Disagree. I feel that these players were not backed enough in their previous franchises and played one game here and there. Therefore it is unfair to compare the performance of the mentioned players this year with the previous years. They are getting much more backing from their franchises now ,thus the better performance.
Rahane is the 12th leading run scorer, Umesh has 124 matches, Hooda 80, and even Dube has played 20 matches over the last two years.
Ofcourse they are getting more backing now, they're more in demand, will bat higher up the order, be automatic selections, because there are more players needed.
Jarrod, do not waste your time reviewing IPL. It is not worth it. As for Rahane, he is certainly not a good player of any bowling, leave alone fast bowling.
The IPL teams could allow for 5 foriegners in a team to increase the quality. They should also allow every player to set his own base price in the auction. I think that would reduce the instances of good foriegn players pulling out. As the league expands, it would also be interesting to see if BCCI reaches some revenue sharing agreement with other boards to block out the 3 months just for IPL.
Seems to me that going more global would help. You mentioned it but I would be interested in your thoughts on what would happen if there were simply no rule in place limiting the number of non-Indian players. Would it become more like the NHL, the top professional league in Ice Hockey that just happens to be played in the US and Canada . Or do you think that less emphasis on it being an "Indian League" would blunt it's appeal in India making it less profitable?
It seems to me that the % of players would still be Indian in any case like in the NHL where 40+ percent are Canadian players.
It's already the NHL or NBA, just with the local rule in it. If you had 20 teams, India would still produce the majority of the players, but because it is run by the BCCI, and not as a separate organisation, you may never have that rule flexed. Though I assume as it grows and develops it might happen naturally.
I keep forgetting the level of government control over sports in current and former commonwealth countries. from a US perspective it seems kind of bizarre. I take the idea that the federal government would never have any say in who the NBA who can hire for granted.
The NBA is a private company though, the BCCI is a government board that started a cricket league. If it started like the NBA, the government would have no/little say.
I would imagine thought that trying to start a league like the IPL in a country with an institution like the BCCI would be difficult if not impossible.
Is the Hundreds tournament in England sanctioned by the England\Wales Cricket
board? Does that board have similar powers as the BCCI?
Disagree. I feel that these players were not backed enough in their previous franchises and played one game here and there. Therefore it is unfair to compare the performance of the mentioned players this year with the previous years. They are getting much more backing from their franchises now ,thus the better performance.
Rahane is the 12th leading run scorer, Umesh has 124 matches, Hooda 80, and even Dube has played 20 matches over the last two years.
Ofcourse they are getting more backing now, they're more in demand, will bat higher up the order, be automatic selections, because there are more players needed.
Jarrod, do not waste your time reviewing IPL. It is not worth it. As for Rahane, he is certainly not a good player of any bowling, leave alone fast bowling.
I will be reviewing it. Having seen Rahane make tough hundreds with my won eyes, and checked the stats, I'm ok with how good he is.
mate, you are so naive. If Rahane is good, Rory Burns is great.
The IPL teams could allow for 5 foriegners in a team to increase the quality. They should also allow every player to set his own base price in the auction. I think that would reduce the instances of good foriegn players pulling out. As the league expands, it would also be interesting to see if BCCI reaches some revenue sharing agreement with other boards to block out the 3 months just for IPL.
In ten years time I believe the quality of Indian players will make the overseas restrictions pretty pointless. Players do chose their base price.
Seems to me that going more global would help. You mentioned it but I would be interested in your thoughts on what would happen if there were simply no rule in place limiting the number of non-Indian players. Would it become more like the NHL, the top professional league in Ice Hockey that just happens to be played in the US and Canada . Or do you think that less emphasis on it being an "Indian League" would blunt it's appeal in India making it less profitable?
It seems to me that the % of players would still be Indian in any case like in the NHL where 40+ percent are Canadian players.
It's already the NHL or NBA, just with the local rule in it. If you had 20 teams, India would still produce the majority of the players, but because it is run by the BCCI, and not as a separate organisation, you may never have that rule flexed. Though I assume as it grows and develops it might happen naturally.
I keep forgetting the level of government control over sports in current and former commonwealth countries. from a US perspective it seems kind of bizarre. I take the idea that the federal government would never have any say in who the NBA who can hire for granted.
The NBA is a private company though, the BCCI is a government board that started a cricket league. If it started like the NBA, the government would have no/little say.
I would imagine thought that trying to start a league like the IPL in a country with an institution like the BCCI would be difficult if not impossible.
Is the Hundreds tournament in England sanctioned by the England\Wales Cricket
board? Does that board have similar powers as the BCCI?