Read this excellent article written by Ashok Malik in Crickinfo. We have all read vague reports of this breakaway competion being formed in India, but this article gives lays out the whole issue as it stands, and gives us a good idea of the big picture.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/cric...ry/293256.html
Not much i can say about this right now except to say, as cricket has obviously sold out it's great traditions to big bucks, this is the future of cricket and it will happen. When money talks, players walk. Just ask that temporary Englishman, Kevin Petersen.

Very sad if this comes to pass, as i expect it will.

Your thoughts.

__________________
The thought police are everywhere..............

A tad melodramatic, Seamer. The proposed Indian Cricket League will have Indian domestic teams playing each other; how's that of interest to anyone outside India, beats me. Just as English County cricket or Australian State cricket survives and thrives alongside international cricket, so will the Indian league, or whatever it gets called.

The sub-continent needs competitive and interesting first-class cricket - that's essential to the long-term survival of the game here. If Zee can organise that, great. If not, someone else should - and given that it could generate money in the long-term, I dare say someone will.

Is this a breakaway competition; perhaps, as it would not have BCCI's backing, initially. But over time, BCCI would probably take it over and get into partnership with Zee. Hence, its not truly breakaway the way Kerry Packer and Channel Nine was - and even that did not mean the death of international cricket!

__________________
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes
Mark Twain

Not sure what I've missed, Seamer, but I can't see anything in this article which is of concern to anyone outside India. If India wants to have an ICL running alongside its traditional formats, why is it a sad thing for you in Australia or me in Europe? The parallel which the writer draws with the English Premier League, an association football competition, seems pretty apt to me, and I can't see what harm the Premier League has done to world football (not a game I care for much, but one which, to me, is no better or worse today than it was before the Premier League came about in England).

The short answer to your survey, from where I sit, is that it makes no difference to me: I don't follow Indian domestic cricket today and I won't tomorrow. I'll continue to follow the international scene.

__________________
Money won't buy you friends. But it gets you a better class of enemy.
Spike Milligan

This would be the guy who always had a British passport due to his mother being born and bred in England. Don't let the facts get in your way eh? This also coming from the country happy to give Kepler Wessels Test caps. Which of his family members were Australian?

I don't want any one party running cricket as much as anyone does, but really it seems that India sneezes and you take it as being a sign that they will start dictating how cricket is run.

Unfortunately, ignoring this article which doesn't really suggest much to my mind, the day will come that money is more important to cricket than the history that is associated with it, unless the consumer age comes crashing down around our ears.

OK NE. I'm going to edit that section out as i don't want it getting in the way of the core issue.

OK fellas, lets look at this logically..

Firstly, lets get this notion out of our heads that this new league will only involve Indian stars and affect Indian cricket. Some of the biggest (non Indian) names in history of the game are already linked to this league. Certainly gives this new comp a fair bit of credibility to attract more stars would'nt you say?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...ia/6658901.stm

The ICL will not be affiliated with the ICC or MCC, thus they will have no obligation to adhere to the laws of the game that have been developed over a century or more. The ICL, being reliant on Zee funding, will cut, edit and paste those laws to Zee's requirements so to ensure continued funding from Zee.

The elite players around the world will be faced with a choice: sign up with Zee for big money or sign up with their respective boards for less money (and with no guarentee that they won't be dropped from the team in the event of a loss in form) Just like the Packer days, you will find that money will talk and players will walk. Especially if guys like Lara, Warne, McGrath and Inzi are involved.

The established boards around the world will be faced with a problem. Allow their players to play in a bastardised version of the game of which they have no imput, control or financial interest, or cancel their contracts. Just as in the Packer situation, they will have their contracts cancelled and will be cut loose from the establishment.

The ICL will be blessed with an abundance of talent and stars, the established boards will find themselves in the opposite situation. Indian fans will then have a choice - Watch ICL games filled with stars of the game, or watch ICC affiliated games filled with no-names. Just like the Packer episode, it does not take a rocket scientist to work out which they will choose.

The ICL coffers start to fill, the ICC affiliated boards' coffers begin to empty. The ICL will be able to pay their players more. The ICC affiliated boards' will be forced to pay their players less. The elite players around the world will start jumping over each other to try to secure ICL contract.

Exactly. So the boards around the world will eventually be forced to crawl up to Zee Telefilms (ICL bankrollers) with their hat in their hands. A Zee Telefilms, who's total priority is profits and 20-20 cricket. Suddenly after 120 years of cricket, the great game suddenly finds itself totally beholden to a broadcasting company.

Would you say the same thing, if those games were changed to 9-a-side matches with 20 minutes each half? That would be the soccer equivilent to 20-20 cricket.

Andy, this is not just India or the BCCI i am talking about now. This is a broadcasting company whose ultimate interest is solely profits.

That's right Andy. Now you finally understand the writing is on the wall in bold text. If 20-20 cricket is your passion then the future of cricket will suit you nicely. If test cricket is your passion, then start buying up DVD's of series past to watch in moments when you wish to reminisce. And get WAT to fire up a 20-20 forum and get ready to move test cricket to a secondary forum

__________________
The thought police are everywhere..............

Its late here, so I'll answer this bit quickly.

There's no 'now' about it Seamer. I've known about the problem as long as you have, I'm sure. In fact, I wrote an article on this as soon as Aus/NZ failed to get the World Cup in line with the previous schedule.

However, unless you want a schizm within the game of cricket, I don't think there's much one (or even a group) can do about it; whatever 'it' may be. The hierarchy of the game needs to understand that one party dictating how the game is run wasn't right when the MCC was doing it, and won't be right if another 3rd party ends up running it.

As I see it, the biggest problem cricket has is too many uneven contests. For any sporting contest to be exciting it has to be reasonably even. Since arriving back in Oz and following the current AFL season I've been impressed with the many good contests each week. Tipping is harder now than five years ago. Cricket needs to move in that direction. Provide even contests and bring excitement to cricket. The spectators will flock to matches and sponsors will open their cheque books.

Of course not - but the EPL has taken a successful game and made it at least as successful as it always was and arguably more so and without making any fundamental changes - it's still eleven a side and played over ninety minutes. It has attracted people from outside England to play in England, admittedly, but all those guys remain eligible for selection for their national sides and in fact the majority of them who are eligible continue to play international football. Why do you think it would be different in cricket?

Essentially, the ICL can't do much to change cricket at its most fundamental level. They may decide to play 70 overs instead of fifty, or have longer matches played over seven four hour days, or they may favour a six over game which can be fitted in between commercial breaks on the TV. But it's very unlikely that they will be playing nine-a-side "cricket" with a sponge ball, three sets of stumps and each man in having a lacrosse stick instead of a bat. And bringing money into the game will not ruin it any more than it has ruined football for those who enjoy that sport. The only way ICL could detract from international cricket would be by forbidding its players from playing in internationals - and frankly, if they try that and succeed, international cricket will not be losing anyone it wants to retain.

Seamer, when Kerry Packer launched World Series Cricket the establishment thought it was the end of the world. Now the establishment runs matches under floodlights with teams wearing coloured strips and playing with a white ball - unimaginable before Packer did it, routine now and I don't hear anyone complaining about it. The ICL, if it gets off the ground, may have some more good ideas which can be run alongside the formats we are used to now or instead of some of them. They might force test cricket to the margins in the sub-continent, but that is something which is happening already, not because the suppliers are forcing it but because test cricket is not what the public wants to buy over there. Test cricket can live alongside the shorter formats and will do so in some areas of the world as long as the punters buy the tickets. I don't see the end of the world coming at us here.

__________________
Money won't buy you friends. But it gets you a better class of enemy.
Spike Milligan

Agreed, and I hope that there is not much interest within India. The problem though is that if it does succeed, other people might start getting similar ideas for other cricket-playing countries. You don't want a Roman Abramovich clone to come over and look at the possibilities for a 'parallel' league here in England.