Dangers of the IPL
Watching England's warm-up match at the quiet and picturesque University Oval in seems a million miles away from the storm which seems to be brewing in the world game.
Today's editorial in the local newspaper the makes very interesting reading. The headline is "Hit for six" and it is a strongly worded warning about what it describes are the dangers of the .
The editorial starts "New Zealand cricket should be as anxious as an opener about to face Brett Lee or Shoaib Akhtar: the future of the game as we know it is in jeopardy. If all goes well, the Indian Premier League will slot into the international calender, our top players will be handsomely rewarded and cricket will be reinvigorated. However, a very different outcome is possible, one in which New Zealand suffers badly."
Because so far English players have not been involved in the IPL it is easy for us to watch on without too many concerns. The player auction was a lot of fun wasn't it … seeing all those top names playing Twenty20 cricket will be spectacular won't it. But try looking at the IPL through New Zealand eyes.
Already they look to have lost one of their star players Shane Bond to the so-called rebel Twenty20 league the ICL. It is a real shame that Bond will not be playing in the forthcoming Test series - in fact would you believe he has never played in a Test against England.
Then one of New Zealand's more successful batsman Scott Styris announces he's retiring from Test cricket and will be taking part in the IPL. And how about the scenario which looks likely to present itself in April. at the start of our summer and it now looks very possible that they will start the trip without three leading players, including their captain.
Daniel Vettori will be playing for Delhi in the IPL and is believed to have had discussions with about arriving in England just 10 days before the first Test. This would allow him to play in six IPL matches. Vettori was signed for over Β£300,000 in last week's auction. Jacob Oram and Brendon McCullum received even higher bids and not surprisingly are also keen to play as many matches as they can in India before they join the tour.
Whilst it is naΓ―ve not to understand why these players have taken the opportunity to join the league, if New Zealand do arrive in England without Vettori, McCullum and Oram it will surely have a detrimental effect on the tour.
It is true that the Kiwi players do not earn the same amount as the likes of English or Australian cricketers, but it just doesn’t seem right for them to put the IPL before a major Test tour.
It is interesting that today the chief executive Malcolm Speed has said that he believes in the future an annual window can be found in cricket's calendar to play the IPL. But there must be a danger that by shoe horning the Twenty20 league into an already crowded programme, players' form and fitness will struggle.
Top players who accept the IPL money will have to be very careful not to complain about player burn-out or cricket fans may start to lose sympathy.
Today's Otago Daily Times editorial accepts that the IPL could bring many positives to the game. It states, "Successful franchises and the whirlwind attraction of Twenty20 could broaden cricket's appeal. New Zealanders could eventually follow Bangalore, Mumbai or Chennai and their international cast of stars - a little like they support Manchester United, Arsenal or Liverpool."
But again it sounds a warning about the future "in a tightened calendar the bigger boys in playing numbers and influence - India , Australia and England - may be reluctant to travel to New Zealand. And will the lack of depth in New Zealand cricket be further exposed if players depart for India? Will New Zealand domestic cricket be further ravaged by IPL commitments?"
It is difficult to predict just what effect the IPL will have on the long-term future of the game. But just because it has yet to fully play its part in the English game we must watch what is happening with caution.
We know that those behind the IPL would love to have a Flintoff or a Pietersen joining their ranks of international stars - and it could well be possible in the future without a detrimental effect on our game. But would we accept one of our top players giving up Test cricket to chase the money swirling around in the Indian leagues?
We would love to hear your views on this subject - and listen out for a fascinating IPL discussion during our coverage of the first Test in New Zealand which starts at 2100 GMT on 4 March. Send your views to the TMS blog or e-mail tms@bbc.co.uk. And look out for more details on the Test coverage coming here shortly.
°δ΄Η³Ύ³Ύ±π²Τ³Ω²υΜύΜύPost your comment
It is just the way the world seems to be going, be it right or wrong, the lure of the Β£, or $, or whatever money is being waved in front of a players nose these days, being seen as a celebrity seems more important and infinately more financially rewarding than merely being an 'England Player'
What with the English players inability to string together any kind of performance, I do not imagine that the franchises would be fighting each other to snap them up, and even if the English players were permitted to join, would we not see a group of players coming through the ranks who wanted to play for the 3 Lions rather than the Delhi Dynamites, or the Bangalore bisons, or whatever it is they are called. At best this is something that will be adopted into the annual calender, at worst it will highlight just how pointless and frivalous an exercise this is. Be it England, New Zealand or whoever, it may just be the beginning of pride being restored in the National games.
Or maybe not.......
Complain about this comment
It's easy to criticise pro sportsmen choosing money over "on-the-fiel" success / glory when ur an accountant, computer programmer, etc.
But if I was a NZ cricketer (or rugby player!) I would do exactly as they have done and make as much money as possible in the last few years of their careers...
Complain about this comment
I didn’t see anything wrong with the IPL, it was about to come at some point..
Premier league is doing precisely that in football..and if county cricket could afford, they would do the same (buy international players to an extent that they would consider retirement from national careers). India, at the moment, have willingness and the money to do this innovative thing. Football today is much bigger than it was 20 yrs ago..same impact I think will be on cricket…but people may have other opinions..
Complain about this comment
We've been here before, with Kerry Packer and again with the unlicensed tours to South Africa in the days of apartheid. The only way to stop it is to pay the players as much as the tycoons are offering--if you can. Honour, duty, and patriotism may have worked for the old-style amateurs, but the lure of the rupee trumps the lot for modern-day professionals.
Complain about this comment
Fantastic news for England should wrap up the series against a mediocre side such as New Zealand home and away 3-0, come on Mighty England...we just need to turn up...and play and roll over these kiwis for a successful tour
Complain about this comment
I would be happy to see the IPL concept expanded. Why not play 50-over one-dayers and even 3 or 4-day matches in the IPL teams? The best players in the world will learn their trade in the most competitive environment and, if selected to play for their country occasionally they will undoubtedly be proud to pull on the baggy green or the three lions.
International cricket is becoming an irrelevance, so much is played these days. Cut down the number of tests, definitely cut down the number of ODIs and ridiculous Twenty20s. Yes, domestic cricket in nearly every country will suffer, but if the IPL is successful, the standard of the (far less frequent) international competitions is bound to improve, and everyone might even be interested in the outcome. You only have to look at the football English Premier League to see this.
(And you'll be able to watch it all on Sky or Foxtel or whatever. When was the last time you watched a 4-day county game on the box?)
Complain about this comment
I would be happy to see the IPL concept expanded. Why not play 50-over one-dayers and even 3 or 4-day matches in the IPL teams? The best players in the world will learn their trade in the most competitive environment and, if selected to play for their country occasionally they will undoubtedly be proud to pull on the baggy green or the three lions.
International cricket is becoming an irrelevance, so much is played these days. Cut down the number of tests, definitely cut down the number of ODIs and ridiculous Twenty20s. Yes, domestic cricket in nearly every country will suffer, but if the IPL is successful, the standard of the (far less frequent) international competitions is bound to improve, and everyone might even be interested in the outcome. You only have to look at the football English Premier League to see this.
(And you'll be able to watch it all on Sky or Foxtel or whatever. When was the last time you watched a 4-day county game on the box?)
Complain about this comment
Update:
New Zealand lost another player to the Indian Twenty20 leagues on thursday. Lou Vincent , their talented but troubled batsman, has had his contract with New Zealand Cricket terminated after signing with the rebel ICL league.
Also in answer to Mr Holford-Strevens (point 4) I can see why this reminds us of the Packer revolution although I would argue that the vast majority of players are paid far more these days than when World Series Cricket was introduced. It is sides like New Zealand who are most at risk where players earn a good amount , but nothing compared to the silly money being offered in India. In answer to Nigel the cricket tragic (point 6) Although I agree that the volume of international cricket is too great , personally I don't think an expanded IPL concept is a good one. Surely what cricket lovers really want to see is battles like the Ashes or India against Pakistan , or dare I say it India v Australia ! Do we really want endless "best of" teams playing against each other ? Look at how badly the ICC Super Test and Super ODI series went, the majority of people just did care who won and do you think players were as bothered about those games as playing in an Ashes series for example.
Complain about this comment
I think that it was pretty inevitable that there would be a step change in the value of cricket. After all it is years since Packer and compared to other sports, cricket has lagged miles behind in terms of commercial exploitation. This is a game that goes on all day (50 overs) or five days and even with 20:20 games 3 hours, or twice as long as football. No wonder advertisers wish to climb on board, especially in the sub continent. Of course,as usual, the establishment is in a tizz about it, after all it's such a traditional game. What they forget, and always do, is that the game is about the participants not the administrators. Would you rather watch the IPL or England v Bangladesh at Durham or, God forbid, Swansea.
Complain about this comment
Some good points, Nick England
But as for me, I would rather watch England v Bangladesh in Swansea, actually I would rather watch England v Bangladesh in Swansea than most Premier League football matches...
Complain about this comment
It all about the Money and the day will come where nobody will be interested in traditional test cricket. IPL is a money squeezing machine. with this we might lose talented players in international arena and opting for so called money IPL.
Complain about this comment
for me it doesn't make any difference; whether it's IPL or ICL or County or domestic or England vs Bangladesh or vs NZ ...i will be busy in my own world, so excuse me ...!!
Complain about this comment
I think one point people have so far overlooked is how unfair, and stupid, the banning of players signed up for the ICL is. NZ have only themselves to blame for losing Shane Bond.
Complain about this comment
I agree with Santosh when he questions the banning of players by their own national cricket authorities. The ICC and national administrators are always keen to line their pockets whenever possible. Take for instance the ridiculously long World Cup last year. How much more advertsing money was made than if it had been a month long tournament? If the ICC is really serious about promoting the game globally, it would ratify the IPL and set aside time in the global calendar. If this means that Australia can't tour Pakistan in March/April because they have had an extended "mini-series" against India and Sri Lanka in their summer, then so be it.
Twenty 20 has finally been lauded globally as a great innovation on the game and one that could realistically crack the US market. Why not embrace the latest high-profile offering and put it to good use, rather than banning the world's best players from representing their country and further damaging the game?
Complain about this comment
Surely the best solution here would be for the BCCI to ratify the ICL rather than to ban it. It is providing an opportunity for more people to make a living from cricket and not costing the BCCI a rupee. Would they not be better to negotiate with the ICL to find a solution that is best for cricket. The current situation with the banning of players is certainly not for the betterment of cricket. It is time for the BCCI to start putting cricket first rather than their misplaced pride. It is also time for the ICC to be proactive for a change and to do something positive rather than sit by and allow this situation to happen. By banning players you are taking away the opportunity for them to play cricket and for us cricket followers and supporters (who fund the game indirectly as the target of the advertisers and TV companies)to enjoy seeing them play for our State teams or country. Ultimately it is us fans who are the losers out of this.
Complain about this comment
Having just spent a week in Kolkatta ( Calcutta ), it seems absurd that this much money is being spent on Cricket when half the population seem to be living in abstract poverty.
Complain about this comment
This is a chance for national teams to "bring on" more new talent than the same fifteen or twenty players that they rely on time after time after all there is safety in numbers.
The IPL can only poach so many.
Complain about this comment
I don't mind the idea of the IPL, per se, but it should not be played at the expense of "traditional" cricket. By that I mean, not at the expense of test, international or county cricket. If, as seems likely, the ICC slot the IPL into a place in the calendar, then all well and good. I'm not particularly a fan of the idea of "best of" teams, but with them money invlolved, it's going to be impossible to prevent players wanting to go. Personally, I prefer the idea of maintaining the traditions that cricket is based on, that is, players playing for their county and country. Being Irish, I have no county side, but will travel over to England a few times a year to test matches or some county games. For me, there's nothing like sitting watching a game of cricket on a sunny summer's day. I think it's important that this not be lost.
For that reason, the IPL should certainly not be expanded and I hope it isn't. The idea of players disappearing off to play franchised cricket would be hugely detrimental to national sides and eventually ruin the game. If all the top players are off playing in India, the quality of county cricket necessarily suffers, meaning that there is no theatre fro players to develop.
Test cricket is the pinacle of the game and should always be kept as such. Playing for your country in a test match should be the greatest aspiration of any player (I also agree that the number of internationals now is silly. India playing 7! ODI's last year on their England tour was ridiculous).
The IPL may be the way cricket is going, but I was delighted today to see Pietersen say that he holds the idea of loyalty to the county game in higher esteem than the almighty rupee. Sentimental I know, but it's nice to see that there are still some professionals out there who remember the reason they started playing cricket in the first place...for the love of the game.
Complain about this comment
I don't mind the idea of the IPL, per se, but it should not be played at the expense of "traditional" cricket. By that I mean, not at the expense of test, international or county cricket. If, as seems likely, the ICC slot the IPL into a place in the calendar, then all well and good. I'm not particularly a fan of the idea of "best of" teams, but with them money invlolved, it's going to be impossible to prevent players wanting to go. Personally, I prefer the idea of maintaining the traditions that cricket is based on, that is, players playing for their county and country. Being Irish, I have no county side, but will travel over to England a few times a year to test matches or some county games. For me, there's nothing like sitting watching a game of cricket on a sunny summer's day. I think it's important that this not be lost.
For that reason, the IPL should certainly not be expanded and I hope it isn't. The idea of players disappearing off to play franchised cricket would be hugely detrimental to national sides and eventually ruin the game. If all the top players are off playing in India, the quality of county cricket necessarily suffers, meaning that there is no theatre fro players to develop.
Test cricket is the pinacle of the game and should always be kept as such. Playing for your country in a test match should be the greatest aspiration of any player (I also agree that the number of internationals now is silly. India playing 7! ODI's last year on their England tour was ridiculous).
The IPL may be the way cricket is going, but I was delighted today to see Pietersen say that he holds the idea of loyalty to the county game in higher esteem than the almighty rupee. Sentimental I know, but it's nice to see that there are still some professionals out there who remember the reason they started playing cricket in the first place...for the love of the game.
Complain about this comment
The IPL has some parallels with Kerry Packer's World Series Cricket in 1977. I think it is interesting that one-day cricket was the upstart at the time (it was still relatively new at international level, the first cricket World Cup was in 1975, 4 years after the first ODI). Kerry Packer 'sexed up' cricket to try to make money.
The IPL, similarly, have found what marketing types would call a 'concept' that appeals: namely, a tournament that takes the most popular form of cricket, and pits evenly matched teams against one another.
The cricketing establishment would do well to consider that they are the cause of the position they are in. By demanding that teams play too many ODIs they have devalued the 'product'. Someone else has stepped in and provided what the viewing public wants.
Overall the IPL is going to do some damage, but I, for one, will be laying the blame at the door of BCCI, for putting their own greedy aims ahead of the needs of cricket.
Complain about this comment