Cover Points : Bangladesh

And then there were (n)one - Part 1 - The wins

arvi — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 02:10:00 GMT

Agatha Christie's famous novel did have one left in the end though the readers find that out only in the end. Similarly, when Edwards walked in,walked in the latest thriller @ ARG(ggg), England could have been forgotten for thinking that it was a...(read more)

ICL internationals in the offing

dcsiva — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:04:00 GMT

Those busy bodies at the ICL have taken another big step in the direction of a challenge to the ICC itself, not just the BCCI. As Soulberry puts it:

So there are three international teams so far in the ICL - India, Pakistan and BD. New Zealand and Sri Lanka cannot be far away and it must be a cinch to whip up an Australian or Saffer team - there are so many players in those ranks who are "out of the loop" so to speak. Can't be long before all teams are represented, now that counties and countries (1st world only at the moment) may not have problems fielding ICL players...they may have problems fielding IPL players instead! Kapil tells us why - ICL plays better cricket and IPL plays better marketing.

Ottayan talks about the BCB's attempt to rein the players back in. And Samir Chopra claims it's all a miscommunication exercise. Here's Sandeep Patil's column on cricketnext:

The six players who come from Bangladesh bring a whiff of fresh air to the ICL's campaign. They have strengthened our resolve to provide better facilities and opportunities to those who have been denied. And this number is only increasing and it is time the ICC and the BCCI took notice of it.

Support for ICL would only mean support to cricketers because we are only concentrating on creating the infrastructure and competitions for young players. We are not competing with the IPL or the BCCI. We have our targets and have set benchmarks in terms of quality entertainment. By denying us the authorities in turn are only denying the young players.

Finally, on a different note, here's Judhajit Basu on TV viewership across the different forms of cricket. No big surprises (excepting perhaps that the IPL beat the Twenty20 World Cup):

Rohit Gupta, SET India president for network sales, licensing and telephony, says Twenty20 is a powerful format. "The audience involvement is three-and-a-half hours compared to eight hours for a one-dayer," Gupta told Cricinfo. "Though an over-exposed format, Twenty20 offers huge excitement, which means the youth and females get involved in large numbers. Understandably, viewership for Test cricket and ODIs has dipped when we talk in relative terms. Hopefully, the concerned authorities will take note of this trend and work on the one-day format in the near future."

While ESS said "it was too premature to comment", industry insiders believe the superhuman success of Twenty20 has resulted in the others taking a beating. "It's a temporary state of affairs and that if the hypothesis persisted for two years, it would certainly a matter of concern. However, I believe one good Test series, especially with the upcoming tour by Australia, will change the picture completely," said a source.

My apologies for the lack on posts recently!

Nations and private clubs

dcsiva — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:01:00 GMT

Where goes nationalism? The Business Standard carries the big story about the IPL:

The successful launch of the Indian Premier League by the Board of Control for Cricket in India on Friday at Bangalore marks a watershed in the history of the game, and could well re-define its future. On the sub-continent, at least, cricket has been an 'Empire strikes back' kind of phenomenon, which is not surprising given the colonial provenance of the game. It looks as if IPL may change that.
google_ad_client = 'businessstandard'; //google_ad_client = 'ca-businessstandard_js'; google_ad_width = 200; google_ad_height = 200; google_ad_format = "200x200_as"; google_ad_type = "text"; google_ad_channel = ""; //google_color_border = "FFFFFF"; google_color_border = "F7F7F7"; //google_color_bg = "FFFFFF"; google_color_bg = "ffffff"; //google_color_link = "639ACE"; google_color_link = "0253B7"; google_color_text = "000000"; google_color_url = "D63431"; //google_skip = adsenseSkip;
Friday's match shows that people are willing to watch a match that has no nationalist sentiment attached to it; indeed, it became clear that it is has become more important to get 22 top performers to play against each other, never mind the banner under which they are playing, than to wage surrogate nationalist wars. All that the new generation, which has no memory of being a colony, wants is a good game of quality cricket. This is not unlike soccer, where loyalties are to clubs rather than countries, except when a World Cup tournament is staged.

Here are some of the reasons why Q likes Twenty20:

Ganguly informing McCullum to be careful against Praveen Kumar as he nips the ball sharply.
Boucher's stares at Kumar and Noffke when they bowled wide ones down leg.
Zaheer subtly showing Ganguly the way and celebrating with Kallis.
...
Ganguly getting his revenge and bowling Zaheer and celebrating with Ponting.
...
Hayden back slapping Murali after the Sri Lankan made an amazing attempt at a catch at mid off.

And Ankit's take on the conclusion of the Pakistan--Bangladesh ODI series:

These days, we love the slam bang stuff. We love the ‘lesser’ teams stand up and challenge the giants. There is a romantic in everyone who wants Kenya to beat the West Indies (oops, this was a bit obvious).
The bottom-line being, sometimes people do not realise the prematurity of a situation, and that’s when we get a 3-0 green-wash (Pakistan v Bangladesh ODI Series, April 2008), and lots and lots more similar happenings preceding it. What do you guys think about it?