Sachin Tendulkar skips West Indies tour

Sachin Tendulkar's decision to skip the West Indies tour altogether (he had already opted out of the limited overs leg) to spend time with his family is bizarre, and unprecedented.

He has so far skipped 3 test tours completely because of injury - Sri Lanka 2001 (fractured toe), Zimbabwe 2005 (not yet fit after elbow surgery) and West Indies 2006 (not yet fit after shoulder tear).

So this would pretty much mean that his last act in a test match in the West Indies was being bowled by Pedro Collins for a brilliant 86, triggering a collapse that ended with West Indies winning the series 2-1.

52.6 Collins to Tendulkar, OUT: Sabina Park erupts! super delivery on the off and cutting in, the ball stayed a touch low, Tendulkar tries to defend it but can't get down in time, the ball crashes into the off and middle stump, the Indian ship is sinking!

His last act in all internationals in the West Indies was being bowled by Dilhara Fernando in the 2007 World Cup, for a blob.

11.3 Fernando to Tendulkar, OUT, and Tendulkar goes! Could this be his last World Cup innings? The ball pitched outside off stump, nipped back, Tendulkar lunged forward, the ball hit the inside edge of the bat and crashed into leg stump, huge huge wicket for Sri Lanka and India are fading away.

My worry isn't about him missing the series, but more about the why. If he wanted to spend time with the family, wouldn't it have made sense to skip the ODIs in West Indies and England, and make himself available for the tests? After all, everyone, including him, bleats on about how test cricket is the ultimate form of the game.

I don't buy the argument that he should have rested from a few IPL games. His side hadn't yet qualified, and by screwing up a few games in a row at the end, they risked not making it to the top 4. As a captain, it was his responsibility to ensure that Mumbai Indians qualified. Remember that they didn't automatically qualify until Deccan Chargers went down last Saturday.

Labels: india, indian premier league, ipl 2011, rest, tendulkar, west indies

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:34 pm | Sledge/Read 179 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Where is the IPL heading?

While I had fervently hoped last year that the number of games would come down so that the tournament could be finished soon, that was a pipe dream considering there's so much money riding on TV rights, etc.

However, I reckoned then that the likes of Hayden, Gilchrist, Kumble, Ganguly, Warne and Murali would not play in IPL 2011. Of the 6, only Warne, Gilchrist and Murali will play. Hayden and Kumble have retired while Ganguly's failure to get anyone to sign him up means that his playing career has effectively ended. Unless, as he exhibited often over the last 20 years, he wriggles out of the situation and surprises everyone.

The main theme at the inaugural IPL auction in 2008 was to get big name players from the same city, state or region that the franchisee had bought the rights for. This was evident when Bangalore went for Anil Kumble & Rahul Dravid, Hyderabad went for VVS Laxman, and to a lesser extent, Kolkata secured Sourav Ganguly's services.

All these players were in their (or nearing) mid-30s and were already at (or close to) the end of their ODI careers.

This year's auction seemed to indicate that franchisees were less interested in creating a fan-base built on the basis of picking in-region players. That's probably why Delhi didn't go for Gambhir, Nehra & Ishant, Bangalore for Dravid & Uthappa and Hyderabad for Laxman.

Are the teams then focussing on building up a team (& fan base?) that will stick around for 3 years together through thick & thin, headed by a few wise heads and driven by impact players?

It's tough to say that, considering Dravid turns 38 tomorrow (happy birthday!), Laxman is 36, Warne is 41, Murali is nearly 39, Gilchrist is 39 and the Duracell/Energizer bunny Tendulkar is nearly 38. How many of these players would even play IPL 2012? Is a year sufficient to create a solid team structure? I'm not sure.

Kochi (Laxman & Murali) and Jaipur (Warne & Dravid) have taken a huge risk. They must hope that the professionalism of these greats rubs off on the younger bunch.

So, is the IPL then moving away from [what seemed to me] a key aspect of its creation, that of a sustainable long-term & loyal fan base for each team, to just creating groups that played together (& were followed) for at most 3 years, only to disband at the next option?

You could argue about it both ways - the number of teams will most likely keep increasing (e.g. Ahmedabad or Baroda, Kanpur, Gwalior or Indore, etc.). Hence, it is only fair that all players are put up for re-auction without any retentions. On the flip side, franchisees & advertisers have spent a fair amount of money in associating a star player to their brand name. It would seem ridiculous for the same player to turn up under a different banner a year later.

Then again, that's not too uncommon anyway, for brand association contracts seem to only be 1 year long ones.

Labels: auction, bcci, india, indian premier league, ipl 2011, lalit modi

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:57 pm | Sledge/Read 7 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

The skeletons tumble out of the BCCI closet

Sharad Pawar's daughter claimed a couple of months ago that her family did not financially benefit from the IPL. The bit to note there is that she did not claim her family was not connected to the IPL at all. What she said was that they did not financially benefit. i.e. their investment was a flop.

That's akin to a burglar claiming that he should have been let off since he had been caught by the police before he stole anything.

When Chirayu Amin was made the interim IPL commissioner after Lalit Modi was sacked, I wondered about the linkages between Shashank Manohar, Sharad Pawar and Chirayu Amin.

The news that Chirayu Amin was part of a consortium led by a company partly owned by Sharad Pawar & family reinforces my belief that there's a serious clean-up act needed in the BCCI.

Now, the only bit of the puzzle that's not yet evident is the fact that Shashank Manohar and Chirayu Amin have a business / family relationship as well.

'Conflict of interest' seems such an archaic term. Maybe we should just call it a 'cabal of interests'.

Louis Brandeis, a member of the US Supreme Court, once wrote in a 1913 edition of "Harper's weekly":

Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.

It's high time the same principles were applied to the BCCI.

It announced earlier this week that there would be no Indian participation in the cricket event at the 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games.

I've got no problems with that. The BCCI is the governing body for cricket, and it is well within its right to identify which tournaments it's contracted players participate in.

However, the BCCI then went on to clarify that the decision was taken since the schedules were made well in advance and that the domestic season would be underway.

This is where I have a problem. Somehow, it seems inconceivable that the BCCI fixes up schedules in advance or adheres to schedules drawn up well in advance doesn't quite.

After all, among other recent achievements, they've tried to tweak around with a scheduled 7 ODI series against Australia, successfully tweaked a 2 test 5 ODI series against New Zealand, agreed to a tour of Zimbabwe at short notice & urgently scheduled multiple series involving Sri Lanka.

It so obviously has something to do with the fact that the BCCI would need to be WADA-compliant for the cricket team to be allowed to play at the Asian Games. After all, if the main side was too busy, it wouldn't have been tough to put together a 2nd XI.

Labels: asian games, bcci, conflict of interest, indian premier league, scheduling, sharad pawar

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:11 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Wanted for Indian cricket: Consistency of selection and a ban on tournaments played in islands

There are far too many reasons floating around for India's exit at the Super Eight stage of the T20 World Cup. No one even mentioned those (IPL, post-match parties, inability to play on bouncy tracks, poor squad selection, etc.) when India beat Afghanistan and South Africa.

By no stretch of imagination were the pitches at Barbados (where India lost to West Indies & Australia) bouncy pitches! They were good all-round wickets. India lost because its batsmen couldn't cope with anything above knee height, because its bowlers had zero ability to pick up wickets and because the fielding was a total joke.

It is a different matter though that the batsmen also struggle when the ball is 'slow and low'. So they can't play anything below ankle height and anything above knee height. Steve Waugh would call that a very huge comfort zone!

As in the 2009 edition, Mahendra Singh Dhoni, bizarrely chose to come in at #5 or #6 although he was in form and among the better batsmen around. Why he continued to persist with promoting an out-of-form and clearly unfit Yuvraj ahead of him was totally beyond comprehension.

The bigger issue though is the total lack of clarity and consistency around selection.

India's selectors keep picking squads for T20 that comprise of largely the same folks who play 50-over ODIs. Given the compressed nature of the T20 game, there is always a huge emphasis on cricketers with at least 2 skills - explosive batting, brilliant fielding and run-choking / wicket-taking bowling. Persisting with chaps like Nehra, Zaheer, Yuvraj (when he is unfit), Harbhajan and Praveen Kumar was really ridiculous.

India's successes in 1983, 1985 (ok, not exactly an ICC event!), 2002 and 2007, and the route to the finals in 2000 & 2003, had significant contributions from the fielding department.

The BCCI had over a year to identify specific players who needed help with playing "bouncy" stuff. When we say 'bouncy' stuff, do remember that it is not even getting close to "chin music"!

The BCCI had at least 4 years to figure out how the tracks in the Caribbean would have played. Was it not important enough? Did it assume that the tracks would be the same as those during the 2007 World Cup or the 4 ODIs in 2009?

Considering that India hadn't played a single game at Barbados over the last 4 years, was it really a surprise that the team was unprepared for the conditions?

Since Jan 2009, 29 players have been selected in India's ODI and T20 squads. That doesn't sound like a huge number, and it may seem like there actually is consistency of selection. But try explaining to the likes of Abhimanyu Mithun, Ashok Dinda, Amit Mishra, Badrinath, Abhishek Nayar, Pragyan Ojha, Ashwin, Virat Kohli, etc. that they have been treated fairly. Notice that with the exception of Kohli, Badri and Nayar, the rest are all bowlers.

This tells us that the 'senior' batsmen in the team are unlikely to get dislodged and any potential claimant to the spot must score a 250 in a 50-over innings or 150 in a 20-over innings to be considered.

Was there clarity around who plays what sort of role? Were Gambhir and Raina expected to bat through the innings? What was the expectation from Yuvraj and Rohit? What was Dhoni's role? If Vijay or Dinesh Karthik got picked, what were they supposed to do? Was Yusuf Pathan only supposed to try to hit every ball for 6 or 4?

Maybe its time for a thorough clean-up. Maybe the players who were picked for the T20 World Cup didn't have the hunger since they'd had it easy. Maybe its time to pick those who do have the hunger.

Forcing the games to be played during day-time hours in the West Indies just to cater to the Indian TV audience turned out to be so farcical after the team's pathetic showing.

The next time around, if the partners & sponsors tried to negotiate telecast timings, the ICC should ask them to take a look at India's recent record before assuming that India would even get to the semi-finals.

More importantly and more pertinently though, the BCCI must put its foot down and insist that ICC tournaments must no longer be held in islands, based on India's past record (Australia-New Zealand: 1992; England: 1975, 1979, 1983, 1998 & 2004; Sri Lanka: 2002 and West Indies: 2007). Of the 7 tournaments, India have been finalists on just 2 occasions and the rest were all major flop shows.

Labels: india, indian premier league, ipl 2010, selection, twenty20, twenty20 world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:47 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Players v/s owners at the IPL

One aspect of the IPL that I've been really curious about is the relationship between the players and the franchise owners.

The first time I thought about it was when Sachin Tendulkar showed interest in having a stake in the Mumbai franchise. At that time, the BCCI did not allow it because it decreed that a playing member couldn't be a shareholder of the team.

It is bizarre that a BCCI official can own stake in an IPL team since Sharad Pawar, as BCCI President, ruled in N Srinivasan's favour. According to Pawar, the franchise bid was by a company and Srinivasan was not a bidder in his individual capacity. Hence, there was no conflict of interest.

Now that argument against having players own equity in the franchise sounds so stupid and outdated. Many organizations, across sectors, provide some sort of equity (sweat or otherwise!), in order to retain and motivate their employees. It makes a lot of sense that players have equity in the franchise.

All that Sachin Tendulkar had to do was to setup a company in someone else's name, and convince Mukesh-bhai and Nina-ben to sell some of their stake to the new company. Alternately, he would need to have a relative own equity in say Teesta Retail Pvt. Ltd.. I'd hardly be surprised if he was not a shareholder, directly or indirectly, in Mumbai Indians.

It does seem to me, based on a couple of reports & interviews in the last 24 hours or so, that the team owners exercise a disproportionate influence on the team, especially on cricketing matters.

Were Chennai Super Kings' selection & on-field decisions influenced by an astrologer who Srinivasan and Srikkanth fervently believe in?

Dhoni does brush it under the carpet, saying that superstition is part of cricket. I think NDTV had an interview with Hayden yesterday, where he was non-committal about the practices bordering on occult.

Shilpa Shetty sounds as close to arrogant as possible when the CNBC-TV18 interviewer asks her "How does the team react to you". She raises her eyebrow and haughtily says "We are the owners, they're nice to us".

If there is a trend here of owners thinking they are superior to the players, or that they can control everything about the game, it's not really good news especially considering there will be a fresh auction next year.

Even if the IPL rules say that a franchise can retain a certain number of India internationals, foreign players, etc., there is nothing that stops a player from choosing to participate in the player auction in 2011.

Players who are frustrated with their team management or owners will leave. Their contract period is over. It is one of the fundamental principles of a free market.

Labels: indian premier league, ipl 2010

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:02 am | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

What is the point of this exercise, BCCI?

Earlier today, Lalit Modi was suspended from his post as IPL commissioner. He has 15 days to respond to respond to the charges. As of now, he remains the IPL chairman.

I'm hardly surprised that a a certain website whose domain he effectively owns continues to list him as chairman and commissioner.

Chirayu Amin, one of the BCCI Vice Presidents, has been appointed the interim IPL commissioner. He is a chairman of Alembic Ltd, a publicly listed company.

But the point of this entire exercise needs to be questioned. The governing council remains as it is (except for Chirayu in, Lalit out) despite them being party to every single decision that was taken. BCCI President Shashank Manohar claimed today that it was not the responsibility of the governing council but that of the CEO & IMG.

With one stroke, he exonerated himself, from the issue as well. Interestingly enough, even before any sort of findings are announced by the investigations by various authorities into various aspects around the IPL, he exonerates Sharad Pawar of any wrong-doing.

Should we be surprised? After all, he is closely linked to Sharad Pawar. Shashank Manohar's father was the advocate general of Maharashtra when Sharad Pawar was the Chief Minister.

I'm assuming that Mr. VR Manohar is one of India's top legal eagles. If not, maybe it is just a coincidence that VR Manohar represented Harbhajan Singh during Judge Hansen's hearing in January 2008.

While we're at it, Chirayu Amin should disclose any sort of relationship that his company has with Shashank Manohar, perhaps as one of their legal advisers. I'd really not be surprised if that was the case.

Labels: bcci, indian premier league, ipl 2010

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:39 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Johnson Cherian, Lalit Modi and a couple of domains

Over 3 years ago, I'd written about one of the BCCI's domains - bcciratings.com. The domain was registered under a name 'Johnson Cherian'. I now notice that the domain has Lalit Modi as an administrative and technical contact.

Tinu Cherian reckons that the ownership details of iplt20.com changed on 19 April.

I don't think his reasoning is right. The 'Updated 1 hour ago' entry he points to merely indicates that the whois server fetched the data 1 hour ago. Just click on the "Refresh" link to see the last update details change.

But yes, the larger issue is that iplt20.com and clt20.com (the Champions Twenty20 League domain) are owned by someone from Modi Entertainment Network, even though the BCCI's address is provided.

So, is Johnson Cherian someone who works for Lalit Modi at the BCCI office? He does seem to work at Modi Entertainment Network, since he is listed as the administrative contact for modi.com as well.

In passing, you can actually go and buy the iplt20.com domain. The whois record indicates the domain expired over a month ago.

For the record, just in case the ownership data changes, here's what the whois information looks like:

iplt20.com

Registrant
Email:
Organization: BCCI/IPL
Address: CRICKET CENTER,WANKHEDE STADIUM,CHURCHGATE
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Country: IN
Postal Code: 400020
Phone: +91.2222800300
Fax:
Name: bcci ipl

Domain : iplt20.com

Administrative Contact :
Name: bcci
Organization: BCCI/IPL
Address: CRICKET CENTER,WANKHEDE STADIUM,CHURCHGATE
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Postal Code: 400020
Country: IN
Phone: +91.2222800300
Fax: 0
Email:

Technical Contact :
Name: bcci
Organization: BCCI/IPL
Address: CRICKET CENTER,WANKHEDE STADIUM,CHURCHGATE
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Postal Code: 400020
Country: IN
Phone: +91.2222800300
Fax: 0
Email:

Created on.......: 2008-03-14
Expired on.......: 2012-03-14
Last updated on..: 2009-01-14

clt20.com

Registrant :
Email:
Organization: NA
Address: BCCI,Cricket Center,Churchgate
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Country: IN
Postal Code: 400020
Phone: +91.1111111
Fax:
Name: Lalit Modi

Domain : clt20.com

Administrative Contact :
Name: Lalit
Organization: NA
Address: BCCI.Cricket Center,Churchgate
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Postal Code: 400020
Country: IN
Phone: +91.2266637373
Fax: 0
Email:

Technical Contact :
Name: Lalitk
Organization: NA
Address: BCCI.Cricket Center,Churchgate
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Postal Code: 400025
Country: IN
Phone: +91.2266637373
Fax: 0
Email:

Created on.......: 2009-02-05
Expired on.......: 2013-02-05
Last updated on..: 2010-01-12

Labels: conflict of interest, domain, indian premier league, ipl 2010, lalit modi, website

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:50 am | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

A strong link between the IPL and the T20 World Cup

Based on statistical evidence^*, Mumbai or Bangalore will win the IPL and 11 out of the 16 teams playing in the T20 World Cup have no chance of winning the World Cup.

Here're the damning statistics:

• Mumbai or Bangalore will win the 2010 IPL tournament. The previous 2 editions have been won by Jaipur (league topper) and Hyderabad (4th on the league table).
  
• The only sides with a reasonable chance of success at the T20 World Cup are Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Ireland, Pakistan and Zimbabwe. The World Cup winning side has never included even a single player who played in the preceding IPL tournament.
  
• Based on current evidence from IPL tournaments preceding a T20 World Cup (sample size: 1), the top 2 run-getters are usually not good enough (or too old) to even feature in their national side's squad. So, the only consequence of Suresh Raina and Rohit Sharma hitting a real purple (orange?) patch is that they will eventually not play at the 2010 T20 World Cup. The only other real contenders are Herschelle Gibbs and Mahendra Singh Dhoni, but they'd need to score something like 300+ runs across 2 innings to race to the top of the 2010 IPL run-getters list.
  
• 3 out of the top 5 wicket-takers at an IPL event played in a T20 World Cup that immediately followed. Hence, at least one out of Pragyan Ojha, Amit Mishra and Irfan Pathan will definitely be called up to play at the World Cup. The first one to have a confirmed ticket booking on a trans-Pacific flight, or willing to travel by road, will get the nod.
  
• West Indies will continue a rich tradition of the hosts (1996 World Cup and 2002 Champions Trophy being examples) never winning a 'World Cup' like event. In much the same manner that the 'home' team has never won an IPL to date.

* - All data is valid as of before the first semi-final of the 2010 IPL event

Labels: indian premier league, ipl 2010, prediction, statistic, twenty20, twenty20 world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:39 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Choking at the IPL

Everytime I see a team screw up a chase at the IPL, I wonder what is it that causes batsmen to choke in a T20 chase.

To a large extent, it is because of the huge pressure on batsmen to succeed. Like several worthy commentators have pointed out, the bowler is really under no real pressure. More often than not, he expects to be tonked around and is reconciled to conceding 8-9 runs an over with the hope of picking up at least 1 top order wicket.

However, a top order batsman is expected to smack it around at a strike rate of at least 150. Every dot ball increases the pressure. A batting effort of 30 in 20 balls with 5x4 and 1x6 looks excellent. Except that the batsman actually scored only 4 runs off the 14 balls that he didn't hit a boundary. This potentially means he had at least 10 dot balls, i.e. he wasted 70% of the balls he faced.

Let's define the set of circumstances that describe how a team chokes while chasing.

• The score being chased isn't ridiculously high (e.g. in excess of 180)
  
• The team is at a fairly comfortable position halfway through the chase (e.g. a required run rate of 9-10 with 7-8 wickets in hand)
  
• The team is fairly well placed with 5 overs to go (e.g. a required run rate of 11-12 with 5 wickets in hand)

In the 2008 IPL tournament, there were 11 such games. In 2009, the number was 13. So far, in 2010, there have been 7 instances of a chasing team 'choking'. It seems quite likely, given there are another 19 games to go, that we'll end up with a similar number of chokes this year as well. Maybe there's a better way to force batsman into taking more responsibility to finish off games - like we wrote over 5 years ago about Twenty20

I think one option would be to have Twenty-20 games with 11 players but only six are allowed to bat, not all eleven.

The main problem that the IPL will face is the number of mismatches. This year alone, there have been at least 20 games where the result was known before the last over of the game started. Somehow, winning margins of 20+ runs, 7 wkts etc. don't seem right for this truncated format. If we extrapolate a winning margin of 20+ runs (say chasing 180) into the 50 over game, it amounts to something like scoring 280 when the target was 320 - a sound thrashing. The debate over which team will lose the most number of games is over. Mohali has lost 8, and have 3 more to play. This means they could end up with 11 losses (from 14 games). Hyderabad is the only other team that could get to 10 (won 4, lost 6 with 4 games to go).

Whoever voted for the Mohali franchise wins themselves a gift voucher for a 2 week fitness programme to be conducted by Yuvraj Singh, Yusuf Abdulla and Ramesh Powar. Sreesanth will be a special guest and he will conduct aerobics sessions for 2 days. VLCC is one of the team sponsors.

In other news, I find it baffling that the various commentators, ex-cricketers, administrators, etc. who protested against the absence of any bids for Pakistani players during the last IPL auction have missed out one very obvious fact - Sri Lankan cricketers are being sidelined at IPL 2010.

The Sri Lankan players in this tournament are Murali, Thushara, Perera, Vaas, Maharoof, Dilshan, Jayawardene, Sangakkara, Mathews, Mendis, Jayasuriya and Malinga. All teams have played 10 games by now. Only Murali, Maharoof, Sangakkara, Jayawardene, Mathews and Malinga have played 6 or more games. Chaps like Dilshan, Vaas, Mendis and Jayasuriya have been sidelined with no-one protesting!

To paraphrase Lord Tennyson, is it better to have been picked and left out than not to have been picked at all?

Labels: indian premier league, ipl 2010, twenty20

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:48 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

IPL 2010 semi-final prediction

We're pretty much at the half-way stage of the league round of the 2010 IPL. At this point in time, Mumbai, with 6 wins from 7 games is the runaway leader, and has definitely sewn up a semi-final slot.

The remaining 3 are the tough ones to predict. In 2008, 7 wins was enough for Delhi to sneak into the semis ahead of Mumbai. In 2009, Hyderabad sneaked in ahead of Mohali though both had 7 wins.

So it is fair to say that 7 wins out of the 14 games (i.e. winning 50% of the games) should be sufficient. Bangalore, Jaipur and Delhi have 4 wins. Hyderabad and Kolkata have 3 wins. Chennai has 2 and Mohali has 1.

That said, momentum is a huge factor, and teams can get going with just 2-3 wins in a row.

The arrival of players from Australia, England and New Zealand will be a significant factor. Which teams are likely to benefit?

Bangalore: Pietersen, Steven Smith and Ross Taylor are the new arrivals. Bangalore's batting has been awesome, especially their top 3-4. But Kohli, Dravid, White & Morgan have been untested and with Pietersen & Taylor joining, this would mean Morgan and possibly White being left out.

Chennai: Hussey and Ntini are the new arrivals, with Ntini returning from injury. They should really have found some hospital as a sponsor given how much they've invested in Flintoff, Oram and Ntini. The bowling leaks far too many runs, and Ntini won't actually change the status quo.

Delhi: Daniel Vettori. This could mean Mishra and Vettori bowling in tandem. So unless Maharoof has a couple of excellent games, he'll be sitting out.

Hyderabad: No new arrivals.

Jaipur: No new arrivals.

Kolkata: McCullum. Their batting has really been pathetic, clicking twice and their highest total is only 180-odd. So his entry will hopefully result in some better performances in the first 5-10 overs.

Mohali: No new arrivals - Hopes is injured.

Mumbai: No new arrivals.

Given the influx, it is quite possible that Bangalore and Kolkata will make it to the semi-finals along with Mumbai provided Kolkata's bowlers learn something from Wasim. Between Delhi and Hyderabad, I'd go for Delhi because their bowling is better than Hyderabad's.

So the semi-final lineup will be Mumbai, Bangalore, Delhi and Kolkata (in order of points from the league stage).

Labels: indian premier league, ipl 2010, prediction, twenty20

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:30 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Last hurrah for quite a few players at the 2010 IPL?

When the Indian Premier League started in 2008, the likes of Hayden, Gilchrist, Kumble, Ganguly, Tendulkar, Dravid, Murali, etc. were eagerly sought after for being famous [then] current international cricketers. Warne had only recently retired.

In 2011, there will be a new fresh player auction and it is quite likely that the likes of Hayden, Gilchrist, Kumble, Warne, Murali and Ganguly would not be purchased at the auction, especially if they don't perform too well in this year's tournament.

While a Kolkata Knight Riders side sans Sourav Ganguly (or indeed a Rajasthan Royals minus Shane Warne) seems unthinkable, the whole point of organizing a tournament on this scale, with title sponsorship sold for 5 years, mobile rights sold for 8 years and TV broadcast rights sold for 10 years, is to ensure that the tournament outlasts individuals.

Hopefully from next year, the IPL will trim down the number of games by splitting the 10 teams into 2 groups. A 45 day tournament to decide the best T20 side from among 8 is around 15-20 days too long! Having 2 groups, and sticking to the current play-each-other-home-and-away formula would mean a total of 44 games (20 league games per group, 2 semis, 1 wooden spoon game and 1 final) and we could be done with the tournament a month!

The quality of cricket so far has been excellent. While seamers have actually made a mark (Vaas, Angelo Mathews, Malinga and Sreesanth), they'll find it tougher as the pitches ease out over the next 40 days. The fielding has largely been really good and all evidence points to R Sathish as being one of the fielding stars of the tournament. For further evidence of his skills, see one of his catches in the 2008 Indian Cricket League tournament.

While we're at it, why don't you take a shot at who will lose the most matches at the 2010 IPL?

	Bangalore Royal Challengers
	Chennai Super Kings
	Deccan Chargers
	Delhi Daredevils
	Kings XI Punjab
	Kolkata Knight Riders
	Mumbai Indians
	Rajasthan Royals

Labels: fielding, indian premier league, ipl 2010, twenty20

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:55 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Could retainerships in Twenty20 leagues prevent premature retirements?

A couple of weeks ago, Andrew Flintoff announced his retirement from test cricket. He was followed by Chaminda Vaas. These retirements come as no surprise considering the physical strain associated with being quick/fast-medium bowlers. If Flintoff plays the remaining 3 Ashes tests, he would end up with 80 tests. The sad part is that he missed a whopping 63 tests. At 143 tests, he'd have been in the top 5 most-capped test cricketers of all time (behind Steve Waugh, Tendulkar, Border & Warne).

Last year, Scott Styris retired from tests. Earlier this year, Jacob Oram threatened to follow his teammate.

The irony is that the same cricketers who extoll the virtues of test cricket, call it the ultimate form of the game, rate their test cricket achievements as being the pinnacle compared to those in other forms of the game, etc. invariably end up retiring from test cricket. Can you point out anyone who has quit ODIs to continue playing tests? So do we all get this lip-service?

Cricket boards really run the risk of many more quality players quitting test cricket. Is it possible for everyone to have the cake and eat it to? Can T20 leagues & international cricket co-exist without antagonizing everyone involved? Is it necessarily a zero-sum game?

Let's make a few assumptions here - some could be wrong of course!

• Cricket administrators (cricket boards & organizers of T20 leagues) are telling the truth when they say test cricket needs to thrive.
  
• Cricket boards want to exercise maximum control over their players.
  
• Players believe that test cricket is the supreme form of the game.
  
• Players want to maximize their earning potential while they're still able to exhibit their skills well.
  
• Sponsors want the best players to be part of the event (not necessarily play) so that they can be used as great marketing vehicles.
  
• Cricket boards don't get anything from the IPL (or indeed any of the other proposed T20 leagues) when their contracted players participate in the tournament. So, a cricket board's first reaction to such a tournament is either that they won't allow their contracted players, or the players can participate for a ridiculously short period of time.
  
• The player's concerns are to not get injured, to play quality cricket, to earn as much as they can and to be able to fulfill their national commitments & contractual obligations with their cricket board.
  
• The T20 tournament organizer's primary concern is that the best players should be available for the maximum possible period of time, and play well enough in order to make the tournament a great success.
  
• Players are paid only on the basis of the number of games they play in T20 leagues.
  
• The money that cricketers earn from the IPL (or other leagues) is far in excess of what they have been earning so far.

Given all these assumptions, how do we best balance the self-interests of the players and the administrators? The combination of the last two factors hugely influences a player's decision to quit playing test cricket and free up that time to play more and more Twenty20, including at events like the IPL, Champions League, etc. Adam Gilchrist was largely spot-on in the talk he gave as part of the 2009 Cowdrey Spirit of Cricket Lecture (transcript & video) when he said:

An acceptance that professional players will increasingly make pragmatic decisions about their careers, which may involve playing less Test cricket or even perhaps, none at all. That the arrival of rich, franchised based competitions like the IPL will hasten this trend and reduce the primacy of playing for your country or provincial team. That a young first class cricketer in Bangladesh or the West Indies may have an entirely different set of playing priorities and goals to those youngsters playing in England or Australia. goals to those youngsters playing in England or Australia. That Cricket Administrators must adapt to these realities with clever programming of international fixtures to dove-tail off these competitions and if necessary radically change, even jettison the Future Tours Program in order to achieve this.

Let's leave aside for a moment the reality that Gilchrist contradicted himself in that statement. If the FTP was jettisoned, this would directly result in the likes of Bangladesh, West Indies & Zimbabwe playing less cricket against the 'stronger' (cricketing & economic factors) teams like Australia, South Africa, India & England. That would imply a reduction in the quality of cricket they're exposed to as well as revenue for boards. Do you seriously expect a cricketer from West Indies to say "No thanks, I'd rather play a test against Bangladesh because I'm so much in love with my administration"? Of course not! He's going to take the first opportunity available to throw away the WICB contract and play in one of the T20 leagues. So actually, by jettisoning the FTP, you could be increasing the risk that "a young first class cricketer in Bangladesh or the West Indies may have an entirely different set of playing priorities and goals to those youngsters playing in England or Australia". Having digressed, we now go back to the question - how to best balance the self-interests of the players and the administrators? Would a retainership-based payment structure work? What if the IPL (or other T20 leagues) split up the player's payment on a 60-40 basis, whereby 60% of the money they get is based on the number of games they play? But the remaining 40% is actually given to their cricket board. The cricket board could reduce the payment made to the player if he skips commitments (training, other contractual obligations, international games, etc.) because he gave a higher preference to playing in the T20 tournament. That 60-40 split is just a number. It could have been 50-50 or even 70-30, but the split-up needs to provide sufficient incentives & disincentives. Players who are not contracted to their boards would receive a pro-rata amount based on the number of games they played along with other contractual obligations fulfilled. This gives cricket boards enough incentive to release players for the tournament, knowing fully well that they will get something out of it if the players don't honour their side of the bargain. Players have an incentive to balance playing T20 leagues and international cricket. They don't fall under the 'daily wage worker' category, because really speaking when you're paid on a pro-rata basis, that is what you are! The tournament organizers & sponsors benefit since they know that cricket boards and players are both committed to the event because they both stand to gain. What are the potential problems associated with such a model? Manipulative boards (and there're plenty in that category) could reduce the payments on the basis of flimsy arguments. Players could opt out of board contracts, thereby removing the boards from the equation altogether and destabilizing international cricket. Tournament organizers & sponsors could offer incentives for players to give up their existing board contracts.

It may still be an option worth considering. If the model can prevent even one star player from quitting test cricket, I'd reckon it has done its job.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2009, burnout, champions league, colin cowdrey lecture, fatigue, flintoff, future tours programme, gilchrist, indian premier league, lord's, mcc, retire, spirit of cricket, twenty20, vaas

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:35 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Rashid Latif's T20 World Cup semi-final lineup prediction

Rashid Latif, one of Pakistan's enfant-terribles and a much sought-after cricketer for the rent-a-quote agency he runs, last week expressed concern that India's cricketers would be jaded after having played the IPL and would hence not do well at the T20 World Cup which starts in England in a couple of days.

I don't think it was a brilliant idea to have the Indian Premier League before the Twenty20 World Cup. It was poor thinking on part of the Indian cricket officials.

Maybe he knows something about the international cricket calendar and global weather patterns that no-one else does.

The period from April to June is typically the leanest for international cricket because to a large extent, West Indies and England are the only places where cricket can be played. It is far too hot in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka & Bangladesh and cold in Australia, South Africa, Zimbabwe and New Zealand. Even in England, April and May are the rainy months.

Given contractual commitments, the IPL had to happen. There was a lot that the IPL organizers did wrong when it came to engaging the Indian government. There was no way that the tournament would be postponed (because there simply was no other free slot available) or cancelled (telecast rights, team owners having spent millions of $ in securing the services of players). So, the tournament went to South Africa, and was a rip-roaring success primarily because of the quality of cricket.

There's also no doubt that the Indian players have been on the road for the last 3-4 months after the tour of Pakistan was cancelled, playing ODIs in Sri Lanka, touring New Zealand and then the IPL. Yet, I don't quite think they're at a stage where they're jaded.

Given a choice between turning up for a T20 World Cup after playing 15 T20 games involving most of the best cricketers and ODIs & a single T20 game against Australia's third choice XI, I know which one I'd prefer if I was an international cricketer.

Going by Latif's logic, countries that didn't contribute significantly to the IPL player base should do very well at the T20 World Cup. So which country has the most number of players in their T20 World Cup squads who didn't show up at the IPL? Let's exclude the Associates teams for obvious reasons.

Country	# of players
Australia	11
Bangladesh	13
England	9
India	0
New Zealand	8
Pakistan	15
South Africa	3
Sri Lanka	5
West Indies	11

The semi-final lineup suddenly looks so bloody obvious: Pakistan, Bangladesh, West Indies and Australia.

Labels: india, indian premier league, rashid latif, twenty20, twenty20 world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:10 pm | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

What motivates them to play in the IPL?

Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, Ganguly, Kumble and Hayden have all retired, from all international and domestic cricket, in the last 2.5 years.

Yet, they all played in the IPL, both this season and the last.

What motivates them to play in the tournament? Is it the competitive urge? Is it the curiosity to find out if they're still good enough to compete with other current players? Is it the money? Did they retire because they were tired of living out of suitcases for nearly 9 months a year? Is it the will to try and master a relatively unfamiliar form of the game? Is it to pass on their decades of cricketing wisdom on to youngsters who'd be in awe of sharing the same dressing room with them?

If it is the competitive urge, why did they retire in the first place? Were they "pushed"? So maybe its a way of cocking a snoop at the selectors or team management.

Again, if it is about wanting to find out if they're still good enough, what's the big deal? They've excelled in their field over the past 10-15 years. So it is plain and obvious that even 1-2 years after retiring, they'd be much better than the average player at the IPL, perhaps even in the 80th percentile (i.e. in the top 20% of the players at the IPL). So why even try checking?

Is it about mastering T20 and learning "new tricks"? Quite possibly so, given that between all of them, they've played 24 T20 internationals and coincidentally, only the Aussies in that list (Hayden - 13, Gilchrist - 9 and McGrath - 2) have played T20 internationals.

Of the lot, it is fair to say that Gilchrist, Hayden, Warne and Kumble (perhaps in that order) have achieved the most in this format with McGrath having a great run last year but strangely not featuring in the playing XI at all this year while Ganguly has had two horrible tournaments barring 2-3 good knocks. Hayden and Gilchrist were the top run-scorers this season while Gilchrist was at #6 last time. Warne was the 2nd highest wicket-taker last time and slipped to #10 this time. Kumble had 2 of the 4 best bowling performances this time even as he got within 2 wickets of the purple cap. McGrath was in the top 10 wicket-takers last time. Ganguly had 2 entries in the top 11 innings scores last time around.

Is it about passing on their gyaan? Again, quite possibly so. I'm sure these chaps are nice enough to try and motivate their teammates through their attitude to preparation, their winning spirit, their focus, etc. Then again, barriers are bound to crop up in a team which has players from multiple countries/cultures. So not all the youngsters would be able to/keen to absorb the gyaan.

Were they sick and tired of being part of the tours & tournaments circus for the best part of 10+ years? Quite possible, because they would have felt the need to give more time to their families and the IPL is just a month-long tournament.

Is it about the money? Most certainly so. The money is huge, and even though McGrath would have been disappointed at not featuring in the playing XI, he earned quite a lot (he was "bought" last year for USD 350,000). None of these players would actually be in a situation where they desperately need money, but hey, who's going to be stupid enough to say no?!

As a parting note, Ganesh pointed me to 53-year old Shirley-Ann Bonaparte. What prompts her to play on, 30 years after she last turned out for West Indies' women's team, now representing the USA women's team?

Labels: ganguly, gilchrist, hayden, indian premier league, ipl 2009, kumble, mcgrath, twenty20, warne

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:23 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Too early to call the IPL semi-final line-up?

The Indian Premier League points table indicates that Deccan Chargers, Delhi Daredevils and Mumbai Indians should take up 3 of the 4 semi-final spots. Yet, it is perhaps worth pointing out that less than a third of the league phase games of this IPL season have been completed.

Each team plays 14 games in the league phase and most teams have something like 9-10 games more to play. That's a huge number of games still in hand to reliably predict a semi-final lineup. Bangalore Royal Challengers maybe down right now, but you really can't rule out anything for any side right now.

The key aspect in the remaining games is who will be available, who won't be and who will replace the ones that're missing.

The only international cricket being played is West Indies tour of England. The teams impacted are Kolkata Knight Riders (Gayle), Bangalore Royal Challengers (Pietersen) and Delhi Daredevils (Shah and Collingwood - are they both considered great 12th man material? Is that why Delhi bought them and haven't bothered playing both yet, especially considering they're going to be unavailable from next week?). Chennai Super Kings have already lost Flintoff.

Some of the Aussies currently playing against Pakistan will return. Kings XI Punjab will especially benefit considering they will have Hopes and Lee back (Marsh is injured). Bracken will be back for Bangalore Royal Challengers, Hussey (David, not Michael who's currently shopping for runs in Perth) returns for Kolkata Knight Riders, Symonds returns for Deccan Chargers and Watson for Rajasthan Royals, providing he doesn't injure himself while collecting his bags after getting off the flight from Dubai to Johannesburg.

Then there are some reasonably known 'foreign' players who haven't even been used so far (BRC - Cameron White; DC - Chamara Silva, Vaas & Zoysa; DD - Andrew McDonald & Maharoof; KXIP - Katich & Pomersbach; KKR - Langeveldt, Mortaza; MI - Dilhara Fernando, Mills, Ashraful & Ronchi; RR - Morne Morkel). Some others (McGrath, Fleming, Dravid) will probably turn up if needed.

It is perhaps safe to assume that by and large, the Indian players without international experience, who will probably start getting more opportunities now, will not significantly impact the result of too many games.

For evidence, the most runs made so far by an Indian player who hasn't featured in any (or too many) internationals for India is 88 from 5 innings by Virat Kohli. Next best is Ravindra Jadeja's 70 in 3 innings. Karan Goel's 57 from 4 innings is the highest by someone who has no international experience. The most wickets by an Indian player who hasn't played any internationals is Kamran Khan's 5 wickets from 3 games.

Last season, Yusuf Pathan (having played 1 T20 game for India) and Manpreet Gony were the best among those Indian players who didn't have any (or too much) international experience.

Looking at the list of new entrants (and those who haven't yet played), Mumbai Indians and Deccan Chargers seem best placed since they won't lose people and will have enough quality players available to pick from. Kings XI Punjab will gain the most since their Aussie players will be available and the bowling gets strengthened. Pietersen is an impact player, so even though he has flopped majorly so far, he could have turned it around in a couple of games to get Bangalore Royal Challengers' campaign back on the rails. Bracken is an excellent bowler, but Bangalore's main problem is the batting. Kolkata Knight Riders will suffer since Gayle will leave and assuming Langeveldt/Mortaza aren't drafted into the captaincy committee, that's one less skipper for them.

So now, maybe it isn't too far fetched if I predicted that Mumbai Indians and Deccan Chargers should make it to 2 of the 4 semi-final spots. Kings XI Punjab and Delhi Daredevils will in all likelihood make up the remaining 2 semi-finalists. But hang on, that is essentially what the points table is telling us right now! Like Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr said, "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" (the more things change, the more they stay the same).

Labels: india, indian premier league, ipl 2009, twenty20

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:33 pm | Sledge/Read 14 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Hardly breaking news - Sunil Gavaskar faces conflict of interest situation yet again

An English newspaper editor once wrote about Sunil Gavaskar - "He has an inability to realize a conflict of interest even when it stared at him in the face". He keeps proving it right every now and then.

In early 2007, he and Ricky Ponting had a slanging match when Gavaskar commented on Australia's behaviour and in response Ponting pointed out that Gavaskar had no business talking of behaviour when he had famously dragged along Chetan Chauhan after being given out lbw off Lillee at the MCG in 1980.

Then last year he alleged at race being involved in Mike Procter's decision to ban Harbhajan for 3 tests after the events at Sydney. David Morgan, the then President-elect of the ICC, expressed concern over the conflict of interest (Gavaskar was ICC Cricket Committee chairman & cricket columnist/commentator). A couple of months later, there were rumours that Gavaskar would be asked to choose from one of his roles and in April of 2008, he resigned from his role as chairman of the ICC's Cricket Committee.

In a column published last weekend, he rubbished John Buchanan's idea of having multiple captains by wondering aloud why people even bothered listening to him. He pointed out that Buchanan had successfully got roles within the Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) support staff for a lot of Queensland friends. He also generally rubbished Buchanan's coaching skills, qualifications & achievements.

Sunil Gavaskar is a member of the IPL's Governing Council. Thus, he really has no business passing judgement on the strategies and plans proposed or adopted by any of the teams that are playing in the tournament. If he isn't on the governing council, he is well justified in criticizing (or applauding) what the various teams do (or don't do). But since he is, surely it is a huge conflict of interest. If there was some decision that the IPL Governing Council needed to make regarding something related to KKR, that team would be be perfectly justified in demanding that Sunny recused himself from the proceedings.

Labels: conflict of interest, gavaskar, indian premier league, ipl 2009, twenty20

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:46 pm | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

IPL facing far too many questions

Before India's general election dates were announced, there was little doubt over the 2009 edition of the Indian Premier League being held. The primary concerns were over what all it would be blamed for, the impact of the attack in Lahore and whether anyone would actually care if Andrew Symonds or Ricky Ponting were missing.

However, it soon became apparent that the Indian government was not quite thrilled with the schedule drawn up for the IPL because the priority in terms of deployment security personnel would (obviously) be for the conduct of elections. After some initial attempts at playing down the issue, the IPL administrators then got into overdrive to accomodate the concerns of the various agencies involved in providing security for the games - the central government, the state police, the state government, etc.

Now, the situation is still in limbo. Revised schedules are being drawn up and I guess things will clear up in the next 2-3 days. I'm sure the IPL administrators will accommodate the government's concerns (as if they had any other choice! It's actually fun to see Lalit Modi actually acknowledging the power of some other authority!). I do believe that the IPL will find in its favour that the government would not want a situation where a sporting event was cancelled for security reasons.

This though doesn't really mean everything else is hunky-dory. Even if the revised schedule is arrived at and announced, there's no guarantee that audiences can actually watch the games. The IPL administration and Sony Entertainment Television (who has the broadcast rights for the Indian sub-continent) are at loggerheads after the BCCI suddenly attempted to remove SET as the broadcaster. That issue is now in the courts.

I do hope that the court also accepts public interest litigations on the actual quality of TV telecasts. I don't think I'm too far away from a stage where I won't bother following a game "live" on TV. Coverage on TV is so irritating to follow, because even as the ball is up in the air and a fielder is getting under it, we're transported to an ad break. The logical next step is that when a bowler loses his run-up, we go for an ad break.

Then of course, there's the whole question of the on-field happenings. I think right now, even 50-over games are forcing bowlers into considering retirement. For evidence, consider the recent India-New Zealand ODI series. It produced the highest ever runrate for a series of 3 games or more and the 2nd highest for a tournament of any length excluding games involving minnow sides (a definition that does include Bangladesh & Zimbabwe but excludes England).

Yes, the grounds were smaller than Ashish Nehra's brain, and the pitches were flatter than Cameron White's legbreaks. But the fact remains that bowlers, by and large, are being made so irrelevant that they might as well not bother turning up. Do I love watching batsmen smacking bowlers around? Sure, at most once or twice a series. Would followers of the IPL T20 games love seeing nothing but sixes and fours? Chances are the answer is no.

Labels: economics, india, indian premier league, ipl 2009, security, tv rights, twenty20

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:40 pm | Sledge/Read 8 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Bretton-Woods system collapse blamed for England collapse at Sabina Park

When England lose, and especially badly, we're normally guaranteed some extremely creative excuses. At least as far as I remember, there've been excuses about prawns, pollution, alignment of stars, too much cricket, too little cricket, injuries, "what's the big deal?", etc.

After England collapsed horribly at Jamaica to lose the first test by an innings (Video on YouTube), two former England captains, coincidentally both from Essex, have now blamed the IPL for distracting England.

I have news for you, Nass & Goochie. The IPL didn't cause the collapse. The England batsmen's poor skills, application & response to pressure did.

Surely then the team shouldn't even bother turning up for games, because all players aren't paid alike. The dressing room should have already been a war-zone, because chaps like Flintoff, Pietersen, Collingwood, etc. obviously earn a lot more than Swann, Bell or Broad. Should all the players be paid the same?

Next thing, they'll blame the collapse of the Bretton-Woods system and the emergence of the US dollar as the reserve currency. Why? Because the IPL bids were in US dollars.

Labels: england, indian premier league, ipl 2009, twenty20, west indies

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:49 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Breaking news: Andrew Symonds pulls out from IPL

In a stunning development, Andrew Symonds has exclusively revealed to this blog that he is pulling out from the Indian Premier League. The news comes a couple of days after Cricket Australia announced that he would not be considered for national selection until he completed his counselling & rehabilitation. He said that his decision was not related to any on-field related issue with Deccan Chargers.

Readers will recall that he was sent off during the Bangladesh one-dayers. Subsequently, he was recalled to the side. However, as part of his rehabilitation programme, Symonds was barred by Cricket Australia from going fishing anywhere.

Having looked at the various teams in the Indian Premier League, Symonds came to the conclusion that it would be impossible for him to resist the temptation to go fishing in the cities where the IPL games were played in. Delhi & Kolkota have rivers, Chennai & Mumbai have beaches while all the others (Bangalore, Hyderabad, Jaipur & Mohali) had lakes (artificial & natural).

Symonds is the latest among prominent cricketers who've decided to give the IPL a miss - Michael Clarke, Stuart Broad and Mitchell Johnson. Michael Vaughan really doesn't count. With a ODI batting avg 27, sr 68 from 83 innings, there's a high chance that he gracefully stepped aside lest the IPL team owners ask him to pay up to go anywhere near one of the teams in the league.

Labels: breaking news, exclusive, indian premier league, ipl 2009, symonds, twenty20

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:59 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

ICL, IPL, Bangladesh cricket and a BCCI website!

A fortnight or so ago, six Bangladesh cricketers sent in their resignation letters to the Bangladesh Cricket Board, to join the Indian Cricket League and play as a team called the 'Dhaka Warriors'.

The board responded by banning them for 10 years. But it was pretty obvious that Bangladesh cricket was in serious shit. Big brother, the BCCI, stepped in to help out. How did the BCCI help? It offered to include more Bangladesh players in the 2009 edition of the Indian Premier League and a Bangladesh team in the 2010 Twenty20 Champions League.

The BCCI's decision is so ridiculous. The Bangladesh Cricket Board does not benefit when its players play in the IPL, or the Champions League. The players do. At this point in time, no cricket board gets any payment for releasing its contracted players for the IPL.

Perhaps the better option for the BCB would have been to get the BCCI to agree to a rapidly scheduled home-and-away test & ODI series. Bangladesh was to have played tests in India in April 2005. That then got postponed, so often, that no-one seriously expects it to materialize.

In a path-breaking, breathtaking and least-anticipated development last week, the BCCI launched its website (www.bcci.tv) over a decade ahead of schedule. One of the first few decisions taken by the outgoing BCCI President, Mr. Sharad Pawar, was to target a 2020 launch of the BCCI's own website.

It's perhaps apt to mention though that during the 2006 edition of the ICC Champions Trophy, you could buy tickets on www.bcci.tv. After that tournament, the site lay dormant, until it sprung to life over the weekend!

Amazingly enough, it even has RSS feeds for press releases and cricket news!

Labels: bangladesh, bcci, india, indian cricket league, indian premier league, ipl 2009, twenty20, website

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:55 am | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]