Mamoon
ATG
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2012
- Runs
- 108,086
- Post of the Week
- 12
You mean non-sense like "Warner would rather play easier tournaments than PSL"? Same PSL where Luke Ronchi was batting like Sir Viv last season? And where the likes of Kamran morph into Gilchrist? If you want to decode nonsense, don't look further than your own green-tinted posts.
Pakistan cricket is not the same brand anymore because we have stopped produce superstars and box-office players. The last big superstars in Pakistan cricket are still the 90's generation. I am not talking about performance here - the 90's generation greatly underperformed in both formats, but that team still had superstars.
Pakistan has stopped producing players who are household names, players who are idolised not only in Pakistan but also greatly admired by cricket fans in other countries. Yes other teams also go through these phases and it can change in the future, but we. can only look at the present scenario.
I am not sure why you are so offended with the notion that Pakistan cricket does not have the same star quality that it did 15 odd years ago.
You are arguing on a different wavelength. You are talking about the future of Test cricket which has nothing to do with the point that I am making. Yes Test cricket does not have a future simply because in today's modern world, people do not have the time to sit through a game that is contested over 5 days. It has nothing to do with Pakistan or any particular country.
What I was trying to convey is that in spite of Pakistan not hosting any international cricket for over a decade, it has not hampered the game. However, if India, England or Australia were to stop hosting matches, it will most likely have a negative impact. This shows that the prestige of Pakistan cricket today is not the same as it was before. Pakistan not hosting cricket would have had a bigger impact in the 70s, 80, 90s than it does today.
You are right that the IPL is a bigger brand than quite a few international teams, but the reason I "singled out" Pakistan is because it is the only major Test nation with zero representation in IPL since 2009. However, that has not prevented IPL from becoming the biggest league in the world by a country mile.
Without international stars, the IPL would not have become the giant that it is today, and the fact that the absence of Pakistani players had no impact on their growth clearly shows that Pakistani players are no longer hotshots in world cricket.
Furthermore, you are wrong that the Premier League is bigger than Real Madrid or Barcelona. I will prove it to you with a hypothetical example. Let's say that Real Madrid or Barcelona or PSG or Juventus etc. decide to join the Premier League. What do you think will happen?
The Premier League brand will receive a major boost because of the inclusion of players like Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar, Mbappe, Dybala, Suarez, Modric, Bale etc. etc. On the contrary, their respective leagues will greatly suffer because of the loss of star quality.
The elite clubs in football are bigger than their respective leagues. The leagues have global viewership because of these major teams. People in India and Pakistan are not exactly fans of Sunderland and Everton. Take Man United, Arsenal and Chelsea out of the Premier League and watch what happens to the brand of English football.
However, if Pakistan joins the IPL as a 9th franchise, it will only have a minimal impact on IPL's global brand. Apart from increased viewership in Pakistan, it is not going to change much. People who don't watch the IPL in India, Australia, England, South Africa and New Zealand etc. are not going to turn up because legends like Faheem, Shadab, Shinwari, Hafeez, Sarfraz, Fakhar, Amir, Hasan, Malik, Imad etc. etc. are now honouring the IPL with their presence, and people in the said countries who are watching the IPL are doing so in spite of the fact that Pakistani players have been banished.
At what point did I imply that the security problems in Pakistan are because of PCB? I have repeatedly stated numerous, numerous times that it is a major constraint for the PCB, and considering the circumstances, they couldn't have done a better job with the PSL. However, that does not mean that the PSL is great. It very clearly is not.
Lesser players than de Villiers have bullied the PSL over the past few seasons. Apart from the notable Pietersen example, there are other international players who played in the UAE but refused to play in the Pakistan leg of the tournament. De Villiers is a bigger deal than all of them and he could have done the same.
As far as international commitments are concerned, he did not have to take part in the whole tournament. Last year, Morgan made a mockery of PSL. After playing in the T20 tri-series in Australia, he joined Karachi for two dead-rubbers in Sharjah, captained both games, refused to play in Pakistan and left with a hefty pay-check.
Do you think de Villiers could not have pulled a stunt like this? Do you think PSL was and is in a position to say no to a player like him?
It is very obvious why de Villiers did not play in the first three editions. At that point of his career, he did not consider it to be worthy of his presence. His priority was to do well for South Africa and preserve himself for IPL. Now at 35, he does not have to worry about international cricket and he is at the end of his career. He no longer is in a position where can turn down contracts worth millions.
I am certain that if the PSL was not scheduled right before the IPL, he would have participated this year. There is too much cricket coming up for him to play after the PSL. From his perspective, the risk is greater than the reward.
.
