Will ICC ever approve ICL?

I doubt if this is going to happen. And the reason is not BCCI as projected by everyone but insecurities of all ICC members. Though in short run, BCCI is the affected party as its market is getting affected immediately but in long run, ICL has the potential to affect all boards and even finish off ICC.

Indian Cricket market is huge and can sustain two parallel leagues. Though BCCI will be affected if ICL is approved and its profits hit but it will still be profitable. A rebel league in other markets can finish off the member board itself. Consider the scenario that ICL is approved and it looks for growth beyond India. Of course, Pak and BD are going to be the first targets and it is very popular in pak also. What happens if it schedule matches in parallel with any international series going on in Pak? Won't PCB be hit? Some of its players may prefer to play in ICL depending on returns and it will slowly be curtains on Pakistan's international cricket.

The country most hit would be Eng. Its local season is from Jun-Aug when it is typically off-season for most countries. An extended season of ICL or any other league in parallel with English Season with most of world's cricketers available to play will surely kill English season and slowly whatever control ICC has on cricket will be lost to corporates. Is this bad, I do not know but this is the reason ICL is facing issues and not because of BCCI only.

The reason I belive private leagues will overrun ICC's version of cricket is that traditionally Cricket administrators have been very poor in handling business issues and this is the reason most of the boards are facing fiscal issues and are dependent on one country to bail them through. A private league like ICL will have professional handlers and is bound to have more commercial success than cricket run by ICC administrators.

PS: I saw this statement in one of the articles on Cricinfo - "The ICC recently drafted new rules on official and unofficial cricket making it virtually impossible for future ICL models to come up but these rules are effective in June. The ICL request falls under existing rules, which state: "In the event of anybody wishing to stage an 'unofficial cricket event', ICC approval should first be obtained before full members could release their players for the event"."
URL - http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/icl2008/content/story/390559.html

In future there cannot be ICL like leagues as this is what all member countries are scared of and even ICC and they are trying to nip this in bud itself.

What wrong did ECB & Giles Clarke do?

ECB and Giles Clarke have been pillored a lot in last few days due to their decision of aligning with Stanford for sponsorship and generating cash for english cricket. I do not understand why are they being treated in this way. Clarke and ECB did what they thought was an excellent way of generating cash for players and board and also help in revival of WI Cricket. Any person in their capacity would have loved this idea. A few days effort every year which would make them richer by $3.5 m and give English players a strong chance to become millionaires. They would have been fools to reject such an offer. Why do people expect them to verify Stanford's credentials? They are in no position to validate Stanford's accounts and check if he is a fraud. This is something that SEC or similar organizations need to do and none of them had raised any red flag at Stanford when this deal was made. ECB even added clauses in their contract with Stanford which gave them "get out" options in case they cannot continue to handle this type of exigency. So, In my opinion, they did no wrong and this move would have been hailed as a master stroke had English players not made a mockery of themselves on Nov 1 against Stanford XI.

I do understand that they were trying to get even with BCCI and also trying to prevent English players from participating in IPL - this motive is something that I do not agree with and this was probably only fault that Clarke's and ECB's thinking had while signing up with Stanford.

Eyes Wide Shut!!!

Ponting & Aus team got fined for slow over rate against NZ in the first test of the series. This is the fifth time Aus and Ponting have been penalized this year but the penalty that he has been getting is miniscule fine. For same offence, Sourav Ganguly and Collingwood have been handed match-bans by ICC match refrees but when it comes to Aus and Ponting, same person takes a different view altogether and ignores previous breaches.
Chris Broad was the referee during Ind-Aus series and also during Aus-NZ series and in two consecutive matches he handed out penalty to Ponting but forgot that if same offence is repeated within twelve months, the level of penalty increases though he applied the same rule while penalizing Sourav Ganguly. In case of ponting, this is the "five-peat" of the same offence this year but he still gets away with a light rap on his knuckles.
ICC - Wake up. You cannot fool the biggest market like this and more people realize the double game that you are playing, more irrelevant you become in cricket affairs and more legitimized BCCI's attempts to control Internation cricket become.

Gautam Gambhir penalized by ICC

Here is one more example of an Indian cricketer being penalized by ICC whereas cricketers from other teams primarily Aus, Eng and SA go scot free for similar kind of behavior on the field. There is a long history of ICC and BCCI playing games of oneupmanship and ICC has thrown rule book very frequently on India cricketers to settle their score and also to make people believe that India board has lots of money but not a good cricket team even after having deep pockets. This makes people think that BCCI is just busy in minting money with no regards to Cricket development. Whenever Indian team starts doing well against any of top nations, we see India cricketers getting penalized for minor infringements affecting their morale and performance. Sample this:
1. India beats SA in a test match for first time in SA in 2006-07 series. Sreesanth is fined.
2. India beats Eng in test series to go 1-0 up. Sreesanth is fined.
3. India beats Aus in T20 world cup Semi-final. Sreesanth is fined.
Incidentally, Sreesanth was a stand out performer in all these matches, and in match against SA, Andre Nel openly bad-mouthed him but still match refree chose to ignore that.
In the current series, Zaheer khan has been bowling very well and he has been fined already. Gautam Gambhir is the leading scorer and he has been banned for the crucial final test.
In the past decade, we have seen many cricketers who have good records against Aus being targeted by match officials on flimsy reasons and troubled with disciplinary actions - Muralidharan, Shoaib Akhtar, Harbhajan, Sourav Ganguly to name a few.
Aus cricketers openly call themselves aggressive but when it comes to taking action, ICC only targets Asian cricketers for aggressive behavior as if Aussies are saints on the field.
ICC mostly turns blind eye towards transgression by other cricketers esp Aus. During 2007-08 Aus-Ind series, Ponting was penalized for slow over rate in third test (Perth). Link: http://content-www.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/story/332294.html
For some reason, this does not figure in the list of breaches that are listed on ICC website - http://icc-cricket.yahoo.com/about-icc/breaches-and-penalties-2008.html
In the current series, during 2nd test, Aus bowled only 85 overs during the day + additional half hour. This is 5 overs less than overs specified (90) and Aus took 30 min extra too. So why was no action taken against Ponting now. Since the same breach happened again within a year, if ICC match refree had taken cognisance of that, then it would have resulted in a much higher penalty this time - may be a test match ban on Ponting but match refree chose to keep his eyes shut on this.
ICC needs to mend its ways pretty quickly. By denying Gautam Gambhir his rights of natural justice, ICC has further lost its credibility in the eyes of Indian cricket fans and it comes across as subservient to Aus cricket board once again. It was in best interest of Aus to get Gambir out of last test and they have ensured it through back doors that he does not play in the final test.

Twenty20 for 20

The last week's events in Antigua culminating in Superstars' win can be summed up as Allen Stanford's show from start to finish. He looked like the master of all he surveyed. He ensured that batsmen played with black bats, had full access to players dressing room and also had WAGs for company.


See this story in The Sun - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/cricket/article1864808.ece
He literally had English cricket in his lap :) (pun intended).


The whole event was nothing more than a publicity gimmick for him and he got better returns than he expected. Yes, he invested $20m into this but in my opinion, he got better returns than he or anyone else anticipated.


The kind of publicity that he got through this event would be worth much more than he spent. The result of the match (Superstars bt England in a one-sided encounter) would give everyone in WI a false hope of WI's cricket revival. Even sane people will forget that winning a match classified as exhibition does not make WI team a good team, leave alone great. But Stanford's spin-doctors would ensure that people in Antigua see him as a philanthropist who revived WI cricket. People will start comparing this result with drubbing that WI teams of 80s used to give England in their heydays.


It is ECB and english cricket which seem to have lost out from the drama of last week. In terms of quality of cricket, it was a pathetic display from English side who seem to be thinking more about how to spend the winner's cheque or how to behave after they have won. Giles Clarke used to call himself as champion of Test cricket, now he has no place to hide. English cricketers have emerged as money-hungry and whining sportsmen. They were seen as a side on upswing during their last series against SA but played as a club side during the match.

After watching this show, I fail to understand why does ECB has issues with its players playing in IPL? If they can play 20-20 in WI for a large amount of money, then can do the same in India as well.

I have been reading articles about BCCI becoming dominant body in ICC and trying to bully other cricket boards using their financial muscle. In this case, Stanford used his financial muscle to make ECB swallow its pride and made them and english cricketers a laughing stock. Not sure if the whole thing is worth it.