How excited are Indian fans (or neutral fans) about the IPL?

[Napa]

Obviously you are clueless. Hitting a baseball is the hardest thing to do in any sport. Those ball players are unbelievable. They are very athletic.

Obviously??? Of course hitting a baseball is difficult, which is why baseball teams rarely score over 10 runs while cricket teams score 500+ regularly.

If I were to do you kind of superficial analysis I would say that "obviously" cricket batsmen are better than baseball batters because they score a lot more runs

Your understanding of cricket is superficial. Spend more time understanding it before making comments like "Quality of play in baseball is head and shoulder above that of cricket".

 

[Chrish]

The inventor of swing bowling or swerve as they called it in those days was actually American; Bart King..

 

[Ph_11]

Hitting is unbelievable too because the seam of the ball is so complex that it can change direction multiple times. Ball does come at 100 mph. In cricket it never does.

 

[Napa]

Only thing comparable in both sports is fielding and baseball is light years ahead of cricket in all three aspects (catching, running and throwing)

Have you even watched these games? You can't compare fielding as baseball players wear gloves and cricket fielders don't.

 

[Ph_11]

Obviously??? Of course hitting a baseball is difficult, which is why baseball teams rarely score over 10 runs while cricket teams score 500+ regularly.

If I were to do you kind of superficial analysis I would say that "obviously" cricket batsmen are better than baseball batters because they score a lot more runs

Your understanding of cricket is superficial. Spend more time understanding it before making comments like "Quality of play in baseball is head and shoulder above that of cricket".

I have played cricket for decades and watched baseball for decades. No comparison.

 

[Napa]

Hitting is unbelievable too because the seam of the ball is so complex that it can change direction multiple times. Ball does come at 100 mph. In cricket it never does.

If you even understand the basics of cricket you would know how easily cricket batsmen dispatch full tosses, which is what baseball pitches are.

 

[Napa]

I have played cricket for decades and watched baseball for decades. No comparison.

I can only assume that those you played with were of seriously inferior quality.

 

[Ph_11]

Have you even watched these games? You can't compare fielding as baseball players wear gloves and cricket fielders don't.

How many cricket players have you seen who can catch balls coming at 100 mph bare hand. Let me guess - none.

 

[Ph_11]

If you even understand the basics of cricket you would know how easily cricket batsmen dispatch full tosses, which is what baseball pitches are.

With a hoitting area 1000 times that of baseball bat. Apples and oranges.

 

[Chrish]

Have you even watched these games? You can't compare fielding as baseball players wear gloves and cricket fielders don't.

I am aware of glove aspect thank you and even neglecting that my point still stands. Majority of cricketers wouldn't pass minimum fitness test required to play in MLB.

I mean guy like Inzi averaged 49 for gods sake. He wouldn't make it to minor league let alone MLB

 

[Ph_11]

I can only assume that those you played with were of seriously inferior quality.

I was never good at anything. On a serious note you are wrong.

 

[Ph_11]

Let me put it this way. take the best cricket player you feel like and I will let you pick any random outfielder of any baseball team, the baseball player is a much better athlete. I dont think any Indian cricket player would even pass the fitness standard of baseball. Everything in baseball happens at a speed of light.

 

[Ph_11]

Someone like Ashwin will not even be allowed in school level baseball team. he looks pathetic.

 

[Napa]

With a hoitting area 1000 times that of baseball bat. Apples and oranges.

Baseball and cricket are like apples and oranges, fair enough. So don't make statements like "Quality of play in baseball is head and shoulder above that of cricket".

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

Let me put it this way. take the best cricket player you feel like and I will let you pick any random outfielder of any baseball team, the baseball player is a much better athlete. I dont think any Indian cricket player would even pass the fitness standard of baseball. Everything in baseball happens at a speed of light.

I don't necessarily watch Baseball but are you saying that ABD wouldn't able to compete on fitness with a normal baseball athlete ??

 

[Chrish]

Quality of fitness and athletics is most definitely head, shoulder and torso above in baseball

 

[Ph_11]

Baseball and cricket are like apples and oranges, fair enough. So don't make statements like "Quality of play in baseball is head and shoulder above that of cricket".

I love cricket but I am in awe when I watch baseball.

 

[Napa]

Someone like Ashwin will not even be allowed in school level baseball team. he looks pathetic.

These are silly arguments. Different players bring different skills to the table. For example, it is true that cricket pace bowlers will outrun all baseball players over short and long distances.

 

[Napa]

I love cricket but I am in awe when I watch baseball.

Most people, even most Americans complain that baseball is the most boring sport to have ever afflicted humankind.

 

[Ph_11]

I don't necessarily watch Baseball but are you saying that ABD wouldn't able to compete on fitness with a normal baseball athlete ??

Exactly

 

[CricketAnalyst]

Exactly

That's dumb. It's obviously untrue.

 

[Napa]

I am aware of glove aspect thank you and even neglecting that my point still stands. Majority of cricketers wouldn't pass minimum fitness test required to play in MLB.

I mean guy like Inzi averaged 49 for gods sake. He wouldn't make it to minor league let alone MLB

Obviously Inzi did not need to run fast to score runs, his skill was able to watch the bowler's action, judge what would happen, and then smack it. A player much more athletic than Inzi would not be able to do these things.

 

[Ph_11]

I don't necessarily watch Baseball but are you saying that ABD wouldn't able to compete on fitness with a normal baseball athlete ??

Let me requalify for accuracy. He can not compete with the out fielders or the infielders.

 

[Ph_11]

Most people, even most Americans complain that baseball is the most boring sport to have ever afflicted humankind.

Compared to football and Basketball.

 

[Napa]

Really silly to compare the complexities of a sophisticated game like cricket to the mindless game of baseball.

For heaven's sake, they don't even have sight screens in baseball. Pitching has nowhere near the complexity of bowling and consequently batters need to be nowhere as sophisticated as cricket batsmen.

 

[Ph_11]

These are silly arguments. Different players bring different skills to the table. For example, it is true that cricket pace bowlers will outrun all baseball players over short and long distances.

No they will not. 90% of the batters can run between bases real fast. They have speed of 60 yards in less than 7 seconds. That is one of the matrix they are checked against.

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

Let me requalify for accuracy. He can not compete with the out fielders or the infielders.

So basically he can't what you're saying is that one of the fittest blokes going around in cricket won't necessarily compete with 80-90% of the Athletes in MLB ?? I guess this is what my understanding is saying based on how you are portraying your case...
[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] you wanna chime in your 2 cents on why this could be accurate/inaccurate - personally I think ABD/Kohli would easily excel in MLB type of sports since the schematics and usage of muscles and body is practically the same for both set of sports. I could be wrong but this is just what I feel is how it might be if we put these players in a baseball setting.

 

[Chrish]

Obviously Inzi did not need to run fast to score runs, his skill was able to watch the bowler's action, judge what would happen, and then smack it. A player much more athletic than Inzi would not be able to do these things.

You have no clue as usual

Anyways, ABDV and Rhodes like athletics would describe what average baseball fieldsmen do as routine.

 

[Ph_11]

Really silly to compare the complexities of a sophisticated game like cricket to the mindless game of baseball.

For heaven's sake, they don't even have sight screens in baseball. Pitching has nowhere near the complexity of bowling and consequently batters need to be nowhere as sophisticated as cricket batsmen.

In baseball they can even see the ball coming. They have to pick couple of points in trajectory and predict the flight path and take a swing. Cricket the balls are coming much slower and have a very large surface area.

 

[Napa]

No they will not. 90% of the batters can run between bases real fast. They have speed of 60 yards in less than 7 seconds. That is one of the matrix they are checked against.

I lost interest in baseball many years ago, but I do remember the superstar McGwire, the home run king. He looked like someone who would comfortably outrun my granny but fall a way behind my aunt.

 

[Ph_11]

So basically he can't what you're saying is that one of the fittest blokes going around in cricket won't necessarily compete with 80-90% of the Athletes in MLB ?? I guess this is what my understanding is saying based on how you are portraying your case...
[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] you wanna chime in your 2 cents on why this could be accurate/inaccurate - personally I think ABD/Kohli would easily excel in MLB type of sports since the schematics and usage of muscles and body is practically the same for both set of sports. I could be wrong but this is just what I feel is how it might be if we put these players in a baseball setting.

These two guys would struggle to see the inside of a major park.

 

[Napa]

In baseball they can even see the ball coming. They have to pick couple of points in trajectory and predict the flight path and take a swing. Cricket the balls are coming much slower and have a very large surface area.

Yes, but in cricket the ball changes direction after pitching on the ground. I think I have already mentioned what happens to full tosses in cricket.

 

[Ph_11]

I lost interest in baseball many years ago, but I do remember the superstar McGwire, the home run king. He looked like someone who would comfortably outrun my granny but fall a way behind my aunt.

Was your granny an olympic athlete?

 

[Ph_11]

Yes, but in cricket the ball changes direction after pitching on the ground. I think I have already mentioned what happens to full tosses in cricket.

It also loses speed by 30%.

 

[Chrish]

Many of these home run hitters are buff but don't get fooled by it. You have to see them when they are running between the bases; except they aren't running, they are FLYING

 

[Napa]

So basically he can't what you're saying is that one of the fittest blokes going around in cricket won't necessarily compete with 80-90% of the Athletes in MLB ?? I guess this is what my understanding is saying based on how you are portraying your case...
[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] you wanna chime in your 2 cents on why this could be accurate/inaccurate - personally I think ABD/Kohli would easily excel in MLB type of sports since the schematics and usage of muscles and body is practically the same for both set of sports. I could be wrong but this is just what I feel is how it might be if we put these players in a baseball setting.

The bottom line is that baseball players are stronger, more muscular than cricketers. Doping has been a big problem in baseball unlike cricket.

Cricketers are more skillful. A great part of batting is mental endurance. Batsman make one mistake in cricket, he is gone. In baseball you get 3 chances on the same day. So you can swing and swing and swing and one connects you are king.

The sort of mental discipline shown by, for example Pujara in playing 525 balls is nowhere to be seen in baseball.

They are very different games, to me cricket is much more sophisticated and complex, and hence better.

 

[USofA]

These are silly arguments. Different players bring different skills to the table. For example, it is true that cricket pace bowlers will outrun all baseball players over short and long distances.

I disagree. Majority of the ball players will outrun cricketers even pace bowlers.

The level at which things are done (in every aspect/facet) in American sports is way higher than sports in any other country.

 

[Napa]

Was your granny an olympic athlete?

My granny wasn't an Olympic athlete, hence I was betting on McGwire to outrun her

 

[Chrish]

Doping has been a major issue in baseball or American sports in general. But then you have match fixing happening every other week in cricket so.. would take doping every day over pre-staged games at least dopers are trying to win the game rather than throwing it off

And LOL at cricketers being more skillful! Cricket has to be most physically forgiving major sport ever!

 

[Napa]

I disagree. Majority of the ball players will outrun cricketers even pace bowlers.

The level at which things are done (in every aspect/facet) in American sports is way higher than sports in any other country.

We do have one sport which Americans play a lot and the rest of the world plays a lot. And the "way higher" level of American sports explains why they have won 12 football World Cups and been runners up in 10 more.

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

We do have one sport which Americans play a lot and the rest of the world plays a lot. And the "way higher" level of American sports explains why they have won 12 football World Cups and been runners up in 10 more.

Napa smashing it right out of the park

Brilliantly done bro

 

[Napa]

It also loses speed by 30%.

Many years from now, after having watched many more international cricket games, maybe you will realize that the ball slowing down isn't necessarily a good thing for the batsman as you seem to believe and there is something called "timing".

 

[Napa]

Napa smashing it right out of the park

Brilliantly done bro

Good to be on your side bro

 

[Napa]

I disagree. Majority of the ball players will outrun cricketers even pace bowlers.

The level at which things are done (in every aspect/facet) in American sports is way higher than sports in any other country.

Here is another sport popular both in the US and other countries, which American athletes dominate:




Link:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/rankings/singles

 

[Chrish]

Baseball is very popular in South America and Asian countries like Japan. Many highly paid MLB guys are Latin or asians.. Ipl has tried to basically rip off the idea of American and European franchise leagues except these leagues are far far more professional and well run while Ipl is dumb and meaningless beyond reasoning and words

 

[Chrish]

And the guy who said Inzis skill was smacking the ball, what explains all his run outs then? I bet no one else managed to do that either while smacking the ball!!

 

[Napa]

Baseball is very popular in South America and Asian countries like Japan. Many highly paid MLB guys are Latin or asians.. Ipl has tried to basically rip off the idea of American and European franchise leagues except these leagues are far far more professional and well run while Ipl is dumb and meaningless beyond reasoning and words

You are as opinionated as the guy who you have for your profile pic, and display as much prejudice and lack of common sense. IPL has gone from starting up maybe around 10 years ago to being a league with a large following and a plethora of well paid players. By every objective criteria it is very well run. And don't lecture cricket fans about professionalism, undoubtedly the worst run sport is football. FIFA is corrupt beyond belief and the rules of football need serious updating to fix the lack of scoring. One sits for 90 minutes, then 30 minutes more and what does one get? A penalty shootout like France-Italy 2006. A coin toss to decide the winner would be about as fair.

 

[USofA]

We do have one sport which Americans play a lot and the rest of the world plays a lot. And the "way higher" level of American sports explains why they have won 12 football World Cups and been runners up in 10 more.

Yes, there is a rumor that we have a "professinal" soccer league. When American sports are mentioned it is pretty much the big four - NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL. The rest are just...there.

 

[USofA]

Here is another sport popular both in the US and other countries, which American athletes dominate:

View attachment 73632


Link:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/rankings/singles

I will give you this. We have not had a good player in the mens side for 20 yrs. We have though had a quite to few men and women tennis greats. In fact we still do in Serena.

 

[Napa]

Yes, there is a rumor that we have a "professinal" soccer league. When American sports are mentioned it is pretty much the big four - NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL. The rest are just...there.

Yeah, sure... NFL, MLB, NBA... great sports which other big countries totally ignore. And soccer isn't "just", more Americans (13 million) play soccer than two of the sports in your list (football and hockey).

With an average attendance of over 20,000 per game, MLS has the third highest average attendance of any sports league in the U.S., and is the seventh highest attended professional soccer league worldwide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_in_the_United_States

When a country like Uruguay (total population 3.4 million) can reach the semis which the US has never been able to, you know that Americans are not obviously better than the rest of the world in sports. Your claim "The level at which things are done (in every aspect/facet) in American sports is way higher than sports in any other country" is just hype. I grant that the American sports media takes hype to a higher level than the media of other countries.

 

[Chrish]

You are as opinionated as the guy who you have for your profile pic, and display as much prejudice and lack of common sense. IPL has gone from starting up maybe around 10 years ago to being a league with a large following and a plethora of well paid players. By every objective criteria it is very well run. And don't lecture cricket fans about professionalism, undoubtedly the worst run sport is football. FIFA is corrupt beyond belief and the rules of football need serious updating to fix the lack of scoring. One sits for 90 minutes, then 30 minutes more and what does one get? A penalty shootout like France-Italy 2006. A coin toss to decide the winner would be about as fair.

Rofl at football rule change to fix lack of scoring!!! That's Ipl fetish for boundries talking!

 

[Ph_11]

Yeah, sure... NFL, MLB, NBA... great sports which other big countries totally ignore. And soccer isn't "just", more Americans (13 million) play soccer than two of the sports in your list (football and hockey).

With an average attendance of over 20,000 per game, MLS has the third highest average attendance of any sports league in the U.S., and is the seventh highest attended professional soccer league worldwide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_in_the_United_States

When a country like Uruguay (total population 3.4 million) can reach the semis which the US has never been able to, you know that Americans are not obviously better than the rest of the world in sports. Your claim "The level at which things are done (in every aspect/facet) in American sports is way higher than sports in any other country" is just hype. I grant that the American sports media takes hype to a higher level than the media of other countries.

Soccer is a strange sport for US. Top athletes in US do not play this game. The guys who cannot make it in Football, baseball, Basket ball etc. you get the drift. Soccer is maybe 7th or 8th popular sport. It is the top 3 or 4 for girls and guess who wins the world cup in that.

In Uruguay that is no 1,2,3 and 4th popular. You get an idea.

 

[Chrish]

If anyone honestly thinks Ipl, psl or whatever can match MLB/ NBA or club football in terms of professionalism or intensity, then there is no hope left for you..

 

[Ph_11]

I am an IPL fan. The problem is that certain Brit thinks it is humourous to make fun of people name and enjoys that. Then he does not take responsibility and blames it on his upbringing.
He impresses a lot of folks with his punctuation and grammar and stff but has zero contribution to the content.
That dude completely derailed this thread.

 

[santos11]

I am an IPL fan. The problem is that certain Brit thinks it is humourous to make fun of people name and enjoys that. Then he does not take responsibility and blames it on his upbringing.
He impresses a lot of folks with his punctuation and grammar and stff but has zero contribution to the content.
That dude completely derailed this thread.

Bro, what is your opinion of Test Cricket? Any idea when it will die?

 

[Ph_11]

If anyone honestly thinks Ipl, psl or whatever can match MLB/ NBA or club football in terms of professionalism or intensity, then there is no hope left for you..

I understand IPL does not but it is a matter of pride for us. I was only referring to the junaids guy who belittled the sport of baseball and gave some superman like properties to the sorriest cricketer Geoff Boycott. He started this slide.

 

[Ph_11]

Bro, what is your opinion of Test Cricket? Any idea when it will die?

I hope soon. I struggle to see the future though.

 

[MenInG]

Dear ALL

No more non-cricket posts on this thread.

Any others will simply be deleted.

 

[Ph_11]

I enjoy cricket and that is the bottom line.

 

[Napa]

Soccer is a strange sport for US. Top athletes in US do not play this game. The guys who cannot make it in Football, baseball, Basket ball etc. you get the drift. Soccer is maybe 7th or 8th popular sport. It is the top 3 or 4 for girls and guess who wins the world cup in that.

In Uruguay that is no 1,2,3 and 4th popular. You get an idea.

You are quite wrong. There are no universal sporting skills. Someone who can play cricket well is likely not going to succeed in other sports and vice versa.

I understand you are trying very hard to find an explanation for underperformance of US soccer players but players do not choose which game they wish to become good at, at the highest level players can only compete in one sport. That is why from ten thousand players you only get someone like Deion Sanders once in a decade and that too he was quite a poor baseball player. Another example would be Drew Henson, who was good at football but thought he could play baseball too, and was a bust.

Michael Jordan developed a very high opinion of himself and thought he could hack it in baseball and found that he couldn't.

This line of thinking that "if only we played soccer we would be successful" is quite prevalent among Americans to explain their lack of success, and a few years ago Kobe Bryant was explaining that the US would have been good in soccer if only he and Michael Jordan chose that as their sport. In reality, they would have lost to the mid-level country like Belgium by a 30-0 margin.

Soccer requires particular skills, cricket requires particular skills, basketball requires particular skills, and these skills are not transferable. The fact remains that in sports where the rest of the world actually participates (like soccer and tennis), the US lags behind considerably.

Pro basketball players in the US is 80% African American though they are only 15% of the population. To succeed in basketball requires strong, fact and tall athletes, and African Americans possess these characteristics in abundance. They not only dominate US basketball but also world basketball.

The very fact that you are bringing in women's sports to justify your arguments tells me that you are clutching at straws.

 

[Ph_11]

You are quite wrong. There are no universal sporting skills. Someone who can play cricket well is likely not going to succeed in other sports and vice versa.

I understand you are trying very hard to find an explanation for underperformance of US soccer players but players do not choose which game they wish to become good at, at the highest level players can only compete in one sport. That is why from ten thousand players you only get someone like Deion Sanders once in a decade and that too he was quite a poor baseball player. Another example would be Drew Henson, who was good at football but thought he could play baseball too, and was a bust.

Michael Jordan developed a very high opinion of himself and thought he could hack it in baseball and found that he couldn't.

This line of thinking that "if only we played soccer we would be successful" is quite prevalent among Americans to explain their lack of success, and a few years ago Kobe Bryant was explaining that the US would have been good in soccer if only he and Michael Jordan chose that as their sport. In reality, they would have lost to the mid-level country like Belgium by a 30-0 margin.

Soccer requires particular skills, cricket requires particular skills, basketball requires particular skills, and these skills are not transferable. The fact remains that in sports where the rest of the world actually participates (like soccer and tennis), the US lags behind considerably.

Pro basketball players in the US is 80% African American though they are only 15% of the population. To succeed in basketball requires strong, fact and tall athletes, and African Americans possess these characteristics in abundance. They not only dominate US basketball but also world basketball.

The very fact that you are bringing in women's sports to justify your arguments tells me that you are clutching at straws.

No I am not. Soccer players are build like DBs or WR in football. Their height is same as baseball players but the fastest and the strongest US athlete is not going to play soccer. It is called a girls sports in US. Kids follow money and there is'nt any. Guys like gals and they rather be with football qb's than some no name soccer player. Math is simple noone likes soccer. The worst athletes in US play soccer. The better ones play other sport. No one on monday morning discusses soccer.

Germany won the WC last time but figure out who did the conditioning for them. A non soccer playing nation.

Cricket England is learning how to hit a ball from whom?

Anyway back to IPL. It is fun.

 

[Abdullah719]

dear all

no more non-cricket posts on this thread.

Any others will simply be deleted.

A reminder.

Thread is about IPL.

 

[Junaids]

Your logic is weak. If there were a dozen Brazilian players with multi-million dollar contracts in the NFL, then Brazilians would indeed know about NFL players. However, there are no such players hence no recognition.

A better comparison would be Puerto Rico. Do Puerto Ricans play in the MLB and do Puerto Ricans recognize MLB players? Yes, and yes.

Similarly Australians, English, NZ and SA fans will be following their top players in the IPL.

This is a key mistake in the discussion of potential spread in influence of the IPL.

Puerto Ricans play baseball because they are American. They don't play cricket because unlike their West Indian neighbours, it's not in their heritage.

This is why BBL, IPL and CPL have completely failed to establish themselves as events to be followed beyond their own home population.

Some mercenary players are attracted by the prospect of a big payday for a tiny time commitment. But we already know from Packer and the Rebel Tours to South Africa that if the BCCI EXTENDS IPL to a point where players have to choose between national team and franchise, the only elite players who would pick the franchise are ones over the age of 30 who need to amass retirement savings.

The preceding discussion about multiple sports was sensationally silly. People don't follow this sport or that sport because one is better or worse. They follow the one which is in their national heritage.

Cricket Australia has got it pretty well pegged. T20 is for people who don't really like cricket and is like a gateway drug, to hook people and make them into the future audience for real cricket. BBL tickets are sold virtually at a loss because the job of the BBL is just to attract a new clientele.

 

[Convict]

Noticed on fox sports' facebook page that Tye got a hattrick.

That's pretty cool. He's a good bloke and its nice to see him earn some money and perform well.

 

[Convict]

You are quite wrong. There are no universal sporting skills. Someone who can play cricket well is likely not going to succeed in other sports and vice versa.

I understand you are trying very hard to find an explanation for underperformance of US soccer players but players do not choose which game they wish to become good at, at the highest level players can only compete in one sport. That is why from ten thousand players you only get someone like Deion Sanders once in a decade and that too he was quite a poor baseball player. Another example would be Drew Henson, who was good at football but thought he could play baseball too, and was a bust.

Michael Jordan developed a very high opinion of himself and thought he could hack it in baseball and found that he couldn't.

This line of thinking that "if only we played soccer we would be successful" is quite prevalent among Americans to explain their lack of success, and a few years ago Kobe Bryant was explaining that the US would have been good in soccer if only he and Michael Jordan chose that as their sport. In reality, they would have lost to the mid-level country like Belgium by a 30-0 margin.

Soccer requires particular skills, cricket requires particular skills, basketball requires particular skills, and these skills are not transferable. The fact remains that in sports where the rest of the world actually participates (like soccer and tennis), the US lags behind considerably.

Pro basketball players in the US is 80% African American though they are only 15% of the population. To succeed in basketball requires strong, fact and tall athletes, and African Americans possess these characteristics in abundance. They not only dominate US basketball but also world basketball.

The very fact that you are bringing in women's sports to justify your arguments tells me that you are clutching at straws.

A lot of the best AFL players were really good junior cricketers (many in state underage squads).

 

[Ph_11]

Andrew is doing well along with several other Aussies. Their contributions are appreciated and enjoyed by the crowds. These guys do make this tournament a better product.

I can see these leagues having 5-6 month windows where all the players are able to earn a decent living thru IPL. In return Indian public is treated to some great cricket. Free market rules.

After several years it will make perfect economic sense to include Pakistani players if IPL has to get 5-6 months window and get to 16 teams.

 

[Junaids]

Andrew is doing well along with several other Aussies. Their contributions are appreciated and enjoyed by the crowds. These guys do make this tournament a better product.

I can see these leagues having 5-6 month windows where all the players are able to earn a decent living thru IPL. In return Indian public is treated to some great cricket. Free market rules.

After several years it will make perfect economic sense to include Pakistani players if IPL has to get 5-6 months window and get to 16 teams.

We already know from Packer and Apartheid Rebel Tours what will happen if/when IPL extends to six months and players have to choose between country or IPL franchise.

IPL would get the players aged 30+, of whom many are ex-internationals - and the youngsters who aren't good enough for an international career.

From NZ:
Older: McCullum, Taylor
Younger but dubious quality: Guptill, de Grandhomme

From Australia:
Older: Warner, Haddin, Watson, Voges, Johnson
Younger but dubious quality: Sean Abbott, Paris, Boland, Lynn et al

 

[Convict]

We already know from Packer and Apartheid Rebel Tours what will happen if/when IPL extends to six months and players have to choose between country or IPL franchise.

IPL would get the players aged 30+, of whom many are ex-internationals - and the youngsters who aren't good enough for an international career.

From NZ:
Older: McCullum, Taylor
Younger but dubious quality: Guptill, de Grandhomme

From Australia:
Older: Warner, Haddin, Watson, Voges, Johnson
Younger but dubious quality: Sean Abbott, Paris, Boland, Lynn et al

Australia is not a good example because 1. With few exceptions, CA pay their nationally contracted more than what IPL does and 2. CA pays these wages to players who can get that money while living in their home cities with their family and friends.

 

[Junaids]

Australia is not a good example because 1. With few exceptions, CA pay their nationally contracted more than what IPL does and 2. CA pays these wages to players who can get that money while living in their home cities with their family and friends.

Agreed, but the same is true of England.

If you imagine a 6 month IPL season with Warner offered $5 million and Paris or Boland or Sean Abbott offered $800,000, I think you get a list like mine.

But I don't think there is ANY price at which Steve Smith or Kane Williamson or Mitchell Starc would accept a six month IPL contract until they are into their thirties.

 

[Convict]

Agreed, but the same is true of England.

If you imagine a 6 month IPL season with Warner offered $5 million and Paris or Boland or Sean Abbott offered $800,000, I think you get a list like mine.

But I don't think there is ANY price at which Steve Smith or Kane Williamson or Mitchell Starc would accept a six month IPL contract until they are into their thirties.

Nah. Everyone has a price. But the price would be far more than they are worth.

As for Warner he wouldn't go for $5 million. You'll find that as a senior Australian player in all three formats that he'd be earning near enough to that anyway.

 

[Junaids]

Nah. Everyone has a price. But the price would be far more than they are worth.

As for Warner he wouldn't go for $5 million. You'll find that as a senior Australian player in all three formats that he'd be earning near enough to that anyway.

Sure, but 6 months and 1 day makes you a tax exile, so instead of paying $1.8 million tax on $4 million gross earnings and netting just $2.2 million he'd instead presumably be netting double.

If I was a 27 year old Mitchell Starc with 148 Test wickets at 28.35 but with current earnings of $4 million per year, I'm pretty sure I'd turn down an offer of even $10 million to play IPL six months per year.

I'd decide to have three more years of Test cricket, aiming to reach 270-300 Test wickets while still earning $4 million per year. And then cash in with three seasons of six month IPL at $10 million per year.

$22 million plus a legacy of 300 Test wickets

Or

$60 million plus 148 Test wickets.

Most proud cricketers would take the 300 wicket option.

 

[USofA]

Sure, but 6 months and 1 day makes you a tax exile, so instead of paying $1.8 million tax on $4 million gross earnings and netting just $2.2 million he'd instead presumably be netting double.

If I was a 27 year old Mitchell Starc with 148 Test wickets at 28.35 but with current earnings of $4 million per year, I'm pretty sure I'd turn down an offer of even $10 million to play IPL six months per year.

I'd decide to have three more years of Test cricket, aiming to reach 270-300 Test wickets while still earning $4 million per year. And then cash in with three seasons of six month IPL at $10 million per year.

$22 million plus a legacy of 300 Test wickets

Or

$60 million plus 148 Test wickets.

Most proud cricketers would take the 300 wicket option.

All evidence to the contarary. I understand what you are saying but it only looks good in the forum world. The real world is very different. The $$$ seems to always wins. The Aus. players I am sure get paid very well. But still feel that they are not making enough or need more. Which is why a whole bunch of them from the captain on down put their name in the IPL auction.

Your scenario though would be a very interesting question for all cricketers. I would like see what they pick. Though I feel this is unlikely to happen any time soon.

I do not see the IPL going to 5-6 months any time soon. I would say it will go to 3 months starting in the next 1-2 years and stay there for a decade. After that is just too far to guess.

 

[Ph_11]

We already know from Packer and Apartheid Rebel Tours what will happen if/when IPL extends to six months and players have to choose between country or IPL franchise.

IPL would get the players aged 30+, of whom many are ex-internationals - and the youngsters who aren't good enough for an international career.

From NZ:
Older: McCullum, Taylor
Younger but dubious quality: Guptill, de Grandhomme

From Australia:
Older: Warner, Haddin, Watson, Voges, Johnson
Younger but dubious quality: Sean Abbott, Paris, Boland, Lynn et al

Packard and Apartheid tours are not a correct comparison. Packard was poaching players without CA approval and they were at each others throat. IPL is very cautious of that and a player has to get their respective boards approval. IPL is approved and Packard was not. As far as apartheid was concerned India's moral stand was correct that they refused to play SA. There was a support for SA in England and Australia but at the same time they knew they were wrong. Rebel tours could never succeed.

IPL might get players 30 and above but I am sure they will get young players too. They love in Smith in India more than the affection he can get from Australia ever. We will work out something with the boarda approval.

Once again IPL is going on with everyone on board. The other two were illegal.

 

[rollingstoned]

Not the least bit interested, IPL season is one bars and lounges here look forward to as they make a lot of money during the month and the only times i have gone to an IPL game were after getting smashed and having to sweat in the April heat inside a cauldron like the Wankhede under floodlights which make it worse.

 

[Ph_11]

Agreed, but the same is true of England.

If you imagine a 6 month IPL season with Warner offered $5 million and Paris or Boland or Sean Abbott offered $800,000, I think you get a list like mine.

But I don't think there is ANY price at which Steve Smith or Kane Williamson or Mitchell Starc would accept a six month IPL contract until they are into their thirties.

You are correct. Smith will never accept that but I am sure we will be able to work something out where he is available for certain dates.

Australia and England are inherently rich and they can do more for their players than other boards. At the same time they are fairly intelligent too and they will realize it takes lot of effort to swim against the tide. It will take time but we are heading towards the English Football league model. Highly successful and a global product.

 

[Ph_11]

Not the least bit interested, IPL season is one bars and lounges here look forward to as they make a lot of money during the month and the only times i have gone to an IPL game were after getting smashed and having to sweat in the April heat inside a cauldron like the Wankhede under floodlights which make it worse.

They need to fix that. India should move the window when the weather is mild.

 

[Ph_11]

Sure, but 6 months and 1 day makes you a tax exile, so instead of paying $1.8 million tax on $4 million gross earnings and netting just $2.2 million he'd instead presumably be netting double.

If I was a 27 year old Mitchell Starc with 148 Test wickets at 28.35 but with current earnings of $4 million per year, I'm pretty sure I'd turn down an offer of even $10 million to play IPL six months per year.

I'd decide to have three more years of Test cricket, aiming to reach 270-300 Test wickets while still earning $4 million per year. And then cash in with three seasons of six month IPL at $10 million per year.

$22 million plus a legacy of 300 Test wickets

Or

$60 million plus 148 Test wickets.

Most proud cricketers would take the 300 wicket option.

Once again where is this money coming from? Test cricket is a net loss proposition. Old Man's cricket is dead and you can see that in the stands. England and Australia are keeping it afloat by artifically pumping money. Every board loses money on Tests (maybe Ashes makes money but other bilaterals are a bust).

A generation of players have been brainwashed into believing that tests are the ultimate standard to go by. I think that is a old wives tale which would be debunked soon. Global economy is very competitive. You cannot watch this crap for 5 continuous days.

Eventually everyone has to play cricket where it makes money.People drinking beer in the stands and staying buzzed for few hours is lot more palatable than for 5 days.

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

They need to fix that. India should move the window when the weather is mild.

No. 80% of the games start at 8 PM so it's fine. Summer is off time for all students, attendances and trp's will be high.

 

[Tusker]

Cricket Australia has got it pretty well pegged. T20 is for people who don't really like cricket and is like a gateway drug, to hook people and make them into the future audience for real cricket. BBL tickets are sold virtually at a loss because the job of the BBL is just to attract a new clientele.

If the T20 and ODI format is that easy to play and succeed in a whole lot of Purists Test cricketers would have also done well in T20. Fact is that it is not the case. The reverse is also not true. Personally I enjoy all formats of cricket. There is no doubt that the limited overs formats have enhanced Test Cricket. Otherwise the 70s and 80s brand of Draw infested Test Cricket would have long been dead.

 

[Bhaijaan]

IPL only seems less interesting when it coincides with an ICC tournament otherwise it is the most premier T20 league in the world for obvious reasons and is fun to watch unless you're at a personal level turned off by T20 format.