Future of the IPL

With the IPL now being broadcast on freeview TV here in the UK i've watched a few games. Its great being able to see players like Gilchrist and Warne but overall I think the standard of the cricket is patchy and as a non Indian viewer it is hard to find a reason to support any of the teams. I see that next year they are going to expand from 8 teams and 60 matches to 10 teams and 94 matches. But I think to build support globally and engage more with fans from around the world they need to include overseas franchises. The model should be based around the Champions League in football which has raised the profile of football greatly. I know they made a half-hearted attempt to make a cricket Champions League towards the end of last year - but I think they need to merge the two ideas.

I recognise that India is the financial powerhouse of the game and any tournament should be based around India to be successful. So my model would combine matches in India with overseas venues and include the 10 Indian teams, but add 10 foreign teams too. They would be split into 4 leagues of 5 teams, the teams play each other twice with the top two teams from each groups progressing to the finals. 2 of the leagues would be played in India, 2 overseas. The finals would ususually be in India. I think England, South Africa and Australia could have 2 franchises each - NZ, Sri Lanka, WI, and Pakistan / Bangladesh would get 1 each.

The South African and Australian franchises could be based around the existing State teams, with a Domestic T20 tournament used as a qualifing stage. The depth of talent in the English counties is too shallow so on top of the usual T20 county tournament in the first half of the Summer I would have 6 or so teams, based loosely around regions that play a qualifying tournament in September. The money would filter down to the residual counties. The two poorest permorming Indian teams from the previous year would cede home advantage and an overseas team would play in each Indian Division, whilst they would join the competition overseas.

Players would still be free to migrate between teams based on transfers, but still only 4 foreign players can play that are not native to that residual area. Players from areas that fail to qualify for the main tournament would be available on a one season basis for all teams to bid for.

So the tournament would look a bit like this:

Gameweeks 1 & 2 (March 1 - March 15)

Division 1 - North India
Kolkata Knight Riders
Delhi Daredevils
Rajasthan Royals
Kings XI Punjab
London Lions

Division 2 - South Africa
Highveld Lions
Eastern Cape Warriors
Kochi Suckers
North Island Kiwis
Trini Posse

Gameweeks 3 & 4 (March 16 - March 31)

Division 3 - South India
Royal Challengers Bangalore
Chennai Super Kings
Mumbai Indians
Deccan Chargers
Colombo Detectives

Division 4 - Australia
South Australia Redbacks
Victoria Bushrangers
Pune Princesses
Lahore Houses
Northern Roses

Gameweek 5 - Finals (April 5 - April 15)

The top two teams from each league qualify for the last 8 - this is 2 groups of 4 teams who play each other only once. The top two teams progress to the semi-finals. So overall that would be 15 games, 95 for the whole tournament. The league structure would guarentee at least 2 Indian teams make the final 8 (and it could be as many as 6). With these 6 or so weeks the schedulers will have plenty of leeway to schedule meaningful Test Series around the rest of the year. The tournament would still appeal massively to an Indian audience but it would also take advantage of their partisan support by seeing the Indian franchises play foreign teams. Other countries would be included too with an element of the tournament being taken on the road, not only to Aus and SA but maybe to the other countries based on a rotation system. Some of the money generated can be used to support the domestic structure of these countries. Indeed the qualifying tournaments for teams from Aus, SA, England, etc. will be another fine source of revenue.

Thoughts?

In this hypothetical tournament you could end up with the semi-finals being:



Eastern Cape Warriors
Prince, Shane Watson, Ingram, Ramnaresh Sarwan, Jacobs*, Boucher+, Botha, Shakib Al Hasan, Stuart Broad, Parnell, Ntini
vs
Deccan Chargers
Adam Gilchrist, Mishra, R Sharma, Andrew Symonds, Laxman, Suman, Dwayne Smith, Chaminda Vaas, Rao, RP Singh, Ojha

Royal Challengers Bangalore
Pandey, Jacques Kallis, Uthappa, Dravid,Cameron White, Eoin Morgan, Goswami+, Vinay Kumar, Kumar, Dale Steyn, Kumble*
vs
Northern Roses
Horton, Jacques Rudolph, Herschelle Gibbs, Paul Collingwood, Gale, Flintoff*, Tatenda Taibu, Bresnan, Rashid, Anderson, Keedy

IPL sucks.

Seeing as your into the tournament making lark, Gary, have a gander at this thread I made last year.

http://www.flamingbails.com/the-flaming-bails-cricket-forum-f1/four-day-world-championship-idea-t7944.htm?highlight=four+day+world+championship

this would have the same issues that the champions league had of players playing for two teams - e.g. gibbs and watson.

the IPL had initially modelled itself on the EPL but in a compact timeframe...it could simply extend the idea to unlimited overseas players and then you have a more global appeal. the franchises are just a label and, icon players aside, have nothing to with the city/state they're named after. e.g. harbhajan playing for mumbai, sreesanth playing for punjab.

one of the things i like about the IPL in its current format is that it showcases young indian players that we would otherwise not see. it also aids their development playing against world class players. your format would greatly reduce exposure they get.

the IPL is fine as it is imo. although if they're going to expand the number of franchises, they would do well to have two groups otherwise theres too many games (even now its pushing it). the globalisation is the domain of the champions league which itself is an interesting idea but needs more thought around the format/player issues etc. as for supporting teams, you just pick the team with your favourite players/style of play - similar to the global brands that are the EPL/la liga/serie A.

I only ever watch occasionally when there's english players involved the same way i'd watch serie A in the 1990's when Platt & Gazza were playing there.

Doesn't interest me otherwise as there is no emotional attachment to any side.

IPL in general is a good product and has the potential to get better...

i don't like it and have NOT watched it because a) they discriminate against Pak players b) Modi is an arsehole who wants to bully every body c) Far far far too many matches.

The emotional bond between spectators and the teams is essential for any sport to succeed.

isn't the emotional bond thing a bit of a marketing tool?

What do you care more about, the performance of your national team, or how the individual players go when playing for other teams in comps around the world?

emotional bonds arent formed overnight.

IPL is a complete asset to the game isen it?

Zat wrote:What do you care more about, the performance of your national team, or how the individual players go when playing for other teams in comps around the world?

i care about pace bowlers and Pakistan

how ever national pride and all that crap is a bit overrated because every one plays for money

Don't have a problem with it. Take matches in when I'm not busy. I just root for WI players. Not really fussed about which teams win or lose.

For me, IPL has taken a lot of the interest away from County cricket because there are fewer Australians playing in the UK now.

the ipl will remain an indian tournament. the international broadcasting rights or the need to have international fans is like having the cherry on top, but at the end of the day is a miniscule percentage of total revenues. if 2 of the teams and half the matches are moved outside india the impact on revenues would be much larger than any offset due to increase of revenues abroad. also the revenue would have to be shared with other boards. the ipl itself will not move out of india

what could change maybe is the champions league and its format. thats for the bcci, ca and csa to decide

If the IPL moves away from being being "an Indian Domestic Competition" to a more International competition then the ICC will come over the top of the BCCI and take on the responsibility (ie Ca$h) for the tournament

The Champions League as an "add on" competition is sort of what the OP is looking at ...

I think that next years "auction" will be a big test of Team Loyalty...

I follow teams at the moment because of the players in them ...Warnie , Gilly , Bog
...and get to like the players thaey are playing alongside ...dont know who i'd follow when the teams get split up and remade

thats the downside of the current auction system, problems with players staying in teams for years. the positive is that almost all the matches are competitive since no one team can afford to buy all the best players due to the auction cap. the teams will be able to keep a so far unspecified number of players in their teams and dont have to release them for next year's auction, provided the player himself wants to stay of course

Couple of flaws off-hand that immediately come to mind, Gary.

1. What you suggest is basically a repeat of the Champions Trophy slightly modified.
2. Imagine Sydney playing Capes somewhere in Timbuktu; Indian tv is the cash-cow and Indian sponsors shell out x.cent millions because they have the market. Who would carry the tv stats and what products would be advertised by foreign cos who’d have to pay a bundle just to amortise the broadcasting cost (rights)?
3. Would the Sydney Roos employ Indian domestic cricketers? That would have to be the case, if Indian tv viewers were to get involved.
4. You’d have to make Lalit Modi chief commissioner for life just to feed his over-inflated ego, let alone the requisite palm greasing and such.

There are probably a few more negative antecedents that may make your proposition a flop. But the financial implications are deciding and most vital.

Either it's an indian domestic comp (which it is) or its an international one.

Holds no real interest for me apart from when English players are in one of the side, but it seems to work for an indian domestic audience so why change it?

The One wrote:the ipl will remain an indian tournament.

if 2 of the teams and half the matches are moved outside india the impact on revenues would be much larger than any offset due to increase of revenues abroad.

. the ipl itself will not move out of india

So IPL SA was a figment of our collective imaginations?

Thanks for some interesting points, if you will allow the indulgance i'm going to try and answer some of the comments....

DJ_Smerk wrote:Seeing as your into the tournament making lark, Gary, have a gander at this thread I made last year.

http://www.flamingbails.com/the-flaming-bails-cricket-forum-f1/four-day-world-championship-idea-t7944.htm?highlight=four+day+world+championship

I like it, Smerky, and I would certainly watch a four day tournament like this. Not sure how many others would though. I think the only way it could possibly work though would be only 4 teams, two semi-finals and a final - perhaps as a curtain raiser to the English season / climax of the Southern Hemisphere one. The major factors that would prevent this are a) time in the packed schedule, b) fan support / media interest, which would lead onto c) money.

Basically most domestic cricket is a breeding ground for the Test team. Most teams First Class teams struggle to attract fans for 4 day games - so if no-one will pay to watch it in the ground will anyone want to watch it on TV? What's the highest crowd we get in England for a domestic FC game - Yorkshire will get 3,000-4,000 a day for the Scarborough festival, can anyone top that? Am I right in saying the Australian or Indian domestic FC games don't attract big crowds either?

I think I would rather we had more meaningful 4 and 5 Test match series and the top level cricket done properly as a priority.

Ash wrote:this would have the same issues that the champions league had of players playing for two teams - e.g. gibbs and watson.

I would have the players go to the highest bidder. Perhaps Michael Clarke could help NSW qualify for the group stage but if Delhi stump up more cash for him then he plays for them in the finals. You could also open up the players from the teams that don't qualify for a final bidding stage - hired guns for the finals stage to improve quality. So if Tasmania don't qualify Ponting is up for grabs for those finals - this would be on top of some overseas players on longer contracts.

Ash wrote:the IPL had initially modelled itself on the EPL but in a compact timeframe...it could simply extend the idea to unlimited overseas players and then you have a more global appeal. the franchises are just a label and, icon players aside, have nothing to with the city/state they're named after. e.g. harbhajan playing for mumbai, sreesanth playing for punjab.

one of the things i like about the IPL in its current format is that it showcases young indian players that we would otherwise not see. it also aids their development playing against world class players. your format would greatly reduce exposure they get.

I agree that the 4 overseas players limit is needed. My model would still have 10 teams filled with these Indian players - but you would have young English players in 2 teams, West Indians in 1 team, etc.

Ash wrote:the IPL is fine as it is imo. although if they're going to expand the number of franchises, they would do well to have two groups otherwise theres too many games (even now its pushing it). the globalisation is the domain of the champions league which itself is an interesting idea but needs more thought around the format/player issues etc. as for supporting teams, you just pick the team with your favourite players/style of play - similar to the global brands that are the EPL/la liga/serie A.

I think you undervalue the importance of the passion of local fans. As later posters said - I don't think you can just build brand loyalty by having good players - the players will eventually leave and interest will drift. I don't think the EPL would have half as many global fans if it wasn't for the passion and atmosphere generated in the ground and by the fans. It remains to be seen if the IPL in its current format will be a success. Will fans in India tire of supporting teams that have no local bonds? This will certainly stop the development on international markets of the IPL. However introduce an international element and the passion immediately intensifies. If the Deccan Chargers are taking on the Eastern Cape Cobras suddenly you everyone in India is supporting them. This can only increase interest and ultimately the revenue generated (both in India and outside).

Despite the political problems the IPL is also missing a massive trick by not including Pakistan players. Imagine the atmosphere and passion if the Karachi Streetfighters or Lahore Houses were playing and Indian team.

Zat wrote:The emotional bond between spectators and the teams is essential for any sport to succeed.

Exactly - and by having the Australian states represented, English regions (though probably not counties), etc. this will increase greatly. I can see the IPL marquee deminishing over time because it lacks this passion generated by regional support. The Indian franchises would need greater local bonds too.

That doesn't mean to say that a better, improved version of the game will emerge out of the IPL innovations. Much like modern Test cricket and ODI's evolved as a response to WSC.

The One wrote:the ipl will remain an indian tournament. the international broadcasting rights or the need to have international fans is like having the cherry on top, but at the end of the day is a miniscule percentage of total revenues. if 2 of the teams and half the matches are moved outside india the impact on revenues would be much larger than any offset due to increase of revenues abroad. also the revenue would have to be shared with other boards. the ipl itself will not move out of india

what could change maybe is the champions league and its format. thats for the bcci, ca and csa to decide

My plan would still have 55 of the 95 games played in India (so 58%). 55 games isn't many less than the 60 currently played, also the 94 matches in one big league proposed for next year is starting to look a little messy and will dilute the impact of each game - my format would be much more focused and each game more meaningful in the context of a league.

Also, isn't the massive revenue generated mainly by TV money? - matches in South Africa, Australia or elsewhere would still be broadcast on TV in India. That's not even to mention the many fans you would get through the turnstiles, or the increased interest in overseas broadcasters.