Twenty20 raises its ugly head.

Good opinion pieces from one of our respected journos.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/sport/cricket/games-twenty20-monster-raises-its-ugly-head/2008/10/15/1223750132684.html

If the ICC had set aside an "IPL window" then the IPL wouldnt have to do it by stealth in 'buying' the allegiance of cricket boards ...

Yup, but that would be too sensible.

skully wrote:Yup, but that would be too sensible.

.... and against the modus operandi and myopic mind set of the BCCI and its supporters (viz., the ICC.).

Merlin wrote:

skully wrote:Yup, but that would be too sensible.

.... and against the modus operandi and myopic mind set of the BCCI and its supporters (viz., the ICC.).

That statement is a bit myopic on its own. Whoever heard of modus operandi in conjunction with the ICC? That organisation is good at only one thing; undermining its own regulations.

embee wrote:If the ICC had set aside an "IPL window" then the IPL wouldnt have to do it by stealth in 'buying' the allegiance of cricket boards ...

First it would be one window, then they would want two... And so on.

JKLever wrote:

embee wrote:If the ICC had set aside an "IPL window" then the IPL wouldnt have to do it by stealth in 'buying' the allegiance of cricket boards ...

First it would be one window, then they would want two... And so on.

I reckon 2 shouldn't be much of a problem

jim rich wrote:

Merlin wrote:

skully wrote:Yup, but that would be too sensible.

.... and against the modus operandi and myopic mind set of the BCCI and its supporters (viz., the ICC.).

That statement is a bit myopic on its own. Whoever heard of modus operandi in conjunction with the ICC? That organisation is good at only one thing; undermining its own regulations.

.... with the assistance and full cooperation of the BCCI.

JKLever wrote:

embee wrote:If the ICC had set aside an "IPL window" then the IPL wouldnt have to do it by stealth in 'buying' the allegiance of cricket boards ...

First it would be one window, then they would want two... And so on.

April/May & September/October

Scrap that.... Jan-Dec

How much INTERNATIONAL cricket is played in pomgolia in those months?

thats april /may and september /october ...not dec /jan

embee wrote:thats april /may and september /october ...not dec /jan

I suggested that a while back

obviously a good idea then

We regularly play tests/odi's in may and september

JKLever wrote:We regularly play tests/odi's in may and september

So change them

For a domestic tournament in another country?

fOR THE LAST TIME IT AS NOT A DOMESTIC TOURNEY

Of course it is...

JKLever wrote:Of course it is...

Okay Chandan.

organised by the BCCI, including only indian teams & played in India

How the fark is that not a domestic tournament?

JKLever wrote:

organised by the BCCI, including only indian teams & played in India

How the fark is that not a domestic tournament?

God, the channelling is getting worse.

Whatever

i think the only two boards with a scheduling problem would be the windies and england. no one else plays cricket at the time. the icc only needs to convince these two

JKLever wrote:

organised by the BCCI, including only indian teams & played in India

How the fark is that not a domestic tournament?

Australia's proposed t20 tournament is classed as domestic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extract Cricket info.


Australia considers IPL-style tournament




India have agreed to clear their biggest superstars to play in Australia's domestic Twenty20 competition as Cricket Australia considers an IPL-like franchise system for the tournament. The revamped event would likely start in 2009-10 as Cricket Australia aims to make the most of Twenty20's growing popularity