Champions League Twenty20 2011

[jacobfelix]

RCB v/s KKR :

Good sudden blitz there from Vettori-Bhatkal... some sudden 60 runs in about 5 overs....

 

[Haarithan]

Its highly annoying to see talented local players such as Bollinger and Bravo not representing their local franchises in NSW and T&T respectively, whilst making handy match winning contributions for some lucrative rich IPL sides.

I just can't see an IPL side not winning this tournament. Not because of their local talents (lol), but because of the 4 big overseas players they boast in their XI, make it five in the case of Mumbai Indians.

Should they fail to win this edition, they should simply be stripped off atleast one qualification spot for the next edition, that will at least restrict the leeching of local talents from other countries. Why have four qualifying sides from a nation that only ranks fourth in the competition's history with respect to the WIN%? Australia and South Africa are miles ahead, yet have only 2 reps. While WI boast only 1 rep, that too by means of a qualifying tournament!

[/rant]

 

[Aditya]

We're sad with 4 IPL teams playing? 9 next year, who says yes?

 

[Bevab]

Me, me.

Next, there'll be a Samsung HD four, a Duracell two run.

Didn't know that there was a name for sixers too.

 

[Haarithan]

Actually, the ICC can work out something along these lines:

UEFA coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here in the European Champions League (football), they take into account the performances by clubs from various countries over the last five editions of the Champions League and statistically rank the nations. By ranking them in that manner, they also fix the number of participants from each country for the next edition of the Champions League. England, Spain and Germany being the dominant forces in European club football eventually end up with maximum representatives (FOUR teams each). Italy, France and Portugal being the next set of powerhouses end up with 3 teams each.

-------

As of now, the win% of each country in the CLT20 (updated until MI v CSK on 20/10/12):

Australia 65.62
South Africa 59.37
West Indies 52.94
Pakistan 50.00
India 48.07
England 35.00
Sri Lanka 33.33
New Zealand 25.00

Click here for individual team stats

So what I'm suggesting is, the ICC need to take into account the number of teams playing in a nation's domestic league, and from there deduce the maximum number of eligible participants, based on the success attained by each nation over the previous editions of the Champions League. Which in my honest opinion should look like this:

Rank - Domestic League - No: of teams in domestic competition - Participants for Champions League

1. Australia (KFC Big Bash League - 8 teams): 2 auto qualifiers, 1 via qualifying tournament. Total - 3

2. South Africa (Standard Bank Pro 20/20 - 6 teams): 2 auto qualifiers. Total - 2

3. West Indies (Carib Beer 20/20 - 6 teams): 1 auto qualifier, 1 via qualifying tournament. Total - 2

4. Pakistan (Faysal Bank T20 - 14 teams): 1 auto qualifier, 1 via qualifying tournament. Total - 2

5. India (Indian Premier League - 8 teams*): 1 auto qualifier. Total - 1

6. England (Friends Life t20 - 18 teams): 1 auto qualifier, 1 via qualifying tournament. Total - 2

7. Sri Lanka (Sri Lankan Premier League - 6 teams): 1 auto qualifier. Total - 1

8. New Zealand (HRV Cup - 6 teams): 1 auto qualifier. Total - 1

9. Bangladesh (Bangladesh Premier League - 6 teams): 1 via qualifying tournament. Total - 1

10. Zimbabwe (Stanbic Bank 20 series - 9 teams**): 1 via qualifying tournament. Total - 1


Leaves us with 10 teams making the main draw while 6 teams making the qualifying tournament. Two off those six sides from the qualifying tournament can progress to the main draw making it a fair 12 team tournament, where all domestic champions from the Top 8 test nations are ensured automatic qualification to the main draw, unlike the situation witnessed over the previous editions.

And most importantly, this bloody player clash rule should be reset in such a manner that local players from non-IPL nations end up representing their own local franchises. To me, that's the most annoying feature of the Champions League.

* Presuming Deccan Chargers aren't a part of IPL 6.
** Zimbabwe had only 5 domestic franchises until last year, but 4 additional teams are set to feature from 2012-13.

 

[Prithvi]

Better leave this Champions League concept and try another IPL with few other top domestic teams, which is what is going on in the name of Champions League now!

 

[SaiSrini]

Isnt it the player's choice as to who he represents? How does the IPL and BCCI get to choose who plays for whom?

Back to the match, Gambhir looks good and seems like he is getting back to touch with a good innings here. Aravind was belted today on a day when he was picked for the India team, which is sad.

 

[Gaurav_7]

Isnt it the player's choice as to who he represents?

Do you really think that's the case?

 

[ferg512]

Some really good suggestions Haarithan but unfortunately I wouldn't be too surprised if next year it goes in the opposite direction and the 5th placed IPL team gets a spot!

 

[Ollie_H]

So what I'm suggesting is, from the next tournament onwards, the ICC need to take into account the number of teams playing a domestic competition of a country and from that deduce the maximum number of eligible participants based on the success achieved by each nation in previous editions. Which IMO should look something like this:

There is just one major problem with this. The ICC doesn't run the Champions League, the BCCI does.

 

[Bevab]

It does not even deserve to get the name "Champions League".

I don't care about this tournament, especially with BPL football nearby and of better quality.

 

[angryangy]

Isnt it the player's choice as to who he represents? How does the IPL and BCCI get to choose who plays for whom?

Although I agree it is just speculation, it'd be naive to think that neither the IPL nor the boards which have a stake in CLT20 could pressure the players. Mike Hussey spoke about not being allowed to leave last year's Champions League to prepare for the India Tests; obviously both the BCCI and CA wanted Hussey to play the Tests, but they saw no money to be gained from having him play a tour match.

But get this; the second day of qualifying is the only day of the tournament to see no IPL teams play. KKR were locked in as Q1 as long as they qualified; but it's not so they get to play at home. Rather, this fixture covers the "gaps" left by CSK, MI and RCB. Considering they only just qualified, we can fully expect to see some extra insurance next year.

Oh that qualifying! What this says is nothing about quality; it says that as long as there are teams from India, South Africa and Australia, then anyone else is a throwaway cameo, including county teams. Especially them!

I don't think it's about rigging the games, although I'm sure having IPL teams in the final is their ideal. It's more about marketing, just getting maximum viewing on each day. The bottom line is getting those local audiences to watch the foreign teams and vice versa.

 

[Bevab]

That is good in a business point of view, but not in a sports point of view.

 

[ferg512]

But get this; the second day of qualifying is the only day of the tournament to see no IPL teams play. KKR were locked in as Q1 as long as they qualified; but it's not so they get to play at home. Rather, this fixture covers the "gaps" left by CSK, MI and RCB. Considering they only just qualified, we can fully expect to see some extra insurance next year.

Oh ok, I did find it rather strange they were locked in as first qualifier now it makes sense. Completely stuffed up the draw though as both Kolkata and Somerset were in the same qualifying group and again in the same group for the actual tournament

 

[ferg512]

India news: 'Injured' Suryakumar Yadav scores unbeaten 182 | India Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo

Wow, this tournament is just full of complete fail..