Take Both the Winners to the Champions League
While the England cricketers returned to India, the 20-20 Champions League organizers could not help but pospone the tournament to October of next year.
India's tour of Pakistan may or may not happen, but then any tour to Pakistan is tentative these days, hence the 20-20 Champions League stands to be the most affected tournament due to the recent Mumbai happenings.
Who though has been affected the most?
The teams definitely.
Victoria Bushrangers and Western Australia Warriors from Australia, Rajasthan Royals and Chennai Superkings from India, Sialkot Stallions from Pakistan, Middlesex Crusaders from England, and Titans and Dolphins from South Africa - all of them face losses.
Each participating country will hold a domestic 20-20 tournament before October 2009, which means that the participants of te inaugral 20-20 Champions League will be very different from what the line up was for this December's tournament.
Fair?
Probably not.
The Stallions and the Bushrangers have won their respective domestic 20-20 tournaments thrice in as many years, and now they are left to do it again if they are to make it to the Champions League.
Surely the organizers need to come up with a solution to avoid this situation.
How about having last season's winners as well as this season's winners participate in the Champions League?
Noone can deny that the Rajasthan Royals deserve to take part in the Champions League after the IPL campaign they had last season.
What if Shane Warne's team don't reach the finals in the next edition of the IPL?
The way things stand as of now, it would mean they will not be playing in the Champions League.
Forget about the financial losses, lets think about fairness for once.
If the winners of the 2 seasons' tournaments are the same then the runners up can come into contention, if not then the 2 champions need to be allowed to play in my view.
That would also mean that the number of teams be increased to 10 from 8 to allow 2 teams each from England and Pakistan.
If there was enough time I would have proposed 4-way 20-20 competitions between the 4 domestic teams (winners and runners up of 2007-08 and 2008-09) to decide the 2 participants of the Champions League, but the lack of time in light of the international schedule will not allow that.
Hence the winners from both the tournaments.
India's tour of Pakistan may or may not happen, but then any tour to Pakistan is tentative these days, hence the 20-20 Champions League stands to be the most affected tournament due to the recent Mumbai happenings.
Who though has been affected the most?
The teams definitely.
Victoria Bushrangers and Western Australia Warriors from Australia, Rajasthan Royals and Chennai Superkings from India, Sialkot Stallions from Pakistan, Middlesex Crusaders from England, and Titans and Dolphins from South Africa - all of them face losses.
Each participating country will hold a domestic 20-20 tournament before October 2009, which means that the participants of te inaugral 20-20 Champions League will be very different from what the line up was for this December's tournament.
Fair?
Probably not.
The Stallions and the Bushrangers have won their respective domestic 20-20 tournaments thrice in as many years, and now they are left to do it again if they are to make it to the Champions League.
Surely the organizers need to come up with a solution to avoid this situation.
How about having last season's winners as well as this season's winners participate in the Champions League?
Noone can deny that the Rajasthan Royals deserve to take part in the Champions League after the IPL campaign they had last season.
What if Shane Warne's team don't reach the finals in the next edition of the IPL?
The way things stand as of now, it would mean they will not be playing in the Champions League.
Forget about the financial losses, lets think about fairness for once.
If the winners of the 2 seasons' tournaments are the same then the runners up can come into contention, if not then the 2 champions need to be allowed to play in my view.
That would also mean that the number of teams be increased to 10 from 8 to allow 2 teams each from England and Pakistan.
If there was enough time I would have proposed 4-way 20-20 competitions between the 4 domestic teams (winners and runners up of 2007-08 and 2008-09) to decide the 2 participants of the Champions League, but the lack of time in light of the international schedule will not allow that.
Hence the winners from both the tournaments.
.jpg)
I think the verdict is that these winners in their respective domestic tournaments don't qualify.
It is a clean slate all over again and next year's winners get to play in the champions 20.
Sad for this year's team :)
Thats what i think is unfair Scorps. This year's teams deserve a look in...
@Q: It's not a bad idea, but the runners-up of this year's competition will be extremely pissed if the champs are guaranteed a spot but not them.
I'm slightly tilted toward a clean slate in 2009, but could be swayed.
Sledge, I see your point regarding the runners up but there needs to be a way for this year's winners to be in contention for a spot in the Champions League...