Wonder how much of this was sparked by the BCCI's confrontationist attitude; initially the ICL hoped to run its Twenty20-- a form of cricket the BCCI had shown zero interest in-- and over time, fold its program into the BCCI calendar, operating under official aegis; with the BCCI in 'off with his head' mode, the ICL must have had its hand forced—players will be reluctant to sign on for just two months of cricket a year, so the league necessarily has to expand its plans in order to provide more working days for its players.
Significantly, the only time the studio audience broke into spontaneous applause was when Delhi-based advocate Rahul Mehra did a 'let a thousand flowers bloom' number, asking why the BCCI, which repeatedly proclaims itself a private body above and beyond the purview of the government, the courts and all other forms of oversight, should be allowed to monopolize the game; and why the ICL, and dozens of such initiatives like it, should not be encouraged to offer more avenues of employment for young players who break their backs honing their skills only to be ignored by the board and the selectors.
An interesting off shoot of the current face-off is the possibility of an informal arrangement with Allen Stanford's Twenty20 initiative in the West Indies. Rumors have been doing the rounds that Subhash Chandra has touched base with the millionaire cricket fan, and that some sort of informal discussions are in place to figure out how the two operators can pool resources and talent, to mount an even more credible challenge to the established order.
Image: Brian Lara was one of the first high-profile cricketers to sign up for the ICL.
India in the United Kingdom 2007
Advertisement
