Stephen Brenkley, out in India to report on the IPL, is
today joined by ex-England cricketer Angus Fraser. From 11.30 this morning the
two will be discussing the event set to change the face of cricket. Feel free
to join the debate or just soak up the conflicting views of The Independent’s
star cricket writers.
Stephen gets us under way...
Well, here it is the Indian Premier League - hip, flip and taking us all on a trip - the all-singing, all-dancing, mega bucks Twenty20 cricket tournament starting today in Bangalore, India. Remember the date and the time: April 18, 2008, 8pm at the Chinnaswamy Stadium. It may, just, be the most significant turning point in the modern history of professional cricket. Eight city-based teams, known as franchises, will compete on a home and away basis over the nexty six weeks. Money, the like of which cricket has never seen, is being thrown at the project.
The franchises were bought for sums ranging from £33.5 million to almost £56 million and a few weeks later most of the world's top players were bought at auction for prices which are actually their salaries for each of the six-week tournaments over the next three years. So MS Dhoni, the new poster boy of Indian cricket will receive £750,000 a year and the Australia all-rounder Andrew Symonds almost £700,000. Crazy money, crazy game.
There is a fear that it might swamp all other forms of the game but the cricketers themselves and the administrators seem determined to protect Test cricket at all costs. The trouble is that once the commercial demon has been released it might devour everything in its path.
The first match is between the Bangalore Royal Challengers and the Kolkata Knight Riders, led by two of the great icons of Indian cricket, respectively Rahul Dravid and Sourav Ganguly. There should be a full house for this and it's true that the game is consuming the city. But there is no absolute certainty that the Indian public and the cricket world beyond will take to the new concept once it gets fully underway. Indians love the Indian team. But money is doing a lot of talking and lot of persuading. There's no doubt Guas that we are seeing something remarkable taking place.
Stephen, we are and nobody is sure exactly how it will all work out. As with everything we get extreme reactions yet somewhere along the way middle ground tends to be found. But those who think there will be no reaction to what takes place in India over the next six weeks are dreaming. It will lead to the structure of domestic cricket changing in England, with Twenty20 cricket taking a more prominent role.
But I do not see it consuming everything in its path including Test cricket. Yes, money talks but there are millions of people who love Test cricket and the game does not want to and cannot afford to lose them. 50 over cricket may be struggling though.
Posted by: Angus Fraser | 18 April 2008 at 11:48 AM
In a way, 50 over cricket has been its own worst ememy with too many matches following a template of three acts, like a Hollywood movie, power play, tedious consolidation, denoument, thrilling or otherwise.
Of course, millions of people love Test cricket, but millins of people aren't watching it. In an odd way, it's Test cricket which is on trial here as much as Twenty20. Should it stay as the pure form it is - 450 overs played across five days - or is there scope for some amendments. I understand you start tinkedring with it at peril but it don't forget Test cricket too has evolved. It wasn't always five for instance.
Posted by: Stephen Brenkley | 18 April 2008 at 11:54 AM
Millions are watching it, if they weren't television would not pay the huge sums they do to cover it. I accept that crowd attendances at Tests in many countries are poor but in New Zealand , for example, the crowds were dreadful for the Super 14 Rugby matches. NZ seems to accept that people do not attend live sport and in a way it shows how successful televison companies have become, in that they have encouraged people to follow it with thme rather than attend matches.
But why would England want to reduce the amount of Test cricket played in a summer. The crowds are there, as is the following on television.
The form of Test cricket could change but are people any more likely to watch a four day match than a five day game and by reducing it by a day you lessen the chance of a result, and the more results the better.
Crowds at Twenty20 in England are excellent and it will be interesting to see them in India. There are several reports in the papers today that ticket sales for some grounds have not gone as well as expected.
Posted by: Angus Fraser | 18 April 2008 at 12:08 PM
The dilemma for broadcasters is that their viewers are much more engaged by a game being watched live by thousands and thousands of people than one being performed in an empty stadium. That is something that needs urgently to be addressed.
Talking of T20 in England there are moves afoot as you know to expand the game there with an English Premier League. But grounds are already full, so I'm not at convinced. I do worry about the dear old county championship. I have detected in the past few weeks discernible move to heap opprbrium on it again, despite the competitive level of the cricket.
Is it possible that blocks of seasons and of years will have to be found for different forms?
Posted by: Stephen Brenkley | 18 April 2008 at 12:14 PM
I agree full houses suggest that a major event is taking place, empty seats do not. But is this a result of their being too much supposedly top level sport being played. We are lucky and unique in England that most sporting events are very well attended. It is not the case in other parts fo the Europe and the world. There is a real urge to attend live sport, which is great. You just wonder whether the credit crunch and a looming recession may change all that. At The Oval this summer they have sold £100 tickets, its ridiculous.
I am sure there will be an expansion of Twenty20 cricket and a reduction of first class cricket - ten matches with semis and a grand final possibly - to fit around it and that would not be the end of the world.
You may be right there with blocking of sections of seasons, with the Twenty20 jamboree being played at the height of summer.
But I do believe the county championship, in possibly a different form, will survive. It was aptly compared to a cockroach the other day. And despite the small crowds and its unprofitable status it is still important.
Schools cost money but we all want our children to go to them and the first class game allows players to develop the skills to put on the sort of show you will undoubtedly witness in India. There may be a lot more money in the game but it is unlikely that much of it will go to county cricketers. It is the superstars who will thrive.
Posted by: Angus Fraser | 18 April 2008 at 12:26 PM
The county championship in some form is vital. But how it and indeed Test cricket is a huge problem for the administrators. Do you think there is room for 18 county clubs. I do actually because I think it would be bonkers for a country the size of England (and indeed the rest of the UK) with its sporting history not to be able to sustain say 400 professional players. But I do worry too that T20 may gather a life force all of its own.
The ECB have been greedy haven't they. I have heard it said that for the World T20 being held in England next year it might have been possible to have very low ticket prices. But that was not possible because of the after effect it would have on the ability to charge higher (though not prohibitively so) for the domestic games. A lot's happening and we'll know more in a few days.
Posted by: Stephen Brenkley | 18 April 2008 at 12:34 PM
I share your concerns and I do believe England can sustain 400 professional cricketers. Whether some of them should be paid as much as they are for what they do and generate is another matter. In some wasy the England players, who generate the money are subsidising them. My fear is that if you take county cricket away from, for example, Somerset and they play under say the Bristol banner, interest in cricket in the south west corner of England will diminish. There are no big football clubs in the region and that is why Rugby is such a big game there. That is not the way to mve the sport forward. It is the same with Durham, amalgamating with Yorkshire. The introduction of Durham has been a huge benefit to England, just look at the players they have brought through. Twenty years ago Harmison, Collingwood, Mustard, Plunkett would probably not have been noticed.
It is slightly ironic that we charge more for admission in England than anywhere else but the demand is higher. Entry to a Test in New Zealand was $30 (£13) so I don't think money is an issue. Yes the ECB are keen to charge and they may get a nasty surprise if they carry on increasing prices as they are.
Posted by: Angus Fraser | 18 April 2008 at 12:48 PM
Having recently been in India for a fortnight I enjoyed the nightly spectacle of Twenty20.It was excellent entertainment for one who is not a great enthusiast but has enjoyed cricket at all levels over the years.
the razamataz of the Indian game should be exported to the UK as it would undoubtably change the face of cricket - probably for the better - watching a team put on 170 odd runs in 20 overs is compelling stuff!
Posted by: mike pardoe | 18 April 2008 at 01:35 PM
Is test cricket under such a threat? In India we had a series against South Africa, every day of every test was 20,000 plus people at the minimum...much more on weekends in Chennai and Kanpur...good crowds in the tests in West Indies against Sri Lanka... I think Test cricket is well and thriving everywhere...and Twenty 20 will just add new people into cricket and not drive viewers away from tests...and who knows some of these people may graduate to tests....
Posted by: Shyam | 18 April 2008 at 06:43 PM
Is test cricket under such a threat? In India we had a series against South Africa, every day of every test was 20,000 plus people at the minimum...much more on weekends in Chennai and Kanpur...good crowds in the tests in West Indies against Sri Lanka... I think Test cricket is well and thriving everywhere...and Twenty 20 will just add new people into cricket and not drive viewers away from tests...and who knows some of these people may graduate to tests....
Posted by: Shyam | 18 April 2008 at 06:44 PM
Is test cricket under such a threat? In India we had a series against South Africa, every day of every test was 20,000 plus people at the minimum...much more on weekends in Chennai and Kanpur...good crowds in the tests in West Indies against Sri Lanka... I think Test cricket is well and thriving everywhere...and Twenty 20 will just add new people into cricket and not drive viewers away from tests...and who knows some of these people may graduate to tests....
Posted by: Shyam | 18 April 2008 at 06:44 PM
Dear Sir / Madam,
If the cricket world thinks that India is on a winner with IPL, then I would suggest to think things over again. Please question the reasons for the IPL being formed, and what is the objective, and practical benefit this would bring to Test Cricket, apart from making the Indian cricket public happy, and the Indian Board of Control for Cricket making very good revenue out of these matches. If one thinks television audiences around the world should be entertained by cheerleaders is good for producing quality Test cricketers, I think people like me, who appreciate the longer version game can kiss Test Cricket good bye forever.
I believe in conclusion that the Indian Board of Control for Cricket, and the ICC can continue to make money, but they will never promote the game in places, such as Europe, South East Asia, and the United States of America to state a few. They just want to self destroy the game for the purpose of money. I hope sanctity and commonsense prevails, and countries such as England, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa realise this aspect. If they do, it will be better for all concerned.
Yours Faithfully,
Muralidaran Ramesh Somasunderam.
Posted by: Muralidaran Ramesh Somasunderam | 20 April 2008 at 06:11 AM
Before we write off the death of Test Cricket, lets have a look at what I.P.L can do for Indian cricket, Traditionally Indian cricket has chosen the talent pool for Indian team from the domestic circuit who are more or less not exposed to the International arena unless they are part of the U19 worldcup team, out of 1 billion people we have a maximum of 20 slots to be filled for national team, because of I.P.L we now have 160 slots to be filled which is having a mix of captains,former captains, best batsmen, best bowlers, coaches from world cup winning teams from around the world.Young cricketers will have first hand experience of what goes into a pressure game .We cant deny the fact that money dictates everything, its happening everywhere!! why not cricket. May be we will be having youngsters who are tried and tested on the field on a international arena comprising the teams picked from the best of the lot. In the chennai vs punjab match on saturday when Hussey was suggesting his partner "Watch the ball" when Bret Lee was bowling. That is when it stuck me about the benefits.if younsters are going to get exposed to the cricketing world let them have it, if they have a better chance of earning more money let them have it.
Posted by: Sasa | 21 April 2008 at 01:51 PM