket.

Twenty20 is all about money and excitement, it will never overtake Test cricket, and I find it unlikely that it will overtake ODI cricket TBH. Good to see you have your priorities sorted though

 

[Richard]

It's too early to say anything like that. It could last a week in January in Australia or something for all anyone knows.

As for too many Twenty20 being played that's your opinion, not that of the masses who'll pay to watch it. The winner of the Twenty20 Cup played the same number of games as the awesome winner of the FP Trophy.

The whole point is that overdoing the format, like anything, is likely to result in the masses wanting to watch it less and less. That's before we even consider the dangers of it damaging the two superior forms of the game.

 

[brockley]

This will be a flop,won't get off the ground.
Their no firm ideas how its run whether franchises or domestic sides.
Also its additional committment from international stars.don't see the players unions to be behind this.
BCCi only doing this because of the ICL.
Things like this been mooted in the past never got off the ground or flopped.
5 years ago in perth they had the best domestic side from australia,india,nz and s africa,it flopped no one came to the games,and it wasn't telecasted.
Personally i would like a super 14 comp with nz,australian and s african sides,that is something more likely to work.

 

[Richard]

Notice ss hasn't posted in this thread yet, though I saw him reading it yesterday.

Too depressed?

 

[silentstriker]

Nah, BCCI will muddle it up. As they do everything else.

 

[Richard]

Think IMG are in charge, TBH, and from the little I know they don't make a habit of muddling things up.

This actually seems to me about the best prospective Twenty20 enterprise yet. Won't mean I'll be interested, of course, but it takes advantage of the format to venture where cricket has never yet gone.

 

[Arjun]

Let's compare the two sides:

ICL:

• Lots of money involved.
• Initiated and run by a leading business professional, and so it may be run more professionally.
• Priorities may not include improving the standard of cricket- aimed more at marketing the game in a country where it needs no market.
• Full of retired or no-hoper players just making up the numbers.
• Struggling to get good grounds.
• More of a Twenty20 event. This form may be beneficial in India, but the proper forms of the game are neglected.
• Will definitely be telecast on Zee Sports. After all, it's a Zee venture.
• Ultimately, it's not official.

PCL:

• A lot less money is involved.
• Run by cricket boards, which usually (especially in India) do a bad job- the state of domestic cricket is proof.
• Quality of cricket is definitely a priority.
• We will see current players in action, or at least those, eligible to play for their countries.
• The boards run this event, and they own the grounds! They don't maintain them too well in India, though.
• This will also be a T20 event, although we expect some FC/List-A cricket as well. The BCCI doesn't like T20 much.
• Knowing the BCCI, this won't be telecast anywhere, except on NEO Sports, which disappears even during live domestic action. Unless cable operators actually transmit the signal.
• It's a board venture, so it's official.

 

[Richard]

Not sure the PCL is planned to be anything other than Twenty20 stuff TBH, think it's just a proper, officially-sanctioned compliment to normal domestic cricket.

I think it's also run, ultimately, by IMG, not any board - the boards have merely dreamt-up the idea. CA have also generally been OK at running comps, and the ECB have sometimes demonstrated they can do it with a semblence of competance (the most obvious examples, WC99 and CT2004, terribly organised though both were, are actually not wholly indicative of the board's skill).