2010 Champions League Twenty20 takes form

[IanG]

That would be perfect. But unfortunately & disgracefully to this wonderful sport of cricket - the ICC is not an independent governing body. The BCCI is the default leader in world cricket.

Well I've been saying for ages that the ICC seem to be nothing more than a puppet for the BCCI.

 

[sohum]

Oh, here comes the BCCI whining again!

--

I agree that defending champions should have an automatic qualification into the next edition. That's the case in a few sports, and it seems like it should be the case here. However, keep in mind that there are many sports where this isn't necessarily the case. For example, the playoffs of any American sport are based on the regular season performance for that season.

The ICC does not have jurisdiction over the CLT20 because it is not a competition involving national teams--it's a competition involving domestic teams. Hence, those matches don't qualify as international T20's. Similarly, the ICC cannot step into domestic leagues and structure it as they wish (like the IPL, the Ranji, etc.).

Finally, the CLT20 is administered by the BCCI, CA and CSA.

 

[War]

Oh, here comes the BCCI whining again!

--

I agree that defending champions should have an automatic qualification into the next edition. That's the case in a few sports, and it seems like it should be the case here. However, keep in mind that there are many sports where this isn't necessarily the case. For example, the playoffs of any American sport are based on the regular season performance for that season.

The ICC does not have jurisdiction over the CLT20 because it is not a competition involving national teams--it's a competition involving domestic teams. Hence, those matches don't qualify as international T20's. Similarly, the ICC cannot step into domestic leagues and structure it as they wish (like the IPL, the Ranji, etc.).

Finally, the CLT20 is administered by the BCCI, CA and CSA.

And can't you see how crazy & ridiculous this is?.

How can 3 international boards have the independent power to create a tournament like the Champions League without the been overseen by an ultimate governing body, like the ICC??.

Thats would be like in football - UEFA (Europe), CONMEBOL (South America) & AFC (Africa) creating its own Champions League involving clubs from these continents & FIFA having no jurasdiction over it.

The fact the Champions League was indeed able to created by 3 boards, shows how the ICC is broken. Every major sport has an authocratic governing body like FIFA, IOC etc that controls everything. It is disgraceful to game of cricket that the ICC is not such a governing body & that the BCCI indeed has so much ridiculous power in cricket.

 

[Cricketman]

What I see it as that the basic structure of the tournament can be decided by the country boards. However, if there is a problem of a large magnitude I think the ICC will step in and sort things out.

I don't see what the big deal is even if the ICC is not involved... BCCI, CA, and CSA are more than capable of handling any issues on their own. They all have flourishing domestic structures, have all hosted huge fixtures w/o the 'help' of the ICC (India and SA with the IPL, KFC Big Bash in Australia).
Don't see why you need to bring in the International Cricket Council for a domestic tournament.

Just stop thinking about the politics and just enjoy the game everyone!

 

[War]

What I see it as that the basic structure of the tournament can be decided by the country boards. However, if there is a problem of a large magnitude I think the ICC will step in and sort things out.

I dont think they can. Look at the current IPL scandal, its the BCCI dealing with it. The ICC can't do anything.

Even if the IPL where to collapse i'm not even sure if the ICC in its broken format can scrap it. All they can do is complain.

I don't see what the big deal is even if the ICC is not involved... BCCI, CA, and CSA are more than capable of handling any issues on their own. They all have flourishing domestic structures, have all hosted huge fixtures w/o the 'help' of the ICC (India and SA with the IPL, KFC Big Bash in Australia).


Don't see why you need to bring in the International Cricket Council for a domestic tournament.

Because thats how it works in other major sports. The main governing body controls & organises all major tournaments.

The cricket champions League although domestic teams are involved. Its like the UEFA CL league in football - its clubs from different countries playing each other - so its very much a international tournament. A proper ICC should be totally be involved in that.

The KFC Big Bah & the IPL are too different things by the way. The Big bash is totally domestic. The IPL is domestic tournament fronting as a international tournament.

Just stop thinking about the politics and just enjoy the game everyone!

One cannot ignore the politics because if the governing body of world cricket isn't structured properly, nagging current problems in world cricket such as:

- player burnout due to the overpacked schedules
- out of control rise of T20 cricket

These wont be able to be tackled properly. The ICC clearly needs revamping.

 

[sohum]

How can 3 international boards have the independent power to create a tournament like the Champions League without the been overseen by an ultimate governing body, like the ICC??.

Where does the ICC have jurisdiction? The Champions League involves domestic teams. The ICC isn't the totalitarian leader of cricket--hell they don't even have authority over the rules (MCC).

Thats would be like in football - UEFA (Europe), CONMEBOL (South America) & AFC (Africa) creating its own Champions League involving clubs from these continents & FIFA having no jurasdiction over it.

You can't really draw football comparisons because there are so many teams playing in so many countries. But just look at the UEFA Champions League. That involves teams from several different leagues. The Champions Trophy T20 involves teams from several different leagues. FIFA does not organize or administer that tournament, UEFA does. Similarly, the ICC does not organize or administer this tournament. The BCCI, CA and CSA do it because they came up with the idea for the tournament.

You are also completely failing to acknowledge the legal ramifications behind the ICC hosting the tournament. The ICC has pre-determined contracts with their sponsors. They have similar contracts with the national boards and players. When an official ICC tournament rolls around, the players must agree to certain sponsorship terms. Remember the whole fiasco during the 2003 World Cup with the Sahara sponsorship that India had? Since the IPL teams are franchised, the ICC cannot exert control over those sponsorships. For example, if Vijay Mallaya (owner of the RCB) has Kingfisher sponsorship logos on his teams kit, he would then be prevented by the ICC from displaying those logos in the Champions Trophy due to the ICC's outstanding agreements. However, he owns the team. Unlike the national team, which represents a country and thus is not a private enterprise, all the IPL teams are franchises. You are not allowed to tell a company how to go about their business.

The fact the Champions League was indeed able to created by 3 boards, shows how the ICC is broken. Every major sport has an authocratic governing body like FIFA, IOC etc that controls everything. It is disgraceful to game of cricket that the ICC is not such a governing body & that the BCCI indeed has so much ridiculous power in cricket.

Really, you're just crying for the sake of it now. The FIFA does not control everything (as evidenced by the UEFA CL, the UEFA Cup, etc.). These are organized by subsidiaries of FIFA, in this case UEFA. Similarly, the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) organizes the Asia Cup. That's bringing together teams from several different countries with no need for the ICC whatsoever.

You also make a mistake in assuming that the ICC should behave like FIFA does. Just look at the different in the number of players. While football is enjoyed in domestic leagues all over the world, there are only a handful of domestic cricket leagues. UEFA needs to enforce some structure since so many leagues can obviously not decide how to proceed. Compare this to cricket--there are 10 "high-level" cricket boards. The ICC really has no need to step into the situation and causing themselves more headaches.

I would say a majority of your opinion is driven by your distaste for the BCCI. You continue to single them out without noticing that CA and CSA are also involved.

 

[Params7]

Needs to be on youtube, for the crowd outside India it'll be bigger than IPL.

 

[sifter132]

I agree that defending champions should have an automatic qualification into the next edition. That's the case in a few sports, and it seems like it should be the case here. However, keep in mind that there are many sports where this isn't necessarily the case. For example, the playoffs of any American sport are based on the regular season performance for that season.

The difference is that in American sports is that their regular season lasts long enough for the best teams to rise to the top. Contrast that with domestic T20 cricket tournaments: they last for a much shorter time and it's much easier to get a 'bad' result where an undeserving team might get the Champions League spot based on some lucky incidents in a short tournament.

Agree with the idea that Pakistan should be getting a team in there. Hopefully with all the current hoo-haa around the IPL someone rules that a Pakistan team can step in for RCB.

 

[War]

Where does the ICC have jurisdiction? The Champions League involves domestic teams. The ICC isn't the totalitarian leader of cricket--hell they don't even have authority over the rules (MCC).

My point is the ICC should be the totalitarian leader of cricket. The fact that it isn't structured that way is a disgrace to the wonderful sport. This is why anytime an independent body or Indiviudual like Kerry Packer 30 years ago & IPL with Modi currently can potentially come & distrupt world cricket.

You can't really draw football comparisons because there are so many teams playing in so many countries. But just look at the UEFA Champions League. That involves teams from several different leagues. The Champions Trophy T20 involves teams from several different leagues. FIFA does not organize or administer that tournament, UEFA does. Similarly, the ICC does not organize or administer this tournament. The BCCI, CA and CSA do it because they came up with the idea for the tournament.

You are also completely failing to acknowledge the legal ramifications behind the ICC hosting the tournament. The ICC has pre-determined contracts with their sponsors. They have similar contracts with the national boards and players. When an official ICC tournament rolls around, the players must agree to certain sponsorship terms. Remember the whole fiasco during the 2003 World Cup with the Sahara sponsorship that India had? Since the IPL teams are franchised, the ICC cannot exert control over those sponsorships. For example, if Vijay Mallaya (owner of the RCB) has Kingfisher sponsorship logos on his teams kit, he would then be prevented by the ICC from displaying those logos in the Champions Trophy due to the ICC's outstanding agreements. However, he owns the team. Unlike the national team, which represents a country and thus is not a private enterprise, all the IPL teams are franchises. You are not allowed to tell a company how to go about their business

Really, you're just crying for the sake of it now. The FIFA does not control everything (as evidenced by the UEFA CL, the UEFA Cup, etc.). These are organized by subsidiaries of FIFA, in this case UEFA. Similarly, the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) organizes the Asia Cup. That's bringing together teams from several different countries with no need for the ICC whatsoever.

You also make a mistake in assuming that the ICC should behave like FIFA does. Just look at the different in the number of players. While football is enjoyed in domestic leagues all over the world, there are only a handful of domestic cricket leagues. UEFA needs to enforce some structure since so many leagues can obviously not decide how to proceed. Compare this to cricket--there are 10 "high-level" cricket boards. The ICC really has no need to step into the situation and causing themselves more headaches.

I would say a majority of your opinion is driven by your distaste for the BCCI. You continue to single them out without noticing that CA and CSA are also involved.

You misunderstood my friend. Let me explain how FIFA is structured as a governing body compared to ICC.

FIFA is the single totalaritian governing body in world football. But because football is such a large sport, individual continents such as UEFA, CONMEBOL, AFC, CONCACAF, CAF, OFC where created as under FIFA in order to help the game run smoothly. But at the end representatives from each confederation still have to answer to FIFA when serious problems goes down.

So for FIFA its ok for the UEFA given the proper structure of FIFA as the independent gloabal governing to operate the Champions League independently. But as i said before if would be impossible in football for 3 conferations in UEFA, CONMEBOL & AFC (which would be like the 3 cricket boards in cricket) moving out independently from FIFA global authority & creating a football tournament. Like what the BCCI, CA, SACB have done with the cricket Champions League.


In cricket ICC is not authocratic & independent. We have had a situation since the MCC in England reliquished its power over the game in 1965 & established the ICC in order to get the other countries invloved in decision making. Where by the major member boards of the top 8 countries when it comes to major decisions vote for things to happen in the ICC. This is how the BCCI power in the game in recent years has gotten so huge, since in voting they will always get the vote of the entire Asian block (4 votes) & weaker financial boards like the windies & New Zealand - overall 6 votes. Only England & Australia & SA are fininacially strong enough to oppose them - but of late they have began to side with the BCCI since they have no choice really.


Their is no independent boss ICC here. This is why it was so easy for IPL, ICL & Champions League to be created without much opposition, since the BCCI runs things. They didn't have to report to anybody for permission to create it.

Back in 1978/79 when Packer & world series cricket came in & almost destroyed cricket with the ODI series revolution. England via the MCC who where the major voice in cricket - couldn't stop Packer. So lets be clear i dont have anything againts India (BCCI), the lack of proper global governing ICC is the fault of the entire cricket community.

 

[IanG]

Needs to be on youtube, for the crowd outside India it'll be bigger than IPL.

Well the Champions League Twenty20 does have a YouTube Channel

YouTube - CLT20's Channel

 

[sohum]

My point is the ICC should be the totalitarian leader of cricket. The fact that it isn't structured that way is a disgrace to the wonderful sport. This is why anytime an independent body or Indiviudual like Kerry Packer 30 years ago & IPL with Modi currently can potentially come & distrupt world cricket.

I really don't see what the problem is. I think people are just complaining for the sake of complaining. You have not said anything in your post which suggests why ICC should have totalitarian control. The ICC has a long track record of poor decision-making and giving them full control would arguably be worse than the boards voting on a decision.

Secondly, cricket is not played by enough countries that it makes sense for one board to make decisions for everyone. The ICC leadership process isn't even democratic--it is periodic. Each region gets a term--which is why John Howard (I believe) is slated to become the next president. As a member board, you cannot possibly accept, without complaint, the ruling of a body that you had no part in selecting. There is a reason that democracy is better than dictatorship.

You are also ignoring the actual cricket, right now. People are quick to point out that Modi/BCCI are destroying the fine game of cricket. However, the problem is not with us. Indian crowds have showed up for any game of cricket, whether it is a Test match, an ODI or an IPL game. There's enough of an audience in India to come to any cricket match. In world cricket, right now, the top teams are as close to each other as they have ever been in the last 2 decades. Australia, South Africa, and India are very close to each other in terms of Tests and ODIs and the likes of Sri Lanka and England are not far behind. We've seen some tightly fought series'.

Of course, the actual cricket gets ignored when people have a statement to make against the BCCI and the IPL.

FIFA is the single totalaritian governing body in world football.

It actually is not. There are several non-FIFA, international-scale football tournaments, but anyway.

But at the end representatives from each confederation still have to answer to FIFA when serious problems goes down.

As they do in the ICC. Just see the Zimbabwe issue. Their political problems caused them to be suspended by the ICC. With the Modi/IPL issue, this is an internal problem with the BCCI. That's like the UN stepping in because of some local crime happening in some city in India.

But as i said before if would be impossible in football for 3 conferations in UEFA, CONMEBOL & AFC (which would be like the 3 cricket boards in cricket) moving out independently from FIFA global authority & creating a football tournament. Like what the BCCI, CA, SACB have done with the cricket Champions League.

That comparison is not equivalent. The UEFA consists of many, many member boards. The UEFA consists of many different domestic leagues. For example, the EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, etc. If you are comparing the UEFA to the BCCI, then you have to show me where all the different leagues are. The BCCI has only one T20 league: IPL. It has only one first class league: the Ranji Trophy. The same is the case with CA and CSA. Hence, your comparison fails. Football is a much larger sport with a lot more players and leagues and organizations. If the FIFA/UEFA did not step in to regulate that, it would be a free-for-all. Compare this with cricket, which has only about 10 high-level boards. It would be a lot easier to find consensus than by the ICC stepping in and deciding what should be done.

This is how the BCCI power in the game in recent years has gotten so huge, since in voting they will always get the vote of the entire Asian block (4 votes) & weaker financial boards like the windies & New Zealand - overall 6 votes.

Umm... India can only consistently count on the Asian block, which is four votes. Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and England always vote with each other and can hence be called the non-Asian block. This leaves West Indies and Zimbabwe as the swing votes. How these votes swing is usually dependent on the contextual circumstances. The BCCI has usually been intelligent about swinging these votes by striking agreements at the right time. IIRC, in recent times India has toured Zimbabwe (whereas all non-Asian countries did not) and struck up deals with WICB and SLC involving bilateral series.

You might say, well this is dirty. India is getting votes by money (since touring those countries will bring money in). Consider the fact that the cricket is actually getting played. I feel like a number of people here are so fussed about the politics that they forget that cricket is actually a sport. And the only way it will actually die is if teams stop playing each other.

Only England & Australia & SA are fininacially strong enough to oppose them - but of late they have began to side with the BCCI since they have no choice really.

This statement is an oxymoron. If those boards are financially strong enough, then they definitely have the choice to oppose them. Once again, you make it seem like the BCCI strong-armed the CSA and CA into hosting the Champions League. Why do you completely disregard the possibility that CA and CSA actually wanted to start the CLT20?

Their is no independent boss ICC here. This is why it was so easy for IPL, ICL & Champions League to be created without much opposition, since the BCCI runs things. They didn't have to report to anybody for permission to create it.

Oh my, this is getting ridiculous. Are the BCCI to ask the ICC every time they want to start a domestic league? Did CA ask ICC before starting their KFC Big Bash tournament? Did the ECB ask the ICC before starting the actual Twenty20 Cup? It is a domestic tournament. The ICC has no business meddling about in it. The issue only came to rise because everyone wanted to play in the IPL. How is that the BCCI's fault? For coming out with a product that was in high demand? How could they have foreseen that the IPL was going to be such a huge success? If they had, then people would have pre-emptively accused them of arrogance!

Back in 1978/79 when Packer & world series cricket came in & almost destroyed cricket with the ODI series revolution. England via the MCC who where the major voice in cricket - couldn't stop Packer. So lets be clear i dont have anything againts India (BCCI), the lack of proper global governing ICC is the fault of the entire cricket community.

Yet cricket still stands strong. And not only did Packer nearly destroy cricket, but he came up with a bunch of revolutions that are still in effect today--well-paid players, superior marketing opportunities, TV coverage, colored clothing, day-and-night games. It is arguable that without these revolutions at the correct time, cricket may have been dead entirely. It was ODIs that kept world cricket going during the 90's when Test cricket was in a trough, and it was ODI cricket that led to the more aggressive brand of Test cricket that is in effect today.

To summarize, I think these two paragraphs written by Dileep Premachandran, in 2008, summarize the situation perfectly:

Its amusing to hear greats of the past talking of how the IPLs success could have dire consequences for Test cricket. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Test-cricket constituency is a distinct one, and it generally consists of people who have played the game at some level, whether thats back garden, park, first-class or international. More importantly, its a group of people that appreciate what Milan Kundera called Slowness, those not obsessed with instant gratification.

Such fans will never abandon Test cricket for the crash-bang-wallop thrills that Twenty20 offers. He or she may go and watch Dumb and Dumber, but its never going to replace 400 Blows or In the Mood for Love in his affections.

The death of the ODI? | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

 

[IanG]

Goes to show that the inmates are running the funny farm

 

[TumTum]

The amount of discussion in this thread is ridiculous.

 

[Mike23]

The amount of discussion in this thread is ridiculous.

I second that.