Home > Pakistan > News: 8 Pakistanis offered ICL contracts…..

News: 8 Pakistanis offered ICL contracts…..

There has been news circulating around, not sure if 100% confirmed, that 8 Pakistani players have been offered the Indian Cricket League professional contracts. The contract amount would be in the $1million-$1.3 million range, and the duration will be 3 years.

PCB has immediately reacted to it, saying that if the player accepts these contracts, then they cannot be selected for national duty. This has essentially made this into a Packer type situation all over again.

The 8 players who have been offerred are Inzi, Shoaib Malik, Razzaq, Afridi, Shoaib Akhtar, Asif, Yousaf and Younis Khan. Minus inzi, the rest are in the starting 11 for Pakistan, so if all accept the contract, it is going to be a very weird situation for Pak.

I thought that if some negotiations could be done, and the season dates figured out, then it should have been possible for these players to both play in the Indian league and also for the national team. After all, the PCB does allow players to play county cricket, sometimes even when tours are scheduled for the national team around that time. Younis Khan for e.g., didnt play against Sri in Abu Dhabi because he had county commitments, and the PCB still selected him for the Scotland tour.

I think the Pakistani players would probably think quite hard, because it is a lot of money. Inzi will accept, and Shoaib Akhtar may do so as well because he wont be able to play for more than a year, max 2, for the national team due to his ever green fitness issues.

Nonetheless, if the Pakistani players are thinking hard about it, why blame all those associate cricketers who have a much easier choice: either get nothing by playing for the national team, or get a good career by playing for county (and qualify for England)…..

Anyone knows whats the format for the ICL? Is it 50 over, or 20 20?

Advertisements
Categories: Pakistan
  1. Cuen Lucas
    August 3, 2007 at 8:08 am

    It’s twenty/20 Nasir.

  2. August 4, 2007 at 5:33 am

    Indian board and also the Pakistan board has openly stated that anyone participating in the league will be banned for life…. Other boards have also come out against this and said that this is taking the game down……

    So be very frank, Packer only did good for cricket. The production value of the matches improved with multiple cameras. There was coverage from both sides of the wicket for the first time; before this half the game was seen was behind the batsman. Coloured clothing and white balls with day night cricket was introduced. Stump cams and stmup mics were introduced. Emphasis was paid on commentary quality etc.

    Which one of these things has been bad for cricket in retrospect? Imran Khan too says that playing in that world series with the best players in the world helped him develop a lot of skill that he then imparted on the other players in making Pakistan world champions from a mediocre team between 1977-1992……

    I am not 100% sure why there is so much opposition to the concept of private ventures getting into making their professional leagues, that too for 20 20 cricket……… I think the main concern is that the if these ventures do well, the ICC would lose money eventually because its own products would not sell for as much….. that would then translate into the boards losing money…..

    The math is not so simple. Take the example of Stanfrod who is involving new countries like Cuba, Dominican republic etc into the fold. If he is able to make an impact, and that would only happen if his venture is successful, the ICC is likely to have more viewers of their products. Now there would be a dent somewhere, but also an addition, so the question is what would the net result be. I think the net result in the long term, and even in the medium term, will be a positive one.

    The boards are also worried that if other products start coming out, then thier own product may lose value. Thats just stupid. It is very very unlikely that a fan would stop watching the Pakistan team in Action against Australia, but instead watch Afridi batting for some ICL team. However, it is quite possible that the fan will watch Afridi playing in the ICL when there is no clash with anything else that he is watching. Thats just the nature of the game in the subcontinent; cricket in any form, and any standard, is better than no cricket. I remember people following stupid things like HK super 8s, and the masters (retired) series, when there was no international cricket going on.

  3. August 4, 2007 at 8:35 am

    Just to point out that whilst Packer certainly refined the concept of day/night cricket with white balls and coloured clothing, he certainly didn’t introduce it. Early experiments with day/night cricket and white balls go back to the 1950s in England, and South Africa in the 60s and early 70s. Coloured clothing goes back even further as whites only became the standard towards the end of the 19th century. Before that, some teams played in coloured clothing. Cambridge University, for example, played in blue. I’m pretty sure that stump cams and stump mics came after Packer. I don’t remember seeing them until the 90s.

  4. Art
    August 4, 2007 at 3:53 pm

    Hmmm this is an interesting subject and made more interesting by the fact that it is 20/20. I guess we can argue until the cows come home about Packer and his influence but at least somewhere at the heart (or very close to it) of it was rewarding the players for a reasonable share of revenue for once.

    This series it appears to me will be for financial reward for the organisers rather than anything else propped up by a dummy spit by a television network that missed out on a contract. cricket and players have certainly evolved over time and in recent years we have had a golden era of test cricket in which Australia has starred. Fast cricket and a determine to win no matter what the situation. One day cricket has also been interesting in a number of clashes down here where from time to time the bat has not ruled the ball. We have been forced by commentating teams (and officials) often made up of a preponderance of yesterday’s batsmen into believing the bat must rule in one day cricket. No there must be a balance and the ball must be gibven a chance.

    No we have 20/20 in which I have no doubt the preponderance of wickets will be flat and unresponsive and if you hit through the line hard you will score. Sorry folks cricket is or should be a contest between bat and ball not just between bat and boundary.

    It would also appear from reports I have heard that more ‘artifical’ help will be given to the so called ‘umpires’ standing in the matches. Mr. Jones and Co forget that the vast majority of cricket is played on grounds somewhere in the world often with a single umpire with just their eye and refleses to judge. The more ‘aids’ given in top cricket reduces the effectiveness in the minds of some players of an umpire’s decisions. Indeed watching some of the nerwer and younger umpires coming through in many countries I have a concern for the future of cricket because of the reluctance of people to become umpires.

    But let’s get back to the story at hand. Commercial profiteering that will add nothing to the game overall except quite probably putting test cricket under pressure.

    (as for Super *’s i have a tournament to umpire in a few weeks and to add to that a day night one dayer at the end of the month).

  5. August 5, 2007 at 11:03 pm

    Younis Khan, Afridi, Shoaib Akhtar and Asif have declined the contracts. It is very unlikely that the captain, Malik, will accept it either…..

    This is essentially a move by the cricket boards to prevent this league from taking off…… The threats that if a player signed for the league, they will never represent the country again is tough. For example, the Pakistan Board has contracts with the players. What if a player did not sign the contract right now, but instead signed the ICL contract for a year. After 1 year, still in good form, he decided that he would rather play for Pakistan. There is nothing that crazy going on here that the PCB has to set up a rule to ban people for life if they sign up.

    Maybe they are trying to set up a reason to kick out Inzi…… he is the only one who will probably sign up for the league.

    I dont understand why it is acceptable for PCB that Younis Khan makes himself unavailable for Pakistan duty because he is playing in county cricket, while a player in the ICL is not acceptable…. ever……

  6. August 6, 2007 at 2:50 am

    How long is the ICL supposed to be every year?

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: