No Indians in Kerry Packer's WSC?

[MMHS]

Actually I just pointed out your hypocrisy when you responded to another poster by claiming you were honest and didn’t rely on false claims to make your point.
Alas, that is exactly what you did and no amount of backtracking or deflection will alter what is evident in this thread.
You claim to be a knowledgeable cricket fan yet either you are continuing with this charade to hide your previous post or you’re not as clued up as you think you are. Otherwise you would not have made the claim that the names you posted above were ‘at the peak of their career’. Most of them were not selected for the most high profile tour of India which happened less than 6 months before Lahore Badshahs joined the ICL, and none of them were selected for the home series against Zimbabwe at the start of 2008.
To claim that they were at their career peak is delusional thinking.

It's fine.

The issue here is not about ICL or who played where. PAK didn't have a domestic system that could provide a security to even top players (even doesn't have now - several PAK starting players left national T20 cup for BPL at the business end, when PCB chief Sethi declared that I one will be allowed to skip National T20), hence it's players are always vulnerable (to leave the national team or even to corruption). Not saying it's the PAK players only, but they are always the easiest targets.

And, PCB never had the balls, neither muscles to block it's top players - for example, take 1998 Independence cup (India), for a tournament of Indian Independence cup, PCB had to send a team without Wasim & Waquar, because they were contracted to Counties and PCB declined to pay their buy back money. ICL was just an example - Inzi did the Tony Greig job for Subhas Chandra & Zee network and he picked players from his choice.... and whoever was called, didn't bother for their PAK career for an illegal league!!!!!

I was well aware of what I was writing - don't even think that it was a slip of pen. But yes, for WSC, you can't blame PAK players - money was too good and players knew that they could make a come back, which wasn't the case for Indian, English & NZ players (you can check my initial post on it) - TCCB never called back it's WSC players, BCCI wont have either. Only ACB (CA) allowed WSC players back because that was one of the conditions of settlement that took place between them and Kerry Packer.

 

[Asifnow]

Though Packer's cricket was way before my birth and I have limited knowledge on this topic but can you pls elaborate on the bolded part? What has height got to do with the calibre of a player? Is it not true Bradman himself invited 5'3" Sachin to his house for special dinner and told him that SRT reminds him of his playing days?

At that point in time, in the 70s, there was a particular style of cricket star, tall, in good shape, maybe with a mullet and a moustache or West Indian and imposing. But more importantly its about style of play, who would pay to watch Sunny bat?

 

[Rajdeep]

At that point in time, in the 70s, there was a particular style of cricket star, tall, in good shape, maybe with a mullet and a moustache or West Indian and imposing. But more importantly its about style of play, who would pay to watch Sunny bat?

Can someone who watched cricket in 70s testify the above statement is true i.e only tall well build cricketers with moustaches were entertained? Must have been pretty racist world back then. Glad to be a cricket fan in 21st century in the IPL era.

 

[Asifnow]

Can someone who watched cricket in 70s testify the above statement is true i.e only tall well build cricketers with moustaches were entertained? Must have been pretty racist world back then. Glad to be a cricket fan in 21st century in the IPL era.

hahaha it wasnt about race, it was about the look, but even then, its more of a jokey way for me to put it. Fact is, Sunny just wasnt a star and Dev would become a star around 83 but even then there bigger names. Not sure Packer would want to pay for those guys.

I'm glad you enjoy the IPL.

 

[Smbhayi]

hahaha it wasnt about race, it was about the look, but even then, its more of a jokey way for me to put it. Fact is, Sunny just wasnt a star and Dev would become a star around 83 but even then there bigger names. Not sure Packer would want to pay for those guys.

I'm glad you enjoy the IPL.

He did want them but Indian just ignored him .. Why is that hard to understand..?

 

[cricketjoshila]

hahaha it wasnt about race, it was about the look, but even then, its more of a jokey way for me to put it. Fact is, Sunny just wasnt a star and Dev would become a star around 83 but even then there bigger names. Not sure Packer would want to pay for those guys.

I'm glad you enjoy the IPL.

Lol

Gavaskar was not a star, a superstar so were Bedi and Vishy. India had defeated WI and England and were ranked number one test team between 1973 and 74.

Not all players want to be mercenaries.

Thats why you dont see Indian players running off to play leagues after leagues.

 

[Junaids]

Can someone who watched cricket in 70s testify the above statement is true i.e only tall well build cricketers with moustaches were entertained? Must have been pretty racist world back then. Glad to be a cricket fan in 21st century in the IPL era.

In Australia it’s certainly true that Packer used sex to sell cricket to women, and its why almost half the TV audience has been female ever since.

The whole “Big Boys Play At Night” advertising campaign was basically based upon the size of West Indian lunchboxes. Really, it was.

And Imran Khan was marketed as a sex symbol, and that lasted for the rest of his career.

So it wasn’t racist, but it was certainly sexist.

 

[Junaids]

Packer promotion.....

 

[Junaids]

Unbelievable that out of ten cricketers in the advert, three are already dead.

Tony Greig
David Hookes
Max Walker

 

[MMHS]

I definitely can’t name drop any Packer meeting! I met Lloyd repeatedly as a Lancashire junior member and Manley I met at the LSE while I was a student in London. (I was at UCL and he was an LSE alumnus, and my flat mate was studying International Relations there).

But Packer wasn’t trying to deliver a profitable, sustainable cricket competition. He wanted to obtain the Australian TV rights and when he was turned down even though he was the highest bidder he just bought the world’s best cricketers as a form of ransom. And they were previously so badly paid that they were delighted to join him.

And it succeeded as planned: he kept the TV rights for the rest of his life and a further 11 seasons after his death: for 38 years in total.

Junaids, my apologies first for being sarcastic with you, I shouldn't have done so.

You see, one of the two of my posts used here as reference (the Kingston Test), was initiated when some internet knob, who must be watching cricket via cricinfo suddenly noticed the scorecard of that Test and thought he would troll around Indians - otherwise, that Test was anything but a mega collapse - IND declared at 6 down for 300+. He had absolutely no clue of the proceedings there and when I explained the situation (trust me, I have no love affair with Pakistanis or Indians here) ......... I can say that his/her initial responses were not polished to put it politely. Those were my early days at PP, sometimes in 2011 - the poster had absolutely no clue or experience about MMHS, and to be kind to him, I had my identity with my user name - must have thought usual ".... ***, this Bengali ...... Larke lenge....". Since then, I have tagged him few times in that thread - never showed the guts to come back.

But, to be fair with him also, it was quite predictable that he'll poke around back side of Indians - it was a fair exchange, I must say. We deshi people are all more or less similar our ego is big, our emotions are erratic. But, you are an Englishman, born in Dacca, now living in Aussie land and you are well aware of your cricket - why you?

Those were the pre match referee era with home umpires running/ruining the show and some of those West Indian wickets those days were notorious. At least, two Tests in WIN later in last 25 years were cancelled by Match Referees for substandard/risky playing surfaces and ironically, both times it was against England. In fact three - 1980-81 Wisden Trophy had 4 Tests with one cancelled - I have forgotten the reason now (Probably Robin Jackman issue). NO WAY, that Kingston Test would have seen second day, had it been played 25 years later with couple of neutral umpires (3rd country nationals - umpires always are supposed to be neutral) adjudicating the game, administrated by another 3rd country Match Referee. Using that Kingston Test as a reason for Packer not hiring Indians for his enterprise is something worthy of some nobody here, who comes for few days glory and then returns back with a new user name, ...... after experience - BUT why you?

Any way, my apologies again (to you [MENTION=6928]Iqbal'sh[/MENTION] also - my motive was never to hurt Pakistani feelings here, neither to downplay PAK players either for joining Packer - I am the biggest fan of that generation).

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I was writing from the memory, but now did take a look. In two tournaments, excluding Inzamam ul Haq, these were the PAK players that left National team and could have been banned for life -

Abdul Razzaq
Naved-ul-Hasan
Humayun Farhat
Tahir Mughal
Imran Nazir
Shahid Yousuf
Imran Farhat
Shahid Nazir
Mohammad Sami
Arshad Khan
Riaz Afridi

And, if I can recall correctly, MoYo also signed for ICL but could play as the tournament was defunct. I leave it to you to judge what is almost - you may look at the profile of other players from established cricket nations, their age, their future prospect that signed for ICL to find out the contradiction.

Yes, a group of BD players also joined and played games there, in a time when these players were playing 10-12 ODIs in a year and a Test or two here and there. Still, these are the players that joined ICL

Aftab Ahmed, Alok Kapali, Dhiman Ghosh, Farhad Reza, Golam Mabud, Mahbubul Karim, Manjural Islam, Mohammad Rafique, Mohammad Sharif, Mosharraf Hossain, Nazimuddin, Shahriar Nafees, Tapash Baisya.

PAK players are mercenaries - you may like it or not, but that's the truth. From Hong Kong sixes to T10 in UAE to Uganda league to club cricket in UK, Canada, Dhaka, Mainland Europe or Middle east - from no other country, so many "regular and in contention for nation selection", players play in these leagues/cricket. Now come back with the talent logic - I am waiting, a very similar thought process actually the mother of this thread ..... I just busted that. No, PAK players at WSC were not bigger mercenaries than the Aussies or West Indians, that you can keep with you - BUT, Indians and Kiwis didn't join there as they opted not to, not because they were "less tal*nted", or "Coward" - this one I'll keep with me.

Regarding nonsense - the amount of garbage I have read from PAK posters and their fans in just this one thread is probably enough to know who talks nonsense.

What is your problem with cricketers trying to make money? The mercenaries you speaking of are mostly players who have little to no chance of ever making the national team or have given up hope of ever playing again. Would you rather have them sit home jobless? And it doesn't even apply to only Pakistani players, but players from all over the world

Hong Kong Sixes: A weekend of fun in Hong Kong where players from almost all test playing nations have fun. Doesn't even qualify as real cricket.

Dhaka Premier League: Literally had three times as many Indian players as Pakistani players before they decided to ban foreign players.

Sri Lanka domestic: Pakistani players who are unable to find a place in domestic sides go to Sri Lanka out of frustration. But I assure you it has more to do with feeding their families than getting rich.

Canada: Actual T20 league that also featured Smith, Warner, du Plessis, Neesham, Lynn, Cutting, Gayle, Russell, Phehlukwayo, along with a number of Pakistani players and other big names.

T10: Pakistani players are banned from playing in this league now but let's mention the names of some of the "mercenaries" that signed up for this tournament, shall we? (besides the Pakistani players who are obviously mercenaries and only care about money as you alluded to) I'll start: Eoin Morgan, Jason Roy, James Vince, Alex Hales, Jonny Bairstow, Liam Plunkett, Jofra Archer, Adil Rashid, Tom Banton, Dawid Malan, Moeen Ali, Chris Jordan, Hashim Amla, CDG, Tamim Iqbal, Mustafizur Rahman, Rashid Khan, Mohammad Nabi, Andre Russell, Nicholas Pooran, Fabian Allen, Lendl Simmons, Kusal Perera, Isuru Udana, Asela Gunaratne, Nuwan Pradeep, Sandeep Lamichanne, Zaheer Khan, Yuvraj Singh

Uganda: All the Pakistani players who played here were retired (formally or informally) from cricket barring Farhat.

So what exactly are you trying to prove when its obvious that Pakistani players play in different parts of the world for different reasons. And its not even just Pakistani players. No test nation has players playing in more overseas leagues than England and West Indies. Pakistan's centrally contracted players are infact bound to a 4 league limit.

You were right till WSC and ICL. Pakistani players were mercenaries in WSC, even ICL despite the fact that most of them were past their sell dates. But then you went overboard with the randomness just to prove your point. Your point may have had weight in 2007-8 or in the late 70s but it doesn't hold any weight now when every test nation barring India has its players or "mercenaries", as you call them, playing all over the world.

 

[Bigboii]

Junaids, my apologies first for being sarcastic with you, I shouldn't have done so.

You see, one of the two of my posts used here as reference (the Kingston Test), was initiated when some internet knob, who must be watching cricket via cricinfo suddenly noticed the scorecard of that Test and thought he would troll around Indians - otherwise, that Test was anything but a mega collapse - IND declared at 6 down for 300+. He had absolutely no clue of the proceedings there and when I explained the situation (trust me, I have no love affair with Pakistanis or Indians here) ......... I can say that his/her initial responses were not polished to put it politely. Those were my early days at PP, sometimes in 2011 - the poster had absolutely no clue or experience about MMHS, and to be kind to him, I had my identity with my user name - must have thought usual ".... ***, this Bengali ...... Larke lenge....". Since then, I have tagged him few times in that thread - never showed the guts to come back.

But, to be fair with him also, it was quite predictable that he'll poke around back side of Indians - it was a fair exchange, I must say. We deshi people are all more or less similar our ego is big, our emotions are erratic. But, you are an Englishman, born in Dacca, now living in Aussie land and you are well aware of your cricket - why you?

Those were the pre match referee era with home umpires running/ruining the show and some of those West Indian wickets those days were notorious. At least, two Tests in WIN later in last 25 years were cancelled by Match Referees for substandard/risky playing surfaces and ironically, both times it was against England. In fact three - 1980-81 Wisden Trophy had 4 Tests with one cancelled - I have forgotten the reason now (Probably Robin Jackman issue). NO WAY, that Kingston Test would have seen second day, had it been played 25 years later with couple of neutral umpires (3rd country nationals - umpires always are supposed to be neutral) adjudicating the game, administrated by another 3rd country Match Referee. Using that Kingston Test as a reason for Packer not hiring Indians for his enterprise is something worthy of some nobody here, who comes for few days glory and then returns back with a new user name, ...... after experience - BUT why you?

Any way, my apologies again (to you [MENTION=6928]Iqbal'sh[/MENTION] also - my motive was never to hurt Pakistani feelings here, neither to downplay PAK players either for joining Packer - I am the biggest fan of that generation).

Oh I thought you were the fan of umer akmal and his generation

 

[MMHS]

What is your problem with cricketers trying to make money? The mercenaries you speaking of are mostly players who have little to no chance of ever making the national team or have given up hope of ever playing again. Would you rather have them sit home jobless? And it doesn't even apply to only Pakistani players, but players from all over the world

Hong Kong Sixes: A weekend of fun in Hong Kong where players from almost all test playing nations have fun. Doesn't even qualify as real cricket.

Dhaka Premier League: Literally had three times as many Indian players as Pakistani players before they decided to ban foreign players.

Sri Lanka domestic: Pakistani players who are unable to find a place in domestic sides go to Sri Lanka out of frustration. But I assure you it has more to do with feeding their families than getting rich.

Canada: Actual T20 league that also featured Smith, Warner, du Plessis, Neesham, Lynn, Cutting, Gayle, Russell, Phehlukwayo, along with a number of Pakistani players and other big names.

T10: Pakistani players are banned from playing in this league now but let's mention the names of some of the "mercenaries" that signed up for this tournament, shall we? (besides the Pakistani players who are obviously mercenaries and only care about money as you alluded to) I'll start: Eoin Morgan, Jason Roy, James Vince, Alex Hales, Jonny Bairstow, Liam Plunkett, Jofra Archer, Adil Rashid, Tom Banton, Dawid Malan, Moeen Ali, Chris Jordan, Hashim Amla, CDG, Tamim Iqbal, Mustafizur Rahman, Rashid Khan, Mohammad Nabi, Andre Russell, Nicholas Pooran, Fabian Allen, Lendl Simmons, Kusal Perera, Isuru Udana, Asela Gunaratne, Nuwan Pradeep, Sandeep Lamichanne, Zaheer Khan, Yuvraj Singh

Uganda: All the Pakistani players who played here were retired (formally or informally) from cricket barring Farhat.

So what exactly are you trying to prove when its obvious that Pakistani players play in different parts of the world for different reasons. And its not even just Pakistani players. No test nation has players playing in more overseas leagues than England and West Indies. Pakistan's centrally contracted players are infact bound to a 4 league limit.

You were right till WSC and ICL. Pakistani players were mercenaries in WSC, even ICL despite the fact that most of them were past their sell dates. But then you went overboard with the randomness just to prove your point. Your point may have had weight in 2007-8 or in the late 70s but it doesn't hold any weight now when every test nation barring India has its players or "mercenaries", as you call them, playing all over the world.

Leave it - the topic here is not Pakistani players.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Leave it - the topic here is not Pakistani players.

Don't make sweeping statements if you can't defend them later.

 

[MMHS]

Don't make sweeping statements if you can't defend them later.

I have put enough logic here for those who understands - it's up to you to accept or not. One side you are asking what's wrong with players trying to earn.... But then not ready to accept that PAK players are not secured from their domestic resources, hence almost desperate to be sold - be as cricketer or match-fixer or YouTube clown - you can't have it both ways.

And, your statement regarding Dhaka league is completely wrong - in cricket season, there were hundreds of PAK players freelancing around Dhaka - they would play here & there fringe tournaments, almost 7 days a week (sometimes two games a day), for cash payment and many of them actually skipped their domestic season - I myself have hired few - $100-200 in cash, accommodation, travel allowance and good food, it was value for money as well. From Wasim Akram to Shahid Afridi - regular in Dhaka League every season.

It stopped in last few years and that gap is filled now by substandard Indians & Lankans for reasons beyond cricket (you can thank few PCB Chairmen as well for that). Our domestic resources also has increased and BCB has put a rush on those random tournaments, where more games were sold than runs scored there.

I was trying to defend the topic of this thread, which I believe I tried my best. Rest are side talks - if you really want to have a go at cricket finance & PAK cricketers, open another thread, I’ll try my best there. I do have some knowledge to share about Cricket & cricketers of Pakistan.

 

[Asifnow]

He did want them but Indian just ignored him .. Why is that hard to understand..?

Lol

Gavaskar was not a star, a superstar so were Bedi and Vishy. India had defeated WI and England and were ranked number one test team between 1973 and 74.

Not all players want to be mercenaries.

Thats why you dont see Indian players running off to play leagues after leagues.

I'd be very curious to know what offers Packer made to the Indian "superstars" and how that compared to the offers made to the Pakistanis and West Indies?

 

[cricketjoshila]

I'd be very curious to know what offers Packer made to the Indian "superstars" and how that compared to the offers made to the Pakistanis and West Indies?

Whatever were the offers, they were rejected. They were not good enough for Indians to become mercenaries like pakistanis or West Indians.

 

[Rajdeep]

In Australia it’s certainly true that Packer used sex to sell cricket to women, and its why almost half the TV audience has been female ever since.

The whole “Big Boys Play At Night” advertising campaign was basically based upon the size of West Indian lunchboxes. Really, it was.

And Imran Khan was marketed as a sex symbol, and that lasted for the rest of his career.

So it wasn’t racist, but it was certainly sexist.

Wow shocking man. Tell us more...did they used to use red light as well to give a more feel to it?

Safe to say that Kerry Packer's world series cricket was more of a WWE kinda gimmick than actual sport that we all love. Thank god times have changed and we dont need sex symbol to attract audience.

Thanks for the info brother Junaids. Next time someone mentions Kerry Packer, I will have a hearty laugh bcoz that wasnt cricket.

 

[Asifnow]

Whatever were the offers, they were rejected. They were not good enough for Indians to become mercenaries like pakistanis or West Indians.

You cant make a claim and then not back it up. You can say its your opinion if you wish.

 

[Junaids]

Wow shocking man. Tell us more...did they used to use red light as well to give a more feel to it?

Safe to say that Kerry Packer's world series cricket was more of a WWE kinda gimmick than actual sport that we all love. Thank god times have changed and we dont need sex symbol to attract audience.

Thanks for the info brother Junaids. Next time someone mentions Kerry Packer, I will have a hearty laugh bcoz that wasnt cricket.

There is a wonderful book called "Cricket Contest" written by the late Christopher Martin-Jenkins. It chronicles the first season of new official cricket in Australia after the Packer settlement. I'm showing off, but I chose it as my prize in my final year of primary school!

CMJ was a wonderful man, but he was an arch-traditionalist. Even in this thread, wonderful posters like [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] and [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] have used expressions like "country" to describe playing ICC cricket, and "rebel" to describe Packer's cricket.

I see official governing bodies as being a bit like royal families: they are just entities which previously seized power and now seek to benefit themselves and retain power. You can't tell me that there is something special about FIFA or the ICC which elevates cricket to somehow become national service. They are just monopolies which are trying to maintain their own power and control.

If you ask anyone from Australia or the West Indies they will tell you the same thing.

When Lillee and Marsh and the Chappells played against Richards and Lloyd and Holding and Roberts that was the real deal - Australia versus the West Indies - whether the ICC or WSC was controlling it. Having the best players conferred total legitimacy.

But when Alan Hurst and Steve Rixon played against Bacchus and Foster and Jumadeen, that ICC series was totally bogus.

Anyway, back to CMJ's "Cricket Contest".

As an 11 year old I was very unconvinced by the idea that WSC had no legitimacy and ICC had total legitimacy. I had followed the court case in London and the TCCB looked ridiculous - it's why I hated how the BCCI first copied ICL with IPL, and then effectively outlawed ICL while claiming that IPL was pure and beautiful..

The Professional Cricketers Association in England was a racist, pro-Apartheid sporting wing of the Conservative Party, and they egged on the TCCB, the MCC and the Media (all of which were also wings of the Conservative Party) to try to drive Packer into ruin. To them it was absolutely fine to spend your winters taking money from South Africa which should have been building hospitals and schools for black people, but playing for Packer was evil and needed punishment.

Sadly CMJ really believed this too. In those days, with Thatcher newly elected, the BBC was considered a national institution for the British ruling classes, like the MCC or Oxford and Cambridge Universities or the Royal Opera House. It was only as Thatcher moved the Conservative Party in the same direction that Trump has moved the Republican Party that suddenly the BBC became a leftist conspiracy.

To CMJ, cricket had to be on the BBC, and ideas like price bidding were just distasteful and absurd. And everyone knew that the ABC was Australia's BBC, and the idea that some nouveau riche upstart could simply buy cricket was absurd and outrageous.

So the establishment - people like CMJ and the BBC and the TCCB and the media - were quick to decry any Packer innovation.

Filming from behind the bowler's arm at both ends of the pitch? Unnatural!

Playing at night when people weren't at school or at work? Disrespectful of tradition!

Paying working class people more to play cricket than a chap could earn in the civil service? Communism!

Making cricket sexy to tempt women to watch? Immoral!

I may argue with people like [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] about how professional cricket was in the 1970's. But the reality is that the elite players were already highly professional, while the administrators were just amateurish parasites.

By the way, I vote for the party whose actions I have made fun of in this post. I'm not a leftie decrying the right. I'm someone like Peter Oborne who is of the right but can see how appallingly we were mismanaging cricket, and how we made Packer happen by trying to stay in the 1930's when it was almost the 1980's.

 

[tyron_woodley]

You cant make a claim and then not back it up. You can say its your opinion if you wish.

the premise of the argument behind packer not selecting indian players due to their lack of physical appeal for his rubbish league is based on? Is there evidence to support that claim ?

 

[cricketjoshila]

You cant make a claim and then not back it up. You can say its your opinion if you wish.

I didnt make the claim, i just said what was reported in the media.

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/mumb...o-took-on-mumbai/amp_articleshow/61314048.cms

Why did a relationship based on friendship and mutual admiration fall away so rapidly? Bedi traces the animosity to his decision not to become part of the multimillion-dollar Packer circus in the late 1970s. Like Bedi, Gavaskar too was offered a contract to play Packer cricket in 1978. He reportedly actively considered the offer but was forced to back off because captain Bedi put his foot down. Gavaskar offers an entirely different version. He claims that he and wicketkeeper Kirmani were the only two Indians to be offered Packer contracts for the 1979–80 season. “Yes, I was open about it and the managing committee even invited me to meet them and give details of what it entailed. I said I would be released to play for India but wouldn’t be available for the Ranji Trophy. They were quite happy to let me go but there were others who manipulated to drop Kirmani from the Indian team and remove me as Indian skipper for the 1979 tour of England even though I had won a series as captain in 1978–79 and scored more than 700 runs. In the end, I didn’t play for Packer since it would have meant that I couldn’t play for India. I chose my country above commercial interests and yet the media called me a traitor and what not!” reveals Gavaskar.


Not everyone wants to be a mercenary. Thats why Indians dont run to a gazzalion of leagues.

 

[Junaids]

I didnt make the claim, i just said what was reported in the media.

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/mumb...o-took-on-mumbai/amp_articleshow/61314048.cms

Why did a relationship based on friendship and mutual admiration fall away so rapidly? Bedi traces the animosity to his decision not to become part of the multimillion-dollar Packer circus in the late 1970s. Like Bedi, Gavaskar too was offered a contract to play Packer cricket in 1978. He reportedly actively considered the offer but was forced to back off because captain Bedi put his foot down. Gavaskar offers an entirely different version. He claims that he and wicketkeeper Kirmani were the only two Indians to be offered Packer contracts for the 1979–80 season. “Yes, I was open about it and the managing committee even invited me to meet them and give details of what it entailed. I said I would be released to play for India but wouldn’t be available for the Ranji Trophy. They were quite happy to let me go but there were others who manipulated to drop Kirmani from the Indian team and remove me as Indian skipper for the 1979 tour of England even though I had won a series as captain in 1978–79 and scored more than 700 runs. In the end, I didn’t play for Packer since it would have meant that I couldn’t play for India. I chose my country above commercial interests and yet the media called me a traitor and what not!” reveals Gavaskar.


Not everyone wants to be a mercenary. Thats why Indians dont run to a gazzalion of leagues.

As soon as you revert to words like “mercenary” you lose the context of Packer’s cricket.

Team 1 was the full, real Australia.

Team 2 was the full, real World Champion West Indies.

Team 3 contained almost all the stars of the World’s best - but exiled - team, South Africa.

Nobody discussed “country versus money” because “country” meant reserve international cricket.

The World Eleven featured:

1. Barry Richards - the world’s greatest batsman.

2. Mike Procter - the world’s greatest all-rounder.

3. Alan Knott - the GOAT wicketkeeper

4. Derek Underwood - the world’s most prolific spinner, and a household name due to the Ashes.

5. Tony Greig - captain of England, and a sex symbol (he really was!)

6. Imran Khan - the world’s best upcoming allrounder. And another sex symbol.

7. Clive Rice - the world’s Next best emerging all-rounder.

8. John Snow - who had come to Australia and won an Ashes series.

9. Garth Le Roux - the world’s fastest emerging bowler.

Yes, Sunil Gavaskar would have been in this team on merit. But he would have been a very marginal pick in the starting eleven, and offered none of the marketing value in Australia that the players listed above offered.

Cricket was sold as sex. I can’t imagine an advertising hoarding with giant pictures of players with the top six buttons of their tight shirt unfastened:

Imran.....Hookes......Little Sunny Gavaskar.

That was never going to happen.

And Bedi would never have displaced Underwood, while Kirmani would never have displaced Knott.

So the Indians were a pretty marginal proposition for WSC, and I would assume that the offers they received were pretty derisory.

 

[cricketjoshila]

As soon as you revert to words like “mercenary” you lose the context of Packer’s cricket.

Team 1 was the full, real Australia.

Team 2 was the full, real World Champion West Indies.

Team 3 contained almost all the stars of the World’s best - but exiled - team, South Africa.

Nobody discussed “country versus money” because “country” meant reserve international cricket.

The World Eleven featured:

1. Barry Richards - the world’s greatest batsman.

2. Mike Procter - the world’s greatest all-rounder.

3. Alan Knott - the GOAT wicketkeeper

4. Derek Underwood - the world’s most prolific spinner, and a household name due to the Ashes.

5. Tony Greig - captain of England, and a sex symbol (he really was!)

6. Imran Khan - the world’s best upcoming allrounder. And another sex symbol.

7. Clive Rice - the world’s Next best emerging all-rounder.

8. John Snow - who had come to Australia and won an Ashes series.

9. Garth Le Roux - the world’s fastest emerging bowler.

Yes, Sunil Gavaskar would have been in this team on merit. But he would have been a very marginal pick in the starting eleven, and offered none of the marketing value in Australia that the players listed above offered.

Cricket was sold as sex. I can’t imagine an advertising hoarding with giant pictures of players with the top six buttons of their tight shirt unfastened:

Imran.....Hookes......Little Sunny Gavaskar.

That was never going to happen.

And Bedi would never have displaced Underwood, while Kirmani would never have displaced Knott.

So the Indians were a pretty marginal proposition for WSC, and I would assume that the offers they received were pretty derisory.

Unofficial mercenary cricket. That was WSC. Like WWE these days. Indians didnt sell themselves as mercenaries then.

And yes a player with 4 tests is not even fit to tie the shoelaces of an opener with 10 test runs.

You can assume anything, doesnt mean its true.

 

[Junaids]

Unofficial mercenary cricket. That was WSC. Like WWE these days. Indians didnt sell themselves as mercenaries then.

And yes a player with 4 tests is not even fit to tie the shoelaces of an opener with 10 test runs.

You can assume anything, doesnt mean its true.

That’s a big claim.

India played against an official “Australia” with a Top Four of

Hibbert
Cosier
Ogilvie
Sergeant

....,captained by a long-retired 42 year old.

Meanwhile the “mercenary” West Indies played a “mercenary” Australia featuring two Chappells, Walters, Marsh, Walker and Lillee.

And for the only time they got to play against the real world champions - Barry Richards, Procter, Rice and Le Roux.

But if you think that Hibbert and Ogilvie were the gold standard, well, I’m surprised.

 

[Rajdeep]

As soon as you revert to words like “mercenary” you lose the context of Packer’s cricket.

Team 1 was the full, real Australia.

Team 2 was the full, real World Champion West Indies.

Team 3 contained almost all the stars of the World’s best - but exiled - team, South Africa.

Nobody discussed “country versus money” because “country” meant reserve international cricket.

The World Eleven featured:

1. Barry Richards - the world’s greatest batsman.

2. Mike Procter - the world’s greatest all-rounder.

3. Alan Knott - the GOAT wicketkeeper

4. Derek Underwood - the world’s most prolific spinner, and a household name due to the Ashes.

5. Tony Greig - captain of England, and a sex symbol (he really was!)

6. Imran Khan - the world’s best upcoming allrounder. And another sex symbol.

7. Clive Rice - the world’s Next best emerging all-rounder.

8. John Snow - who had come to Australia and won an Ashes series.

9. Garth Le Roux - the world’s fastest emerging bowler.

Yes, Sunil Gavaskar would have been in this team on merit. But he would have been a very marginal pick in the starting eleven, and offered none of the marketing value in Australia that the players listed above offered.

Cricket was sold as sex. I can’t imagine an advertising hoarding with giant pictures of players with the top six buttons of their tight shirt unfastened:

Imran.....Hookes......Little Sunny Gavaskar.

That was never going to happen.

And Bedi would never have displaced Underwood, while Kirmani would never have displaced Knott.

So the Indians were a pretty marginal proposition for WSC, and I would assume that the offers they received were pretty derisory.

In short, Hardik Pandya would have been great fit for Packer's cricket based on the criteria's you mentioned.This is getting hilarious every passing minute

 

[cricketjoshila]

That’s a big claim.

India played against an official “Australia” with a Top Four of

Hibbert
Cosier
Ogilvie
Sergeant

....,captained by a long-retired 42 year old.

Meanwhile the “mercenary” West Indies played a “mercenary” Australia featuring two Chappells, Walters, Marsh, Walker and Lillee.

And for the only time they got to play against the real world champions - Barry Richards, Procter, Rice and Le Roux.

But if you think that Hibbert and Ogilvie were the gold standard, well, I’m surprised.

Fun mercenary cricket. Hardly serious stuff called test cricket. It was a circus.

 

[Junaids]

Fun mercenary cricket. Hardly serious stuff called test cricket. It was a circus.

And yet everyone who ever played it - from the two Richards’ to Imran Khan to Ian Chappell to Tony Greig - said that WSC was the toughest, hardest, most difficult and high quality cricket that they ever played.

 

[Junaids]

Fun mercenary cricket. Hardly serious stuff called test cricket. It was a circus.

So how did “official” full-strength India manage to lose to Hibbert, Ogilvie, Cosier and Serjeant as the Australia D team?

 

[Swashbuckler]

So how did “official” full-strength India manage to lose to Hibbert, Ogilvie, Cosier and Serjeant as the Australia D team?

Patriotic umpiring.

 

[tyron_woodley]

patriotic umpiring, no drs, no no ball umpire and not to mention back then fixing was rampant. Not that it isn't present today but it's much harder to match fix in the modern era. In saying that it still exists albeit fixing is done in a much more covertly.

 

[Junaids]

patriotic umpiring, no drs, no no ball umpire and not to mention back then fixing was rampant. Not that it isn't present today but it's much harder to match fix in the modern era. In saying that it still exists albeit fixing is done in a much more covertly.

Fixing in the 1970’s?

Really? Tell me more!

Barely any cricket was even televised outside the host country, and NONE was televised live outside the home country.

The first overseas tour televised live was England in the West Indies in 89-90. And it was over the next decade that fixing really increased.

As for DRS, only Packer had a camera behind the bowler’s arm at both ends. In the “official” cricket you and [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] claim was the real thing, half the overs were shown from the wrong end. Good luck with ball tracking!

 

[tyron_woodley]

Fixing in the 1970’s?

Really? Tell me more!

Barely any cricket was even televised outside the host country, and NONE was televised live outside the home country.

The first overseas tour televised live was England in the West Indies in 89-90. And it was over the next decade that fixing really increased.

As for DRS, only Packer had a camera behind the bowler’s arm at both ends. In the “official” cricket you and [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] claim was the real thing, half the overs were shown from the wrong end. Good luck with ball tracking!

It started in the 70s. County and club games in domestic tournaments, in England and other countries, were allegedly fixed by teams to secure points and league positions.

In such situations, players were not bribed with money but relied on mutual interest. If a match was of crucial importance to one team and not to the other, an accommodation would be reached between the teams as to who would win. Similar arrangements would be made to secure bowling and batting points.

 

[MMHS]

Are we still in it!!!!!!!!!!!!

The WSC was really of the highest standard of cricket, most of world's top players played there under three team names. But, still it was not recognized cricket, a renegade league and players left for it wasn't sure about it's future either - they went from instant gratification. At similar time, there was a soccer league in USA and NY Cosmos did similar things to WSC, but with semi retired superstars. Imran in his book himself had written about the quality of cricket at WSC and how it helped him to develop into a world class fast bowler .... but still it was illegal cricket and TCCB (ECB) never called back their WSC players. I am sure BCCI won't have either, probably NZCB as well.

From quality perspective no question about it - WSC was at it's best, but I think in cricket it's the National banner that pulls the crowd. I am sure between IPL and Indian team - most Indians will pick National team. Couple of years back BPL's collection of star players was only second to IPL and BD T20 team was below even AFGs - still, I hardly bothered for watching BPL, but did watch every game played by the national team, even T20!!!! Packer himself did realize that eventually people will get bored with his circus and his enterprise had no future.

I believe 1977 IND series wasn't a crowd puller, but next year's Ashes (ENG won 5-1 against Packer reject Aussies, which made Mike Brearley the genius he was ...) was followed in numbers. That gave Packer the clue that he won't be able to sustain for long with his venture. Also, PAK players returned to national team ahead of IND series (at home) and surely WIN players would have done so for 1980 ENG tour (If still WSC was running). Eventually, Kerry Packer & ACB could settle in between and that bond still is going strong.

But, the point stand - few Indians (& Kiwis, young English players) were approached by Packer's agent (s), but they declined - that's the reason why Indians, Kiwis and young English players were not in WSC. Otherwise, I am sure Kerry Packer wasn't that fool to hire 36 years old John Snow over 27 years old Willis, for Snow's heroics 7 years back. Rest are just useless side talks here.

 

[Junaids]

[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]

Just three minor disagreements:

1. Nobody took the 77-78 Ashes seriously. The Aussies were all reserves - Border, Hughes and Hogg were unknowns until they performed well - and England were without Knott, Greig, Woolmer (who had made consecutive hundreds in that summer’s home Ashes) and Underwood. That was equivalent to England now missing Root, Stokes, Archer and Broad, or Australia now missing Warner, Smith, Cummins and Lyon.

2. England did pick ex-WSC players - Knott and Woolmer both returned to the team, while Greig and Snow were too old. They also picked former South African rebels: Gooch, Emburey, Larkins, Willem et al.

3. John Snow was a household name in Australia because he won the Ashes there seven years earlier and was respected and feared to the point that a spectator assaulted him. Bob Willis barely took a wicket in the five years up to Packer: he then returned and blew away weak teams but he was very much a fringe player until Packer. Yes, by 1977-78 Willis was better than the ancient Snow. But Snow was Box Office in Australia and Snow wasn’t.

 

[Bezli]

I don’t want to be rude, it def has to do with looks.

 

[Junaids]

Again, people are getting too influenced by the idea of being an “official” competition.

In 1977 Cricket was still run by the MCC from Lords in all but name. The ICC was its figleaf, run from the clock tower at Lords, and had only stopped being called the Imperial Cricket Conference 12 years earlier.

If you supported the ICC, you basically regretted Indian independence or the idea that within a few years (4) Australians and New Zealanders would lose their nationality status as “British Subjects”.

The MCC were a bunch of pro-Empire anti-Commonwealth Independence racists who wanted to maintain links with Apartheid South Africa, and the ICC was how they controlled world cricket.

Packer was a bullying businessman, but he acquired 90% of the world’s best cricketers because nobody respected the ICC or MCC outside England.

I get that younger readers are buying into this “official versus mercenary” fairy tale that the ICC spun to try to maintain control while still paying the players peanuts. But it was nonsense, and only the British public swallowed it - they were used to doing what the upper classes told them to do.

In Australia literally nobody took “official cricket” seriously. It overnight became a joke competition with reserve players.

But Packer has no interest in delivering WSC for any longer than it took to get the TV rights from the ACB.

Packer won a total victory. WSC paid for itself many times over: it made a small loss at the time but brought him 38 years of monopoly TV rights.

 

[Junaids]

Just to highlight why no person of colour should idealise the ICC or MCC in the 1970’s.

The Secretary of the MCC at the time was Donald Carr. Two decades earlier on a tour of Pakistan he had responded to an umpire giving several bad decisions by manhandling him, dragging him to the showers and holding him under a running shower.

The ICC was dominated by the white countries. Insanely, this included the West Indies: they had stopped having white captains 16 years earlier but still had white-only WICB Presidents until 1981.

And it was (White) WICB President Jeff Stollmeyer who supported the English TCCB and Australian ACB in their futile legal disaster against Kerry Packer’s World Series Cricket.

 

[andy0204]

Are we still in it!!!!!!!!!!!!

The WSC was really of the highest standard of cricket, most of world's top players played there under three team names. But, still it was not recognized cricket, a renegade league and players left for it wasn't sure about it's future either - they went from instant gratification. At similar time, there was a soccer league in USA and NY Cosmos did similar things to WSC, but with semi retired superstars. Imran in his book himself had written about the quality of cricket at WSC and how it helped him to develop into a world class fast bowler .... but still it was illegal cricket and TCCB (ECB) never called back their WSC players. I am sure BCCI won't have either, probably NZCB as well.

From quality perspective no question about it - WSC was at it's best, but I think in cricket it's the National banner that pulls the crowd. I am sure between IPL and Indian team - most Indians will pick National team. Couple of years back BPL's collection of star players was only second to IPL and BD T20 team was below even AFGs - still, I hardly bothered for watching BPL, but did watch every game played by the national team, even T20!!!! Packer himself did realize that eventually people will get bored with his circus and his enterprise had no future.

I believe 1977 IND series wasn't a crowd puller, but next year's Ashes (ENG won 5-1 against Packer reject Aussies, which made Mike Brearley the genius he was ...) was followed in numbers. That gave Packer the clue that he won't be able to sustain for long with his venture. Also, PAK players returned to national team ahead of IND series (at home) and surely WIN players would have done so for 1980 ENG tour (If still WSC was running). Eventually, Kerry Packer & ACB could settle in between and that bond still is going strong.

But, the point stand - few Indians (& Kiwis, young English players) were approached by Packer's agent (s), but they declined - that's the reason why Indians, Kiwis and young English players were not in WSC. Otherwise, I am sure Kerry Packer wasn't that fool to hire 36 years old John Snow over 27 years old Willis, for Snow's heroics 7 years back. Rest are just useless side talks here.

Underwood was playing for England till rebel tour and he was there at WSC.

 

[MMHS]

Underwood was playing for England till rebel tour and he was there at WSC.

Thanks, he indeed was called back for 1979-80 AUS tour. I think, once CA called back their players (after settlement with KP), TCCB also got soft on their players - only Underwood was good enough still to be recalled.

 

[MMHS]

[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]

Just three minor disagreements:

1. Nobody took the 77-78 Ashes seriously. The Aussies were all reserves - Border, Hughes and Hogg were unknowns until they performed well - and England were without Knott, Greig, Woolmer (who had made consecutive hundreds in that summer’s home Ashes) and Underwood. That was equivalent to England now missing Root, Stokes, Archer and Broad, or Australia now missing Warner, Smith, Cummins and Lyon.

2. England did pick ex-WSC players - Knott and Woolmer both returned to the team, while Greig and Snow were too old. They also picked former South African rebels: Gooch, Emburey, Larkins, Willem et al.

3. John Snow was a household name in Australia because he won the Ashes there seven years earlier and was respected and feared to the point that a spectator assaulted him. Bob Willis barely took a wicket in the five years up to Packer: he then returned and blew away weak teams but he was very much a fringe player until Packer. Yes, by 1977-78 Willis was better than the ancient Snow. But Snow was Box Office in Australia and Snow wasn’t.

Could be. It's not possible now to dig every piece of history now and do a PHd, neither required - the point is established that WSC indeed was the highest class of cricket and a league that taught many things to the administrators, but still cricket had to return in it's usual operating model.

 

[Junaids]

Could be. It's not possible now to dig every piece of history now and do a PHd, neither required - the point is established that WSC indeed was the highest class of cricket and a league that taught many things to the administrators, but still cricket had to return in it's usual operating model.

Now, this bit I can comment upon.

In 1977 Packer had won a total victory in court before Mr Justice Slade. The TCCB and ICC bans on WSC players were found to be unlawful.

But for two southern and one northern summer the TCCB and ACB simply chose not to select the WSC players, and leaned on the West Indies and Pakistan not to either.

By the end of 1978-79 official cricket in Australia had been routed by WSC. And Packer was ready to take the TCCB and ACB to court for defying the earlier verdict.

It was clear that the “official” office-holders would be jailed, and that the ACB, ICC and TCCB would be bankrupted.

So “official” cricket surrendered. Packer then had a choice: run world cricket himself or simply give it back to the “official” structures in return for the TV rights which were the only reason he had done this in the first place.

He was a businessman. He’d got what he wanted and had no interest in running cricket himself. He’d just used it for ransom purposes.

 

[Junaids]

Incidentally, for the next decade Packer had total control of the Australian Team.

He over-ruled the selectors, he would ring the dressing room and order that a message be sent to the skipper (first Hughes, then Border) to make him change the bowler or the field.

And they did!

https://m.qt.com.au/news/mike-carlton-reveals-kerry-packer-influence-in-new/3542210/

 

[MMHS]

Incidentally, for the next decade Packer had total control of the Australian Team.

He over-ruled the selectors, he would ring the dressing room and order that a message be sent to the skipper (first Hughes, then Border) to make him change the bowler or the field.

And they did!

https://m.qt.com.au/news/mike-carlton-reveals-kerry-packer-influence-in-new/3542210/

KP was a blessing for cricket - otherwise cricket still would been stuck with 1895 County model. He had the power, guts & vision; but most importantly guy had genuine love for the game. He did twist the law, but for the betterment of the game, and thanks God that the guy took the trouble to fix cricket, otherwise these Lords and Barrons and Sirs would have finished this game by now hanging on to their tradition. I rate cricket of 1980s & 90s as the peak in history and lots of credit should be given to Packer.

I have already agreed most your points regarding WSC - just didn’t agree with the Indian players part. No love affair, and I certainly don’t have any desperation to clear Gavaskar or Bedi’s image, but it’s just disrespectful - some of the Indian payers were true greats of the game. There could be many other reasons for Indians not playing in WSC, but not what is written here - courage, guts .... even height.

I tried my best to watch/read whatever there is available for WSC, and it was definitely well above the level of official cricket, but still it wasn’t Test cricket.

 

[MenInG]

The World Series Cricket tournament in the late 1970s, conceptualised by Australian media magnate Kerry Packer, ushered in television coverage, coloured kit and floodlit games, a hitherto unknown trend in the sport. Among the prominent performers in the Packer series was Greg Chappell, who tallied over 1,400 runs at an average of 56.60 with five centuries while facing the likes of Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Joel Garner and Imran Khan.

Chappell spoke to Sportstar about the overarching influence of Packer’s innovations, the impact it had on Australian cricket and more.


Where did the idea of World Series Cricket develop?

There was a feeling among players in the mid-’70s that we were not being given enough respect by the administration. We felt that our opinion on programming, playing conditions and remuneration was not being heard. Ian Chappell as captain had met with the board around 1975 and I, as captain, had done the same in 1977. On both occasions, we felt we were given only a cursory hearing and in the case of money we were completely disregarded. Sir Donald Bradman seemed to be the biggest stumbling block in the process.


Was WSC the closest thing to democracy that Australian cricket had in over a century?

Possibly. Kerry Packer was much more generous than the board, but he was still quite dictatorial (about) what he expected.

Although it was derided by the purists at first, in retrospect do you see the Packer series as a tipping point in the sport?

WSC was the biggest turning point, not only in cricket but sports television in general. It was the genesis of fully professional sport in Australia and was the catalyst for the huge increase in pay, conditions and a voice in the running of the game that the players have had since.

In the days leading up to WSC, there was talk among the Australian cricketers about walking off... Was there a feeling that you guys weren’t getting a fair share of the pie at the time?

We never discussed walking off, but we were frustrated with the way the board ignored our view on the game generally and how much the players were worth. We were never wanting full-time professionalism, but we did feel under-appreciated and underpaid.


How did you get on with Kerry Packer? What’s your favourite story about him?

Kerry delivered everything that he promised and more. He was a good but demanding boss. My favourite story is of a meeting that he had with Ian Chappell in 1977 as WSC was being formulated. Kerry invited Ian to his office to discuss players and other aspects of the concept. During the conversation, Kerry told Ian that he would be the Australian captain. Ian had retired from Test cricket and I was the Australian captain and suggested that perhaps I should be captain. Kerry responded by saying, ‘You don’t think this is a flipping democracy do you?’ That pretty much summed Kerry up.


Did Australian cricket suffer in the late 1970s without the Packer players?

No doubt it did. Twenty-odd of the best players had been taken out of the system, so players were thrust into positions in some cases before they were ready. It did give opportunities to some players who went on to become greats of the next era, Allan Border being a prime example.


Does the modern-day Twenty20 explosion have its roots in WSC?

No doubt it has been influenced by what happened in the late ’70s. Cricket is the only sport that I can think of which has three formats that work well at the top level. Kerry definitely showed what could be done with some imagination and promotion.

Were there any cricketing moments that stood out?

I think the overall standard of the cricket of those two years was the outstanding achievement of WSC.

Lastly, was WSC the first step towards establishing cricket as a viable profession?

No doubt. Kerry showed what could be done with imagination and promotion and showed how it could be run as a business. I have no doubt the game would not be where it is today without Kerry Packer and WSC.

https://sportstar.thehindu.com/cric...r-don-bradman-sports-news/article31536945.ece