Subhash Chandra is also a media baron, also a jilted suitor for TV rights despite making the best offer and is also up against a board that guards its turf zealously and which, given the discontent emanating from every corner of its territory, faces the prospect of the game going into complete disarray.

However, there are two key differences between then and now. Packer's gambit was fuelled almost solely by money, based on the absurdly low wages top international players were drawing at the time. His bait to players was simply an exponential increase - up to tenfold, in some cases - in whatever their boards were paying them.

That won't work in India, where the top players are famously well-paid. True, the current deadlock over the latest player contracts is over money - the share of TV revenue - but that is a relatively minor irritant. In any case players' endorsements - a bigger source of their earnings - is directly linked to their Team India status. That is the ultimate carrot the BCCI holds: The India cap, and what it means. It is the doorway to credibility - ask all those batsmen whose centuries in World Series Cricket added nothing to their career averages - and, equally, the only measure of success by the brand managers.

That lack of a lure may explain the second glaring difference: Chandra doesn't have a Name. Not a single Name as a player, not a single Name as an administrator or official in any capacity. Packer had several Names to begin with, and kept adding more once the ball was set rolling.

If the BCCI feels threatened, it may be stirred into action. If Chandra has held out his hand in genuine partnership, and if the BCCI accepts, Indian cricket can only get better. Which isn't saying much right now but every little bit helps

What Chandra needs is an evangelist, just as Ian Chappell and Tony Greig were to Packer, spreading the good word among their peers, their credibility substituting for Packer's relative lack of stature. If, for argument's sake, Sachin Tendulkar were to become brand ambassador for the Indian Cricket League, half of Chandra's work would be done. Of course, Chappell was a recently retired captain, and Chandra could soon have his pick of players with such a profile.

It might be easier for the ICL to tempt players from overseas; many of the top names are anyway familiar with the financial carrots that India offers, several have agents or representatives here and if it is a quick-fire, one-month affair, they might be strongly tempted to make some fast money. There is opportunity here for Inzamam-ul Haq, say, or Brian Lara or even Glenn McGrath.

Actually, there is opportunity there for Cricket Australia too (and the ECB, and every cricket board the BCCI has rubbed up the wrong way): It can use its hold on these cricketers as leverage in the constant (and often bitter) bargaining that the global cricket administration has become. Want us to block McGrath? No problem, but let's talk about hosting the next World Cup. Pietersen on the ICL list? We'll get him off, but meanwhile those B-list venues for our next tour...

And yet. And yet there is the possibility that, given the vast space that remains untapped in Indian cricket, Chandra can pull something off. For years the BCCI has steadfastly taken for granted the vast legions of footsoldiers of Indian cricket - the umpires, state players, stadium crowds, administrators, average fans; for years it has turned a blind eye to everything but the opportunity to make a quick (and very big) buck; for years, it has done nothing to look at cricket away from the bright lights of the one-day games. Now, it could be hoist on its own petard.

The trick, for Chandra, could be to think big by thinking small. Either small matches in big cities - a Twenty20 game in, say Bombay Gymkhana or Kolkata's CCFC, where one can relax with a glass of beer and watch the fun with PLUs, maybe even be part of the fun (this is the age of reality TV, and a cricket reality show on Chandra's Zee TV has already sent one player to Leicestershire). Or big matches in small towns, where Chandra's empire already has a strong media presence - a one-day game in, say Allahabad or Jalandhar or Bharuch, the sort of place where India's best young players now come from.

Would the fans buy it? That's a tough one; they are the world's most neglected cricket fans and have no love lost for the BCCI but are also notoriously star-conscious. Also, India's cricket culture is not participatory. Yet it's also true that they have never been wooed, made to feel important; if Chandra puts them at the centre of his nascent universe, who knows?

There are other options. In a larger context and in the longer run, India has to find a market for its cricket economy that will not expose the cricketers' shortcomings. Simply put, it means more cricket against the B teams or, more significantly, hijacking the offshore cricket concept. He could take the travelling circus overseas and trawl the NRI markets.

The trick, in any or all of this, is to have serious cricket. Ultimately, WSC succeeded because the players lived up to the hype; the big boys, as Imran so famously boasted, really did play at night. The two Richards were in sublime form and, along with the Chappells and sundry others, fought on level terms with the world's best fast bowlers at their peak. It was great cricket and made great viewing. If Chandra indeed lures Ganguly and Tendulkar to his side, he'd have to ensure they play a very different game to what they've been playing of late.

In all this, of course, there is opportunity for Indian cricket in general. After all, what Chandra is proposing is effectively what the BCCI should have been doing anyway -in terms of building both infrastructure and manpower. If the BCCI feels threatened, it may be stirred into action. If Chandra has held out his hand in genuine partnership, and if the BCCI accepts, Indian cricket can only get better. Which isn't saying much right now but every little bit helps.

The idea has potential - something like NBA for cricket. But I don't think Zee has the right skills to do it. Their programming is bad in general, and the matches that they covered had awful commentators etc. And Lalit Modi has indicated that any such move would be on his terms.

Good one, Indian cricket needs this at the moment, this is in line with what kerry packer did in australia years back, it was a revelation, but Mr chandra has to make sure that ICL tries to tap potential from every street corners of the country by bringing in players with athletic and alround capabilities regardless of their backgrounds by employing paid selectors and throw dirt on the BCCI system that produces great models for advertisements, lets hope that it does not create problems like Mr standford`s Twenty20 in west indies.

surely has a great potential, more than an NBA to indian cricket this would be an EPL to indian cricket, and what a time to give a proposal like this, just when BCCI is looking to do something drastic to improve the game, work of a very smart businessman, great timing MR.Chandra...

Its a wonderful venture--well thought out and the timing of its launch was perfect. Well in India, if a PHL game could draw huge crowds in Chandigarh, the magnitude of success of the ICL is tremendous. If the BCCI can somehow imbibe this into its own domestic structure instead of the facile one-day and Twenty20 tournaments that it is hosting(at the cost of a TV deal with Nimbus), the quality of the game will definitely improve in these formats and the coffers of the BCCI will swell(more than taking care of the damages in the TV deal). Its a win-win situation which the BCCI should not shun.

This is an interesting article exploring the various possibilities ahead if the new Cricket League were to succeed. But I think even before we get to that, we need to look at how difficult it could prove for the League to actually even take off. We already have Lalit Modi saying this cannot go ahead without the BCCI's approval. This attitude of the BCCI is something which is bound to put a spanner in the works. As you have rightly said, Indian cricket is a very jealously protected domain of the BCCI. How much the BCCI would be open to such a revolutionary idea remains to be seen.
Another point I would like to make is with regard to the comparison of Subash Chandra's move to Kerry Packer. I believe one major difference now compared to then, is the power and control the ICC has on the game of cricket worldwide. Just like the BCCI has already reacted negatively, trust the ICC to come up with all kinds of objections, particularly when it comes to international players playing in the League.
Subash Chandra's move, as you said - if genuine, would strive to take all these factors into consideration and make the whole idea a grand success. But if it is just another purely commercial venture hidden behind a cricketing viel, well, lets forget about it!

Bringing game to small cities will be very crucial, which BCCI failed to do so. If BCCI did allow ICL to use their grounds i think they can use other sports stadiums(like athletics or hockey). As u said, success of ICL now it really depends on how they exploit the week points of BCCI.

It would do wonderful things for Indian cricket.However sadly the name of the game is "money".Mr.Chandra is not doing this for a charity - he would want a minimum 4-fold return on his investment.And if he is betting on the TV audiences - meaning Advt. revenues, he will be in for a shock. With so much cricket being played,there is already so much viewer's apathy to the test and ODIs of late. Atleast in the initial years, ICL may only be able to attract the third rung cricketers or discarded cricketers. Imagine a team of Ajay Jadeja,Sadagopan Ramesh,Sarandeep Singh,Sunil Joshi,etc., playing - would that attract TV audience and/or spectators in the ground? What say guys?

If ICL tie up with BCCI to gain only commercial benefit and doesn't improve quality of cricket, then they will face huge criticism and whatever ZEE has earned over the time period by gaining public popularity will slide and chances of loosing market share. I would prefer ZEE to stand on its own identity and bring quality cricket and make money as much as you want. Good luck ZEE for bringing this revolutionary ided, hopefully you will live up to peoples expectation. Sanjay Ghodke

ICL should and must grow up to be a force to be reckoned with. There is no gainsaying that Zee TV having already done the requisite spade work will rise up to deliver its goods, standing tall.It will reap enormous financial benefits, and command a n enviable position in the cricketing world.So its oppurtune to start right away with ICL alone and no tie- ups.Maybe a Universal Cricket League is in the making.Good Luck and Best Wishes.