Sauce for the goose....

Remember this

For example, photographers applying for IPL accreditation will have to ensure that their clicked photos:

* appear as still images (and not as moving images or rapid-sequence streaming or refreshed images) and cannot be used to support a so-called on-line match-tracking report, audio or text based commentary service;

* are published in the relevant print media for editorial reporting purposes only;

* images are not used in association with any marks, names or logos of any third party (commercial or otherwise); no online use or publication or syndication of any such still photographic images is allowed without the express prior written consent of IPL.

These rules have already drawn flak from international media agencies like the Agence France Presse (AFP).

Then there was this

The Associated Press (AP) will not be covering this year's Indian Premier League (IPL) cricket tournament in South Africa because organizers have imposed unacceptable conditions on media outlets covering the event.

The AP and major international news organizations Reuters and Agence France-Presse sought to persuade IPL organizers to change their minds about terms and conditions imposed on media.

The News Media Coalition, an association that represents a worldwide collection of news organizations, has also tried without success to resolve the dispute.

IPL Chief Executive Lalit Modi refused to amend conditions, including one that bars media groups from supplying news and photos about IPL events to Web sites that specialize in cricket. The IPL has signed an exclusive agreement to supply news and photos about the Twenty20 tournament to one Web site.

Now, square that with this

© AFP . This image may not be reproduced without specific consent from AFP

If media outlets desire complete access to events that are technically the property of the event holders, why don't the same rules apply to disseminating the content that is copyrighted by the very same media outlets?

What does"specific consent" mean? And how different is it from the argument Modi and CA and other had forwarded when barring media outlets from freely distributing content from their events?

Huh??

"For instance, in Australia, they use the kookaburra ball and I want to cope with the extra swing and also work on my early minutes of play. I enjoy the game and I want to keep playing well rather than worry about issues like selection."

Havent they been using the Kookaburra ball for the past two seasons in the Ranji Trophy?

World T20 won't repeat mistakes of World Cup

but will make new ones.

This time around, adult tickets will range from £20 at Trent Bridge to £90 at Lord's, even though Under-16s will be able to watch the final for as little as a tenner.

Then there is the schedule - 27 games in 15 days with no allowance for the rain. Plus back to back games on all match days until the semi finals means no leeway with the playing schedule in case of disruptions.

Imagine a situation where all of India's games get rain affected.India goes through to the Super 8's without having played a game and then gets eliminated in the Super 8's on account of not haviing played a game - imagine the repercussions on ad revenues and sundry other items if this were to happen.

Then there are the hours of play - all of which are targetted for prime time audiences in the UK. But the prime time audiences in the UK will have to pay to watch the T20 World Cup, given that it is on Sky.

And what about the audiences who bring in the dough?

Sat 6
18:00 local, 17:00 GMT 4th Match, Group A - Bangladesh v India
Trent Bridge, Nottingham

Wed 10
17:30 local, 16:30 GMT 12th Match, Group A - India v Ireland
Trent Bridge, Nottingham

One game begins at 12:30 AM IST on Sunday, the other at 12:00 AM IST on Thurdsay.

Nice!

PS - Thanks Q for pointing it out. And apologies to my maths teachers over the years. I am incapable of doing simple addition!

The Hours of play are 22:30 IST and 22:00 IST.

On maintaining the foreign player cap

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.

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.

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.

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?