Cover Points : ECB

EPL, a bitter pill

dcsiva — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:53:00 GMT

Hold the press! The ECB has a new competition in the offing that will revolutionize the game...featuring all the counties and then some more playing Twenty20. Who would have thought that the county boards could have thought of something just so exciting and revolutionary.

Or was that self-serving and stultifying? I forget. The actually interesting Stewart/Bradshaw proposal is out and we have this instead:

The EPL will have two divisions of 10 teams featuring the 18 existing counties plus two overseas teams.
There will also be a Twenty20 League to replace the existing Twenty20 Cup.
The England and Wales Cricket Board has yet to confirm which foreign teams will play in the EPL but the winners of the Indian Premier League and a Sir Allen Stanford XI are rumoured to be the ones that will be chosen.

Andrew Miller is quite scathing, and Jonathan Liew compares it to the Premiership:

What the EPL vision reminds me of most is not its Indian counterpart, but its footballing equivalent: the bloated, joyless Premiership. A middle-class preserve, a place where corporate fools will go to show how ‘down with it’ they are, the domain of Sky or Setanta subscribers alone. We will be told, patronisingly, that this is the price you pay for higher standards.

Finally, Q has the run down on Pakistan's probables squad for the Champions Trophy, including an introduction to the 5 unknowns in the squad.

Sleepy Indian venues and doping Asif

dcsiva — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:53:00 GMT

The English media and the ECB, on behalf of English touring fans, have been complaining about the tour itinerary in India later this year:

The England and Wales Cricket Board announced on Monday it was upset that India's regular Test venues like Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai and Mohali were not given matches during the six-week tour.
India want the two Tests in December to be played in Ahmedabad and Mumbai, while the seven preceding one-dayers were spread across various centres like Rajkot, Guwahati, Cuttack and Jamshedpur.
"We would like to remind the ECB that our venues are always decided on the basis of a rotation policy," Indian cricket board secretary Niranjan Shah was quoted as saying on the cricketnirvana.com website.
"The itinerary for the England tour has been finalised on the basis of this rotation policy."
...
An ECB statement issued on Monday said: "ECB are disappointed that, despite their representations, the itinerary doesn't offer the thousands of supporters who follow the England team abroad the opportunity to experience more of the great cricket grounds of India.

Here's King Cricket's personal take on some of the venues. Note the acerbic but exactly detailed first comment to King's entry. But for some real action, see the Guardian's David Hopp's entry and the ensuing commentary that even manages to discuss the 1857 mutiny and the current war in Iraq (see spoonman5150's comment, and humptydumpty's response.)

Mohammad Asif has been caught again in a dope scandal:

Pakistan paceman Mohammad Asif will seek a "B sample" test after testing positive for a banned substance during play in the Indian Premier League (IPL), his lawyer said Tuesday.
The IPL announced on Monday that the 25-year-old fast bowler had failed a drugs test at the lucrative Twenty20 tournament held from April to June.

But looks like he's going to get away with it. Again. This time because some idiot (or clever agent?) managed to announce his name before a testing of his 'B' sample. This is against WADA rules, apparently. Here's Ratnakar Shetty's nonsensical explanation:

The procedure is that once the report of dope test was received, the player has to be identified and can be asked whether he will exercise the choice for his 'B' sample test and can be asked to be physically present when the sample was tested, he said.

"However, if the player is not named, how do we ask the player to be present to give an option along with the representative" during the test?" Shetty said.

Apparently it's impossible for the chief administrator for the BCCI to do anything except via the media. And, finally, there was a Test match on. A tame draw between England and South Africa that might have been a fighting draw at one point. Will asks if we should be complaining about such cricket or not.

Sri Lanka all tear shaped

dcsiva — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:57:00 GMT

Sri Lanka Cricket just solved a payrise problem---Ottayan says that their debts have been cleared by the upcoming India tour---but are in all kinds of trouble over the newly scheduled tour next year to England. Looks like they're seriously considering letting their star players play in the IPL next year instead of touring England:

"The issue is yet to be finalised and very much at a discussion stage," the source said, asking to remain anonymous. He said they were awaiting a response from the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB).

Some 13 Sri Lankan cricketers, including star players Mahela Jayawardene, Sanath Jayasuriya, Muttiah Muralitharan and Kumar Sangakkara, have signed three-year contracts to play in the IPL.

The players argued they received permission to play in the IPL before the ECB came up with the idea of replacing Zimbabwe with Sri Lanka for the early part of the summer 2009.

Meanwhile the MCC, Surrey, Hampshire and Lancashire have been caught with a plan for a 50 million pound Twenty20 for the top nine counties only:

The quartet had planned to launch their manifesto at Tuesday's board meeting of the England and Wales Cricket Board but it was leaked yesterday. Tuesday's meeting will now be an explosive one. While the competition, it is claimed, could realise £85m annually, some of which would be passed on to all the 18 existing counties, those outside the charmed circle are bound to resist. The basic principle that all counties participate in domestic competitions is the bedrock of the existing domestic system.

Not only that, but the ECB wouldn't be fully in charge. And the backlash has been swift in coming. Finally, a brilliant post on Michael Vaughan by David Barry.

Oil and water in Dubai

dcsiva — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:41:00 GMT

The big ongoing story is of course the ICC's discussion of Zimbabwe. The British government's instructions are clear: no play. But what then happens to the Twenty20 World Cup? The Culture/Media/Sport Secretary of State says:

Like others, I have watched events unfold over the first half of this year, hoping against hope that the country would be about to enter a new era.

When it became clear that would not happen, I took the reluctant step last week of writing to the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) to say that the UK Government would prevent next summer's tour from taking place.

It was not something the Government did lightly. Wherever possible, sport and politics should be kept separate. Our governing bodies should operate autonomously. Any direct intervention should be a last resort and only in the most exceptional circumstances.

But that, in my judgment, is what we are presented with here. Mugabe's patronage of Zimbabwe Cricket blurs the line between politics and sport. Cricketing relations in these circumstances bring a brutal regime uncomfortably close.

And here are John Traicos and Goolam Rajah taking opposite sides of the recurring sports and politics question—do they/don't they mix. Traicos focuses on the moral standing of cricket players in Zimbabwe and Rajah on the moral standing of foreign players, boards and governments:

Yes
John Traicos
Former South Africa and Zimbabwe Test cricketer

Suspending Zimbabwe from inter-national cricket will have little or no
political impact because there are greater issues at stake - Robert Mugabe may like cricket but power and position probably matter most. It is unrealistic to expect sanctions to effect political change by putting pressure on those in power if a sporting body is controlled by politicians and has to adhere to the laws of the country, regardless of whether or not it agrees with them. In any case, anyone upset by a sporting boycott can do nothing about it since the right to vote currently has no relevance in Zimbabwe.

...
No
Goolam Rajah
General manager of the South Africa cricket team

Frankly, I think it is crazy for anyone to say there is no place for sporting
boycotts, or that they are ineffectual. South Africa is living, breathing proof that they can have a profound and dramatic effect for the better.

Here's Homer's entirely financial explanation of this mess. And, finally, Q spots some shady reporting by the Guardian about the ICC's meeting.

(My apologies for the long absence from blogging!)

IPL fallout

dcsiva — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:23:00 GMT

Scorpicity argues that the IPL is really already over. The Royals won:

Seriously they have! Because how meaningless in context are these so-called knockout rounds in the name of Semi-finals and finals are in the IPL!

Why? Because a six league team just doesn't need a knock-out stage. A best of three final with the top two teams maybe. I think the deeper point may be that that all the narratives built around the different teams (Rajasthan are intelligent, Bangalore stupid, Kolkata fancy, etc.) are based on pretty flimsy grounds...not enough data.

Jagadish goes through all the injuries caused by playing over a month's worth of IPL. Hayden and Tendulkar stand out in particular:

All this makes me wonder if talk about international cricket being more important than the IPL is hogwash. If that indeed were the case, players wouldn't be risking aggravating injuries when they had international commitments immediately after the IPL ended.

And Sanjay posts news of the Indian ODI squad while the English counties start panicking over the ECB's trawling for ideas from broadcasters.

Media restrictions and more on the West Indies

dcsiva — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:20:00 GMT

BCCI relaxes some of the media restrictions for the IPL. Livemint frames the money issue at the heart of this:

Essentially, the underlying principle in both instances is the same. Seeking to maximize their revenues, the cricket authorities in both countries want to monetize every aspect of the game. On the face of it, say legal observers, this argument cannot be faulted. Especially since it is a privately organized event, for which entry is based only on tickets.

Yet, going down this path is questionable. For those unable to witness the event, especially those who cannot afford to pay for entry, the media, including print publications, is the only alternative. In other words, the public would lose out if the face-off is not resolved amicably. This would be a disaster given the cult following of cricket in the subcontinent in general and India in particular.

Ian Bishop suggests a possible turning point for the West Indies. And Sime looks forward to the Australia series:

Sarwan may be on the cusp of delivering on the potential, he has displayed glimpses of for so long......with the Aussies on the horizon.

Island Express highlights a lesson for India in a gritty Gayle performance:

Gayle is *** against Vaas and he knew it. But 1-0 down, he knuckled down, and did not give Vaas his wicket, and made a valuable 45 in the first innings, on what looked like a lively wicket, inspiring debutant and opening partner Chattegoon to do the same along the way.

And Mark covers the face off between Pietersen and Clarke. Jrod is more than a little sceptical of Pietersen.