Having missed the semi finals and finals of the IPL thanks to the Memorial Day weekend, I am in no position to comment on the whats and the wherefores of the same.
But perusing through the blogs, I gathered this much
1. The Closing ceremony sucked
2. The finals was worthy of the tournament.
3. Andrew Symonds continues to be the agent provocateur and likes bullying people.
That said, the reason for this post is this - post the IPL ( and even during it), there have been questions/discussions/queries on various media sites on the merits or lack there of of the 4 foreign player cap in the IPL.
Some see this as impinging on displaying the best talent there is available within the teams, others see this as racist.Others point to the FTP, citing that if the IPL wants its own window, it must do more to accomodate the interests of the other Boards ( and players).
I completely endorse the cap.
Whats more, I would strongly advocate reducing the number of foreign players per team as the franchises expand. For the reasons listed below
1. I had, in a previous post, alluded to the fact that in Mumbai, club cricket was slowly petering out, replaced by age group cricket. And I believe this is true for the rest of the country too. And
I had written this
And because of this, there is no "mentoring" a la club cricket wherein a 40 year old grizzled veteran of many a skirmish would be around to guide a 16 year old colt on the intricacies and vagaries of the game.The IPL is resolves that problem. It is the only real forum where a Manish Pandey can rub shoulders with an Anil Kumble and learn what it means to be a Test cricketer. It is also the only forum where real mentoring happens - it is in every one's interests that players perform and given that there is a requirement to field kids from the U-23 age group, the onus is on the veterans to guide them to perform at their very best.
And because the "mentoring" no longer exists, there is a lot less cricketing savvy on display - kids have all the skills coaching can get you but implementing those skills and thinking about the game is a whole different story altogether.
2. Domestic cricket in India suffers because the marquee players do not participate, thus lowering the standards of play. Lower standards of play implies there is no real gauge of the talent of the player - is Cheteshwar Pujara the real deal given that he scores heavily at Rajkot and not so heavily elsewhere? Is Abhishek Nayar a journeyman cricketer or does he have it in him to step up to the next level? Does Rohit Sharma have bottle and can he construct an innings?
The intensity and the standards of play of the IPL answer a lot of these questions. While the ability to construct an innings may be up in the air, the IPL does give a window to the temperament of the player in question and his ability to perform when under the microscope. It also is the only avenue where an up and coming player is tested against an established one.
The IPL helps separate the chaff from the wheat.
3. Pre IPL there were two aspects of the game where the foreign players trumped the Indians - pre match preparation and training. Pre match preparation as in the mental aspect of the game with emphasis on how to approach the nets while batting, bowling and fielding. The training emphasized on the physical aspect of the game - the fielding drills, the game situation simulations etc.
With the legions of trainers and fitness instructors and dieticians and coaches that tail each of the IPL franchises, the gap that separates the Indians versus the foreign players is fast closing.
4. Coalescing 30 Ranji teams into 8 franchises implies that the best of the Indian talent is available for selection - the onus is on the franchises to make the smart picks. And with the ICL players returning to the fold, the options available to the franchises only increase - imagine a Stuart Binny playing for the Royally Challenged and an Ambati Rayadu for the Chargers.
5. The IPL gives unheard of players an opportunity to show case their talents - who had heard of a T. Suman till IPL 2009? And they deserve it because, having done the hard yards in the domestic scene, they merit their place in the sun.
6. The argument for the best available talent to be fielded is a tenuous one, at best. No one doubts Ricky Ponting's skill as a batsman. But is he really going to augment the KKR batting when he averaged a measly 9.75 when the IPL was played in 2008? And what about Jesse Ryder, Kevin Pieterson and Andrew Flintoff. Or Jacob Oram. No one can argue that they were amongst the best available talents there are. But how much did they really supplement their team? And wouldn't increasing the foreign player cap have meant that Sudeep Tyagi never got an opportunity to bowl. Ditto Shadab Jakati?
7. The racism charge - is laughable at best. England caps its Kolpak players and has a limit on the number of foreign players participating in County cricket.Australia's domestic season is dominated by Australians, give or take a Pom or a Dutchman. The same is true of Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. South Africa has a cap too on its foreign imports. And yet, no one calls them racist.
8. There are 9 Test playing nations. Which equates to 135 players ( considering 15 players per team). Of these, the number of players equipped to play T20 cricket ( temperamentally. technique wise, or otherwise) is probably less than half. Even if allowance is made for fringe players , the number of total available foreign players wont top 100. Which equates to around 12 players per team ( given the current franchise breakup). Of those 12, having 4 players in the game amounts to a 1/3rd quota of foreign players playing per game. With expansion, the number of foreign players per team will diminish and the proportion of foreign players playing for a given team will correspondingly increase.And the numbers will remain skewed in favor of the foreign players vis a vis the Indians.
So arbitrarily increasing the number of foreign players serves no purpose at all.
Finally this - the IPL will not be accommodated in the FTP until 2011, when it comes up for review. So a window for the IPL for the next 2 years is out. Furthermore, when the FTP does come in for review, cognizance will be taken of the primacies of the English and Australian Cricket seasons. And not just because the ECB is contractually bound to host 7 Tests and 15 ODIs every year. Likewise CA ( and hence its reluctance to compromise with CSA on hosting the Boxing Day test). Add to this mix the emergence of the P20 and the SPL ( Southern Premier League) from 2010 onwards and there is just no way in hell that the ICC will accommodate a 6 week window for the IPL.
Given this, and given player availability, wouldn't it be prudent for the BCCI and IPL organizing committee to focus inwards and work on raising the standards of the Indian pool instead of focusing outwards and increasing the cap on the foreign player pool?
30 comments:
I agree on all the counts.
But the biggest reason for me though is that it is the INDIAN Premier League. Yes its has managed to attract and international audience but by and large it remains an Indian competition. Its aim should be to promote local Indian talent - whether thats the sole aim or not is questionable, but this quote of 4 foreign players definitely helps that objective. As does the regulation to have 1 U-23 player and a certain number of regional players in the squads.
Would you expect a county to have half its team built up of non-english player? Or once the Southern Premier League gets underway, would you expect them to have more than half the players from outside Aus, Sa, NZ?
Exactly.
Cheers Q :)
I think the limit has to stay, it is the only thing stopping the tournament from being just a money grubbing whore. And 4 international players is still enough for guys like Shaun Marsh and Morne Van Wyk to prove themselves.
With the 4 player limit in place, this has to be thought of as a domestic tournament, and thusly not get into the FTP. The champion's league, which is now fully international, should get on the FTP though.
But its not yet on the FTP as Lalit claimed.. And if it is put on the FTP then the ICC need to do something abt Pakistan's unwanted omission from it...
Q, I know it isn't but it should be, and Pakistan should be allowed to play in it.
UJ,
I would go so far as to advocate a reduction in the number of foreign players per team.Coupled with a salary cap restriction, franchises will have to shop smart instead of shopping volume.
And that will translate to a much higher standard of play.
As regards the FTP, if the IPL doesnt get a window, odds of the BCCI pressing for a Champions League window are small.
The IPL is where the money is, the Champions League is a sop for the other Cricketing boards missing out on a piece of the pie.
Cheers,
Q,
Payback for this -
Karachi: Pakistan sports minister Pir Aftab Shah Jilani alleged that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) of influencing the ICC to shift the World Cup 2011 cricket matches from Pakistan and deplored the BCCI’s role in the issue. The minister also blamed Pakistan cricket authorities for not handling the World Cup issues properly.
Cheers,
Homer, surely we are above all this payback and shit.. irrespective of what was said, I believe come 3rd June the world cup decision will be taken keeping all interests in mind, including Pakistan's.
Q,
I forgot to add the question mark after the payback for this line..
That said, isnt all of this just shadow boxing? The PCB posture, the BCCI reponds. Miandad chimes in, Modi chimes out.
And so on and so forth.
I agree that all interests will be considered come June 3rd, but until then this giant pantomime will continue.
More power to it ! :)
Cheers,
Homer,
I like 4-player cap. And I like the # 4. I dunno how 3 would be.
:-)
Anyway, I definitely don't want more foriegn players, and want the emphasis to stay on the Indian in the IPL.
(Cannot take any more complaints on how IPL is bad for Int'l cricket!)
Leela,
As long as the pie is not shared ( according to terms laid down by others), the complaints on how the IPL is bad for International cricket will continue.
I would much rather we shrink the foreign player base so as not be hostage to the whims and fancies of different boards - no window, lack of player availability etc etc.
Having a dominant Indian participation negates all that. And as long as the Indians get to see close competitive games, how does the team composition even become relevant?
Cheers,
Homer,
I think in the first year the IPL needed the int'l players to develop the buzz. But now maybe we don't have to have them anymore with Indians taking to the IPL in a big way.
However, I do like the 4 int'l players. :-)
Instead of reducing the # of foriegn players in the final XI, I think there should be a restriction on the # in the squad. Instead of wasting their money on inflated foriegn purchases, the franchises will buy smarter and concentrate more on the domestic players.
Perhaps even a restriction on the # of foriegn coaches in the squad after the KKR debacle ;-)
The IPL is resolves that problem.
Needs some grammatical correction. Yo baby!!!
Good catch English Teacher! But then you had to spoil it with the "Yo baby!!!" :)
Nice try Sam, but baiting me is not going to score you hits.
Cheers,
The IPL hype has sent mixed messages about what it is meant to be. On the one hand, it is a domestic competition with the usual ability to impose restrictions on team make-ups. I'm not sure what, if any, official restrictions there are in Aus domestic cricket, but as you say, that sort of thing is normal and certainly not racist. (On a side note, we've had more Pakistanis and Zimbos than Englishmen or "Dutch" recently...)
On the other hand, it is spruiked as imitating the soccer leagues, which are completely open to foreign players, and that's part of the appeal. The four player restriction tries to make the IPL domestic and international at the same time. I'd usually react along the lines of eating and having cake, but in this case I think that than rather than having a split personality, this could come to be seen as one of the established ways of doing things. This can happen if the IPL continues to be successful without chopping and changing this aspect for a few more years.
While I like the idea of promoting domesitc talent, that would be the business argument against reducing the quota (it is also inconsistent with Modi's travelling plans). What affect this has on the rest of the world is another matter altogether.
Yeah its been going on for a long time now Homer, and it needs to stop. For Pakistan's sake. We need India.
Isn't it strange that Nasim Ashraf's administration was known as "BCCI's puppets", while this one is known as "anti BCCI"..
Why can't we have moderation.. why do we always have to be on extremes.
Jonathan, Australian domestic teams are allowed one foreign player in the XI.
Homer, you write "So arbitrarily increasing the number of foreign players serves no purpose at all."
This needs some qualifications. It may serve no purpose in the furthering of Indian cricket, but if you removed the cap, teams would take advantage of it and play more foreigners. They would do so because you'd get a higher standard of cricket.
If the cap remains in place (and I expect it will), I wonder if any talented players would think of emigrating to India to qualify as a local. At the first IPL auction, being an Indian was worth an extra $270k.
(A similar argument is made about the sometimes proposed 6+5 rule for football - that it would destroy the African nations' teams because their top players would take out English citizenship to earn more money.)
I agree on all points you've raised, Homer. IPL is a domestic tournament and should remain so...
Jinathan,
As far as I know, players have the choice of playing for club or country in soccer leagues. I am also aware that clubs often dictate whether certain players can be released to play for their country.
The IPL dynamics are different - players here have to be released by their home boards to play in the IPL.And home boards can recall players at any point in time - the IPL remains hostage to the whims and fancies of the different Boards till such a time that it finds its own slot in the FTP. And that is not going to happen anytime soon.
As things stand today, the 4 player limit seems to work but as franchises expand, I would like the 4 player limit will shrink to 3.
As regards the Modi traveling plans, the only places where the IPL is viable are India, South Africa and England. The West Indies may be an outside shot but the TV schedules make it a no go.
Given the inherent hostility within England to the IPL, South Africa remains the only foreign venue that can stage the IPL.
Cheers,
Q,
The BCCI was ready to play Pakistan during Kargil. And they were ready to play Pakistan post 26/11. In both cases the Govt of the day intervened.
It would help if Pakistan could differentiate between its fair weather friends and long term associates.
Bad mouthing the very people who have been allies for so long will do Pakistan cricket no good.
Cheers,
David,
But as has been proven in both editions of the IPL, having foreign players does not necessarily guarantee results ( or higher standards of cricket) - Deccan Chargers had some of the biggest power hitters last year ( Symonds, Gibbs, Afridi and Gilchrist) and went nowhere, this year Rohit Sharma was their go to guy.As were RP SIngh and Pragyan Ojha.
As regards emigrating, will 6 weeks of work sustain that individual for the rest of the year? And what happens to team selection - will other cricket boards acquiesce?
Cheers,
Well Homer on one side all of you bloggers slams 20 20 cricket not being the real cricket and still you feel that it will somehow groom the Indian players. Cheteshwar Pujara scores in Rajkot may be he will scores in IPL as well is that a better indicator of his talent. Well if anybody feels that close matches with only Indian players will bring a lot of audience to the tournament then they should actually watch any of the high profile domestic finals and see how many people are actually watching the tournament.In the end IPL is IPL because of these inter country interactions. Most of the people just turn up to watch Warne's captaincy when they watch RR. So why would you want to take away all that fun ?If they want to keep it as competitive and intense which was one of your arguments then they will need this foreign players.
Indophile,
I will try to address your points as best as I can.
1. Bloggers are not a monolith. For example, I have not dismissed T20 as not being real cricket.
2.If you have been following the domestic scene,you will know that the last 3 seasons have been amongst the most dramatic. Our domestic scene suffers on account of a lack of marketing. If the BCCI were to divert even 10% of the efforts put in for the IPL towards domestic cricket, you will find a much larger audience for these games.
3. Regarding foreign players, the debate is about how many - the general opinion that I have noticed is towards more, I am inclined to go with less.Will having no foreign players impact the IPL - only if the overall standard of play within India is at a level that it makes foreign participation irrelevant. And that is not a bad target to aim for :)
Cheers,
Agreed Homer... It was also the Pak govt that did not allow the players to go for the IPL...
The only blows that have taken place are regarding the WC.. also in that case the BCCI did not stand by the PCB, i.e. BCCI put no pressure on the ICC to not take the cup away from us.
Now I don't blame the BCCI for doing what they did, they had their interest to look after and in these times its hard to support Pakistan.
In another time though the BCCI as well as the other boards would have supported the PCB.
So maybe the PCB felt let down, hence all that trash talk in the media by Miandad and the rest.
I do not agree with what the PCB officials have been saying, but then leaving Pak out of the CL - was that the right way to reciprocate?
Q,
Firstly, we dont know who exerted what pressure on whom in the ICC deliberations.
Given that the Sri Lankan team had been shot at in broad daylight at a busy intersection in one of Pakistan's largest cities despite being promised "Presidential level" of security, would it even matter who exerted how much and what kinds of pressure at the ICC meet?
Then there is the constant hum from across the border, sniping at the IPL. People in positions of responsibility within the PCB establishment have, at various times, castigated the IPL and even invoked match fixing.
Then there was the infamous Ijaz Butt statement, equating the security situations between Pakistan with India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
And then there was this -
Pakistan Cricket Board chairman Ejaz Butt has accused the ICC and the BCCI of treating them as beggars and threatened dire consequences if they are not allowed to host 2011 World Cup matches.
This despite securing the support of Sharad Pawar in Pakistan's endevour to retain the WC.
And let me ask you this - Australia has steadfastly refused to travel to Pakistan since 1998. And yet, Pakistan will honor its commitment to travel there for its 3 Test series. So what happened to the principle involved? And given what is in the news with regards to Indian students being attacked in Australia, where is the voice of support from across the border stating that in solidarity with their South Asian neighbors, Pakistan deems the security situation in Australia to be unacceptable?
Pakistan wont do it and I dont expect Pakistan to do it. Pakistan has its own interests to safe guard and that is what it is doing - vide all the chatter vis a vis the World Cup and the IPL and everything in between.
So, why does the BCCI owe the PCB anything?
The Pakistan Government blocked Pakistani players from playing the IPL and the Pakistani players traveled to South Africa to demand compensation from the IPL?
Why this sense of entitlement?
Cheers,
1. Firstly, regarding the sniping at the IPL and the match fixing.
Miandad did not snipe at IPL. He did so at 20-20 cricket as a whole. Be it IPL, ICL, all sorts of 20-20 cricket, Miandad and Imran Khan have openly talked abt how they think the format is a joke. Its not an attack on the IPL.
Match fixing was talked abt by all and sundry, not Miandad alone. The Indian media was full of it.
This is not an attack by Pakistan on the IPL.
2. Regarding the world cup. The situation is a mess. I agree. BCCI could not have stood up for the PCB, I understand. But the PCB had to do something to fight for its right. The legal cases were the right way since the ICC had not even deemed it necessary to have a dialogue till after the cases were files, the attack on BCCI was uncalled for. But as I said, one can understand the feeling of being let down.
3. The attack on SL was where the PCB fucked up cos of the security that they failed to provide. Thats enough reason for no one to tour Pak ever. But Pak is willing to host the WC matches elsewhere, which also the ICC did not agree to till the cases were filed.
4. Once the support from Sharad Pawar was forthcoming, the PCB attack on BCCI has stopped. No word has come in. Everything that was said was before that. That doesn't make it right, but once we got the support we have been quiet.
5. Attacks on Indian students in Australia happened, have the BCCI talked abt security situation in Australia? In another time, the BCCI would have stood up for the PCB and the PCB would have done the same.
6. Pak Govt. disallowed the Pak players to travel to India for the IPL due to the security concern. Why did the franchises cancel the contracts? Ponting and Hussey opted out of the IPL, did their contracts get cancelled? Watson, Bracken, Hopes weren't allowed to take part in the IPL, did their contracts get cancelled?
Then when the IPL got shifted to South Africa, Pak Govt. said our players can travel. Why weren't they allowed to take part?
I understand that the squads had been announced and the players had been replaced by the franchises, but still something could have been done, nai?
The payments that the Pak players demanded were their IPL dues from last year and the sum that they ar entitled to due to cancellation of their contracts. They didn't ask for money that they were not entitled to.
Finally, the champions league snub in my opinion was unwanted. The world cup issue is a separate one and is being handled, but what Modi basically did was:
He invited Pakistan to a party, that party got cancelled. Modi told everyone that the party will take place next year. Then Modi told the media that the party is taking place but Pakistan is not invited because their Govt. wont allow them to come and yesterday was the cut off date, hence no Pakistan.
Was the PCB told of a cut off date? Was the PCB asked if a team form Pak will come? Were they informed that they will not participate?
Its a bit sad that teams from all the cricketing nations are taking part in the CL, but Pakistan.
Q,
All valid points. However this, from Cricinfo -
The PCB's own inaction has done nothing to ease the situation. The day after the decision was announced, a number of senior officials were contacted, none of whom had any coherent reply to the situation. One senior official didn't know what the Champions League was, while others referred the matter to the chairman, who simply referred it back.Like the World Cup and Pakistan's insistence that they did not get India's support, where lies the truth?
And it is also a fact that till date, the Pakistan Government has not revoked its ban on sportspeople traveling to India. So, as the BCCI official said - "We don't want a problem in the last minute... with so much money at stake, we don't want to take the risk of inviting a team when - as of now - it is clear that there will be political problems with visas, clearance,".
Also,
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Pak-players-not-to-travel-to-S-Africa-for-IPL-pay-dispute/457986/
The players claimed that the IPL authorities neither allowed them to play in second IPL, nor explained why their contracts were either suspended or cancelled. The players also claim the IPL owes them outstanding contractual money.
Incidentally, the company representative is in London at present to meet with the President of the Federation of International Cricketers (FICA) Tim May to seek his advice on the dispute with the IPL. The company had earlier said four of the players, including Malik, Tanvir and Butt, would be traveling to South Africa this week to meet with the IPL and franchise officials. Malik said the players had authorised the company to negotiate with the IPL and franchisees on their behalf as they wanted to be financially compensated for missing out on the IPL and over the non-professional way the IPL had handled the contractual issues.
Cheers,
Q,
About accommodating the Pakistani players in the IPL - could it have been done? Sure it could have. If a tournament could be moved from one country to another, this was peanuts.
Question is, should it have been done?
Lahore happened because the PCB messed up big time. And yet, since that time till today, has the PCB even launched an inquiry into the incident? Have they, between then and now, made a single statement detailing contingency measures if a similar situation were to arise again? Have they done anything at all to alleviate the feeling that no one is in control and that traveling to Pakistan is a non starter?
The only thing we have heard from Mr Butt is him questioning the veracity of Simon Taufel and Chris Broad's narrative of the incident.
And yet, despite all this, what exactly did the PCB want the BCCI to do at the ICC for them to turn arpund and whine that the BCCI did not do enough?
And then there is this -
"When we used to play cricket all the boards had principles but now I see that money has made them turn a deaf ear to everything," Miandad told PPI. "India with the power of its money has earned the support from all stakeholders and we find no one who could listen and support us."
If principles matter, why look for the BCCI support during the WC discussion? And if India's clout matters, why talk of principles at all?
Since when could you have the cake and eat it too?
There is a lot that we dont know of here. And given that, within the PCB itself, there seems to be no one who has his handle on the steering, who is to say that the PCB was not informed about the Champions League?
If, after Lahore, they demand unprecedented support from the BCCI and yet complain that it was inadequate, what credibility does the PCB have in making any claim about anything whatsoever?
Cheers,
Homer,
1. I believe the incoherent reply regarding the CL was because the PCB had no idea about wat was happening, i.e. why were they not in it?
2. The Govt. hasn't banned sports people travelling to India has it? The IPL concern was due to Mohd. Asif being detained at the Delhi airport for no reason, and also concerns due to the Mumbai attacks, which Pak is blamed for.
3. There seems to be some confusion regarding the IPL dues. I believe Pak players are due outstanding amounts from last year. Compensation for missing out this year does not make sense.
4. Lahore incident was unfortunate. I agree PCB has not done anything, but then is the payback for that barring players for the IPL? I dont think so.
5. All the PCB wanted was for the Asian boards to demand the ICC to allow Pak to hold its matches elsewhere.
6. Miandad ki bakwaas.. what can i say.
I just think its a mess that could have been avoided easily.
Q,
1. We dont know the reason for the incoherence - we dont know what was communicated and who in the PCB was in the loop.
2. Till date, neither the PCB nor the Pakistan Government has clarified its stance vis a vis travel of sportsmen to India post 26/11. If the Pakistan Govt has banned travel, there is no clarity on whether the restriction was limited to just the IPL or whether it was a blanket ban. And the onus of clarifying this lies entirely with the PCB or the Pakistan Govt, not the BCCI.
3. And yet, the IPL/BCCI is held responsible for this confusion.
4. Post Lahore, the PCB has had nothing to say with regards to how they plan to mitigate this situation. If there are no assurance, let along concrete plans to alleviate a serious security situation ( the same yardstick used by the PCB to show horn the BCCI, SLC and BCB along with the PCB), how did it expect support at the ICC meetin?
5. The ICC vote was for removing Pakistan from hosting the WC games, not removing Pakistan as host. If the PCB felt so strongl;y about this, they should have voted against the motion. Instead, they abstained. And then the crib about the lack of support from the BCCI!
Think about it - the PCB could have voted against the motion, they would have had a strong case and the opther Boards would have a solid ground to support the PCB. Instead, the PCB abdicates its responsibilities and then expects everyone else to go fight for it! And then complains about "lack of support"!
And not only that, it disregards well meaning advise from the BCCI to refrain from the lawsuit. Instead it sounds out every media outlet that is willing to listen that the BCCI has left them in the lurch.
And after all that, it expects robust support from the BCCI?
5. Miandad can mouth off all he wants to. But when he makes IPL specific remarks and he does so as the Director General of the PCB, it is a reflection of official policy. Just like when Niranjan Shah opens his mouth, whether in official or personal capacity, it is taken as official BCCI policy.
Point is, the PCB has done nothing to strengthen its position. Instead it is holding all and sundry responsible for the sorry state of affairs.
And it wants to play its grievances in public, without considering the implications of the same, it should be prepared for the blow back too.
Sure the mess could have been avoided, but the PCB decided that playing to the gallery trumped common sense.
Cheers,
Post a Comment