IPL good or bad for cricket?

Ishtylish cricketer · #1 April 7, 2008, 02:02 PM

I have come across number or people who are criticising IPL without actually giving me any logical explaination for it. I was wondering what do our fellow BC members have to say about the inaugural IPL event?

The way I see it (though most of my friends didn't see it that way), IPL is in primitive stage and they are trying to arrange an agreement with ICC so that no ICC matches conflict with IPL which would put to rest what most people think IPL is doing: in plain english taking away players and preventing them from representing their own country. Second criticism is that India is monopolising cricket. True but it's a business and those have the means to exploit the resources will. Unfortunately, there's no room for sympathy, in business. Also, if you look at all major sports, international matches are not played that often and it is the franchise based leagues that rule these sports. In all major sports international events are dominated by few countries just like in cricket. In soccer, African nations don't complain that EPL, Series A, Bundes Liga, etc monopolise the sport because stars from African nations are getting the money as well. To me it looks like cricket fell behind from other major sports by sticking to playing this many international games in a season and can probably catch up to other sports by having something like IPL. I mean BCCI and I did it because they can do it as most of the other cricketing nations don't have the monetary capacity to invest in cricket nor the interest to do it. I hate watching ICC matches because there's hardly any matches that goes to full 50 in ODIs or to last over in tests. Obviously I watch Bangladesh's games and teams I like because of the players I like but if you put all the stars together for a league event it makes for a better game.

As I found out through talking to my friends, most people don't welcome changes even if it can bring positive changes. I mean my Idea may sound very radical but even if the IPL wanted to have test matches against the individual teams I would welcome that too just because the quality of cricket is going to be better than watching Australia and SA dominate against all other countries for the most part. Getting aside from my radical ideas to people I've talked to don't realize that this as a 5 week tournament only! There will still be plenty of ICC matches but IPL if is successful lesser known players from other countries even from Canada for instance could have a chance to earn a decent living from cricket. IPL matches will be watched by people from all cricketing countries which it itself is good for the sport and is not the case for ICC matches unless it's a big event like world cup. Of course India will benefit from this but so do other franchise based leagues. NBA, NHL, etc which include players from all over the world but USA, Canada benefit the most because they are able to leaders in those sports but players from other countries who would make less money by playing in their own country appreciate these leagues because of the level of competition, money and they are better able to develop their games with proper coaches, nutrition programs, and have the privilege to learn the game from the best players in the world with whom they may be playing or opposing. 20/20 in general allows them to compete with and against some of the best players in a format that is designed to be fun and competitive.

ICC matches results with ever growing technology and coaching depend on how good rich is the infrastructure, cricketing structure, coaching, facilities, etc are of a country to develop cricketers who can compete at the highest level. In other words there's a strong positive correlation with or how much money is spent on cricket (or generally speaking GDP) and how good of a test playing country is. Srilanka is perhaps the only exception and their rise in cricket to me can be attributed to having good coaching and cricketing structure. However, in a franchise based system those things will be there for every team thus, the result will depend on performances on the field only because theoretically all other things are equal. I think these matches will also be closely contested given that most teams have star players in all aspects of the game so as a fan of cricket I will be interested in those which is why I will support IPL. My favourite team is Mumbai. I'm a big Tendulkar fan.

Murad · #2 April 7, 2008, 02:06 PM

Bad for cricket. But good for the players bank accounts.

Tigers_eye · #3 April 7, 2008, 03:30 PM

I c,
If you use multiple paragraphs then the post would easily be read. Right now I doubt you would have any takers to read it all at one go.

From Bangladeshis prospective, IPL is good for Indian Cricket and fans. Not good for BD cricket.

Ishtylish cricketer · #4 April 7, 2008, 04:48 PM

Thanks Tiger's eyes. I fixed it. But why is bad from Bangladeshis prospectives and for Bd cricket?

BANFAN · #5 April 8, 2008, 01:10 AM

I havn't heard any criticism of IPL yet, just hear of appreciations all around. The current indian criticism is not for IPL, it's for the players instead of practice/rest going for IPL shooting. Infact many boards seem to be inspired by IPL idea and have their own league. Any tournament of cricket is good for cricket, because it gives chance for more and more players. How can a game of cricket be bad for cricket?

We in bangladesh are not at all affected in +/- any way. As we have no participation there yet, other than 01 so far. But in the long term if we remain to be excluded like this, our players will be missing a chance of competitive cric as well as money. Why not BD opens up the domestic competition for foreign players and sponsors?

nobody · #6 April 8, 2008, 01:24 AM

IPL would be a killer for cricket. People like Afridi would no basic would be hero; while Taufiq Umar a technically correct player would be villain, Look at other premiar league - how that is destroying soccer. With all the money they are making Gerrand (BTW I am a pool fan), Lampard a world beater - which they are not; while Xavi, Samir Nasri who are far better player technically a nobody.
For Bangladesh it would be a suicide. We would never be No1 if we allow this circus. For the sake of cricket BCB should refrain from associating with this form of cricket and request media not to telecast it.

*AsifTheManRahman* · #7 April 8, 2008, 01:30 AM

Let's face it - cricket's not always going to be a 5-day game. Heck it's not even going to last 50 overs. People won't have time for something as long and slow-paced as that. So like it or not, the IPL is the beginning of a revolution that will change cricket forever.

Is it bad? I don't necessarily think so. Sure, I wouldn't want to give up watching Mushfiq score a patient hundred in a swinger's (don't laugh you perverts!) paradise, but the shorter the game, the more interest it'll generate. We'll see teams with brown, white, yellow and black people fighting as a unit - the diversity will definitely help the game grow. That's where the world's headed, and the game should follow.

Come to think of it, world cups would generate more craze that way too (as international games would become a rare commodity), as opposed to being a dull affair with a bunch of officials who don't know what the bleep they're doing.

auntu · #8 April 8, 2008, 02:15 PM

very bad

today BCCI is doing tommorow CA, day after tommorow PCB.........

going on and on....

billah · #9 April 8, 2008, 02:30 PM

IPL is not, and will never be significant enough to have a long term impact on cricket. This type of stuff come and go in every professional sport.

Ishtylish cricketer · #10 April 9, 2008, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billah
IPL is not, and will never be significant enough to have a long term impact on cricket. This type of stuff come and go in every professional sport.

Billah saab, 20/20 is here to stay. It puts fans to seats. It's exciting, unpredictable, short everything that all the other sports have. I love test cricket just as much as everyone else but I am tired of seeing domination by 2 countries only. Let's split up talent make it competitive and I'm sure all the nay sayers would come around on this league. To me cricket is finally catching up to other sports where the league based games are the most occuring events and not international games. International games are the ultimate so they should be played a lot less. Put it this way, should you eat Steak everyday, even though you want to? You won't because you'll get fat and die sooner. Cricket needs a balance. I don't have any problem with India organising this because they are not choosing players based on race, religion, etc. It's simply based on your value as a cricketer. Just like NHL, NBA, NFL, etc. IPL won't detract from ICC because it's 5 weeks tournament kinda like UEFA or March Madness. The marketing is done by movie stars, I mean non cricket followers like my parents may even watch that. I want cricket the sport to grow and ICC with it's crap marketing and country vs. games has not been able to do that so, give someone else (India) a chance. I know it will be hard to cheer for a city from another country but cheer for the city that represents Bd players or your favourite player. The product won't be bad that much I can tell you.

Ishtylish cricketer · #11 April 9, 2008, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AsifTheManRahman
Let's face it - cricket's not always going to be a 5-day game. Heck it's not even going to last 50 overs. People won't have time for something as long and slow-paced as that. So like it or not, the IPL is the beginning of a revolution that will change cricket forever.

Is it bad? I don't necessarily think so. Sure, I wouldn't want to give up watching Mushfiq score a patient hundred in a swinger's (don't laugh you perverts!) paradise, but the shorter the game, the more interest it'll generate. We'll see teams with brown, white, yellow and black people fighting as a unit - the diversity will definitely help the game grow. That's where the world's headed, and the game should follow.

Come to think of it, world cups would generate more craze that way too (as international games would become a rare commodity), as opposed to being a dull affair with a bunch of officials who don't know what the bleep they're doing.

Exactly right. IPL is the coles notes version of cricket. Bring those fans to cricket first then they will learn about test cricket and will be interested in playing. One of the reasons Canada and US is not interested in that sport because they simply don't understand it and it's too long for them. Give them baby stuff first and then introduce them to the real stuff.

Tigers_eye · #12 April 9, 2008, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ishtylish cricketer
Thanks Tiger's eyes. I fixed it. But why is bad from Bangladeshis prospectives and for Bd cricket?

I am from old school. To me the meaning "test" is test of patience. Total opposite of T20 cricket where patience gets you no where.

We (BD team) are good at T20 cricket. Top to bottom all aggressive players who can score in a hurry. They have no understanding of patience and building an innings. They have no understanding of building a partnership. That is what cricket is all about in my opinion.

In test we got a victory in 50+ test. If you want to see a second victory in test then these young boys need to be banned from playing T20 cricket for the next 5 years. For any player it is not easy to switch from T20 mode to Test mode when they don't have patience. One has to understand the game on how it is played. De Villers is also an aggressive player. Yet he scored a double century in foreign conditions. That shows the understanding he has of the game. Our 20-23 boys don't have the understanding. With Participating in IPL this understanding will hindered more.

Our team has no real leadership. The pupet leader captain Ashraful has no patience. How does one expect the team to have patience? Everyone will follow the leader. Giving bullsh*t excuses of team rule does not change the fact that he is averaging 4 against Pakistan in ODIs. You think he has any power to ask better performance from Rokibul or Shakib or Riyad when his is the worst?

One can not learn Patience in T20 cricket. That is why I am against BD players participating in IPL.

As for Indian players, if they want to play test cricket in T20 mode more power to them. If they want their youngsters to learn T20 only and focus their target I have no problem with that. Their domestic structure is strong enough to produce patient players whereas ours is not. We can not just make our domestic cricket stronger over night. This take time and proper processes put in place. Resources need to be utilized properly.

Ishtylish cricketer · #13 April 9, 2008, 06:16 PM

TE, I was trying to demystify those who are saying IPL is going to kill cricket because India will get the money and no other country will get any money...well that's true for those 5 weeks only but on the other side, in 5 weeks period at most there's maybe room for 2-3 teams touring meaning potential revenue loss for 2-3 countries but is the loss of one tour for a country that significant loss of income? In other words would taking a tour of the calender for a country make them broke or affect them gravely in terms of revenue? Even if you think it is the players from all cricketing nations because of whom the game exist, don't have an issue with this, so why should we? Fact of the matter is ICC's business model has failed drastically for number of years now. In order to attract more people into the game something needs to be done.

TE, test is still the ultimate and you don't have to tell me that. My dream in high school was to rep Canada at some point, could have in U19 but I had labs at the same as the prelim-practices so couldn't attend the practices. I used to practice for hours after school perfecting my drives, pulls, cuts, sweeps, you name it and I learned those from a professional player...my favourite player currently is Ian Bell and before that was Marvan Atapattu so I am just as old school as you are in the sense that I like test cricket and appreciate those who play proper cricket rather than slash and smash t20. I originally didn't like t20 like many but was sold after realizing the success it will have. I think people need to be broad minded and welcome changes if they bring forth good results.

My point all along was that IPL will be watched by all cricketing countries people rather than 2 countries between whom the ICC events are played and it can possibly attract an audience that cricket never had before just because it was too long for them. T20 brings in those who just understand 6, 4 wicket, win and loss.

It isn't India's or ICC's job to produce good cricketers for Bangladesh, it's BCB's job. ICC can give the money but how that money gets used is not their problem as far as I understand. Bd's development in cricket is hindered by the lack of coaching at the grass root level and lack of 1st class games so they don't have the cricketing basics to succeed at the top level. If other players from different countries can play all formats why can't our players? I mean older players don't play because they are not quick enough for the game not because T20 would detract skills from their test game. Bd's players are so young but not many were approached by IPL just because their quality is so poor. Sadly, there's one Bd player who's playing in the IPL and he doesn't play tests so Bd's losing nothing.

If the game appeals to those who've learned to keep their head still pre and post delivery, were taught to keep hands back against slower deliveries, learned the use of forward press against sharp turners, taking off stump guard against offies, head slightly ahead of knee for off drives, etc (ie. those who play the game competitively or understand the game well) than that sport will not attract a large audience. T20 makes cricket idiot proof and will make games more competitive and is geared to deliver good entertainment for everyone.

You know the beauty of arguably the best sport in the world soccer lies in its simplicity. Cricket is just as simple of a game if you reduce it to the lowest common denominator, bat for score, field to save runs or catch and bowl to pick up wicket and it should be that simple for the general fans. Ian Chappell once said that english guys make cricket very complicated when it shouldn't be. The format of 20/20 almost takes away the possibility being all out for a team so you can go at the bowling from ball one and even if your team loses wicket in the process no team is ever out of the game. The unpredictibility appeals to me and those who are sold by 20/20. Unpredictibility is not good in work, studies, or in other life matters but in sports it's very appealing. If you bring the best players together anywhere they will produce competitive games more so than ICC events. Teams like ours Bd and Zimbawae have almost no chance against any country under normal circumstances. It gets boring watching us struggle mightily against others or others dominating us. I can watch other teams that's true but IPL provides the opportunity to watch cricket in the same wavelength as NHL, NBA where players from different countries play together. I was taught to support good cricket so I will support IPL.