-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
IPL vs state
- Thread starter brockley
- Start date
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
The other issue for the IPL is that existing domestic state contracts in Australia, specifically states that they can't play for any other domestic sides within their seasons, without the permission of the domestic sides. Pretty sure it is the same rule in NZ, as NSW had to get Otago permission (well we paid Otago) for McCullum to play for us, not NZC.
They changed these rules a couple years back to stop players leaving to play the ICL for a couple weeks and then come back or leave early for county cricket. For players that don't have CA contracts, its the state boards you need premission to play within their contract period. Pretty sure most state sides will tell the IPL to get ****ed unless the players made a requested like Nannes in the CL this year.
They had the same problems with the county players last season, as they had to get permission from county boards from non ECB contracted players. The current domestic contracts already counter this.
They changed these rules a couple years back to stop players leaving to play the ICL for a couple weeks and then come back or leave early for county cricket. For players that don't have CA contracts, its the state boards you need premission to play within their contract period. Pretty sure most state sides will tell the IPL to get ****ed unless the players made a requested like Nannes in the CL this year.
They had the same problems with the county players last season, as they had to get permission from county boards from non ECB contracted players. The current domestic contracts already counter this.
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
I dont know who is right or wrong here. I guess it all depends on what the contracts state.
If the IPL contracts are exclusive and the State/Province/County contracts are exclusive then one has to ask why players were allowed to sign both contracts.
If the IPL feels the players are contractually obliged to play for them then I am with them, if the IPL is trying to shoehorn in clauses left out of the original contract then they are at fault.
It will all come out soon enough, until then I reserve judgment
If the IPL contracts are exclusive and the State/Province/County contracts are exclusive then one has to ask why players were allowed to sign both contracts.
If the IPL feels the players are contractually obliged to play for them then I am with them, if the IPL is trying to shoehorn in clauses left out of the original contract then they are at fault.
It will all come out soon enough, until then I reserve judgment
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
Yep I agree.
I was under the impression that is exactly what the IPL was trying to do.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Yes thats what they are trying to do. They did it before with the banning of players who played for ICL which affected your NZ, PAK & Bang teams mainly.
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
Maybe, I dont know what the players signed though
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
I highly unlike for players involved in STRONG state sides they would pefer their IPL sides over their domestic team, unless they player himself requested to play for IPL side as Nannes did in Champions league.
Thats why i hope players rebel & stick to their domestic teams & cripple the IPL - since the IPL would be nothing without the international stars.
If the state players don't play ipl with players already away from ipl,ipl could well fold or whimper,without foreign players.
Seriously this could end in court state contracts vs ipl contracts.
On another point brad hodge and his age 35 he would have to take the money.
Also what helps you get picked more for national cricket ipl or state cricket,could come down to that.
At least its one thing shane harwood doesn't have to worry about
Seriously this could end in court state contracts vs ipl contracts.
On another point brad hodge and his age 35 he would have to take the money.
Also what helps you get picked more for national cricket ipl or state cricket,could come down to that.
At least its one thing shane harwood doesn't have to worry about
Last edited:
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
Precisely the point, and I suspect nobody on this forum does.
Hasn't stopped the usual suspects from posting their usual rubbish though.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
The IPL's quite right as well.
Players are very handsomely rewarded by their franchises for playing in the IPL, the IPL is quite right to insist on full commitment from those who have signed contracts.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Haa since you dont have the balls to call my name, i'll answer. I never said i know what the players signed either. I said it would be highley unlikely that a player involved in a STRONG local domestic team i.e Watson (NSW) vs Rajastan Royals or Bravo (Trinidad) vs (Mumbai Indians) for eg would not play for their domestic team vs their IPL team. In the event that both these teams have to play in Champions League & they have to choose a side.
Thats why i say i hope players prefer their domestic sides, if IPL bannes them it will only cripple the IPL - since without international players the IPL would be crap.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
I didn't mention names as I was referring to more than one person, but if the cap fits...
I personally couldn't give 2 hoots about which domestic team these player's represent, seeing as the biggest name stars tend to not play domestically anyway, thus making it a moot point I would suggest.
I personally couldn't give 2 hoots about which domestic team these player's represent, seeing as the biggest name stars tend to not play domestically anyway, thus making it a moot point I would suggest.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Well isn't the IPL & CL aim to give domestic cricket, teams & local players worldwide more of a high profile?. So if this idiotic contract rule comes in, its just breaking up domestic teams just for sake of money.
If they want to impose this rule, scrap the Champions League.
You really hate the BCCI, IPL and Modi don't you?
As it seems to be a recurring theme thus far, lets use Bradley Hodge as an example. We all know he's a great FC played and an even better T/20 player, and that Kolkata would want him available for every IPL game. Similarly, Victoria would want him available for every game as well because he is one of their key batsmen. I would expect a domestic contract to be exclusive from October through March at least, which keeps Hodge playing for Victoria whilst allowing him to go over and play IPL and County Cricket. Then, I would assume that his IPL contract is exclusive during the IPL window.
Now, the wording of 'IPL Window' could be crucial. Is it stated to be for the duration of the IPL tournament (from Date1 to Date2), or is it left vague without set dates? If it has a start/finish date, then surely Hodge would make sure he's free to play a Shield final. Would he seriously give that up to play a couple of T20s?
But if its vague, and Modi determines the window to be any time IPL-sanctioned cricket is played, then you could have serious issues. If an IPL Champions League (Presuming Kolkata is in and Victoria isn't) game overlaps with a Shield game, you have 2 exclusive contracts fighting each other, with both parties having a legal case to have Brad playing for them.
Surely, Kolkata and Victoria would have to reach a decision, and hopefully Hodge would have a say, common sense would prevail and he'd play for Victoria, whose contract would have been signed pre-IPL. Contracts are so damn complicated at times. Even Yr. 9 Commerce doesn't help.
What's the bet I just made an absolute fool of myself?