What's new

[PICTURES/VIDEOS] PSL should go head to head with IPL

No worries cricket is already a dying sport in England, look at no. Of counties they are in losses
 
The Professional Cricketers' Association (PCA) is contemplating a legal challenge following the England & Wales Cricket Board's (ECB) ban on players participating in the Pakistan Super League (PSL) and other franchise leagues that coincide with the domestic summer.

Daryl Mitchell, PCA's interim chief executive, expressed frustration over the lack of consultation prior to the policy's announcement. The ECB's new directive aims to retain domestic talent during the summer, particularly as the PSL is set for April next year, overlapping with other domestic competitions. Players are upset, fearing this could significantly impact their earning potential during the home season.

A notable player agent has indicated that the ECB's new policy may face legal challenges. "Legally, I believe it could be contested," the agent remarked, warning that this approach might prompt players to retire from red-ball cricket earlier than expected. "This will likely counteract their intentions. For an England player exiting a central contract, why would they commit to a full county deal that could affect their earnings in leagues like the PSL?" In 2024, over 20 significant short-format franchise competitions are scheduled, with numbers expected to rise further in subsequent years.
 
This is because PCB made a dumb move of hosting PSL at the same time as IPL. They thought by doing so they will jeopardise the daddy league. But little did they know, IPL gets played when county cricket starts. So it was only natural that ECB will protect its players from playing in franchise cricket before start of a fresh season. Had they kept the PSL in normal window of February, this situation would not have arisen.
 
Local.Dada said:
What exactly is the case here? ECB said it’s contracted players not to play PSL. PSL franchises and PCB have no financial agreement or contract with those players?
Click to expand...
The ECB can't stop people plying their trade. Let's see how ECB justify this in court, if the challenge comes
 
Rajdeep said:
This is because PCB made a dumb move of hosting PSL at the same time as IPL. They thought by doing so they will jeopardise the daddy league. But little did they know, IPL gets played when county cricket starts. So it was only natural that ECB will protect its players from playing in franchise cricket before start of a fresh season. Had they kept the PSL in normal window of February, this situation would not have arisen.
Click to expand...
Inds are worried about the PSL. Why?
 
Did they look at only the schedule of IPL before coming up with this? ENglish domestic season always starts in April and through September. Windies also has some assignments in May.
 
Bewal Express said:
The ECB can't stop people plying their trade. Let's see how ECB justify this in court, if the challenge comes
Click to expand...

Of course the ECB can tell players they have to play the games they've been contracted to play, there's no chance this even reaches court.
 
Bewal Express said:
The ECB can't stop people plying their trade. Let's see how ECB justify this in court, if the challenge comes
Click to expand...
That would be between the player and ECB then, nothing to do with PSL or PCB. If an English player is desperate to play PSL he will discuss that with ECB, negotiate, sue or whatever. Unless he takes money from PSL/ PCB and refuses to play citing this rule, it is a different matter other wise nothing PCB or PSL can do about it.
 
Rajdeep said:
This is because PCB made a dumb move of hosting PSL at the same time as IPL. They thought by doing so they will jeopardise the daddy league. But little did they know, IPL gets played when county cricket starts. So it was only natural that ECB will protect its players from playing in franchise cricket before start of a fresh season. Had they kept the PSL in normal window of February, this situation would not have arisen.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand why Indians think everything is done to damage them.
Due to IPL, most international cricket stops and best players are in IPL, which would allow the remaining international players to be available and feature in the PSL. PSL is trying to take IPl scraps here basically. For example Warner has never played in PSL, but now that he’s not been picked in IPl, he’s available for PSL which helps the brand.
 
Farabi said:
I don’t understand why Indians think everything is done to damage them.
Due to IPL, most international cricket stops and best players are in IPL, which would allow the remaining international players to be available and feature in the PSL. PSL is trying to take IPl scraps here basically. For example Warner has never played in PSL, but now that he’s not been picked in IPl, he’s available for PSL which helps the brand.
Click to expand...
Warner may join the commentary team. Steve smith did commentary last time. Usually the get around 250 to 500,000 USD for commentary stint.

Salary of Commentators in IPL 2024 ​

Dugout Panel: $520,000 to $750,000
English Panel: $252,000 to $550,000
Hindi Panel: $82,000 to $370,000
Regional Panel: $82,000-1,55,000
 
jnaveen1980 said:
Warner may join the commentary team. Steve smith did commentary last time. Usually the get around 250 to 500,000 USD for commentary stint.

Salary of Commentators in IPL 2024 ​

Dugout Panel: $520,000 to $750,000
English Panel: $252,000 to $550,000
Hindi Panel: $82,000 to $370,000
Regional Panel: $82,000-1,55,000
Click to expand...

How many commentators does IPL need? They cannot offer every unpicked high profile foreign player a commentary stint.
 
jnaveen1980 said:
Warner may join the commentary team. Steve smith did commentary last time. Usually the get around 250 to 500,000 USD for commentary stint.

Salary of Commentators in IPL 2024 ​

Dugout Panel: $520,000 to $750,000
English Panel: $252,000 to $550,000
Hindi Panel: $82,000 to $370,000
Regional Panel: $82,000-1,55,000
Click to expand...
I don’t understand what your point is?
I was sharing the reason why Pakistan has scheduled PSL to go with IPL. Warner was just an example.
You’re trying to show how big IPL commentary salary is so he will go there.
We get it BCCI, indian cricket, IPL is big. Get over yourself buddy and have some grace.
 
Farabi said:
I don’t understand what your point is?
I was sharing the reason why Pakistan has scheduled PSL to go with IPL. Warner was just an example.
You’re trying to show how big IPL commentary salary is so he will go there.
We get it BCCI, indian cricket, IPL is big. Get over yourself buddy and have some grace.
Click to expand...
Yes. That is how they landed Smith. Warner is doing commentary now for FOX. So there is a chance he could be hired.
 
PSL is not as big a brand as IPL is but ECB's decision makes no sense. They were ok for IPL but no for PSL... Maybe they were threatened that if they go to PSL, they will not get picked in IPL next time.
 
So what next for PSL as another competitor arrives in the horizon in shape of Nepal Premier league.

Due to IPL the top draws not available even second tier remain on standby for IPL. ECB already barring its players.

Add to it the scheduling issues, Naqvi is in for another bumpy ride
 
This will be a very interesting couple of months ahead. English players not playing the IPL will complain about being forced to play domestic when they can easily make more money in PSL.
 
England players threaten legal action over ECB’s new policy on NOCs

England players have threatened legal action against England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) over its new policy on issuing No-Objection Certificates (NOCs) for international leagues.

The players have expressed their dismay over the new policy which imposed a ban on England players from participating in franchise leagues except for the Indian Premier League (IPL) which clashes with the domestic season.

Reports said that the new policy on the NOCs will also dent England cricketers’ participation in the upcoming Pakistan Super League (PSL).

As per England media outlets, the players’ agents were of the view that the ECB did not want to upset the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and allowed players to participate only in the IPL.

arynews.tv

England players threaten legal action over ECB’s new policy on NOCs

England players have threatened legal action against England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) over its new policy on issuing No-Objection Certificates (NOCs)
arynews.tv arynews.tv

The hypocrisy of ECB will be exposed
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kianig89 said:
England players threaten legal action over ECB’s new policy on NOCs

England players have threatened legal action against England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) over its new policy on issuing No-Objection Certificates (NOCs) for international leagues.

The players have expressed their dismay over the new policy which imposed a ban on England players from participating in franchise leagues except for the Indian Premier League (IPL) which clashes with the domestic season.

Reports said that the new policy on the NOCs will also dent England cricketers’ participation in the upcoming Pakistan Super League (PSL).

As per England media outlets, the players’ agents were of the view that the ECB did not want to upset the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and allowed players to participate only in the IPL.

arynews.tv

England players threaten legal action over ECB’s new policy on NOCs

England players have threatened legal action against England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) over its new policy on issuing No-Objection Certificates (NOCs)
arynews.tv arynews.tv

The hypocrisy of ECB will be exposed
Click to expand...
Well ECB is trying to do what's best for English cricket :hamster:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bewal Express said:
The ECB can't stop people plying their trade. Let's see how ECB justify this in court, if the challenge comes
Click to expand...

Those players are contracted t ECB. They are employees. ECB isn't stopping the ordinary guy on the street from going to PSL.
 
Kianig89 said:
England players threaten legal action over ECB’s new policy on NOCs

England players have threatened legal action against England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) over its new policy on issuing No-Objection Certificates (NOCs) for international leagues.

The players have expressed their dismay over the new policy which imposed a ban on England players from participating in franchise leagues except for the Indian Premier League (IPL) which clashes with the domestic season.

Reports said that the new policy on the NOCs will also dent England cricketers’ participation in the upcoming Pakistan Super League (PSL).

As per England media outlets, the players’ agents were of the view that the ECB did not want to upset the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and allowed players to participate only in the IPL.

arynews.tv

England players threaten legal action over ECB’s new policy on NOCs

England players have threatened legal action against England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) over its new policy on issuing No-Objection Certificates (NOCs)
arynews.tv arynews.tv

The hypocrisy of ECB will be exposed
Click to expand...

BCCI pays ECB a amount which is equal to 20 per cent of the total money ECB players get.

If the total salary received by English players is 10mn USD, ECB will receive $2mn.

PCB can try a similar arrangement.
 
cricketjoshila said:
BCCI pays ECB a amount which is equal to 20 per cent of the total money ECB players get.

If the total salary received by English players is 10mn USD, ECB will receive $2mn.

PCB can try a similar arrangement.
Click to expand...
But how will ECB justify making IPL an exception?
 
cricketjoshila said:
BCCI pays ECB a amount which is equal to 20 per cent of the total money ECB players get.

If the total salary received by English players is 10mn USD, ECB will receive $2mn.

PCB can try a similar arrangement.
Click to expand...

Worth mentioning that all leagues in the world already pay at least 10%.
 
Bewal Express said:
Nope
Click to expand...

Read section 32A ICC operations manual.


Section 32A protects the primacy of international cricket by requiring a Member board to make
it a condition of a foreign player’s participation in its domestic event(s) that the player’s own
Member board (i.e., the Member for which the player plays/or is qualified to play international
cricket) does not object to his participation in such event(s).
The foreign player may only participate in the domestic event(s) if (and to the extent that) his
Member board issues a ‘No Objection Certificate’, or ‘NOC’, confirming that it has no objection
to that participation.
If the Member board declines to issue a NOC, then the original Member board cannot allow the
player to participate in its domestic event. Instead, the player has to be released (where
required) to play international cricket for his Member board.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Read section 32A ICC operations manual.


Section 32A protects the primacy of international cricket by requiring a Member board to make
it a condition of a foreign player’s participation in its domestic event(s) that the player’s own
Member board (i.e., the Member for which the player plays/or is qualified to play international
cricket) does not object to his participation in such event(s).
The foreign player may only participate in the domestic event(s) if (and to the extent that) his
Member board issues a ‘No Objection Certificate’, or ‘NOC’, confirming that it has no objection
to that participation.
If the Member board declines to issue a NOC, then the original Member board cannot allow the
player to participate in its domestic event. Instead, the player has to be released (where
required) to play international cricket for his Member board.
Click to expand...
Nope. The players aren't owned by the ECB and any move to force a change is illegal. It's called restraint of trade. This isn't a debate
 
Players threatened to boycott 100 shall ECB continue with their current position of ban on other leagues.
 
Bewal Express said:
Nope. The players aren't owned by the ECB and any move to force a change is illegal. It's called restraint of trade. This isn't a debate
Click to expand...

As per ICC rules ECB NoC is required. Everyone has to abide by that.

Players are contracted to ECB and counties, they are employees. So ofcourse their employees will not have freedom to go and play anywhere they please.
 
cricketjoshila said:
As per ICC rules ECB NoC is required. Everyone has to abide by that.

Players are contracted to ECB and counties, they are employees. So ofcourse their employees will not have freedom to go and play anywhere they please.
Click to expand...
But ECB lives under UK law. I hope that is not too complicated for you.
 
Bewal Express said:
But ECB lives under UK law. I hope that is not too complicated for you.
Click to expand...

ICC doesn't live under UK laws. ECB cannot have separate rules fir themselves. International cricket has same rules. Hope that isn't too complicated for you.
 
Kianig89 said:
Players threatened to boycott 100 shall ECB continue with their current position of ban on other leagues.
Click to expand...

That's their only option. Because legally ECB is in the clear. The players are contracted to ECB and counties they can restrict where these contracted employees play.
 
It's a good stance from the ECB, and I'm all for it, even though it may effect PSL.

There are too many leagues clogging up the calendar, and it affects English domestic cricket.

Best way to protect international cricket is to give league windows and make multiple leagues run in parralel. It will also develop a hierarchy of leagues, with each having their own niches and merits, and will actually give more opportunities to players rather than the same players hogging the leagues.

Have an Asian window, UAE + Africa + Aus window, England + Windies+ USA, window 3 times in the year.

If better players pick IPL over PSL or BPL then so be it, these leagues can still exist and give platform to upcoming players.
 
cricketjoshila said:
ICC doesn't live under UK laws. ECB cannot have separate rules fir themselves. International cricket has same rules. Hope that isn't too complicated for you.
Click to expand...
ECB does and it cannot enforce anything illegal here. If the ICC decided to make the ECB CEO the king, do we still have to follow their edict 🤣🤣🤣
 
Bewal Express said:
Not all are. Players like Root are but others aren't
Click to expand...
That is fairly straight forward. Depend on the employment original employment contract if there is a cooling period or not.

If they are not under contract and if there is no cooling off period, ECB has no standing.
 
rpant_gabba said:
That is fairly straight forward. Depend on the employment original employment contract if there is a cooling period or not.

If they are not under contract and if there is no cooling off period, ECB has no standing.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. The ECB have overreached and all it will take is one player to take it to court and they will back down
 
rpant_gabba said:
I have signed non-competes before and sat at home and got paid for 18 months without being able to join the new job. My old employer footed the bill :inti
Click to expand...
I don't think the ECB have many such agreements. If they are contracted they can be told what to do and if they are only contracted to counties, they can't
 
Bewal Express said:
ECB does and it cannot enforce anything illegal here. If the ICC decided to make the ECB CEO the king, do we still have to follow their edict 🤣🤣🤣
Click to expand...

In cricket. Yes.

If you are a English player, you have to have NOC from ECB to play in any league anywhere.

On one hand you support PCBs two league NOC rule but you think ECB who pay far far more than PCB is restricting trade.
 
rpant_gabba said:
That is fairly straight forward. Depend on the employment original employment contract if there is a cooling period or not.

If they are not under contract and if there is no cooling off period, ECB has no standing.
Click to expand...

ICC has a cooling period rule. Any player who retires has to get NOC for next 5 years.

Active players have to get a NOC.

I have posted the ICC rule above.
 
Bewal Express said:
Absolutely. The ECB have overreached and all it will take is one player to take it to court and they will back down
Click to expand...

What overreach? Are players playing FC cricket under contract of respective counties or not?

Are counties governed by ECB or not?
 
Bewal Express said:
I don't think the ECB have many such agreements. If they are contracted they can be told what to do and if they are only contracted to counties, they can't
Click to expand...

Counties are governed by ECB. And as per ICC rules any active player will require ECB NoC.
 
cricketjoshila said:
ICC has a cooling period rule. Any player who retires has to get NOC for next 5 years.

Active players have to get a NOC.

I have posted the ICC rule above.
Click to expand...
I'm confident that ECB will get taken the cleaners if they withhold NOC to an out of contract player.

Its an ICC rule. ECB still has to follow UK law of the land. eg., Kolpak

For active players for sure they need a NOC
 
rpant_gabba said:
I'm confident that ECB will get taken the cleaners if they withhold NOC to an out of contract player.

Its an ICC rule. ECB still has to follow UK law of the land. eg., Kolpak

For active players for sure they need a NOC
Click to expand...

No board has yet denied NOC to a retired player. Doesn't mean they won't.

All boards are in on this rule. Why will PCB ruin relationship with ECB for some retired player? No board will.

Kolpak has nothing to do here.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Counties are governed by ECB. And as per ICC rules any active player will require ECB NoC.
Click to expand...
I know it's difficult for you to understand but the ECB can act within the law. If it refuses NOCs, it will end up in court with a million £ legal bill. This isn't India
 
Bewal Express said:
I know it's difficult for you to understand but the ECB can act within the law. If it refuses NOCs, it will end up in court with a million £ legal bill. This isn't India
Click to expand...

It has refused NoCs and all a few players are doing is threatening to boycott.

No one is going to court. No one has gone to court.

Any employer is within his rights to stop its employees from moonlighting.

There are laws. This isn't Pakistan.
 
cricketjoshila said:
It has refused NoCs and all a few players are doing is threatening to boycott.

No one is going to court. No one has gone to court.

Any employer is within his rights to stop its employees from moonlighting.

There are laws. This isn't Pakistan.
Click to expand...
Players have threatened court and if it goes to court the ECB will lose. If a player isn't under your contract, you cannot tell them how to earn living. It's a nation of laws, it's not India
 
Bewal Express said:
Players have threatened court and if it goes to court the ECB will lose. If a player isn't under your contract, you cannot tell them how to earn living. It's a nation of laws, it's not India
Click to expand...

There is no chance of this even getting to court let alone being deemed restraint of trade, requiring an employee to be available for the period they've signed a contract to be available for is not restraint of trade.
 
HitWicket said:
There is no chance of this even getting to court let alone being deemed restraint of trade, requiring an employee to be available for the period they've signed a contract to be available for is not restraint of trade.
Click to expand...
No there is def a chance and if they go to court, they will win.
 
Bewal Express said:
No there is def a chance and if they go to court, they will win.
Click to expand...

Once again, requiring someone to be available for the period they've agreed to be contracted for isn't restraint of trade. No one's going to take this to court because they'd be laughed out of there.
 
But that has to apply to all players on the same contracts. The ECB know they don't have a leg to stand on if it goes to court. As soon as you make an exception then all players have right to know. The IPL doesn't make our laws.
HitWicket said:
Once again, requiring someone to be available for the period they've agreed to be contracted for isn't restraint of trade. No one's going to take this to court because they'd be laughed out of there.
Click to expand...
 
Bewal Express said:
Players have threatened court and if it goes to court the ECB will lose. If a player isn't under your contract, you cannot tell them how to earn living. It's a nation of laws, it's not India
Click to expand...

Players are under contract either with ECB or counties. No one gets to play FC without contract.

And if you play FC you need NoC from the National board to play leagues.

This isn't Pakistan.
Bewal Express said:
But that has to apply to all players on the same contracts. The ECB know they don't have a leg to stand on if it goes to court. As soon as you make an exception then all players have right to know. The IPL doesn't make our laws.
Click to expand...

IPL is paying ECB a large amount of money to release the players. PCB can also offer the same amount and ask for equal treatment.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Players are under contract either with ECB or counties. No one gets to play FC without contract.

And if you play FC you need NoC from the National board to play leagues.

This isn't Pakistan.


IPL is paying ECB a large amount of money to release the players. PCB can also offer the same amount and ask for equal treatment.
Click to expand...
The county policy is let players play. That's why they play IPL, so if they allow players to play in one in not in others then the policy has no legs. Players will claim discriminatory behaviour and the judge will through out their objections, unless it was stated at the time of the signing of the contract and this certainly isn't. This isn't Ind and the IPL doesn't make our laws
 
Bewal Express said:
But that has to apply to all players on the same contracts. The ECB know they don't have a leg to stand on if it goes to court. As soon as you make an exception then all players have right to know.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't, you're clueless, allowing a specific exception in an employment contract doesn't mean everyone is suddenly allowed to break their employment contract for whatever they want.
 
HitWicket said:
There is no chance of this even getting to court let alone being deemed restraint of trade, requiring an employee to be available for the period they've signed a contract to be available for is not restraint of trade.
Click to expand...
Are we talking about players under contract?

by employee, you are implying there is a contract. you can only make demands of your employee.

Those retired might have a strong case. If there is cool off period written into their contract, that legality of that can be challenged in court
 
HitWicket said:
No, it doesn't, you're clueless, allowing a specific exception in an employment contract doesn't mean everyone is suddenly allowed to break their employment contract for whatever they want.
Click to expand...
You can't change contracts when they have already been signed. Try it and see what happens. And if they give permission IPL and not others,it becomes discrimination.
 
rpant_gabba said:
Are we talking about players under contract?

by employee, you are implying there is a contract. you can only make demands of your employee.

Those retired might have a strong case. If there is cool off period written into their contract, that legality of that can be challenged in court
Click to expand...

Yes, this only affects players under contract to play red ball county cricket.


Bewal Express said:
You can't change contracts when they have already been signed. Try it and see what happens. And if they give permission IPL and not others,it becomes discrimination.
Click to expand...

There is no change to the contract, the contract is just being enforced rather than players being given special dispensation to break it. Discrimination has to be against a persons characteristics, only allowing them to temporarily break their contract to take on temporary employment with one employer but not another therefore cannot be discrimination.
 
HitWicket said:
Yes, this only affects players under contract to play red ball county cricket.
Click to expand...
Those guys are SOL.
HitWicket said:
There is no change to the contract, the contract is just being enforced rather than players being given special dispensation to break it. Discrimination has to be against a persons characteristics, only allowing them to temporarily break their contract to take on temporary employment with one employer but not another therefore cannot be discrimination.
Click to expand...
Agree. If you carry out activity that will impact your contractual obligations, the employer has the right to prevent you from such activity

eg. in US professional sportsmen have language which prohibits them from things like pickup games etc

or teminate your contract.

Whether they can deny NOC after termination is up for debate
 
I would love to see a PSL competing with the IPL, but not one confrontational agaisnt the IPL. So far they have done very well in terms of providing players flexibilty regarding their IPL commitments and I hope that stays the case.
 
hnIPFi1.png


FedEx Powers Super Kings Journey as Principal Sponsor in a Multi-Year Agreement​


Federal Express Corporation (“FedEx”), the world’s largest express transportation company, announced today its global sponsorship in cricket as the ‘Principal Sponsor’ and the ‘Official Logistics Partner’ for Chennai Super Kings (CSK) in India and Joburg Super Kings (JSK) in South Africa.

The announcement, made at an event attended by Richard Smith, chief operating officer, international, and chief executive officer, airline, FedEx, Kami Viswanathan, president, FedEx Middle East, Indian Subcontinent and Africa (MEISA), KS Viswanathan, chief executive officer, Chennai Super Kings, and Ankit Baldi, chief operating officer, Chennai Super Kings, marks the start of a collaboration that will span the Indian Premier League (IPL) and SA20 seasons beginning in 2025.

“Sports transcend borders, uniting communities through passion, resilience, and shared experiences,” said Richard Smith, chief operating officer, international, and chief executive officer, airline, FedEx. “Cricket is the heart and soul of India, a strategic market for FedEx, and this collaboration reflects our dedication to energizing growth and prosperity of businesses and people across the country and beyond.”

As part of this collaboration, the FedEx logo will feature prominently on the back of the team’s iconic jerseys, symbolizing a shared focus on performance and reliability. FedEx will leverage its extensive global network and advanced digital tools to ensure the efficient transportation of team kits, match equipment, and official materials from India to Johannesburg, the U.S., and to Super Kings players around the world. This sponsorship also offers unique opportunities to engage with the FedEx brand, team members, customers, and communities, further reinforcing the FedEx commitment to support and connect global audiences through the spirit of cricket.

“Cricket thrives on teamwork, performance, and the ability to inspire—a reflection of what makes CSK the most valuable IPL franchise,” said Kami Viswanathan, president of MEISA, FedEx. “Our collaboration with the Super Kings mirrors this drive for excellence and growth, aligning with our focus on delivering transformative solutions that power success. Together, we celebrate a legacy of achieving new milestones, both on the field and in the world of trade and commerce.”

“We are pleased to partner with FedEx,” said Chennai Super Kings CEO KS Viswanathan. “This collaboration reflects our shared values of excellence, reliability, and commitment to delivering the best for the fans. The global presence and reputation FedEx has for innovation makes them an ideal partner as we take the Super Kings’ story to new horizons. Together, we hope to deliver unforgettable moments both on and off the field.”

FedEx has a strong legacy of supporting global sports programming where its logistical expertise ensures seamless experiences for teams, fans, and organizers. The association with the Super Kings further strengthens its ties to high-profile sports, blending the excitement of cricket with the FedEx hallmark values of trust and reliability.

newsroom.fedex.com

FedEx Powers Super Kings Journey as Principal Sponsor in a Multi-Year Agreement

newsroom.fedex.com newsroom.fedex.com
 
HitWicket said:
Yes, this only affects players under contract to play red ball county cricket.




There is no change to the contract, the contract is just being enforced rather than players being given special dispensation to break it. Discrimination has to be against a persons characteristics, only allowing them to temporarily break their contract to take on temporary employment with one employer but not another therefore cannot be discrimination.
Click to expand...
So if a teacher is given time to go holiday to Ind and PK, that would be OK? Nope. The judge will ask why and they won't have an answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FearlessRoar
  • Poll
Should PSL consider banning players who opt out for non-injury reasons?
Replies
13
Views
436
FastBowlingAllrounder
F
The Bald Eagle
[EXCLUSIVE] Is Mike Hesson becoming Pakistan's Head Coach? PSL 9 Champion Coach in conversation with Saj
Replies
9
Views
1K
Saj
S
FearlessRoar
Overlapping windows for PSL 10 and IPL 2025 proposed by the PCB
2
Replies
140
Views
6K
SportsWarrior
S
FearlessRoar
  • Poll
Why do IPL products excel in Test cricket, whereas PSL products struggle in the format?
Replies
46
Views
834
jnaveen1980
J
FearlessRoar
[PICTURES/VIDEOS] Mohammed Siraj's onfield behaviour issues
2
Replies
107
Views
2K
RedwoodOriginal
RedwoodOriginal
Back
Top