IPL cap removed

[silentstriker]

It was mentioned in the other thread, but this is a very serious move, which could backfire if the costs get too high and the franchises aren't profitable. But, on the plus side, the players should see some increased compensation as a result.

On the other hand, it doesn't really do anything for the disparity in that you could earn in 30 days five times what you make the whole year playing for your country.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...llowed_no_cap_on_fees/articleshow/3492441.cms

 

[duffer]

Now it gets interesting. Expect Mumbai to spend massive in the next few years. Could definitely end up a league with huge disparity between the haves and have-nots.

 

[pup11]

I think this move could prove to be a real IPL killer, someone like Ponting earlier said that if the salary cap was taken off the even-competition between the teams would go up in smoke and richer franchises would have an upper hand over other franchises, which is true, so this is something that needs to reviewed imo.

 

[cricman]

Smart Move IMO, you'll see smarter teams sign Cheaper and Effective Players ... Next move would be to have a 2nd Division League with teams getting promoted and regulated

 

[duffer]

Smart Move IMO, you'll see smarter teams sign Cheaper and Effective Players ... Next move would be to have a 2nd Division League with teams getting promoted and regulated

Long way away from that for me. Nowhere near enough quality players to make it happen. Would just dilute it too much

 

[cricman]

Long way away from that for me. Nowhere near enough quality players to make it happen. Would just dilute it too much

Than Long Live the ICL ... Can't believe I said that

 

[duffer]

FWIW I don't mind the ICL. Just think it's a no-frills version of the real deal, but I wish the players there well.

 

[bryce]

I think this move could prove to be a real IPL killer, someone like Ponting earlier said that if the salary cap was taken off the even-competition between the teams would go up in smoke and richer franchises would have an upper hand over other franchises, which is true, so this is something that needs to reviewed imo.

There is enough quality cricketers out there for this not to happen. Especially when the format is 20/20 - where we've even seen Zimbabwe beat Australia. The unpredictable nature of 20/20 guarantees this will never be the case imo

 

[Precambrian]

Rajasthan's success and Deccan's failures showed money cannot buy success, so i am not really bothered about the increase in salary cap.

 

[Pratters]

Good move. Free markets should be allowed to prevail.

 

[Goughy]

Im all for free market pressures taking control.

However, it certainly could backfire. If its about stars, glamour and money then its a great idea. If its about a competetive cricket league then it isnt for the best.

 

[Burgey]

Good move. Free markets should be allowed to prevail.

As so well demonstrated recently by AIG and Lehman Brothers?

 

[Pratters]

However, it certainly could backfire. If its about stars, glamour and money then its a great idea. If its about a competetive cricket league then it isnt for the best.

Money cannot always buy success, particularly in a format like 20-20 where results are unpredictable. Mumbai Indians and Deccan Chargers, two of the most expensive teams this time around did not do themselves proud.

With free markets prevailing, more money comes into the game which is always excellent. Money coming into cricket is always good. Often all of it isn't used aptly which is the problem.

 

[Pratters]

As so well demonstrated recently by AIG and Lehman Brothers?

How much can the Fed intervene. They have to stop some where. Look, I am strongly Libertarian and so you will see me support a free markets stand more often than not.

 

[pup11]

Rajasthan's success and Deccan's failures showed money cannot buy success, so i am not really bothered about the increase in salary cap.

I think the Deccan side was just way too overrated, except for Symonds, Gilchrist and Sharma rest of their signings were lame and piss-poor, likes of Gibbs, Afridi, RP Singh were too much of a hit and miss picks, had they all done well then Chargers would have decimated every other side in the competition, and then they had Styris and Vass both of 'em are hardly suited for T20 cricket (if bulk of the responsibility is given to them), so if you have another look at their squad, one would notice they just bought big names without doing much research.

 

[Burgey]

How much can the Fed intervene. They have to stop some where. Look, I am strongly Libertarian and so you will see me support a free markets stand more often than not.

I was talking more about how free marketeers tell govt to bugger off and leave them alone, then when they're in the ****ter for billiions, go cap in hand to the same govts begging for a bail out, which they often have to do because the effect on people if a player as big as AIG falls over is massive.

 

[Goughy]

Money cannot always buy success, particularly in a format like 20-20 where results are unpredictable. Mumbai Indians and Deccan Chargers, two of the most expensive teams this time around did not do themselves proud.

With free markets prevailing, more money comes into the game which is always excellent. Money coming into cricket is always good. Often all of it isn't used aptly which is the problem.

No but it can help.

American Football is successful because of its hard salary cap.

Salary caps require good management. A bad financial decision cannot just be written off and the cheque book reopened.

Teams with money may have a bad season, however they will not have 2-3 bad seasons in a row as they can afford to rectify the situation.

Lots of money and no salary cap allows bad management to go unpunished.

However, it will drive salaries up which I always for.

 

[Pratters]

I was talking more about how free marketeers tell govt to bugger off and leave them alone, then when they're in the ****ter for billiions, go cap in hand to the same govts begging for a bail out, which they often have to do because the effect on people if a player as big as AIG falls over is massive.

My point was that the Fed cannot keep on bailing out. Ultimately you have let free markets prevail.

 

[Pratters]

No but it can help.

American Football is successful because of its hard salary cap.

Salary caps require good management. A bad financial decision cannot just be written off and the cheque book reopened.

Teams with money may have a bad season, however they will not have 2-3 bad seasons in a row as they can afford to rectify the situation.

Lots of money and no salary cap allows bad management to go unpunished.

However, it will drive salaries up which I always for.

If it is a hard salary cap which is very liberal, it is fair enough. However, as the situation stands right now, the caps are too low which stops a lot of money coming in. Given the madness of cricket in India and the revenues it can generate, the caps have to be increased big time at least. Whether it should be removed is debatable. I am for it's removal but as you have given the NFL example, a hard cap can work fine as well.

 

[Goughy]

If it is a hard salary cap which is very liberal, it is fair enough. However, as the situation stands right now, the caps are too low which stops a lot of money coming in. Given the madness of cricket in India and the revenues it can generate, the caps have to be increased big time at least. Whether it should be removed is debatable. I am for it's removal but as you given the NFL example, a hard cap can work fine as well.

Thats fair enough.

The current (or old) salary cap appears to be nothing more than a guess and had no basis in reality.

It probably needed to be adjusted or removed. Id just be more inclined to adjust upwards rather than abolish. Especially in the short term as the league is still new and data and patterns are in short supply.