Winning the IPL is more difficult than winning World Cup: Sourav Ganguly

[Rajdeep]

Sourav Ganguly said that Rohit Sharma was the best option to replace Virat Kohli as the skipper of the Indian team across formats. Recently, Rohit had to face the ire of the netizens after India crashed to a heavy defeat at the hands of Australia in the final of the World Test Championship (WTC) at the Kennington Oval in London.

India lost the match by 209 runs and lost their fourth ICC final in the last 10 years. However, Ganguly reckoned that Rohit is still the best option to lead India at the highest level. He said that having captained Mumbai Indians (MI) to five Indian Premier League (IPL) titles, Rohit has the ingredients to be a successful skipper.

Ganguly, who previously worked as the president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), backed Rohit, saying that winning the IPL is more difficult than winning the World Cup.

“The selectors needed a captain after Virat left and Rohit was the best that time. He had won 5 IPL trophies and done well at the international level as well; he won the Asia Cup. He was the best option. India also played in the final of the Test championship, although we lost.

“Even two years ago, we lost the WTC final. We reached the semis of the T20 World Cup. So, the selectors picked that person who was the best for the job,” Ganguly was quoted as saying to Aaj Tak.

Ganguly was of the opinion that even as it needs 4-5 matches for teams to advance to World Cup semis, sides need to go through 17 matches to win the IPL.

“I have full faith on Rohit. He and MS Dhoni have won 5 IPL titles. Winning the IPL isn’t easy because it’s a tough tournament. Winning the IPL is more difficult than winning a World Cup as there are 14 matches after which you take part in the playoffs. In the World Cup, it takes only 4-5 matches for a place in the semis. In the IPL, it takes 17 matches for you to become champions,” he added.

https://www.indiatoday.in/sports/cr...g-world-cup-sourav-ganguly-2392195-2023-06-12

 

[Hitman]

Before the usual suspects jump on Dada, he merely said that winning the IPL is more difficult than winning the World Cup before of the former's format. He never said winning the IPL is bigger or more prestigious than winning the World Cup.

And before anyone jumps at me, I absolutely loathe any form of T20 cricket.

 

[Ab Fan]

Rohit Sharma didn't won MI the IPL trophies. It was the team that he had helped him to win those trophies.

Rohit 's personal stats are pretty atrocious in IPL and has often been carried by his teammates, Hardik and then SKY alongwith the 4 overseas performers in winning the trophy.

As of today, Rohit is a great ODI cricketer , good T20 cricketer and average Test cricketer.

 

[Rajdeep]

Before the usual suspects jump on Dada, he merely said that winning the IPL is more difficult than winning the World Cup before of the former's format. He never said winning the IPL is bigger or more prestigious than winning the World Cup.

And before anyone jumps at me, I absolutely loathe any form of T20 cricket.

Lets put it this way, Kohli captained India in 3 ICC events and took the team to finals in 2 off them. Same Kohli captained RCB 10 times and only manage to reach finals once.

So Dada has a point, IPL is more tougher due to nature of the format.

 

[Major]

WHat a dumb statement. IPL is domestic cricket with domestic players, international cricket is the best 11 of the nation playing

 

[Ab Fan]

WHat a dumb statement. IPL is domestic cricket with domestic players, international cricket is the best 11 of the nation playing

Ganguly was an aggressive and inspirational leader of the game, a true legend in his own rights but after this comment by him in public, I think he is no longer a legend as he has broken hearts of about 250 millions fans.

 

[Major]

Ganguly was an aggressive and inspirational leader of the game, a true legend in his own rights but after this comment by him in public, I think he is no longer a legend as he has broken hearts of about 250 millions fans.

nice attempt at trolling, but the guy made a very dumb statement

 

[PakEngFan]

Idiotic statement to say the least.

 

[Extra_Cover]

Before the usual suspects jump on Dada, he merely said that winning the IPL is more difficult than winning the World Cup before of the former's format. He never said winning the IPL is bigger or more prestigious than winning the World Cup.

And before anyone jumps at me, I absolutely loathe any form of T20 cricket.

By this logic of number of games the PSL, CPL, Lanka Premier League, etc are all more difficult to win compared to the world cup.

 

[Mamoon]

WHat a dumb statement. IPL is domestic cricket with domestic players, international cricket is the best 11 of the nation playing

You have 2-3 associate teams in every ICC tournament. These teams will get smashed by all IPL teams. In addition, you have full-members like Ireland and Zimbabwe who will also lose to IPL teams.

In every ICC tournament, more than half of the teams are there just to make up the numbers. They are never in contention. It’s the same 4-5 teams that end up winning the trophy.

IPL is a more level-playing field, pretty much all the 10 teams have a realistic chance of winning the trophy plus it is a very long tournament and 2-3 wins on the trot are usually not enough to advance to the next round.

There is nothing wrong with Ganguly said. It is a very logical statement but it is not surprising to see people misinterpret what he is trying to convey.

 

[Mamoon]

By this logic of number of games the PSL, CPL, Lanka Premier League, etc are all more difficult to win compared to the world cup.

All leagues provide a more level-playing field compared to international cricket because they have comparable resources and players are picked in an open market.

In international cricket there is no balance of play because some countries are more powerful than others and have a bigger, richer talent pool.

For example, Ireland will never have a stronger chance of winning a World Cup than England but Lahore Qalandars will not always be better than Quetta Gladiators.

Within the leagues, IPL is relatively tougher to win because it is the longest tournament and you need to show a lot of consistency.

 

[Major]

You have 2-3 associate teams in every ICC tournament. These teams will get smashed by all IPL teams. In addition, you have full-members like Ireland and Zimbabwe who will also lose to IPL teams.

In every ICC tournament, more than half of the teams are there just to make up the numbers. They are never in contention. It’s the same 4-5 teams that end up winning the trophy.

IPL is a more level-playing field, pretty much all the 10 teams have a realistic chance of winning the trophy plus it is a very long tournament and 2-3 wins on the trot are usually not enough to advance to the next round.

There is nothing wrong with Ganguly said. It is a very logical statement but it is not surprising to see people misinterpret what he is trying to convey.

IPL is full of domestic players. Out of the 150 indian players, 15 are interantionla level while 130+ are just domestic Players.

International players are the countrys best.

Ganguly made a very dumb statement.

Remember, Kamran Akmal and Younis Khan are IPL winners while Kohli is not. So are we gonna pretend that Younis Khan achieved bigger than Kohli by having an IPL win in his career?

ICC tournaments are proper tournaments. The associate example also doesnt work as we have seen India lose to Bangladesh and during the last world T20, we saw associate teams win crucial games

 

[Mamoon]

IPL is full of domestic players. Out of the 150 indian players, 15 are interantionla level while 130+ are just domestic Players.

International players are the countrys best.

Ganguly made a very dumb statement.

Remember, Kamran Akmal and Younis Khan are IPL winners while Kohli is not. So are we gonna pretend that Younis Khan achieved bigger than Kohli by having an IPL win in his career?

ICC tournaments are proper tournaments. The associate example also doesnt work as we have seen India lose to Bangladesh and during the last world T20, we saw associate teams win crucial games

IPL is full of domestic players but this applies to all teams. They have fixed quota of international players and they have similar financial resources which means they are competing on a level-playing field.

In international cricket, you cannot have a level-playing field because some countries will always have more resources and talent pool than other countries.

Franchise cricket is not the oligopoly of a few teams but international cricket is. Franchise cricket gives every team a fair chance which is why it is more difficult to win.

You gave a wrong example of associate teams winning one-off matches. Winning one-off matches is one thing but winning the tournament is a totally different ball game.

You can have 100 ICC tournaments and teams like Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Scotland, Namibia etc. will not win a single tournament.

These 100 tournaments will be divided between the same 5-6 major teams.

On the other hand, if you have a 100 IPLs or PSLs for that matter, the tournaments will be more evenly distributed among all participants. This is why they are relatively more difficult to win.

Furthermore, as far as Kohli vs Younis vs Akmal are concerned, you cannot judge individual players by team trophies because winning trophies depends on so much more than individual performances.

For example, Kohli has not won a T20 World Cup so far but he is easily the best individual player in history of T20 World Cups.

 

[Rajdeep]

All leagues provide a more level-playing field compared to international cricket because they have comparable resources and players are picked in an open market.

In international cricket there is no balance of play because some countries are more powerful than others and have a bigger, richer talent pool.

For example, Ireland will never have a stronger chance of winning a World Cup than England but Lahore Qalandars will not always be better than Quetta Gladiators.

Within the leagues, IPL is relatively tougher to win because it is the longest tournament and you need to show a lot of consistency.

Agree with this. In a world cup, you often play against minnows/associate teams which are mere formality. In a league like IPL, there are no weaker opposition as most teams have established international superstars. Take the bottom teams in IPL this season -

Punjab - had players like Sam Curran, Livingstone, Dhawan etc

Hyderabad - had Markram, Brooks, Phillips, Mayank, Bhuvi

Delhi - had Warner, Russow, Salt, Nortje, Shaw.

None of the above were poor teams but that is how close the competition is. In a world cup, a team like Ireland or Scotland or Namibia are hardly any competition.

 

[Major]

IPL is full of domestic players but this applies to all teams. They have fixed quota of international players and they have similar financial resources which means they are competing on a level-playing field.

In international cricket, you cannot have a level-playing field because some countries will always have more resources and talent pool than other countries.

Franchise cricket is not the oligopoly of a few teams but international cricket is. Franchise cricket gives every team a fair chance which is why it is more difficult to win.

You gave a wrong example of associate teams winning one-off matches. Winning one-off matches is one thing but winning the tournament is a totally different ball game.

You can have 100 ICC tournaments and teams like Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Scotland, Namibia etc. will not win a single tournament.

These 100 tournaments will be divided between the same 5-6 major teams.

On the other hand, if you have a 100 IPLs or PSLs for that matter, the tournaments will be more evenly distributed among all participants. This is why they are relatively more difficult to win.

Furthermore, as far as Kohli vs Younis vs Akmal are concerned, you cannot judge individual players by team trophies because winning trophies depends on so much more than individual performances.

For example, Kohli has not won a T20 World Cup so far but he is easily the best individual player in history of T20 World Cups.

Ok lets do an analysis of what you claim

We can take England as a case study here as they won the World T20 2022, which was held in Australia
England was placed in Group 1, this group had the following teams:
New Zealand
England
Australia
Sri Lanka
Ire Land
Afghanistan
Game 1
Englands first game was against Afghanistan. This team had a very batting with on Ibrahim Zadran good enough, however its bowling was quite strong. Rashid Khan, Nabi and Mujeeb played this game and these 3 bowlers are very good that IPL franchises for them. Furthermore Fazal haq Farooqi was also playing on an Australian wicket. England with its mighty batting power (that no IPL team can match), was still reduced to 5 outs while chasing a score of 113 and it took them 18 overs to get across.
Now here you may argue that Afghanistan is a weak side that even an IPL team can beat, that is arguable. Because the same IPL domestic team would also be facing Englands bowling aswell

Game 2
England faces Ireland, and Ireland smashes 157 in 19 overs. Irelandas bowler josh little troubled England enough that there was a slight collapse. Eventually England lost by 5 runs due to DLS. Ireland took wickets at the right time.
This associate team managed to win against the mighty England team.

Game 3
Australia vs England gets rained off. But two high quality sides where the game could had gone either way
Game 4
England vs New Zealand, and NZ is a good team internationally with Glen Phillip and lockie ferguson being the top performers. Butlerr smashes a 73 off 47 and wins the game for England by 20 runs. These are two very high quality sides.
Game 5
England vs Sri Lanka. The Lankans post a target of 141, and England loses 6 wickets while chasing it. They take 19.4 overs to win the game by 4 wickets.

Semi final
England beats India that has the likes of Kohli, Sharma etc
Final
England beats Pakistan that has the likes of Babar, Iftikhar, Rizwan and Shaheen

Now lets take a look at Chenai Super Kings who won the IPL 2023

Im just gonna show you their squad

The captain is a 41 year old Veteran, that cant even bat now adays.
Their Overseas:
Moeen Ali
Devon Conway
Sisanda Magala
Dwaine Pretorius
Santner
Ben stokes

Conway and Stokes are high quality players here (both faced as opposition in world t20). Santner a good player in India.
Pretorious only plays one gamme and Magala plays 2. There performance is nothing special.

The rest of the Indian stars are Jadeja, Rahane and a 37 year old Rayudu, the rest of the team is
Akash Singh
Bhagath Varma
Deepak Chahar
Deshpande
Shivam Dube
Hangargeka
“Mandal
Pathirana
Shik Rasheed (LOL)
Simarjeet Sindh
Spati
Nishant Sindhi
Prshan Solanki

Now looking at that squad of the champions team, you are gonna say that IPL is much more harder than the world t20? Remember, in a world t20 you lose a semi final you go home. In an IPL you get a chance.
You seriously going to tell me that domestic team with those above names that faces similar teams is much harder than winning a world t20 with international players?

India won only 1 World T20 out of 8 T20 tournaments, if its that easy why India couldn’t win more? Why India lost to West Indies? Why India lost to Sri Lanka? Why India lost to England? Why India lost Pakistan?

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Ok lets do an analysis of what you claim

We can take England as a case study here as they won the World T20 2022, which was held in Australia
England was placed in Group 1, this group had the following teams:
New Zealand
England
Australia
Sri Lanka
Ire Land
Afghanistan
Game 1
Englands first game was against Afghanistan. This team had a very batting with on Ibrahim Zadran good enough, however its bowling was quite strong. Rashid Khan, Nabi and Mujeeb played this game and these 3 bowlers are very good that IPL franchises for them. Furthermore Fazal haq Farooqi was also playing on an Australian wicket. England with its mighty batting power (that no IPL team can match), was still reduced to 5 outs while chasing a score of 113 and it took them 18 overs to get across.
Now here you may argue that Afghanistan is a weak side that even an IPL team can beat, that is arguable. Because the same IPL domestic team would also be facing Englands bowling aswell

Game 2
England faces Ireland, and Ireland smashes 157 in 19 overs. Irelandas bowler josh little troubled England enough that there was a slight collapse. Eventually England lost by 5 runs due to DLS. Ireland took wickets at the right time.
This associate team managed to win against the mighty England team.

Game 3
Australia vs England gets rained off. But two high quality sides where the game could had gone either way
Game 4
England vs New Zealand, and NZ is a good team internationally with Glen Phillip and lockie ferguson being the top performers. Butlerr smashes a 73 off 47 and wins the game for England by 20 runs. These are two very high quality sides.
Game 5
England vs Sri Lanka. The Lankans post a target of 141, and England loses 6 wickets while chasing it. They take 19.4 overs to win the game by 4 wickets.

Semi final
England beats India that has the likes of Kohli, Sharma etc
Final
England beats Pakistan that has the likes of Babar, Iftikhar, Rizwan and Shaheen

Now lets take a look at Chenai Super Kings who won the IPL 2023

Im just gonna show you their squad

The captain is a 41 year old Veteran, that cant even bat now adays.
Their Overseas:
Moeen Ali
Devon Conway
Sisanda Magala
Dwaine Pretorius
Santner
Ben stokes

Conway and Stokes are high quality players here (both faced as opposition in world t20). Santner a good player in India.
Pretorious only plays one gamme and Magala plays 2. There performance is nothing special.

The rest of the Indian stars are Jadeja, Rahane and a 37 year old Rayudu, the rest of the team is
Akash Singh
Bhagath Varma
Deepak Chahar
Deshpande
Shivam Dube
Hangargeka
“Mandal
Pathirana
Shik Rasheed (LOL)
Simarjeet Sindh
Spati
Nishant Sindhi
Prshan Solanki

Now looking at that squad of the champions team, you are gonna say that IPL is much more harder than the world t20? Remember, in a world t20 you lose a semi final you go home. In an IPL you get a chance.
You seriously going to tell me that domestic team with those above names that faces similar teams is much harder than winning a world t20 with international players?

India won only 1 World T20 out of 8 T20 tournaments, if its that easy why India couldn’t win more? Why India lost to West Indies? Why India lost to Sri Lanka? Why India lost to England? Why India lost Pakistan?

Going around in circles.

His comment is Australia, India, England, NZ are the MAJOR TEAMS that win most of THE ICC trophies nowadays.

You can have 100 ICC tournaments but Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Namibia or Ireland might sneak a win but they WONT WIN THE ENTIRE TOURNEY.

To win an entire tourney requires consistency.

In IPL you need HIGHER levels of Consistency than the WC where you can lose a few shock games but still end up playing final and semi finals.

IPL is not BETTER THAN WORLD cup CRICKET.

It's a league after all.

But winning it ? Requires more consistency (even if all players are bang average), than winning World Cups (all players may be excellent for Afghanistan but they wouldn't win the World Cup in 100 tries).

Don't argue one off upsets as proof that WORLD CUP IS SUPERIOR.

World CUP is superior anyways.

Simply because playing for countries is better than leagues.

 

[Major]

Going around in circles.

His comment is Australia, India, England, NZ are the MAJOR TEAMS that win most of THE ICC trophies nowadays.

You can have 100 ICC tournaments but Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Namibia or Ireland might sneak a win but they WONT WIN THE ENTIRE TOURNEY.

To win an entire tourney requires consistency.

In IPL you need HIGHER levels of Consistency than the WC where you can lose a few shock games but still end up playing final and semi finals.

IPL is not BETTER THAN WORLD cup CRICKET.

It's a league after all.

But winning it ? Requires more consistency (even if all players are bang average), than winning World Cups (all players may be excellent for Afghanistan but they wouldn't win the World Cup in 100 tries).

Don't argue one off upsets as proof that WORLD CUP IS SUPERIOR.

World CUP is superior anyways.

Simply because playing for countries is better than leagues.

I disagree, the thing is IPL all the teams are of domestic and same quality. By being same quality it doesnt mean they are of high quality.

A domestic tournament in Zimbabwe cricket will have all teams of same quality, and it would be hard for one of the teams to win. Now should Flower come out and say that look its more diffult to win a domestic Zimbabwe tournament than a world cup?

Like I said, if world cup is easier, than where are Indias ICC trophies from the last 10 years? 0 trophies in the last 10 years and we see these stupid claims by gnaguly

 

[Dr_Bassim]

I disagree, the thing is IPL all the teams are of domestic and same quality. By being same quality it doesnt mean they are of high quality.

A domestic tournament in Zimbabwe cricket will have all teams of same quality, and it would be hard for one of the teams to win. Now should Flower come out and say that look its more diffult to win a domestic Zimbabwe tournament than a world cup?

Like I said, if world cup is easier, than where are Indias ICC trophies from the last 10 years? 0 trophies in the last 10 years and we see these stupid claims by gnaguly

Your point about all the domestic teams being poor and WC TEAMS being so much better would be validated if you can show me any event in last 10 years where Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Ireland or Namibia or even Netherlands have managed to win the tournament.

Last 10 ICC tournaments

1. WORLD CUP Odi 2011 India
2. T20 world cup 2012 WI
3. Champions trophy 2013 India
4. T20 WORLD cup 2014 SL
5. World Cup ODI 2015 Australia
6. World cup T20 2016 west Indies
7. Champions Trophy 2017 Pak
8. World Cup 2019 Australia
9. World Test Championship 2020 NZ
10. WORLD cup t20 2021 Australia

The 5 to 6 major teams always take the trophy no matter HOW many upsets happen in Group games.

 

[Major]

Your point about all the domestic teams being poor and WC TEAMS being so much better would be validated if you can show me any event in last 10 years where Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Ireland or Namibia or even Netherlands have managed to win the tournament.

Last 10 ICC tournaments

1. WORLD CUP Odi 2011 India
2. T20 world cup 2012 WI
3. Champions trophy 2013 India
4. T20 WORLD cup 2014 SL
5. World Cup ODI 2015 Australia
6. World cup T20 2016 west Indies
7. Champions Trophy 2017 Pak
8. World Cup 2019 Australia
9. World Test Championship 2020 NZ
10. WORLD cup t20 2021 Australia

The 5 to 6 major teams always take the trophy no matter HOW many upsets happen in Group games.

Look at the tournament format, eventaully teams compete in the super 6s. Winning every game becomes important. Point is, if Afg is in teh super six than all teams will face them and lets say all teams get a point against Afg, but when Eng has to face NZ or Aus, only the better team will win.

IPL is first of all a league. CSk was behind RR and was able to come back to the top. Secondly, in the ipl they have play offs, teh first 2 teams, if they lost their play off match they can still return to the tournament by winning the game against the winner of the second play off game.

IPL is much more favored towards teh top 2 teams. Even in IPL RR has never won again after 2007 and the whole tournament is being dominated by either Chennai or Mumbai

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Winning Quaid - E- Azam trophy is more difficult than winning a series in Australia

 

[Major]

Winning Quaid - E- Azam trophy is more difficult than winning a series in Australia

whats ridiculous is the usual posters coming in to defend the qoute only because an Indian said it.

The ridiculousness is just too much

 

[salman24]

India is the best team. An Indian team has won every edition of the IPL since its inception in 2008.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Winning Quaid - E- Azam trophy is more difficult than winning a series in Australia

Good one.

India can never win Quaid-e-azam trophy. I am 200% sure about it.

 

[Firebat]

When you say a trophy is more difficult to win than another, it means you have to play at a higher level, play better quality cricket to win that trophy compared to the other.

The top 5-6 international sides are better than the top 5-6 IPL sides, almost by definition because they are the best XI of each country's population. Therefore, to win a tournament like ODI WC that has better quality teams, you have to play at a higher level, thus it is more difficult. This is so basic.

Just because IPL is a more level playing field or the T20 format is unpredictable, doesn't mean it's more difficult to win, just more difficult to predict. A team in a T20 tournament final can play bad cricket in a game but fluke the title off a few tiny moments. Have they played better quality cricket that a team who has won the World Cup? Come on.

 

[nextover666666]

This is why I can never take Indian Cricket Seriously, when you get comments like this how can you

 

[Mamoon]

Ok lets do an analysis of what you claim

We can take England as a case study here as they won the World T20 2022, which was held in Australia
England was placed in Group 1, this group had the following teams:
New Zealand
England
Australia
Sri Lanka
Ire Land
Afghanistan
Game 1
Englands first game was against Afghanistan. This team had a very batting with on Ibrahim Zadran good enough, however its bowling was quite strong. Rashid Khan, Nabi and Mujeeb played this game and these 3 bowlers are very good that IPL franchises for them. Furthermore Fazal haq Farooqi was also playing on an Australian wicket. England with its mighty batting power (that no IPL team can match), was still reduced to 5 outs while chasing a score of 113 and it took them 18 overs to get across.
Now here you may argue that Afghanistan is a weak side that even an IPL team can beat, that is arguable. Because the same IPL domestic team would also be facing Englands bowling aswell

Game 2
England faces Ireland, and Ireland smashes 157 in 19 overs. Irelandas bowler josh little troubled England enough that there was a slight collapse. Eventually England lost by 5 runs due to DLS. Ireland took wickets at the right time.
This associate team managed to win against the mighty England team.

Game 3
Australia vs England gets rained off. But two high quality sides where the game could had gone either way
Game 4
England vs New Zealand, and NZ is a good team internationally with Glen Phillip and lockie ferguson being the top performers. Butlerr smashes a 73 off 47 and wins the game for England by 20 runs. These are two very high quality sides.
Game 5
England vs Sri Lanka. The Lankans post a target of 141, and England loses 6 wickets while chasing it. They take 19.4 overs to win the game by 4 wickets.

Semi final
England beats India that has the likes of Kohli, Sharma etc
Final
England beats Pakistan that has the likes of Babar, Iftikhar, Rizwan and Shaheen

Now lets take a look at Chenai Super Kings who won the IPL 2023

Im just gonna show you their squad

The captain is a 41 year old Veteran, that cant even bat now adays.
Their Overseas:
Moeen Ali
Devon Conway
Sisanda Magala
Dwaine Pretorius
Santner
Ben stokes

Conway and Stokes are high quality players here (both faced as opposition in world t20). Santner a good player in India.
Pretorious only plays one gamme and Magala plays 2. There performance is nothing special.

The rest of the Indian stars are Jadeja, Rahane and a 37 year old Rayudu, the rest of the team is
Akash Singh
Bhagath Varma
Deepak Chahar
Deshpande
Shivam Dube
Hangargeka
“Mandal
Pathirana
Shik Rasheed (LOL)
Simarjeet Sindh
Spati
Nishant Sindhi
Prshan Solanki

Now looking at that squad of the champions team, you are gonna say that IPL is much more harder than the world t20? Remember, in a world t20 you lose a semi final you go home. In an IPL you get a chance.
You seriously going to tell me that domestic team with those above names that faces similar teams is much harder than winning a world t20 with international players?

India won only 1 World T20 out of 8 T20 tournaments, if its that easy why India couldn’t win more? Why India lost to West Indies? Why India lost to Sri Lanka? Why India lost to England? Why India lost Pakistan?

How much time did you waste on this off-topic post that I didn't even read completely? From what I could gather by skimming through, you are arguing that international cricket is of higher quality than IPL because IPL teams are largely composed of domestic players.

The debate here is not about whether IPL is of higher quality or not; the debate is whether it is harder to win or not. It is harder because it is a level-playing field and a longer tournament.

The gap between a strong IPL team and weak IPL team is much smaller than a strong international and weak international team.

You keep emphasizing that IPL is made up of domestic players, but this applies to all IPL teams. We are talking about relative strength here not absolute strength.

As far as the relative strength of IPL is concerned, you will not agree with this but if the Pakistan team joins the IPL as a franchise, I can assure you they will not win it.

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=135038]Major[/MENTION]

I ended this debate with this statement:

You can have 100 ICC tournaments and teams like Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Scotland, Namibia etc. will not win a single tournament.

These 100 tournaments will be divided between the same 5-6 major teams.

On the other hand, if you have a 100 IPLs or PSLs for that matter, the tournaments will be more evenly distributed among all participants. This is why they are relatively more difficult to win.

No one can disprove or challenge what I said here. It is proof that winning the IPL is more difficult than winning an ICC tournament. End of debate.

 

[Mamoon]

When you say a trophy is more difficult to win than another, it means you have to play at a higher level, play better quality cricket to win that trophy compared to the other.

The top 5-6 international sides are better than the top 5-6 IPL sides, almost by definition because they are the best XI of each country's population. Therefore, to win a tournament like ODI WC that has better quality teams, you have to play at a higher level, thus it is more difficult. This is so basic.

Just because IPL is a more level playing field or the T20 format is unpredictable, doesn't mean it's more difficult to win, just more difficult to predict. A team in a T20 tournament final can play bad cricket in a game but fluke the title off a few tiny moments. Have they played better quality cricket that a team who has won the World Cup? Come on.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with this.

Winning the Conference League was as difficult (if not more) for West Ham as winning the UCL was for Man City, therefore it will not be wrong to suggest West Ham deserve as much credit and respect as City.

When you look at the relative strength and resources of teams competing in the Conference League, it is by no means easier to win than the UCL even though the UCL is a far more prestigious tournament.

 

[Energy]

In the last 20 years Aus, Eng, Ind, Pak, NZ, SA, WI and SL have each won an ICC tournament of some nature. That's 8 out of 10 test playing countries.

If an ICC tournament is held every year it is likely we will see the trophy get rotated amongst these teams, similar to the IPL.

IPL is a homogeneous tournament with the same conditions, same set of pitches, players and expertise. Ganguly, quite stupidly is basing his opinion on the number of games logic which is a numerical indicator only. Just putting on game after game and asking teams to play for two months in the same drill does not mean the tournament is difficult to win.

In a world tournament, you play the best players from other countries, different conditions each year, different challenges ie some teams better on spin, others on pace whilst the rest on batting etc. In the IPL the make up of all teams is the same. So even if you keep playing the same teams 50 times, it's still easy to win if you get the right combination of players.

England's last ODI World Cup win with 9 matches was much tougher than Chennai's 20-matches IPL win.

 

[Firebat]

I wouldn't necessarily agree with this.

Winning the Conference League was as difficult (if not more) for West Ham as winning the UCL was for Man City, therefore it will not be wrong to suggest West Ham deserve as much credit and respect as City.

When you look at the relative strength and resources of teams competing in the Conference League, it is by no means easier to win than the UCL even though the UCL is a far more prestigious tournament.

You are talking about something entirely different, once you start introducing the word "relative".

Of course there's a debate to be had if you said it's more difficult for RCB to win the IPL than England to win the WC, or something along those lines. Ganguly never mentioned anything to do with "relative" difficulty, and it's an utterly moot argument to use anyway; can I not say it is harder for Namibia to win the WC than it is for Kolkata to win the IPL? What have I proved? Nothing.

You know I was never very good at athletics in high school, I was quite slow compared to my peers. I found it very difficult to ever win a sprint race. In fact, I bet you it was harder for me to win a 100m race in my high school than it was for Usain Bolt to win the 1st Heat race at the Beijing Olympics. What have I proved exactly? That my high school race is more difficult than the Olympics?

When you say tournament A is more difficult to win than tournament B, it's nothing to do with the relative difficulty or relative strength of the teams, and Ganguly did not even imply, let alone state, that "relative" is part of his reasoning.

 

[MenInG]

Salman Butt on this topic:

“I didn't expect a world-class player and a captain to say something like this. How can you compare league cricket with Test (and international) cricket? There's no comparison. You're comparing the ultimate format of cricket with the shortest format where only four international players are in a team? There's no comparison,”

 

[happydavy]

The difficulty of a competition is defined by the difference of competency of teams participating and not the format. If a tennis tournament has 5 sets for each match while another has 3, that doesn't mean 3 setters is easier than the other. Some may have better skills in 3 setter while others in 5, so hard or easy will be different for each player and not the tournament itself. It's like saying winning 400 metres is difficult than winning 100 metres and so Wayde van Niekerk is greater than Usain Bolt. But then indian commentators could design any logic to make Indian team look good.

 

[pakistani pride]

OK, so now we know not to take Ganguly serious in the future.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Former Indian cricketer Sourav Ganguly said, while speaking to media reporters after the announcement of the ‘Bengal Pro T20’ to be held in June 2024:

“It’s happening in every state. We are probably 5-6 years late on this. Any way of playing the sport will always be very helpful. T20 is an important part of cricket these days and this will be a huge opportunity for everyone to perform.”

 

[Slim]

This statement is still one of the strongest contenders to be the dumbest take of all time.