ICL -should it be ICC endorsed

[Sanz]

I
In comparison, we find that getting an IPL cap is very tough. Hopefully the Icon Player thing goes out of the window and some high-profile non-performers will be dropped in some time.

Is that a joke or what ? What the hell is Darren Lehman doing there ?

It is not even a fair competition, ICL is handicapped by all the bans by various boards. In an open market, ICL will beat the crap out of IPL.

 

[Arjun]

Is that a joke or what ? What the hell is Darren Lehman doing there ?

It is not even a fair competition, ICL is handicapped by all the bans by various boards. In an open market, ICL will beat the crap out of IPL.

Darren Lehmann was merely a fill-in, and nothing more. In comparison, we find several Indian youngsters (prospects and U-19 players) on the bench, and even veterans like Gibbs and Zoysa don't get a match.

ICL has far too much going against it- lack of funds, lack of coverage, but more importantly- lack of a proper schedule (why would Flintoff give up his place in an England team to play in ICL when both matches clash?)- and even more importantly- lack of any convincing power whatsoever- or anything to back up their claims- to get even one current international in their ranks. Yes, the boards (forced by the BCCI) have banned it, but there is nothing the ICL has done to force a reversal.

Everyone who's watched both leagues would know that ICL against IPL is a boxing match between Michael Jackson and Mike Tyson. There's nothing that has happened to suggest that a league with Adam Parore as a star player will even nick one with virtually all international teams in action, let alone beat the you-know-what out of it. Unless, of course, you're working for Zee or Essel or East India Company or any of those Subhash Chandra companies.

 

[chaminda_00]

Parore was very much a fill in player, due to their lack of keeping options in ICL. Just like Lehmann was a fill in player until the Royals got their overseas players back. The fact that they have signed guys like Bond and other guys who have some chance of International recall. Shows the league would have a future if it was endorsed. There is no doubt it will always be the 2nd child to IPL, but so will the proposed English league.

 

[Arjun]

Parore was very much a fill in player, due to their lack of keeping options in ICL. Just like Lehmann was a fill in player until the Royals got their overseas players back. The fact that they have signed guys like Bond and other guys who have some chance of International recall. Shows the league would have a future if it was endorsed. There is no doubt it will always be the 2nd child to IPL, but so will the proposed English league.

I don't know what kind of a future it would have even if endorsed. They can't convince a single current international. Even Chris Read and Vikram Solanki didn't come back. Shane Bond was picked at a time when he was injury-ridden (and still is) and would struggle to make the national team. Not surprisingly, he retired and shifted to this league, given how little cricket in New Zealand pays. He wouldn't have even thought of a league as intrusive as the ICL (clashes with several international matches in all three editions in a year) if he was fully fit- just like Brett Lee.

Several domestic players are poor, particularly from teams such as Gujarat, Saurashtra, Maharashtra, Haryana and several Central and East teams. Yet, none of them moved an inch toward the ICL, so there is a lot wrong and little beneficial with the league- and they can't cover it up. For all these youngsters, an India cap, however distant, is still far more valuable than a little extra cash. In fact, some domestic players even said they wouldn't join the ICL because their future wouldn't be assured, when they don't know if the ICL will last long.

Darren Lehmann, though, was a strange pick, when they had Langer (or not?) in their team, as well as a competent domestic option in Niraj Patel. That, however, is past now.

 

[chaminda_00]

I don't know what kind of a future it would have even if endorsed. They can't convince a single current international. Even Chris Read and Vikram Solanki didn't come back. Shane Bond was picked at a time when he was injury-ridden (and still is) and would struggle to make the national team. Not surprisingly, he retired and shifted to this league, given how little cricket in New Zealand pays. He wouldn't have even thought of a league as intrusive as the ICL (clashes with several international matches in all three editions in a year) if he was fully fit- just like Brett Lee.

Several domestic players are poor, particularly from teams such as Gujarat, Saurashtra, Maharashtra, Haryana and several Central and East teams. Yet, none of them moved an inch toward the ICL, so there is a lot wrong and little beneficial with the league- and they can't cover it up. For all these youngsters, an India cap, however distant, is still far more valuable than a little extra cash. In fact, some domestic players even said they wouldn't join the ICL because their future wouldn't be assured, when they don't know if the ICL will last long.

Darren Lehmann, though, was a strange pick, when they had Langer (or not?) in their team, as well as a competent domestic option in Niraj Patel. That, however, is past now.

I think you will find that a lot more Indian players and even some current Internationals would join the ICL if their International and domestic careers weren't put on ransom by BCCI if they joined the ICL. It doesn't surprise me that many below par Indian domestic players choice not to join the ICL, even if they got no chance of making the Indian side. There really no turning back for these guys if the join.

Considering Bond and other have played the ICL and now are still allowed to play county cricket. I would expect a few more overseas players to join the ICL and the number will dramtically increase if it was endorced. The English players didn't come back as it clashed with their County schedule. Chris Read himself said he would be happy to go back if it didn't effect his domestic or International career.

You really do under estimated how much your average FC cricketer in NZ, West Indies and Sri Lanka are fed up with getting paid nothing. I know for sure that majority of Sri Lanka A players and fringe Internationals would join the ICL if it was endorsed and they wanted them.

 

[Richard]

As opposed to the interests of one Board and any tv network that pays them cash?

Not all cricket boards are purely self-serving.

 

[chaminda_00]

Not all cricket boards are purely self-serving.

Name one that isn't.

 

[Richard]

No cricket league is ever set up with the stated aim of disrupting the game. That's ridiculous, since they're playing the damn game. They can be set up with the stated aim of disrupting "authority" as you put it, though this authority also happens to control cricket, and probably where you get the idea private leagues are trying to kill cricket just because they're not endorsed by national boards.

Those behind the ICL don't care a damn if they destroy the game, they are only interested in getting cricket for their Zee network in the short-term.

Some of those in national cricket boards don't care about the game either, but there's also plenty of people involved who do.

 

[Richard]

Name one that isn't.

CA and the ECB.

There are people in both boards who care deeply about the game. I'd imagine there are in all other boards, too, even if it's not always apparent.

The game would not have survived if there weren't.

 

[chaminda_00]

CA and the ECB.

There are people in both boards who care deeply about the game. I'd imagine there are in all other boards, too, even if it's not always apparent.

The game would not have survived if there weren't.

Considering some of the stuff the CA have done recently I doubt that. Also if there wasn't a high level of self interest within the ECB. Why else would have be considering the Standford Twenty20 proposal.

Yeah they are not as bad as some other boards, but they aren't that great themselves. I think you fill find in most boards the people that actually care about the game either have little say or are out numbered. At the end of day you have to be power hungry and have a lot self interest to get to the top in these types of organisations.

 

[Arjun]

I think you will find that a lot more Indian players and even some current Internationals would join the ICL if their International and domestic careers weren't put on ransom by BCCI if they joined the ICL. It doesn't surprise me that many below par Indian domestic players choice not to join the ICL, even if they got no chance of making the Indian side. There really no turning back for these guys if the join.

Considering Bond and other have played the ICL and now are still allowed to play county cricket. I would expect a few more overseas players to join the ICL and the number will dramtically increase if it was endorced. The English players didn't come back as it clashed with their County schedule. Chris Read himself said he would be happy to go back if it didn't effect his domestic or International career.

You really do under estimated how much your average FC cricketer in NZ, West Indies and Sri Lanka are fed up with getting paid nothing. I know for sure that majority of Sri Lanka A players and fringe Internationals would join the ICL if it was endorsed and they wanted them.

It's not an issue of authority alone. The ICL has a very intrusive schedule, interfering with multiple international events. Any player you'd expect in the ICL, with no ban, would turn it down because he's more keen on playing for his country.

Cricket New Zealand was hit by a players' revolt over pay hike, when they were paid little. One of them, Chris Drum, left the game because he thought he'd earn more from a job as a travel agent than by playing cricket. In fact, all the ICL players whom many consider good enough for their national teams, have issues with their respective boards and joined it in protest. Nobody who's having a good time and values the national cap will join the ICL.

The very appearance and image of the ICL is about sloganeering and lobbying. All their advertisements try to brag and challenge the authorities, without presenting anything definite. In comparison, the IPL only shows what is happening. Even in commentary, we find that the IPL commentators only talk cricket and something off-topic, for a lighter moment- and if anything is left, they try to promote themselves, while ICL commentators do far too much self-promotion. They're forced to do that when they're struggling, and that league isn't getting any attention at all, when (source : TAM) international matches often get TRPs of 8 units and the IPL gets 5 or 6, the ICL gets a paltry 2 and a half.

Why would anyone join such a league? Least of all when its credentials are so dubious? Even though it is banned, they should have tried harder, and done a Packer with his WSC. They couldn't do a thing.

 

[chaminda_00]

It's not an issue of authority alone. The ICL has a very intrusive schedule, interfering with multiple international events. Any player you'd expect in the ICL, with no ban, would turn it down because he's more keen on playing for his country.

Cricket New Zealand was hit by a players' revolt over pay hike, when they were paid little. One of them, Chris Drum, left the game because he thought he'd earn more from a job as a travel agent than by playing cricket. In fact, all the ICL players whom many consider good enough for their national teams, have issues with their respective boards and joined it in protest. Nobody who's having a good time and values the national cap will join the ICL.

The very appearance and image of the ICL is about sloganeering and lobbying. All their advertisements try to brag and challenge the authorities, without presenting anything definite. In comparison, the IPL only shows what is happening. Even in commentary, we find that the IPL commentators only talk cricket and something off-topic, for a lighter moment- and if anything is left, they try to promote themselves, while ICL commentators do far too much self-promotion. They're forced to do that when they're struggling, and that league isn't getting any attention at all, when (source : TAM) international matches often get TRPs of 8 units and the IPL gets 5 or 6, the ICL gets a paltry 2 and a half.

Why would anyone join such a league? Least of all when its credentials are so dubious? Even though it is banned, they should have tried harder, and done a Packer with his WSC. They couldn't do a thing.

Yeah there is no doubt that ICL haven't done things well and have no one else to blame then themselves for a lot of things that have happened in the ICL so far. Things like trying to over sell the products and going for us v BCCI tactic have been stupid.

I don't think comparing it to Packer is really fair the situation is completely different though. Packer saw a major player backlash coming up. He just made the most of it. The push for change isn't as big now. But there is need or players wouldn't be signing regardless if there not big name players.

The big point you seem to be missing though is that is shouldn't be a choice between playing for your country or ICL. Just look at Bond, when he signed he was told that he could still play for NZ, by NZC. His plan all along was to play for NZ and then if they had a break he would play in ICL. Basically the same thing he was planning on doing and has done in past with county sides.

If you take out the choice between country and ICL. There would be a lot of players sign up for the league, regardless of how poor aspects of the league have been run. End of the day would rather play in poorly run league where they get decent money then a league where they get no money. Also if your not getting much money playing in your domestic competition it is probably a sign it not been run that well either.

There is massive need for these type of leagues, until your average domestic player or even your International players from smaller countries get paid a decent wage. There is still a major gap between the top earns and the rest. With stuff like the IPL that gap is just going to get bigger.

There are some major reasons why a mass of players would sign for ICL if the ban was lifted. The only major thing stoping a lot of players signing now is the potential ban from domestic and international cricket.

 

[Sanz]

but more importantly- lack of a proper schedule (why would Flintoff give up his place in an England team to play in ICL when both matches clash?.

Are you always this clueless or getting a degree in BSing ?

IPL schedule is as poor as it can be. It is already 45 degrees in India and the series would have clashed with Pak-Australia (if it were on), needless to say Pak-Bangla series already clashed with it. Aus-WI series is going to be there, NZ-Eng is going to be there too. Some Saffies missed the games as well.

Let's not talk about scheduling, okay because unless ICC creates a special window, Any such league is going to clash with major series, as is evident during this IPL.

 

[Janus]

I get the feeling that alot of people on this board actually don't like the ICL and would probably do anything to get rid of it. Personally I actually accept players rights to choose who they play for as it's important for the future of cricket that the ICC is removed from power and replaced with a less restrictive governing council.

The ICL has to be accepted on the basis that players want to play in it, that's the ultimate endorsement.

 

[Richard]

Considering some of the stuff the CA have done recently I doubt that. Also if there wasn't a high level of self interest within the ECB. Why else would have be considering the Standford Twenty20 proposal.

Yeah they are not as bad as some other boards, but they aren't that great themselves. I think you fill find in most boards the people that actually care about the game either have little say or are out numbered. At the end of day you have to be power hungry and have a lot self interest to get to the top in these types of organisations.

Of course you do, though that's not to say that in the likes of Ian MacLaurin and Tim Lamb there have exclusively been people high up in the ECB who have been entirely self-serving. Neither of these two were faultless, but I have absolutely no doubt they cared about cricket in general, and especially the welfare of the game in this country.

As I said, though - if people who cared about the game were completely outnumbered in all cricket-boards, there's no way the game would still exist - it'd have eaten itself long ago.

 

[Richard]

it's important for the future of cricket that the ICC is removed from power and replaced with a less restrictive governing council.

If the current I$C$C has power stripped from it, those gaining power instead (the BCCI, for instance) are likely to do an even worse job.

 

[Janus]

If the current I$C$C has power stripped from it, those gaining power instead (the BCCI, for instance) are likely to do an even worse job.

I was thinking more along the lines of FIFA at the time but that's a bad example as UEFA call the shots there so...

It sounded nice to get rid of the ICC and the Boards but it reality it would be like cutting off your arms. Moving on...

 

[slugger]

If the current I$C$C has power stripped from it, those gaining power instead (the BCCI, for instance) are likely to do an even worse job.

In all fairness it seems your concern is BCCI will yeild the power "if" the ICC was removed and there concern may to some degree place a bigger priorty on indian cricket... when in essense this what the ICC has done for the majority of the time in re: to aust. and eng cricket.

 

[Richard]

The BCCI already yield power and have done for a fair while, and everyone knows it.

It's not a "concern" as such - we know there will be much to deplore about it, as most know the BCCI have historically tended to be a poor bunch. I$C$C have rarely been much better.

The simple point I am making is that only rarely at a macro or micro scale has cricket been controlled by those with excellent intentions.

 

[weldone]

oops, i thought the thread talks about IPL and so voted 'yes'....discount my vote guys...endorsement of ICL by ICC...no ways...I believe ICL should never be bigger than it is now...otherwise the co-existence of IPL and ICL may kill international cricket which I don't want ever to happen