Will the ICL really improve Indian first class cricket ?

[Predator_05]

...asks Siddharth Mongia in his cricinfo column. Some fascinating insight.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/307710.html Kapil Dev has called the 51 Indian players who have joined the ICL the cream of Indian cricket. He has also described them as courageous. Some might call them practical and clever instead; opportunistic even. A few of them have been tried and discarded at the national level, and none is close to national selection. By the time this season ends, 22 of them will be over 27, an age after which very few make it to the Indian national side. About 20 of these players represent their state sides regularly. Others do not feature regularly even in their club sides. A few haven't even played in the BCCI's age-group tournaments. Some are young, have served their states with distinction, and have perhaps made the most important move of their careers, knowing they might not ever be considered for selection for India. None of the names excites any more than it did when they played out the BCCI's Twenty20 tournament in front of empty stands last season. In all likelihood they have been picked by the ICL to ensure there are enough players to make possible games of cricket - games that will feature them alongside a handful of international stars, all either retired or disgruntled with their respective boards. Only a handful of these Indian youngsters can claim to be part of the cream of their state teams, let alone Indian cricket. JP Yadav is one such. Shalabh Srivastava, Deep Dasgupta, Laxmi Ratan Shukla, Ambati Rayudu, Reetinder Sodhi, Yashpal Singh and Anirudh Singh will also be difficult to replace in their Ranji sides. Yashpal and Srivastava are the youngest among the lot, at 25. In the company of similarly talented players they played fairly competitive, if not crowd-pulling, cricket till now. Going by what has happened and assuming that the ICL manages to draw in about 18 big names, a standard ICL team will comprise three international has-beens, two domestic has-beens, and six domestic never-weres. Not the most thrilling prospect, especially in India, where last season a Ranji final featuring Sachin Tendulkar, Zaheer Khan, Wasim Jaffer, and Sourav Ganguly could not draw crowds. And will Brian Lara or Inzamam-ul-Haq be able to motivate themselves enough to face the likes of T Kumaran? The ICL currently doesn't have enough manpower for six ordinary teams, let alone six good ones. They are still about 35 players short if they are looking at 15 per side. They had better be prepared to skim through the buttermilk now that they have taken what cream they could. The grounds, the umpires, the support staff, and many of the other requirements for good cricket have still not been procured - else they would surely have been paraded at the press conference where the player signings were announced. That said, the BCCI can hardly afford to scoff at the ICL's selections. The board has lost about 10 per cent of the players who played in the Ranji Trophy last year. For the BCCI, how much the ICL will gain from these players is not as significant as how much the BCCI will lose without them. Bengal, runners-up for the last two years, have lost Dasgupta, Shukla, and Abhishek Junjhunwala - their captain, an established No. 6, and a promising No. 3, with a total of 1099 runs and 30 wicketkeeping dismissals between them last season. Bengal have also lost Subhomoy Das, Shibsagar Singh, and Subhojit Paul, who has regularly been a part of their XV. Of the eight players Hyderabad have lost, four played in all the Ranji matches last season. Each of the others played at least three games each. Young medium-pacer Alfred Absolem took 24 wickets at 12.75 in the three matches he got, and looked a player to watch out for in the coming seasons. Hyderabad will have to conceive an altogether new team, captain included. Then there are teams like Tamil Nadu who have been hit only marginally. Of the 20 players who represented them last season, two have left. Of those two, R Sathish was a regular, and DT Kumaran played only one match. Punjab have lost big names, Sodhi and Mongia, but those two played only three matches each last year, scoring 92 runs between them. Ishan Malhatra, the medium-pacer, played four matches last season, taking 10 wickets. Rajesh Sharma's action is under the scanner, and Muneesh Sharma, Sumit Kalia and Sarabjit Singh have hardly been regulars. Railways' loss is more significant. JP Yadav may have had his 15 months of international fame, but he was still his team's single most important player. The season they won the Ranji Trophy, he was the second-highest run-scorer and wicket-taker in the tournament, with 379 runs and 27 wickets. Last season, with his team down, Yadav bowled 250.4 overs (about a quarter of the total number bowled by Railways) and scored 325 runs. He may not be a star attraction, or a future India prospect, but even at 33 he is irreplaceable for Railways. Similarly Services' Yashpal Singh was among the best performers last season, with 835 first-class runs in eight matches. There are already many reasons for not bothering to visit a ground to watch a Ranji match; a few more have just been added. The ICL's recruits may be a motley bag, but their loss to Indian domestic cricket will be a sizeable one. And surely more players will be on the ICL's radar. When the ICL was first announced, there was a certain optimism attached to it. The vision one had was that of the real cream of Indian cricket playing in a highly competitive league. Now, though, with the ICL running in parallel to, and not complementary with, the BCCI's tournaments, we're in for the unappetising prospect of two sub-standard leagues that have been created out of one.

The last line sums up my biggest fears. Two sub-standard leagues being created out of one. Will the standard of cricket really be that high when you you have a bunch of aging superstars (Lara, McGrath, Inzamam et al) and a bunch of mediocre Indian cricketers ? The superstars aren't getting any younger and are clearly over the hill. Hence it's safe to assume that they won't be in it for the long haul. Like the author said; after playing at the highest level for over 10 years, can they be expected to motivate themselves to face mediocre Indian FC cricketers week in and week out ? The teams will be comprised of a bunch of average FC cricketers, none of whom are capable of making the national team (many got their chances and failed). Irani and Duleep trophy matches are identical in terms of team composition - ie; the best FC cricketers in India split into two separate teams, contesting a trophy. These matches have never drawn crowds in the past (even when stars like Ganguly and Zaheer played) so why will crowds turn up to watch this ? With all the optimism that surrounds the ICL, will the dream ever materialise ? Regular BCCI administered FC cricket will become even worse (it's bad enough already !) as the states lose their most consistent performers. With this exodus of players occuring thick and fast, they cannot be expected to replace them at such short notice. This will result in some very poor cricket being played during the Ranji trophy season. Idiots like Vengsarkar already denounced Indian FC competition as being bereft of talent - in light of these recent developments, they have further reason to believe so now.

[beetle]

I heard somewhere, BCCI is coming out with a similar 20/20 league... I saw something about this on the news ...but just then that clown sanjay dutt got released from jail and since then it is just that on the news.....

[manali]

no, it wont survive a year:two_thumbs_up:

[The Outsider]

Don't think the standard of cricket played will be too bad. They are starting off with 20/20 and then one dayers, formats in which ordinary players can have great days and put up good performances. The biggest challenge will be to bring in the crowds and they'll need some solid marketing strategies to do that. Televising the games is one step but that in itself won't suffice. They would need to focus on more crowd-cricketer interaction as that's the only thing which will draw crowds in to start off with. Perhaps have some gimmicks like drawing lots from the crowds to bowl one over to Lara or face one over from McGrath. Stuff like that.

[Chandan]

Predz, ICL is not meant for spectators in stadium. It is for television. And I'm sure Subhash Chandra won't be stupid enough to spend 100 crore on substandard cricket which won't attract the TV audience. As for Indian domestic cricket, if BCCI pulls up its socks, makes the FC cricket and OD cricket a bit more competitive, I'm sure crowd will be attracted. I can't remember missing even one Challenger match if it was shown on TV. Even Ranji finals and other matches, if telecast, were followed by many. If BCCI makes the domestic cricket matches more competitive, and exciting and compact, it'll have a good following though certainly not as much as that of an international!

[The Outsider]

ICL is not meant for spectators in stadium. It is for television.

Matches on TV are boring to watch if there is no crowd involvement on the ground. I am sure the marketing guys at Zee are aware of it and will try some novel ways to get the crowds in.

[Predator_05]

I don't know how you can dismiss the importance of stadium spectatorship. It's the best indicator of how popular the game is. What i would like to see is something similar to what the English have - notice how their Twenty20 matches are usually sold out ? That would be ideal. Crowd spectatorship and TV viewership go hand in hand. The problem is that the Ranji and Irani trophies never generated any crowd interest. If the local public around the venue aren't taking these matches seriously, don't expect the rest of the country to. ...and how can the BCCI make FC cricket more competitive ? Surely it's the players who make a league competitive, not the administrators. The admin's role is restricted to creating the conditions for cricket to prosper (stadiums, television, etc) - that is where it stops. The quality of play you see on the pitch is solely in the hands of the cricketers. If you have mediocre cricketers, you will see mediocre cricket Ultimately, what does the Indian national team gain from this ? I assume that we all consider this league to act as a feeder league to the national team, right ? Providing the talent, the next generation of cricketers who will represent India. But as of right now, you have a league of players who are 25+, many of whom are downright average cricketers. Most won't get anywhere near an Indian cap, so it's obvious that the national team doesn't stand to benefit from this at all ?

[Chandan]

Matches on TV are boring to watch if there is no crowd involvement on the ground. I am sure the marketing guys at Zee are aware of it and will try some novel ways to get the crowds in.

Yes. They can invite people, call the kids for free, for starters and such things!

[Chandan]

I don't know how you can dismiss the importance of stadium spectatorship. It's the best indicator of how popular the game is. What i would like to see is something similar to what the English have - notice how their Twenty20 matches are usually sold out ? That would be ideal. Crowd spectatorship and TV viewership go hand in hand. The problem is that the Ranji and Irani trophies never generated any crowd interest. If the local public around the venue aren't taking these matches seriously, don't expect the rest of the country to.

For people to come to stadium to watch these matches, you should have comfortable seating, proper and clean toilets, arrangements to have food and drink. Why on earth will people take so much risk in the absence of these facilities to come to ground and watch FC cricket in India??

[Chandan]

...and how can the BCCI make FC cricket more competitive ? Surely it's the players who make a league competitive, not the administrators. The admin's role is restricted to creating the conditions for cricket to prosper (stadiums, television, etc) - that is where it stops. The quality of play you see on the pitch is solely in the hands of the cricketers. If you have mediocre cricketers, you will see mediocre cricket

Quality of play will never improve if you have close to 30 teams playing the Ranji cricket, with most having just 2-3 decent players. If you want a discussion, we can discuss about how we can change the format of domestic cricket.

[Predator_05]

For people to come to stadium to watch these matches, you should have comfortable seating, proper and clean toilets, arrangements to have food and dring. Why on earth will people take so much risk in the absence of these facilities to come to ground and watch FC cricket in India??

This is true - but how come these factors don't deter spectators from watching India play ? Face facts Chandan; the standard of cricket is the problem. If there was good cricket on show, the crowds would turn up no matter how poor the stadiums are Can you answer my other points please

[zubinpepsi]

and with this shitty board tht can neevr happen. the immaturity of the board is clearly seen with their knee-jerk reaction of starting their 20-20 league.. what the hell where they doing all these days n months..

[beetle]

I think this BCCI league will take the wind out of the ICL sail.......

[zubinpepsi]

I think this BCCI league will take the wind out of the ICL sail.......

yeah i think so.. having all the control over the players, boards, stadiums, ICC.... etc.. wonder how ICL is gonna react to this

[Predator_05]

Quality of play will never improve if you have close to 30 teams playing the Ranji cricket, with most having just 2-3 decent players. .

Fair enough, but we do have competitions like the Duleep and the Deodhar - the quality of play in those matches still isn't that high.

[Chandan]

This is true - but how come these factors don't deter spectators from watching India play ? Face facts Chandan; the standard of cricket is the problem. If there was good cricket on show, the crowds would turn up no matter how poor the stadiums are Can you answer my other points please

No Predz. Why didn't the stadium fill up for SA vs NZ in Mumbai in the Champion's Trophy? Was the standard of cricket bad?? Why are stadiums for matches involving India filled up? Because people love watching Indian team play and even these factors don't deter them---its their passion!! And BCCI is trying to exploit this to hilt and is least bothered about improving these basic facilities for spectators!!

[beetle]

I don't think they will be getting too many big fish for some time. I wish this ICL does well for sometime to give the BCCI a big scare .....and get in some reforms....

[Chandan]

Fair enough' date=' but we do have competitions like the Duleep and the Deodhar - the quality of play in those matches still isn't that high.[/quote'] The format is extremely bad and BCCI plans is such that it is finished in a hurry. If you're willing to have discussion about how to improve it, I can have it with you.

[Chandan]

I don't think they will be getting too many big fish for some time. I wish this ICL does well for sometime to give the BCCI a big scare .....and get in some reforms....

BCCI is already scared and thats why it has come up with concepts like PCL. We'll see how they do that. Meanwhile I really liked the future plans of ICL about having academies, and then coach kids in the formative years. That way, within 3 years they won't have to lure players from BCCI. They'll have their own team genuinely developed and nurtured by ICL. They are a professional group and will certainly follow these plans in much more professional way than BCCI. Apparantly many kids and teenagers are logging in on their site and are expressing their desire to be trained at those academies!!

[Predator_05]

No Predz. Why didn't the stadium fill up for SA vs NZ in Mumbai in the Champion's Trophy? Was the standard of cricket bad?? Why are stadiums for matches involving India filled up? Because people love watching Indian team play and even these factors don't deter them---its their passion!! And BCCI is trying to exploit this to hilt and is least bothered about improving these basic facilities for spectators!!

That was more of a one-off, to be honest. I remember crowds turning up for AUS vs NZ matches in the '04 TVS Cup. I don't see how basic facilities will make a big difference in spectatorship. Ultimately, you go to a stadium to watch good cricket. Sure, comfy seats and catering will improve the stadiums but will crowds turn up if the cricket is of a poor quality ? Besides, aren't the ICL only responsible for the cricket played, not for the stadiums ? Anyway, this leads in to the discussion of how quality of play can be improved so feel free to delve into how you think the format can be improved. I am guessing you want to see an English/Aussie style two-tier system with two seperate divisions ?