yoda Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 I don't understand why IPL will kill test cricket. You will find some players who are good at both, you will find some who are only good for a single format. No matter what, they all want to play for the country - at least that's what we have heard Indian players say. Ask RU, he claims he would give up his IPL money to play for the country. Badrinath just earned 800k in IPL. You think he is any less motivated to play for India in the WI series even though he will be making much less? Regarding new players coming in the future, it is anyone's guess. Just because you feel it threatens one form of the game, it doesn't mean the game needs to stay stagnant and not evolve.
jairamesh Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 The problem with Test matches is that ICC and in general cricket boards are run by retarded egoist corrupts, look at the current examples Majola, Giles Clarke, Sharad Pawar, Butt, Sutherland. None of these guys have played at the highest level and they all have *****d themselves to capitalists interest with disregard for TEST cricket's future. Test cricket ever since it's inception lacks that confirmation who is the best like the ODIs and T20i have the world cups. ICC needs to get that World Test Championship going, with a champion being crowned every four years. This creates a frevish following where every game counts. Basically ICC needs to bring sexy back into Test cricket. But I just can't see it happening with the morons who run ICC. As for BCCI, it's simple, people seem to confuse the BCCI's interest with ICC's interest. It's like the survey suggests, that these FICA players expect to be fed by BCCI! effing joke.
putrevus Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 In the name of tradition why are people trying to deprive players their chance to make some money.Majority of people here who have voiced their opinion against IPL are working abroad away from their country for better living. IPL is boon for local cricketers who otherwise would never dream to make a living playing cricket.What is so wrong about it. Not all players can have talent like Sachin or Dhoni but that doesn't mean they are not working hard and sacrificing other aspects of their lives to become the best they can become in cricket. If IPL shows a way to players like Paul Valthaty who due to many reasons could not make it thru the system, we need to appreciate cases like that and hope we find lot more talent who can play for team India. IPL works because it will encourage young Indian kids and their parents will not stop to take cricket as profession because of money involved. BCCI may be run by corrupt people but it is doing far better than any other sporting body in the country.
putrevus Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Putrevus' date=' I will ask you the same question that I asked yoda : which is a better form of cricket( in terms of cricketing skills ) Test Match or T20 ?[/quote'] I myself don't like T20, I like test cricket which is still by far best form of cricket but that is my personal opinion. but I believe IPL is good Indian cricket in long term, it gives young Indian players to play the game with great players and if they are any good they will learn a lot from that experience and become better players in all formats. Only in IPL you will have you will have young Ishant Sharma learning from best fast bowler on the planet Dale Steyn.If Ishant wants to become better bowler he has best available resource which would not be other wise available for guy like him for not one or two days but six weeks. Why is that a bad thing. there will be negatives for every thing like in life. some players might just want to play T-20 and will be content with it, you cannot eliminate those scenarios. As I said without IPL only handful of players will make to top and rest of them will slog in domestic cricket all thru their careers without tasting fame and wealth. Do you think Bhajji would have any competition from Ashwin without IPL and also I can guarantee he would resting for this upcoming tour of WI if not for IPL , established players like him sit on their past laurels and give lame excuses for their non performances. Indian cricket history is littered with players sitting on their past laurels and expecting everything handed to them as a matter of right.With IPL all players are performing on same platform thereby giving some comparison for others to judge. It may not churn out test players but it sure will put notice to non performers in Team India in all formats which is not a bad thing.
yoda Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Bradri is a very bad example the dude made all the hard yards in the FC cricket aiming to play for India ... IPL just happened along the way. A better example would be someone who debuted under IPL ... you would know the names ... can you show me one single such player that has the skills to cut it in Test match cricket ? 99% of those who are benefiting from the gravy train will simply not get even close to the Test team. They will do so when the current crop has left the scene and there are vacancies and by then most every Ranji player would be aspiring to make it to the gravy train and would be having skills that suit that format (I even doubt if there would be any serious Ranji trophy played ) . It is then that Test Cricket will start to suffer because they cant compete. The first casualty would be the sponsorship due to the lack of competitive Test Cricket and then BCCI will slowly start to pull the plug as it wont be economically viable. From theron it is just a spiral downwards. Why should IPL debut/non debut be relevant for players being ready for test cricket? IPL is a T20 format and players who shine here do so mainly in this format. Same is true other way round as well. Guys like Raina shine in IPL and ODI, but is not ready for tests. So what? And guys like Vijay seem to do well in IPL and tests but suck in ODIs. Guys like Valthaty are probably good only for IPL. Guy like Ashwin seems to be doing well in both IPL and ODIs and could play tests as well. And what is evolution you are talking about ? Swinging from the hip ? Gyrating Cheerleaders ? A bunch of corporate thigs throwing their ill-gotten money ? Isn't there a sport that offers that sort of "evolution" already ? But if you are serious let me know if you really want to compare Test Match cricket to T20 and I will tell you why T20 is the opposite of evolution ... I mean are we kidding here when you say T20 and evolution in the same sentence ? :hysterical: Test match cricket is the big daddy of them all. Don't kill the beautiful game because you don't have the required patience and nous to appreciate its beauty. Dude, some of the innings this IPL like the ones from Gayle were far more interesting to watch than some slow boring test knocks. Don't make it sound like every test player is a RD or a SRT or a Sehwag. You may like watching tuk-tuk cricket for 5 days, it doesn't mean everyone should be forced to do the same. Evolution of cricket to ODIs first and now to T20s is because people are not satisfied with test cricket. If they were, there would be no need to tinker with it. Yes I'am all for competition ... and as I said lets set the monetary gains for both formats at the same level and then see what happens. 90% of all the big guns will hit the exit from the Tontee-Tontee bakwas like it never happened. That is the true worth of IPL. Just because the pitifull and spineless ICC doesnt have the intestinal fortitude to do what is right by stopping the vulgar display of money power it doesn't mean that it is the right thing. Well the market decides the money for these sport. If test cricket is going to pull in the crowds as T20 does, there will be money. If not too bad.
yoda Posted June 3, 2011 Posted June 3, 2011 If it were a Independent corporation it would have non-compete rights. This is like a big corporation spinning out a new entity and then letting that entity to compete with the main venture and indeed shutdown the main corporation. :hysterical: If the main corporation has been producing the same goods for 100 years and the market isn't interested in it anymore (except a few who like using the same product over and over again), guess what happens? it will be glad there is some product to sell from one of it's new entities so all can eat. :winky:
yoda Posted June 3, 2011 Posted June 3, 2011 you are talking as though ICC was a loss making org for 125 odd yrs till tontee came about ? :hysterical: BTW what happened to the ICL ? it was the same brand spanking new glitzy product no ? And BTW what happened to your initial claim that Test Cricket is the better product ? And yeah its not just me ... any cricket fan that knows anything about the game will tell you this. Go open a Poal and find out. You do know that many boards are losing money and one the main revenue generators is TV sponsor money when they play India? Yes India can generate money for all forms cause we have a lot of following for all the formats still. Regarding which is a better product, it is for the market to decide that. For me personally, I enjoy all forms, but restrict tests to good teams and ODIs to WC and multi-nation tourneys. Have no interest in Eng-SL (mainly because SL minus Murali are very weak) or Pak-WI or Ind-Bang tests or meaningless bilateral ODIs.
jairamesh Posted June 3, 2011 Posted June 3, 2011 And what is evolution you are talking about ? Swinging from the hip ? Gyrating Cheerleaders ? A bunch of corporate thigs throwing their ill-gotten money ? Isn't there a sport that offers that sort of "evolution" already ? Surely that can't be bad, share the dough man!. Better to fritter it away than have it stashed away.
cricketrulez Posted June 6, 2011 Posted June 6, 2011 Putrevus' date=' I will ask you the same question that I asked yoda : which is a better form of cricket( in terms of cricketing skills ) Test Match or T20 ?[/quote'] It is interesting how you dodged his main point. It was about the cricketers not selected for national team making a decent living. From your posts, I get the feeling that you want them to sacrifice their lives and aspire for the national team just so you can enjoy the "pure" form of cricket. You said make the salary cap same as central contracts. I say go the other way make central contracts same as IPL salary and rest test players from other formats. instead you want control over other peoples lives for your version of "Pure" entertainment. can i make rules like that in your profession?
cricketrulez Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 BossBhai: Katich What would you say to katich him getting dumped inspite of good performance for Aus the last 3 years (50 ave in tests) mainly becos a nagging injury. Tough ****, right? he got paid for his play during those three years correct? Its not CA's problem if he has trouble making a living correct?
Zap_Brannigan Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 instead you want control over other peoples lives for your version of "Pure" entertainment. can i make rules like that in your profession? I keep repeating this over and over again in Test Vs T20 debate. But noone answers me. I will repeat my stance on this and show how hypocritical the test purists sound. Ironically, test cricket today is not what test cricket used to be 100 years ago. Tests of 1900 has evolved into a shorter format and in many other different areas to become what we call test cricket today. Yet, the same cannot happen again to give birth to T20. SO which format is the best test of skills ? Timeless tests with uncovered wickets, no thigh pads etc, no helmets,tests as it used to be 100 years prior. But with today's standard of fielding and variety in bowling. Basically, it doesnt exist.
Zap_Brannigan Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 T20 is simply not cricket never mind a Progression or improvement of any existing versions of cricket. Just go follow baseball .. afterall it is also something that "evolved" out of cricket. Too bad you are out of luck then. Market will dictate the change. If test purists make tests as profitable as T20, then they can have their tests. If not, it will die out eventually and it will be talked as an archaic format in a few decades, similar to the timeless tests. Currently, TV rights are sold as "number of days of cricket", which means test cricket is preferable for BCCI as 1 game constitutes 5 days of cricket. But soon TV companies will demand to buy rights separately for tests and ODI/T20s. That's when test cricket will start its death. Till then, you dont have to worry about test cricket dying.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now