IPL
The IPL (Indian Premier League) is a cricket tournament that was designed by India's official governing body, the BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India) as an alternative to ICL (initially, as a way to have the ICL cancelled, but later as an alternative). Like the ICL, the IPL has player auctions where players can earn a million dollars (US) for playing in a short month long tournament, as compared to their annual salaries of in the order of US $100,000, depending on which country they play for etc. The IPL copied many of the innovations made by the ICL. Unlike the ICL, the IPL is approved by the BCCI and as such players can play without fear of being banned by their national board. The IPL has also organised their tournament so that it is in between international matches (as much as possible) and have even asked to have a window between international matches so that players can play for the whole tournament.
Series 1[edit]
Duration: 18 April 2008 - 25 May 2008
Series 1 featured 8 teams, all of which were based on cities in India (unlike the ICL, which has 2 international teams, from Bangladesh and Pakistan). Also unlike the ICL, the IPL required that at least 4 players out of any playing 11 be actually from the city that the side is from. The 8 sides played each other twice each, once home and once away (unlike the ICL where they only played each other once each).
In the first half of the series, many international stars were playing, such as Ricky Ponting, Brett Lee (who is much loved in India), Matthew Hayden and Michael Clarke from Australia. A number of players then were called away to play for their country, and they then had players called in to replace them. Retired players such as Adam Gilchrist, Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne played for the entire series as did players who weren't deemed good enough to play for their country, such as Shane Watson and Shaun Marsh, both of whom later did play for Australia at least partially as a result of their IPL performances.
The end result of the tournament was that the Rajasthan Royals won the competition, led by the recently retired Shane Warne, who was both captain and coach of the side. Shane Warne did so well that he said that he considered a return to international cricket, although he later said that he was joking. Indeed, a number of the best players (see http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/353461.html) in the tournament ended up playing for their country later, including Yusuf Pathan for India, Sohail Tanvir for Pakistan and the previously mentioned Shane Watson and Shaun Marsh. Such a pity that 2 of the better players, Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath, are now retired.
World Series plans[edit]
The IPL planned to have an international world series, which would feature the best from the world's best Twenty/20 tournaments. Whilst they naturally ignored the ICL, they controversially also ignored Allen Stanford's "Stanford Twenty/20" competition in the West Indies, which is known as one of the pioneers of Twenty/20 cricket. They even threatened not to allow England's best to play because of their connections with the Stanford Twenty/20 for $20 million, and secondly because a number of England's players also played in the ICL.
The plan was to have the winner and runner up of the IPL in India, the "KFC Big Bash" in Australia, the English Twenty/20 contest (which was the first ever Twenty/20 tournament), the South African "Pro 20" tournament (the only country which uses the term Pro 20, while all other countries call it Twenty/20) and the Pakistan Twenty/20 tournament. Pakistan and England both only have their winning team included, while the other 3 competitions have the top 2. It should be noted that Pakistan has their own side in the ICL while England have not only had a number of players in the ICL but they also have played in the Stanford Twenty/20 for $20 million. Probably Pakistan and England are effectively being punished by the IPL for daring to oppose them, the punishment being only being allowed 1 team instead of 2. Of note, West Indies are not participating, in spite of having one of the biggest Twenty/20 tournaments (Australia's Twenty/20 tournament is not particularly big, yet they have 2 entries, although the IPL justifies this because Australia are ranked number 1 in world cricket).
A number of players played in the IPL but were also playing for their local side. This caused some controversy. Should they then play for their home or should they be forced to play for the IPL? The IPL initially said that they would be forced to play for the IPL. A number of the affected players then said that they would not play in the tournament at all. This issue is still in dispute. The World Series is, after all, being organised by the IPL, hence they would say that they can justify having their international signings all play for their IPL teams. On the other hand, is it really a fair tournament if they can't play for their home state? Interestingly, because England's season is in the off season for all other countries, a number of players from other countries also play in England. Potentially, they could be a member of an English Twenty/20 side, an IPL side and their home side. As it turned out, however, this didn't actually happen in this instance.
The tournament was planned to go from 3 Dec 08 - 10 Dec 08, with the 8 teams split into 2 groups of 4, then semi finals and finals as knockouts. Teams would play 3 matches in their groups, once each against the other 3 teams in the group only. Groups were split so that each country/league only had 1 team per group.
The planned tournament was cancelled in the wake of the recent terrorist attacks, although it may be restarted in early 2009.
Series 2 plans[edit]
Series 2 plans to have 4 more sides, to a total of 12, with much the same format. The IPL organisers are still negotiating with the ICC (International Cricket Council), the governing body of world cricket, to try to create a window such that the IPL can be played for a month when there are no other international matches, so that their international stars can play in every match. To date, no such window exists.
Controversies[edit]
The IPL's major controversy has been in relation to its opposition to the ICL. Why are there 2 different Twenty/20 cricket tournaments in the same country? ICL started first, and sought approval by the BCCI. The BCCI then went ahead and made their own competition using the same format as the ICL and then banned players from playing in the ICL, or if they did, then they could never play for India or in India, then encouraging other national boards to do the same thing.
In addition, however, the IPL has been involved with a number of controversies, primarily in relation to their contracts and that they want to own the players in every sense of the word. The IPL, put simply, wants players who are bought by the IPL to play for the IPL at every opportunity, even at the expense of their own national duties. Much negotiation has taken place about this.
Secondly, the IPL has caused controversies because of their demands for national boards to ban players from playing for their country if they played for the ICL. Some national boards, such as Australia and New Zealand, went along with this, while others, such as Pakistan and England, did not. England's board was worried that players may flee to the IPL and then not play for England, and in response (in coordination with Allen Stanford) they have created their own similar league, calling it the EPL (English Premier League, not to be confused with the football league of the same name), although that league is yet to be fully planned out yet.
A lot of concerns have been raised from various quarters about the bullying that the IPL are doing, in trying to control players and indeed whole national boards into doing what they want them to do. The fact that they seriously said to international players like Ricky Ponting, the captain of Australia, that he would not be allowed to play for Australia while the IPL tournament was going on, raised a lot of concerns. They have continued on with this bullying attitude with relation to their proposed world series. They have also been very hard lined with regards to anyone who plays for the ICL.
There are also a lot of concerns about why the IPL is seen as any different to any other nation's local tournament. Australia has their own rather low-key Twenty/20 tournament, which overlaps international fixtures and they do not demand for a window for the KFC Big Bash to take place. If international players want to play in a local competition in another country, then they can do so, and always have been able to do so, but the concern is that in the case of the IPL players might be doing it just for the money.
Another big concern is that potentially every major country could have their own version of the IPL. West Indies already has the Stanford Twenty/20 tournament, South Africa has their Pro20 tournament and England, which already has their own successful Twenty/20 tournament, are now looking at making an IPL-style contest, calling it the EPL. Australia, too, could have their own IPL-style contest if they so desired. Yet if all of these countries did this (not to forget Sri Lanka, Pakistan and New Zealand) then when is there time to play international matches? It could potentially be simply that we have a year with a month each for 10 different Twenty/20 tournaments in 10 different countries, then a month for a "best of" tournament and a month off. Players could potentially play for all 10 tournaments. It would then effectively mean that there is no point in having the other matches. 50 over a side cricket, which until recently was simply called "one day cricket" would be as good as over, and where would there be room for playing test cricket? Indeed, where would there even be room for playing international Twenty/20 cricket?
IPL's innovations[edit]
Cricket has been for many years only played in a small section of the world. While it is the most popular sport in the subcontinent (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh) and is very popular in England, Australia and the West Indies, and moderately popular in New Zealand and South Africa, nonetheless it is virtually unheard of outside of this. Like baseball, it is a sport only played by a few. Whilst in theory there are over 100 national cricket teams, realistically there are only 10 "elite" sides, and realistically 2 of them are a lot worse than the others (Bangladesh and Zimbabwe). With Twenty/20 cricket, they have a game that for years has been labelled by Americans (and others) as boring, being suddenly available in quick 2 hour matches. 5 day test matches (which were originally timeless and often lasted for 9 or 10 days) are seen to be too boring by Americans. Even one day matches are too long for Americans, who make a lot of jokes about the boredom of it. But 2 hour matches with cheerleaders, excitement, and every ball being exciting, is something that they could watch.
Even if Americans don't like the idea of Twenty/20 (Allen Stanford, one of Twenty/20's main innovators, from Texas, on the other hand, thinks that they will), the fact is that Twenty/20 matches appeal a lot more to people in areas that people do like cricket. The concept, which was first started in England, was hugely popular and it has been hugely popular everywhere that it has gone.
IPL (or actually ICL, but the ideas were stolen and copied by IPL, but with BCCI approval) has taken that to another level. Players can earn US $1 million for a month of work, as compared to US $100,000 for an entire year's work playing for their country. In that month they only play for 2 hours at a time, only 1 hour of that in the field. Rather than needing to be super fit to handle 5 days worth of a test match, they only need to be able to handle 2 hours.
While the ICL did have a lot of innovations that were then stolen and copied by the IPL, the IPL did have some of their own too, simply by being approved by their national board, the BCCI. Yes, people could go to the ICL and make millions too, but they would be doing so at the expense of their international career (which Shane Bond, for one, was willing to do). For the IPL, players could go to it and still keep their international careers. Ricky Ponting only played for half of the series and still made US $500,000 for the week that he was there. Adam Gilchrist, who for over 10 years played for Australia in almost every match, made almost as much in a month of playing not particularly well in the IPL than he did in his entire international career, after he has already retired.
The whole buying players idea (and indeed, the whole franchises were up for auction too) may sound sleazy, but it also adds a bit of excitement to it all. Good players, or at least players who would be well suited to Twenty/20 cricket, can earn a lot.
Perhaps one big negative is that the classical test cricketer, who is poorly suited to Twenty/20 cricket, suddenly can't make any money at all. The player who bats solidly but not quickly can't make the IPL and is considered to be worthless. The bowler who can't bat to save himself is deemed to not be worth the risk. Glenn McGrath, one of the all-time greats for Australia, couldn't even get his asking price as a minimum bid because he bats so badly, while Andrew Symonds, who is barely in the Australian test side, was worth over US $1 million as the most expensive player in the league. The all-rounders, who bat and bowl reasonably well, are suddenly priceless. The batsmen who hit hard but don't last long are suddenly great, while in longer forms of the game they would be horrible. The players who bowl well in short spells but then break down are great. The unfit players who can do well for short stints are great.
Whether we end up with 10 different IPL-like leagues, or IPL and ICL merge, or what happens, we can say one thing for certain: the IPL has changed cricket forever.