So this rebel cricket breakaway league...

[slugger]

This is the same guy who after creating the ICL motivated the ICC and BCCI to establish a t20 league. If his next challenge was more in line with creating a test cricket world cup where upon the winning teams participating where going to receive millions of dollars... once again it could the catalyst for the ICC to pull finger and create a test cricket championship that all teams are treat as equals and stop this crazy bilateral bollocks.

 

[vic_orthdox]

When other guys from your own country are still waiting on cash from the same guy, it'd be a big surprise to see anyone take the leap over there.

 

[Riggins]

Yeah he'd basically have to pay the $50m up front to get anyone decent across you'd think.

 

[Hurricane]

When other guys from your own country are still waiting on cash from the same guy, it'd be a big surprise to see anyone take the leap over there.

I guarantee he has an answer ready for a concerned prospective player who inquires over that issue - probably something like:

"Certainly working on our past obligations is something that we are fully investigating. There is some discrepancies between our accounting and other reports that we need to get closure on. But we are fully committed to resolving that to everyone's satisfaction."

 

[Flem274*]

this won't be a thing. if you're spending 50 million bucks on getting players to tournaments the BCCIICC will do their best to sabotage and your previous tournament collapsed under corruption and hasn't paid up the much smaller sums of cash to it's employees, you're not going to survive.

It's like these guys are having a competition to see how far into overdraft they can get their bank accounts before the bank runs out of numbers.

 

[Flem274*]

but fmd a global franchise FC comp would be cool to see if the teams had some identity rather than being like what the IPL sides are.

 

[Prince EWS]

but fmd a global franchise FC comp would be cool to see if the teams had some identity rather than being like what the IPL sides are.

I'd be pretty keen even for a 50-over competition like this.

 

[Hurricane]

but fmd a global franchise FC comp would be cool to see if the teams had some identity rather than being like what the IPL sides are.

They would hope to call them tests to draw tv deals

 

[cnerd123]

TBH I've been trying to think about how to make Franchised Test and ODI cricket feasible for a few weeks now. I think it's the only way forward for cricket.

The Pros are pretty clear.:

1) No cricketer is being disadvantaged for where they are born. A West Indian or Zimbabwean cricketer can earn just as much as an Indian one if he is good enough. Dutch and Kenyan cricketers can finally play Tests.
2) We will finally have some decent marketing behind the matches
3) Less meaningless, bilateral tours (I'm looking at you India/SL)
4) More competitive cricket all around


But how do we actually go about achieving this? Do we scrap nations and have 1/2 franchises per country (3 perhaps for Eng/Aus and 4 for India)? Or do we take the best domestic side from each country and let them play in Tests? Do we have any local/foreign player quotas or let it be totally free market?

The most feasible route is letting India run it all. Let India be to Cricket what England and the EPL are to football. Expand the IPL to include Test and ODI variants, give those formats official FC status, and have it be the attraction of the calendar with International ODIs and Test being a side event - a Test League (2 divisions, promotions and demotions), an the ODI and T20 World Cups.

Expand the IPL to have more teams (I'd say around 20, with 10 in each division and a 2 up/2 down system), allow 5-6 International players per XI, and expand the Test League to 2 Divisions and the World Cups to 20 odd countries.

The best players from the weaker Test sides will be able to find a side to play for in this new IPL, 5 International players per XI * 20 sides = 100 players will be needed. There will definitely be space for talents like Braithwaite, Mominul Haque and Brendan Taylor - players who could be excellent in Tests (and maybe ODIs) but who lack exposure to strong Domestic cricket which could hinder their development. We'll also see a lot more younger talent stay in the game and tailor their game for Tests and ODIs, since now there is actually good money in this as well. T20 will probably still pay the highest, but atleast being a Test specialist is now viable.

Exposure to strong domestic cricket will also help the weaker nations get stronger without having to find the resources to somehow develop a strong domestic infrastructure themselves. This should lead to more competitive Tests and ODIs overall.

Over time, let the IPL expand to include more sides and franchises. I can envision Division 3 and Division 4 sides will start recruiting talent from Associate nations as they will be cheaper and more available - this in turn will strengthen these nations and empower youngsters in these countries to stay on represent their sides. More nations playing Tests and ODIs, albeit not frequently and at a lower standard, is also a good thing.

 

[Flem274*]

It would have to be domestic based. No one is going to support generic world elevens or franchises based on cities/regions from one country. Australians for example will not tune in in mass numbers to watch Steve Smith or Ryan Harris play for the Mumbai Noonecares like they do to watch them play for Australia.

The Champions League almost had it perfect, except the filthy dirty conflicts of interest between the CL and IPL ruined everything. Central Districts turning up without their most influential player on them being there in the first place (some bloke called Ross Taylor) because he was sitting on the bench for the Indian City World XI was silly for example.

A big fat league with many teams would be the way to go. All or most Australian and South African states, North and South Islands of New Zealand (or even North, Central and South since for once the Shield is strong enough to do this) would make for a high quality competition of its own and throw that in against the best the Northern Hemisphere has to offer would be epic.

 

[cnerd123]

But then if you propose that, you will have all the richest franchises -and therefore best talent- concentrated in India, with maybe one or two good sides from Australia and England. Guys like Ross Taylor may very well still be warming the benches for that Indian City World XI while the lone Zimbabwean franchise ends up playing high-schoolers to make up the numbers.

You could perhaps restrict how much foreign talent each side can sign, and the best Associate talents may still find a franchise to play for, but then you will have the case of talents from poorer countries (West Indian, Sri Lankan, etc) earning far less than their equally talented counter-parts from richer countries simply by virtue of being born in the wrong place.

You also have troubles with scheduling if you have franchises all over the world in one league. What if a side has to play 3 consecutive away games in England, New Zealand and Australia before a home game in West Indies? Will you be scheduling matches 24/7 to accommodate all time zones? Won't the BCCI demand that all the matches their sides play be scheduled to best suit the Indian audience; local fans be damned?

 

[Prince EWS]

You could perhaps restrict how much foreign talent each side can sign

I don't think you'd actually need to do this. Franchises would want to concentrate a supporter base and make money, particularly early on, so they'd be much more inclined to sign up players who had a local profile. Assuming you had a salary cap and all teams spent roughly the same amount, McCullum for example would be worth a lot more to a NZ-based franchise than an overseas one, and he'd probably be more inclined to sign for a NZ-based franchise even for slightly less money given he could live closer to family if he did. You'd get a fairly natural bias towards localism without needing to actually force it in any way, at least in the early stages of a competition.

You also have troubles with scheduling if you have franchises all over the world in one league. What if a side has to play 3 consecutive away games in England, New Zealand and Australia before a home game in West Indies? Will you be scheduling matches 24/7 to accommodate all time zones? Won't the BCCI demand that all the matches their sides play be scheduled to best suit the Indian audience; local fans be damned?

I think you'd have to have pools based on timezones and then finals.

 

[Flem274*]

Yeah salary caps are a good start. Even in cribbertopia it's important for everyone to have the same start and a non capped salary potential when there is an obvious inequality between cricket boards wouldn't be the fresh start needed for this competition to work

 

[cnerd123]

Yea I could see salary caps working but can't see the BCCI agreeing to it.

 

[Riggins]

They'll just give Mumbai a bogus cost of living allowance.

 

[cnerd123]

I think you'd have to have pools based on timezones and then finals.

This also runs the risk of leaving cricket in the same state as it is - high viewership for the Indian sides and whoever plays them, and lower viewership for other pools. I imagine the European Division and the Oceania Divsion will have some decent veiwership thanks to England/Aus/NZ, but who will tune in to watch Guyana play Florida or Natal play Namibia?

Less viewership, less moneyz, lower quality of cricket. Won't be a big issue if the idea of Salary Caps is accepted by the BCCI, but if it is a open market where franchises pay what they want, then all the talent and money will continue to be concentrated within the subcontinent (particularly India) and we'll continue to see declining standards around the world.

At most the BCCI will regulate the salary that each side within the Indian Leagues pays out -for the sake of competitive cricket- but they aren't going to agree to their sides having the same budget as sides like Jamaica and Colombo.

Also the finals will have to be played in India/India friendly time-zones, just because it would be crazy to play them at a time that the largest audience in the world won't be able to tune in. And as we've seen with the Champions League, the BCCI will try to shoehorn in more than their fair share of teams into the Finals.


I think for Franchise-based FC and OD cricket to really be viable, it has to be based in India. Or at most, within India/Australia/England. Just because the other regions will not sustain the kinda of viewership needed to make it lucrative.

At most, I suppose, you could have a European League, an Indian League, and an Australian League. Their seasons will all slightly overlap (June - Sept/Oct for Europe, August - Nov/Dec for India, and Oct - March/April for Oceania), and the Indian league will most likely be the richest one, but this way you capture the three biggest time-zones, you have cricket all year around (allowing for a player to play for multiple teams), and you provide enough teams for the talents from the lesser nations to be able to find someone to play for. Give these games FC/OD status and let each tournament decide their own salary caps and foreign player restrictions and such.

Then once in a while you can have the marquee International events - maybe a Test League than runs on a 2-3 year cycle with 2 divisions, and then a large World T20 (20+ nations ala the Football World Cup) and a concentrated ODI World Cup.

Realistically speaking you'd need to have some sort of global rankings or seedings that allow the Big 8 to have direct entry into these events regardless of how crap they are, and then qualifiers for the rest of the nations to prove their worth. A 20 team WT20 may very well be 20 minnows playing for the right to qualify for a main tournament with the Big 8. You also don't want the possibly for India/Aus/Eng getting knocked out early, and you don't want them getting demoted in the Test League. This I feel will lead to some set of rules/regulations that won't make it much of a fair competition (maybe a point system to encourage defensive cricket so India can avoid relegation by just stonewalling their way to draws on flat pitches, or a regulation that says these 3 are immune and the lowest points out of the remaining 5 will relegate instead), but hey, it will be a start.

 

[GIMH]

Let India be to Cricket what England and the EPL are to football.

You want them to destroy the very essence of cricket?

 

[Niall]

Essel Group Confirms Plan to Set up Rival T20 Cricket League - Cricket News

Sydney: The Subhash Chandra-owned Essel Group has confirmed its plans to set up a rival Twenty20 cricket league by including leading players from around the world to participate in the cash-rich event.
After Chandra's ambitious ICL failed to cut much ice post strong opposition from the BCCI, the media magnate is once again to trying to make his company's foray into the lucrative world of cricket and probably give IPL stiff competition, reported the Sydney Morning Herald.

It has been two weeks since reports of the registration of company names by the Essel Group in cricket-playing nations - in Australia they registered the company Australian Cricket Control Pty Ltd� - sparking concerns about a breakaway organisation and leading to an ICC investigation.

But now, Essel's head of finance and strategy Himanshu Mody reveals that the initial plan is to set up an inter-city T20 league in India.

According to reports, discussions have included offering leading players, including Australia's Michael Clarke and David Warner, as much as 50 million US Dollars in multi-year contracts in an effort to lure them away from their national bodies.
It is learnt that the Chandra-owned channel Zee and its subsidiary Ten Sports frozen out of lucrative rights to televise cricket in India their ambitious plans have progressed from setting up a rebel T20 league to a parallel world governing body.
Chandra raised the possibility of players being given bank guarantees as a way to convince them to join his venture given Essel's record of not paying ICL wages.

Between 40 and 50 players from the defunct ICL remain out of pocket to the tune of 2m USD despite Essel recently settling with 12 of the players for a figure of 280,000 USD in a Mumbai court.

The Essel group though is well aware of the BCCI reaction with the prospect of IPL facing competition from the T20 event.

The group is also looking to include more grounds than they utilised in ICL, around 10-12 cities, 8-12 teams and the added attraction of Pakistan players. The league is expected to start in less than a year's time.

 

[cnerd123]

Sounds like a terrible idea.

I doubt they have enough money to lure all the biggest stars away, and even if they did, no way are they going to have enoug of an audience to earn it all back, especially once the BCCI starts sanctioning them.

 

[Niall]

Exiled former IPL boss Lalit Modi reveals plans for international cricket takeover - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Perplexed about having test cricket in any breakaway league, love it dearly but still the least profitable format by a long shot. I dunno probably a carrot for the likes of England and Aussie players.