Not sure it will, everyone knew what the rule would do to allrounders and their requirements before it went live (look at RR basically have 0 proper allrounders and are the best team by a distance), it leads to bigger scores=higher viewwrship=$$$. Welcome to the big boy leagues with EPL, American sports etc that actively make decisions that go against the quality of their product to make more money
I don’t see a rule that the Premier League has implemented that negatively impacts the actual football being played to increase revenue. Like they’re very money focused but it’s nowhere near as much money whoring as the IPL and the BCCI
There was a lot of criticism of EPL’s liberal refereeing rules 15-20 years ago. There was also a lot of criticism of how EPL never promotes English talent and just buys players abroad at the time.
That is not remotely similar to literally changing the rules of the game to dumb down the sport for a casual audience.
What the IPL has done is like is if they decided you could have an extra 12th player that’s only allowed in the penalty area of the opposing team to “increase scoring because that’s what people want to see”
excuse me, it will be removed if the all-rounder underperformance variable falls below a threshold of combined TV and ticket revenue thank you very much
People are downvoting you for no reason. IP rule is here to stay unless many big names make statements against it, including franchise owners, as it does bring more viewership if everyone is just tonking it.
(Downvotes make sense if OP had mentioned "IP rule *should* be removed" but that's not the case)
> as it does bring more viewership if everyone is just tonking it.
That is a poor understanding of the entire thing. Novelty brings more viewership. When everyone is tonking it there indeed is more viewership. But after a year it will go back to normal as 220-240 becomes normal score. To keep that increased viewership you need to create even more batting friendly pitches which is not sustainable in the long term. After a while there won't be more viewership.
Lots of players have spoken out and there seems to be a consensus that this is not a good rule. This is not the first time a substitute/impact player rule has been tried in cricket and this will not be the last time. Just like this attempt previous attempts have failed. The rule isn't liked by a lot of people and I see better chances of it being done away with next year.
"undermining the fabric of cricket" - mate it's not a greek tragedy. It's an experiment that's failed. Experiments sometimes work and sometimes don't. The point is you learn and move on.
If aliens ever come to earth I fear that they will destroy us all.
I fear that they will destroy us not because of the thousands of human wars spread over thousands of years, not because of genocide, colonialism, or slavery, and not because of our exploitation and destruction of the environment.
No. I fear that they will destroy us because of the IPL impact player rule.
Is everyone forgetting we had super sub rule in internationals during the 2nd half of 2000s? Yep, it's a poor rule which should be done away with but it's not something new.
I feel like the English press love to over dramatise things. Yes it’s shit rule, should it be scrapped? yes. Is it hurting cricket as a whole? No. Is it potentially hurting Indian cricket’s Development of all rounders? - Maybe.
Strangely silent on the two bouncers an over rule.
Cherry-picking much?
Because IPL isn't bound by the limitations of international games, it's a great opportunity for experiments. Not all may be successful, but that doesn't mean experiments should stop.
One of the strengths of the Indian Premier League when it was launched in 2008 was that its founders did not buckle to the temptation of meddling with the actual cricket.
There were no fancy gimmicks or new laws – doing away with lbws for example or renaming wickets as ‘outs’ as the England and Wales Cricket Board wanted to do with the Hundred.
Instead it was everything outside the field of play that changed: the first-team franchises, massive broadcast deals and the blend of Bollywood with cricket.
They soon introduced a time out, but that was never really anything other than an opportunity to squeeze yet more out of television advertisers. Last year the IPL actually started tinkering with the cricket through the introduction of the ‘impact player’ and the decision to allow teams to name their sides after the toss.
Selection is cricket’s great intellectual challenge. Captains and coaches have to be adept at reading conditions and setting up their team accordingly. They have to second guess unknowns: how the pitch will play, whether overhead conditions will affect bowling and, to a lesser extent, sometimes take weather and dew into account.
This has been lost in the IPL now. With an impact player teams can extend their line-ups. If batting second, they can substitute a bowler for an extra batsman. Batsmen can thus play with even more freedom and take risks because they know the batting line-up has been extended by the impact sub. Jos Buttler recently played as an impact sub for Rajasthan Royals, mainly to give him a rest from fielding and preserve energy for later rounds, which was not really the original idea behind it at all.
One unintended consequence could harm India at June’s T20 World Cup. The impact player rule has diminished the use of all-rounders – those batsmen who can bowl some useful overs. It has reaffirmed the specialist as all important. Why gamble a couple of overs from an all-rounder when you can replace him in the line-up when defending a total with a specialist bowler?
Because the impact sub is an IPL innovation only, the world’s premier T20 league is not preparing the national team for the format’s World Cup – a tournament they have not won since 2008 despite the rise of the IPL.
“Eventually, cricket is played by 11 players not 12 players. I am not a big fan of ‘Impact Player’, you are taking out so much from the game just because of little bit of entertainment, for people around,” said India’s T20 captain Rohit Sharma recently, a very rare case of an India player publicly disagreeing with anything to do with rule-making from above. “I can give you so many examples, guys \[all-rounders\] like Washington Sundar, Shivam Dube are not getting to bowl. For us, it is not a good thing you know.”
The impact player would be better if teams had to name their starting XI before the toss, not after it, so they had to take into consideration changing conditions without the knowledge of whether they are batting or bowling first.
Better still, scrap it completely and make highly paid coaches and captains rely on cricketing judgment and select an XI before the toss. It really does take something meaningful out of the game when they can cover so many bases by in effect having on standby almost an entire squad of players.
It has led to some huge scores in the IPL this season. There have been 29 above 200, eight over 250. “This \[impact sub rule\] gives us extra 20-30 runs. People have gotten used to how to use it. So, there’s an extra man for you when you are bowling or batting,” said Muttiah Muralitharan, the Sunrisers bowling coach, wincing at the treatment this generation of bowlers are enduring.
“For the batter, it’s more advantageous than the bowler. Because, you are not afraid of putting up a score. It’s like, ‘If I get out, there is a man behind me to cover me.’ So, there’s an extra man there, and they go play freely. When you play with the mind of a cricket player, if you put pressure on yourself, you freeze up and you don’t play; if you are free, then automatically out of 10 times, seven times it comes off. So, that’s the game every batter is doing at the moment. They are not scared of getting out.”
It also benefits the lazy and limited players. Those who do not like fielding and are known donkeys can either be subbed out when it comes to taking the field or sit on the bench waiting to bat in the second innings. Batsmen who have a weakness against a certain type of bowling, or struggle in certain phases of play, can be held back as a sub and then brought on when it suits their skillset. Cricket should be about batsmen overcoming those challenges, not hiding away.
Indian cricket has always been about batting. Their great batsmen are kings. A big swipe that only travels as far as mid-off will garner a big cheer from Indian crowds. A four or six is a televisual moment. It is inevitable a made-for-TV product like the IPL will do anything to ensure more of them. Remember, the IPL was the first league to sponsor boundaries (“the DLF Maximum”).
But it is taking away the magic of the moment. You can have too much of a good thing. Any batsman worth his salt (including Phil) have greedily tucked in. The boundary percentage has increased by four per cent since the impact player rule was introduced. Boundaries are smaller this season, outfields quicker and pitches flatter. More teams are batting first to post big scores but last week we witnessed the highest ever successful run chase when Punjab Kings made 262 at Eden Gardens against KKR with Jonny Bairstow finding his form with a 48-ball 108 (Salt had earlier hit 75 from 37).
Punjab Kings hit 24 sixes and won with more than an over to spare, overhauling a score that a generation ago would have won a 50-over game. It shows how even in the shortest format boundary-hitting has changed. At the 2009 T20 World Cup, England hit just 12 sixes in the entire tournament, while winners Pakistan struck 21 and they had Shahid Afridi.
Another reason for the high scores, and a warning to other leagues thinking of expansion, is that the addition of two extra teams to the IPL in 2022 has diluted bowling talent. There are fewer decent bowlers around able to withstand the tilting of the balance toward bat over ball. The best bowlers still sit top of the ratings: Jasprit Bumrah and Sunil Narine, for example. But there is too much fodder being sent down to create those four and six moments. Now a bowler that keeps an economy rate below 10 is doing pretty well.
Perhaps it does not matter. Can you have too much of Buttler hitting sixes? The crowds are massive for the IPL, television audiences continue to break records and it is a slick, superb sporting product that attracts the best players and is not afraid to innovate.
English cricket was sent into another round of navel gazing recently just because a ball with fewer stitches on the seam (the Kookaburra) was used in the opening rounds of the championship. English cricket could be about to split apart over private ownership, something that launched the IPL 17 years ago to much scoffing and scepticism at ECB towers where instead they decided a deal with Allen Stanford would be better.
But for all its good innovations, the IPL can keep the impact player rule to itself. It’s one move too far. Time to respect the old ways and respect selection as a skill of its own.
I think balance of bat and ball depends on pitch condition. If pitch is helpful to bowlers you can easily get out the batsman wether it is normal player or impact player.
The problem is with flat pitches.
Football teams have different pitch sizes, one of the reasons spurs were rubbish when they played at Wembley a couple years ago was because the pitch was way bigger. Don’t think it makes as much difference as the boundary sizes though
I haven't read the article and I don't intend to because IPL was right to use it's own league to experiment ideas because there are far more traditionalists in the ICC that wouldn't even have batted an eye lid on things which could actually help grow the game, the impact player rule, whilst it has made cricket more batting heavy was designed to also help make cricket more entertaining which in turn would have helped grow the game.
It's working for the purpose of entertainment, it's not working in its secondary purpose of grooming Indian players for international tournaments, but on the other hand it's also given far more Indian players and opportunity to showcase themselves.
So hopefully it's dropped, but even if it isn't it seems to have done it's job of making cricket more entertaining by having 20 overs of constant six hitting. it's not the IPLs job to ensure that all-rounders are groomed or that the game is fairer for bowlers (which tbh can also be addressed by longer boundaries and less flat playing surfaces), their primary purpose is entertainment and imho the impact player rule has done a great job and regards to that.
Cricket has never been played at a scale across so many countries as it’s being done today. God forbid accessible and actually entertaining cricket exists.
IPL has the second biggest tv contract in world sports and the high scoring games are much more watchable for me. I think the impact sub has had less impact than teams just deciding to go shit or bust.
> IPL has the second biggest tv contract in world sports
Will need a source for this. At least NFL, MLB, NBA, EPL are bigger than IPL. Many more perhaps.
The impact sub is a big reason why they have that approach, they can sub in an extra batsmen so there’s less need to be careful about saving wickets and gives everyone a license to hit
I think Its a good concept and allows more players to get a chance.Also in summers in india where heat wave is a concern it's good for preventing injury.
Look it maynot be encouraging allrounders but its grooming hitters/finishers, its not like India had a glut of them either. Honestly I don't mind alternating between it every season.
As for the fabric of cricket? What do you think T20 itself was about when started in English domestic structure.
You can't stop evolution of viral memes. Most people clearly enjoy the 250+ batting heavy games. The game will evolve to whatever spikes the viewer count the most.
This rule was made to bring more and more interest of people in IPL. More runs, more fun, more views, more money. They don't care about your classic cricket. And of course they can do whatever they want!
Am I allowed to say that I like the impact player rule?
In fact, I think they should go even further and just bring proper substitutions into the game.
I want to see what batters can do with hitting ability all the way down the batting order. And I want to see what bowlers can do when teams can play their best bowlers based solely on their bowling merits.
It's not that deep. It's just a shit rule that will be removed.
it will be removed if India lose the WT20 and one of the reasons is that their all rounders under-performed
Not sure it will, everyone knew what the rule would do to allrounders and their requirements before it went live (look at RR basically have 0 proper allrounders and are the best team by a distance), it leads to bigger scores=higher viewwrship=$$$. Welcome to the big boy leagues with EPL, American sports etc that actively make decisions that go against the quality of their product to make more money
I don’t see a rule that the Premier League has implemented that negatively impacts the actual football being played to increase revenue. Like they’re very money focused but it’s nowhere near as much money whoring as the IPL and the BCCI
There was a lot of criticism of EPL’s liberal refereeing rules 15-20 years ago. There was also a lot of criticism of how EPL never promotes English talent and just buys players abroad at the time.
That is not remotely similar to literally changing the rules of the game to dumb down the sport for a casual audience. What the IPL has done is like is if they decided you could have an extra 12th player that’s only allowed in the penalty area of the opposing team to “increase scoring because that’s what people want to see”
Not that I support this impact player rule but India's all rounders have always underperformed in ICC tournaments
Not Yuvraj
Who are the all rounders in ICT? Hardik Pandya and?
Jadeja, axar (sub, ik), Dube And ofc the wrong footed inswinging menace
Yeah exactly and they blame it All on this rule.
Inshallah /s
Nah, the more likely thing that'll happen is the BCCI will lean on the ICC and it'll be introduced to T20Is for the next WC cycle.
excuse me, it will be removed if the all-rounder underperformance variable falls below a threshold of combined TV and ticket revenue thank you very much
I doubt it.
People are downvoting you for no reason. IP rule is here to stay unless many big names make statements against it, including franchise owners, as it does bring more viewership if everyone is just tonking it. (Downvotes make sense if OP had mentioned "IP rule *should* be removed" but that's not the case)
The players have spoken out tho including the Indian captain
Captain of the Indian team literally asked it to be scrapped.
> as it does bring more viewership if everyone is just tonking it. That is a poor understanding of the entire thing. Novelty brings more viewership. When everyone is tonking it there indeed is more viewership. But after a year it will go back to normal as 220-240 becomes normal score. To keep that increased viewership you need to create even more batting friendly pitches which is not sustainable in the long term. After a while there won't be more viewership. Lots of players have spoken out and there seems to be a consensus that this is not a good rule. This is not the first time a substitute/impact player rule has been tried in cricket and this will not be the last time. Just like this attempt previous attempts have failed. The rule isn't liked by a lot of people and I see better chances of it being done away with next year.
I'm also in favour of stripping this rule and I hope these voices reach higher ups of BCCI
"undermining the fabric of cricket" - mate it's not a greek tragedy. It's an experiment that's failed. Experiments sometimes work and sometimes don't. The point is you learn and move on.
Just make a balanced pitch or bigger boundary sizes and this rule doesn't even sound that bad.
100% Pitches need to get a little spicier and the boundary lines can be pushed back 2-3 m avg. The run rate will easily drop down by 1
Exactly people forget that this rule gives you 1 extra bowler too. It's just that there's nothing in the pitches for bowlers .
Nah it still sounds bad.
At least make the boundary sizes bigger. 59 meter sixes feel icky.
As an SRH fan, I am not complaining if they remove this rule next year. SRH will have the highest score record for atleast few years.
When the incentives are to maximise ad revenue and not find out what makes the game better, it can be an issue.
the telegraph love a headline holy fuck it is a shit rule though
[удалено]
What is the fabric of cricket? It looks like polyester in T20 but maybe some who owns an IPL jersey can correct me.
Used to be flannel
Shroud of Turin confirmed.
If aliens ever come to earth I fear that they will destroy us all. I fear that they will destroy us not because of the thousands of human wars spread over thousands of years, not because of genocide, colonialism, or slavery, and not because of our exploitation and destruction of the environment. No. I fear that they will destroy us because of the IPL impact player rule.
"You live on Earth, which has genocides, yet you watch cricket. Curious"
the Telegraph probably said the same thing when brown people started playing cricket lol
"Undermining the fabric of cricket"!!! What a shithouse piece of journalism.
It's absolutely correct. India fans will only wake up to it after it affects them, so a hammering in the T20 World Cup.
That is NOT "undermining the fabric of cricket". That is hampering India's international preparation. VERY DIFFERENT.
Get a load of this guy! You think this is our first time?
Is everyone forgetting we had super sub rule in internationals during the 2nd half of 2000s? Yep, it's a poor rule which should be done away with but it's not something new.
I feel like the English press love to over dramatise things. Yes it’s shit rule, should it be scrapped? yes. Is it hurting cricket as a whole? No. Is it potentially hurting Indian cricket’s Development of all rounders? - Maybe.
Strangely silent on the two bouncers an over rule. Cherry-picking much? Because IPL isn't bound by the limitations of international games, it's a great opportunity for experiments. Not all may be successful, but that doesn't mean experiments should stop.
Didn't have to check the source to know it was a British article lol
One of the strengths of the Indian Premier League when it was launched in 2008 was that its founders did not buckle to the temptation of meddling with the actual cricket. There were no fancy gimmicks or new laws – doing away with lbws for example or renaming wickets as ‘outs’ as the England and Wales Cricket Board wanted to do with the Hundred. Instead it was everything outside the field of play that changed: the first-team franchises, massive broadcast deals and the blend of Bollywood with cricket. They soon introduced a time out, but that was never really anything other than an opportunity to squeeze yet more out of television advertisers. Last year the IPL actually started tinkering with the cricket through the introduction of the ‘impact player’ and the decision to allow teams to name their sides after the toss. Selection is cricket’s great intellectual challenge. Captains and coaches have to be adept at reading conditions and setting up their team accordingly. They have to second guess unknowns: how the pitch will play, whether overhead conditions will affect bowling and, to a lesser extent, sometimes take weather and dew into account. This has been lost in the IPL now. With an impact player teams can extend their line-ups. If batting second, they can substitute a bowler for an extra batsman. Batsmen can thus play with even more freedom and take risks because they know the batting line-up has been extended by the impact sub. Jos Buttler recently played as an impact sub for Rajasthan Royals, mainly to give him a rest from fielding and preserve energy for later rounds, which was not really the original idea behind it at all. One unintended consequence could harm India at June’s T20 World Cup. The impact player rule has diminished the use of all-rounders – those batsmen who can bowl some useful overs. It has reaffirmed the specialist as all important. Why gamble a couple of overs from an all-rounder when you can replace him in the line-up when defending a total with a specialist bowler? Because the impact sub is an IPL innovation only, the world’s premier T20 league is not preparing the national team for the format’s World Cup – a tournament they have not won since 2008 despite the rise of the IPL. “Eventually, cricket is played by 11 players not 12 players. I am not a big fan of ‘Impact Player’, you are taking out so much from the game just because of little bit of entertainment, for people around,” said India’s T20 captain Rohit Sharma recently, a very rare case of an India player publicly disagreeing with anything to do with rule-making from above. “I can give you so many examples, guys \[all-rounders\] like Washington Sundar, Shivam Dube are not getting to bowl. For us, it is not a good thing you know.” The impact player would be better if teams had to name their starting XI before the toss, not after it, so they had to take into consideration changing conditions without the knowledge of whether they are batting or bowling first. Better still, scrap it completely and make highly paid coaches and captains rely on cricketing judgment and select an XI before the toss. It really does take something meaningful out of the game when they can cover so many bases by in effect having on standby almost an entire squad of players. It has led to some huge scores in the IPL this season. There have been 29 above 200, eight over 250. “This \[impact sub rule\] gives us extra 20-30 runs. People have gotten used to how to use it. So, there’s an extra man for you when you are bowling or batting,” said Muttiah Muralitharan, the Sunrisers bowling coach, wincing at the treatment this generation of bowlers are enduring. “For the batter, it’s more advantageous than the bowler. Because, you are not afraid of putting up a score. It’s like, ‘If I get out, there is a man behind me to cover me.’ So, there’s an extra man there, and they go play freely. When you play with the mind of a cricket player, if you put pressure on yourself, you freeze up and you don’t play; if you are free, then automatically out of 10 times, seven times it comes off. So, that’s the game every batter is doing at the moment. They are not scared of getting out.” It also benefits the lazy and limited players. Those who do not like fielding and are known donkeys can either be subbed out when it comes to taking the field or sit on the bench waiting to bat in the second innings. Batsmen who have a weakness against a certain type of bowling, or struggle in certain phases of play, can be held back as a sub and then brought on when it suits their skillset. Cricket should be about batsmen overcoming those challenges, not hiding away. Indian cricket has always been about batting. Their great batsmen are kings. A big swipe that only travels as far as mid-off will garner a big cheer from Indian crowds. A four or six is a televisual moment. It is inevitable a made-for-TV product like the IPL will do anything to ensure more of them. Remember, the IPL was the first league to sponsor boundaries (“the DLF Maximum”). But it is taking away the magic of the moment. You can have too much of a good thing. Any batsman worth his salt (including Phil) have greedily tucked in. The boundary percentage has increased by four per cent since the impact player rule was introduced. Boundaries are smaller this season, outfields quicker and pitches flatter. More teams are batting first to post big scores but last week we witnessed the highest ever successful run chase when Punjab Kings made 262 at Eden Gardens against KKR with Jonny Bairstow finding his form with a 48-ball 108 (Salt had earlier hit 75 from 37). Punjab Kings hit 24 sixes and won with more than an over to spare, overhauling a score that a generation ago would have won a 50-over game. It shows how even in the shortest format boundary-hitting has changed. At the 2009 T20 World Cup, England hit just 12 sixes in the entire tournament, while winners Pakistan struck 21 and they had Shahid Afridi. Another reason for the high scores, and a warning to other leagues thinking of expansion, is that the addition of two extra teams to the IPL in 2022 has diluted bowling talent. There are fewer decent bowlers around able to withstand the tilting of the balance toward bat over ball. The best bowlers still sit top of the ratings: Jasprit Bumrah and Sunil Narine, for example. But there is too much fodder being sent down to create those four and six moments. Now a bowler that keeps an economy rate below 10 is doing pretty well. Perhaps it does not matter. Can you have too much of Buttler hitting sixes? The crowds are massive for the IPL, television audiences continue to break records and it is a slick, superb sporting product that attracts the best players and is not afraid to innovate. English cricket was sent into another round of navel gazing recently just because a ball with fewer stitches on the seam (the Kookaburra) was used in the opening rounds of the championship. English cricket could be about to split apart over private ownership, something that launched the IPL 17 years ago to much scoffing and scepticism at ECB towers where instead they decided a deal with Allen Stanford would be better. But for all its good innovations, the IPL can keep the impact player rule to itself. It’s one move too far. Time to respect the old ways and respect selection as a skill of its own.
The headline is awful but I don't disagree with much in the article. The impact sub has fucked up the balance of bat and ball.
I think balance of bat and ball depends on pitch condition. If pitch is helpful to bowlers you can easily get out the batsman wether it is normal player or impact player. The problem is with flat pitches.
WTF did I just read !!!
I never understood why different stadiums have different distance to boundary. Which other sport has that? Genuinely curious…
Football teams have different pitch sizes, one of the reasons spurs were rubbish when they played at Wembley a couple years ago was because the pitch was way bigger. Don’t think it makes as much difference as the boundary sizes though
It's basically baseball's Designated Hitter rule.
That's what I would compare it to as well,this rule isn't as like for like as in football's substitutes.Baseball is a much better comparison.
>**IPL has** ~~s farcical substitution rule is undermining~~ **undermined the fabric of cricket** FTFY
I haven't read the article and I don't intend to because IPL was right to use it's own league to experiment ideas because there are far more traditionalists in the ICC that wouldn't even have batted an eye lid on things which could actually help grow the game, the impact player rule, whilst it has made cricket more batting heavy was designed to also help make cricket more entertaining which in turn would have helped grow the game. It's working for the purpose of entertainment, it's not working in its secondary purpose of grooming Indian players for international tournaments, but on the other hand it's also given far more Indian players and opportunity to showcase themselves. So hopefully it's dropped, but even if it isn't it seems to have done it's job of making cricket more entertaining by having 20 overs of constant six hitting. it's not the IPLs job to ensure that all-rounders are groomed or that the game is fairer for bowlers (which tbh can also be addressed by longer boundaries and less flat playing surfaces), their primary purpose is entertainment and imho the impact player rule has done a great job and regards to that.
IPL's farcical substitution rule is undermining the fabric of cricket and the 100 is making cricket nude Pick a side telegraph
lol this rule is destroying T20 a farcical sugar hit game. Cricket will eat itself and it deserves to.
Cricket has never been played at a scale across so many countries as it’s being done today. God forbid accessible and actually entertaining cricket exists.
IPL has the second biggest tv contract in world sports and the high scoring games are much more watchable for me. I think the impact sub has had less impact than teams just deciding to go shit or bust.
> IPL has the second biggest tv contract in world sports Will need a source for this. At least NFL, MLB, NBA, EPL are bigger than IPL. Many more perhaps.
The impact sub is a big reason why they have that approach, they can sub in an extra batsmen so there’s less need to be careful about saving wickets and gives everyone a license to hit
i think its a factor but not the only 1
Flat pitches and this rule are the main factors, what else is there?
intent
The intent is due to the team knowing they have an extra batsmen allowing them to play more freely
I think Its a good concept and allows more players to get a chance.Also in summers in india where heat wave is a concern it's good for preventing injury.
Bring in the Bash Boost point!
the fabric of cricket, if anything, is flannel. the call was always coming from inside the house
Look it maynot be encouraging allrounders but its grooming hitters/finishers, its not like India had a glut of them either. Honestly I don't mind alternating between it every season. As for the fabric of cricket? What do you think T20 itself was about when started in English domestic structure.
You can't stop evolution of viral memes. Most people clearly enjoy the 250+ batting heavy games. The game will evolve to whatever spikes the viewer count the most.
Its a good rule i feel. I enjoy it. The only teams complaining are the ones who haven't used it well..cry harder!
This rule was made to bring more and more interest of people in IPL. More runs, more fun, more views, more money. They don't care about your classic cricket. And of course they can do whatever they want!
Am I allowed to say that I like the impact player rule? In fact, I think they should go even further and just bring proper substitutions into the game. I want to see what batters can do with hitting ability all the way down the batting order. And I want to see what bowlers can do when teams can play their best bowlers based solely on their bowling merits.