Bangladesh Premier League news February 28, 2012

Chittagong threaten to pull out after semis confusion

ESPNcricinfo staff
  shares 16

Chittagong Kings have threatened to pull out of the next edition of the Bangladesh Premier League because they were replaced in the semi-finals of this year's tournament hours after being officially deemed to have qualified. The matter descended into farce, with the BPL first making a clear statement on Monday saying Chittagong were one of the semi-finalists and then, at 2:45am on Tuesday morning, issuing a release saying that in fact Barisal Burners were the fourth semi-finalists. The situation became murkier on Tuesday as the Chittagong franchise alleged that the BPL had also not responded to their reports of being approached to fix matches.

Nasir Ahmed, the Chittagong manager, said the manner in which Chittagong had been ousted from the knockout phase was an "injustice". "We rushed to the stadium [at night] and on arrival we were given a letter which said Barisal are through to the semi-final and we are out," he said. "We were stunned as this could not happen according to the tournament's bylaws. This is an injustice and we want a remedy."

On Sunday evening, after Barisal had chased down Chittagong's score in 15 overs, it was announced by the broadcasters that Barisal were through to the semi-finals on the basis of net run-rate. This, according to Mike Procter, BPL match-referee and technical committee member, was a false announcement. "It didn't come from us, nothing official came from us," Procter said. "If the television [broadcasters] speculate and if you guys [the media] speculate, we do not take the responsibility.

At that point, Chittagong, Barisal, Khulna Royal Bengals and Dhaka Gladiators were equal on 10 points. On Monday, Dhaka lost narrowly to Rajshahi and Khulna beat Sylhet Royals. By virtue of 12 points from 10 games, Khulna went to second place, leaving Dhaka, Barisal and Chittagong tied on points at the end of the league phase.

In the head-to-head results between the three teams level on 10 points, Dhaka had beaten Barisal twice and Chittagong once and therefore qualified for the semi-finals in third place. That now left Chittagong and Barisal in contention for the fourth spot. Chittagong had two wins, against Barisal and Dhaka, while Barisal had only one, against Chittagong. Barisal's net run-rate, however, was better than that of Chittagong.

On Monday evening, BPL governing council chairman Gazi Ashraf Hossain officially announced the semi-final line-up. "According to the rules Rajshahi, Khulna, Dhaka and Chittagong are through," he said. He produced a photocopied page from the by-laws where clause 21.8.2 was pointed out. It said: "when three or more teams finish with equal wins in the league, then the team(s) which was (were) the winner of the most number of matches played between those equal teams in the league will be placed in the higher position(s). If after applying this criterion, there are many items which are still equal, then such equal teams shall be ranked according to their net run-rate in the league."

It was announced that Chittagong were in the semi-finals on the basis of a better head-to-head record in the three-way tie on 10 points, which included Dhaka.

At 2.45 am on Tuesday morning, however, the BPL issued a release which said that Barisal was the fourth semi-finalist. The second and third points in the release said:

"(2) Three teams - Dhaka Gladiators, Barisal Burners and Chittagong Kings are on equal (10) points. Dhaka Gladiators have most wins from meetings with Barisal Burners and Chittagong Kings and therefore qualify as the 3rd semi-finalist.

"(3) With Barisal Burners and Chittagong Kings both having one win against each other the 4th qualifier had to be decided on the basis of superior net run-rate. Barisal edged ahead of Chittagong on net run-rate to become the 4th semi-finalist."

Procter explained that the confusion arose because there were two clauses: one concerning a situation in which three teams were equal on points (21.8.2) and one referring to a similar situation with two teams (21.8.1). The former was used to decide Dhaka's qualification, which left Chittagong and Barisal level, meaning clause 21.8.1 would come into effect and Chittagong's win against Dhaka would not be counted.

"Because they ended up with the most points Dhaka were taken out of the equation," Procter said. "Two teams were left. So you could not have a head-to-head between three teams, but only two."

Chittagong, though, were left fuming and their chief executive has now also said they had been approached to fix matches. These claims come a day after the arrest of a Pakistani citizen, who was attending BPL matches, on suspicions of involvement in fixing.

"We have been approached by unknown callers at three times to fix matches," the Chittagong chief executive Sameer Quader Chowdhury said. "We informed the BPL governing council in writing but did not get any response. Even the man arrested on suspicion the other day was first identified by us."

He also said that Chittagong were considering pulling out of the tournament, though the franchise had been bought for three years. "We have invested a lot in this tournament [but] if this trend continues, we will not participate from the next edition."

Another bone of contention for the Chittagong Kings was that the official scoring website (digicricket.marssil.com) showed Chittagong above Barisal in the head-to-head count till 11am in the morning but later had N/A (not applicable) filled for each team in the head-to-head column.

Edited by Dustin Silgardo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY yorkshire-86 on | March 1, 2012, 21:26 GMT

    Barisal Burners is such a brilliantly thought out name they deserved to go through. Chittagong Kings is a rubbish name, like Sylhet Royals. Any name with a connection to royalty is rubbish.

  • POSTED BY on | March 1, 2012, 2:16 GMT

    the way semi finalists teams have been changed particularly qualification of Barsial instead of Chittagong. ICC should take strong actions it seems that only fixed teams have been sent to semi final by BPL administration.

  • POSTED BY on | February 29, 2012, 11:04 GMT

    ITs completely unjustice for CTG. Who does not know about the rule, please got though CB series where Head to head considered before run rate. CTG eliminated due to political reason. The owner of Barishal is from Goverment and The owner of CTG is from Opposition. How can a decision can be changed overnight.

  • POSTED BY on | February 29, 2012, 9:39 GMT

    I would like" Chittagong Kings" to change their name and have a new name "Chittagong Reds" instead.I would like that they should play in complete red,just as the red colour of Zimbabwean cricket team.Chittagonians prefers red and red colour will always keep them on fighting spirits. Mumtaz Mayeem(RedMan)

  • POSTED BY Wazirabadi on | February 29, 2012, 9:38 GMT

    Guys please don't take anything from BPL. It's been a good tournament for BD. They should have done it same as the world cup. (1) Points, (2)Run rate and the 3rd criteria head on wins. Simple & straight. Get ready for BLAST OFF TONIGHT.

  • POSTED BY A.Z.Abbasi on | February 29, 2012, 8:59 GMT

    It's only the first season of BPL. These things always happen. They'll learn from it. BTW I enjoyed BPL and looking forward for the final.

  • POSTED BY ROLAYH on | February 29, 2012, 8:07 GMT

    well they should have kept it simple as it is very unlikely for multiple teams to end up on the same run rate...

  • POSTED BY M-S-R on | February 28, 2012, 19:10 GMT

    These kinds of chaos are nothing new in BD- we make mess of everything - its part of our daily life…. we're slow learners!!!!

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 18:57 GMT

    this is a circus.a tournament which is run by hipocrates.i also dont understand who is telling the truth and who is telling lies but however this basically demolishes bangladesh's reputation.an imitation of ipl but even more disastrous

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 17:15 GMT

    BPL shown that how inexperience they r

  • POSTED BY yorkshire-86 on | March 1, 2012, 21:26 GMT

    Barisal Burners is such a brilliantly thought out name they deserved to go through. Chittagong Kings is a rubbish name, like Sylhet Royals. Any name with a connection to royalty is rubbish.

  • POSTED BY on | March 1, 2012, 2:16 GMT

    the way semi finalists teams have been changed particularly qualification of Barsial instead of Chittagong. ICC should take strong actions it seems that only fixed teams have been sent to semi final by BPL administration.

  • POSTED BY on | February 29, 2012, 11:04 GMT

    ITs completely unjustice for CTG. Who does not know about the rule, please got though CB series where Head to head considered before run rate. CTG eliminated due to political reason. The owner of Barishal is from Goverment and The owner of CTG is from Opposition. How can a decision can be changed overnight.

  • POSTED BY on | February 29, 2012, 9:39 GMT

    I would like" Chittagong Kings" to change their name and have a new name "Chittagong Reds" instead.I would like that they should play in complete red,just as the red colour of Zimbabwean cricket team.Chittagonians prefers red and red colour will always keep them on fighting spirits. Mumtaz Mayeem(RedMan)

  • POSTED BY Wazirabadi on | February 29, 2012, 9:38 GMT

    Guys please don't take anything from BPL. It's been a good tournament for BD. They should have done it same as the world cup. (1) Points, (2)Run rate and the 3rd criteria head on wins. Simple & straight. Get ready for BLAST OFF TONIGHT.

  • POSTED BY A.Z.Abbasi on | February 29, 2012, 8:59 GMT

    It's only the first season of BPL. These things always happen. They'll learn from it. BTW I enjoyed BPL and looking forward for the final.

  • POSTED BY ROLAYH on | February 29, 2012, 8:07 GMT

    well they should have kept it simple as it is very unlikely for multiple teams to end up on the same run rate...

  • POSTED BY M-S-R on | February 28, 2012, 19:10 GMT

    These kinds of chaos are nothing new in BD- we make mess of everything - its part of our daily life…. we're slow learners!!!!

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 18:57 GMT

    this is a circus.a tournament which is run by hipocrates.i also dont understand who is telling the truth and who is telling lies but however this basically demolishes bangladesh's reputation.an imitation of ipl but even more disastrous

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 17:15 GMT

    BPL shown that how inexperience they r

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 16:46 GMT

    Awesome...bloody awesome....here we go...BPL turning into IPL..from the first round...lol..

  • POSTED BY Hassan.Farooqi on | February 28, 2012, 16:06 GMT

    I do not know what is the confusion. Looking at the points table it is clear that Chittagong did not make it to the finals due to lower run rate. Are Chittagong officials just putting up a show to cover their failure?

  • POSTED BY Tokai69 on | February 28, 2012, 15:27 GMT

    No doubt, organizers appeared very unprofessional in sorting out the semi-final spot. Eventually they made the right decision to resolve tie between BB and CK; otherwise it would be a big injustice for BB when their NRR is better than CK and they both got a head-to-head win. They made the mistake in the first place to consider head-to-head results of three teams to resolve conflict between two teams. Organizers owe a big appology to Kings

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 15:14 GMT

    Oops, this is clearly a mistake. Regarding resolving a 3-way tie, the by-law says, "If after applying this criterion, there are many items which are still equal, then such equal teams shall be ranked according to their net run-rate in the league".

    BUT *after* applying the head-to-head criterion there are no more equal teams! The head-to-head criterion is not for selecting just one team out of three. The head-to-head is for ranking the three tied teams. The top 2 in that ranking should simply go through.

    I don't see anything in the by-law that states (or implies) that in a 3-way tie they will first use one rule to pick a top team, and then use a different rule to break the tie between the 2 remaining teams.

    Procter thinks that after Dhaka qualified, the three-way tie transforms into a two-way tie. That's ridiculous. The tie doesn't change. You pick teams to qualify, but a three-way tie is ALWAYS a three-way tie. That is the whole point of having separate rules??

  • POSTED BY timeh on | February 28, 2012, 15:04 GMT

    That is the most absurd manipulation of the rules I've ever heard of (David who? ;).

    Seems pointless to apply the 2-tied-team rule after seeing the results of the 3-team rule calculations.

    Wonder how much that finals spot cost the Burners...

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 14:15 GMT

    CTG will find so many excuses now. They forgot that this is not a divisional tournament.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 14:15 GMT

    CTG will find so many excuses now. They forgot that this is not a divisional tournament.

  • POSTED BY timeh on | February 28, 2012, 15:04 GMT

    That is the most absurd manipulation of the rules I've ever heard of (David who? ;).

    Seems pointless to apply the 2-tied-team rule after seeing the results of the 3-team rule calculations.

    Wonder how much that finals spot cost the Burners...

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 15:14 GMT

    Oops, this is clearly a mistake. Regarding resolving a 3-way tie, the by-law says, "If after applying this criterion, there are many items which are still equal, then such equal teams shall be ranked according to their net run-rate in the league".

    BUT *after* applying the head-to-head criterion there are no more equal teams! The head-to-head criterion is not for selecting just one team out of three. The head-to-head is for ranking the three tied teams. The top 2 in that ranking should simply go through.

    I don't see anything in the by-law that states (or implies) that in a 3-way tie they will first use one rule to pick a top team, and then use a different rule to break the tie between the 2 remaining teams.

    Procter thinks that after Dhaka qualified, the three-way tie transforms into a two-way tie. That's ridiculous. The tie doesn't change. You pick teams to qualify, but a three-way tie is ALWAYS a three-way tie. That is the whole point of having separate rules??

  • POSTED BY Tokai69 on | February 28, 2012, 15:27 GMT

    No doubt, organizers appeared very unprofessional in sorting out the semi-final spot. Eventually they made the right decision to resolve tie between BB and CK; otherwise it would be a big injustice for BB when their NRR is better than CK and they both got a head-to-head win. They made the mistake in the first place to consider head-to-head results of three teams to resolve conflict between two teams. Organizers owe a big appology to Kings

  • POSTED BY Hassan.Farooqi on | February 28, 2012, 16:06 GMT

    I do not know what is the confusion. Looking at the points table it is clear that Chittagong did not make it to the finals due to lower run rate. Are Chittagong officials just putting up a show to cover their failure?

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 16:46 GMT

    Awesome...bloody awesome....here we go...BPL turning into IPL..from the first round...lol..

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 17:15 GMT

    BPL shown that how inexperience they r

  • POSTED BY on | February 28, 2012, 18:57 GMT

    this is a circus.a tournament which is run by hipocrates.i also dont understand who is telling the truth and who is telling lies but however this basically demolishes bangladesh's reputation.an imitation of ipl but even more disastrous

  • POSTED BY M-S-R on | February 28, 2012, 19:10 GMT

    These kinds of chaos are nothing new in BD- we make mess of everything - its part of our daily life…. we're slow learners!!!!

  • POSTED BY ROLAYH on | February 29, 2012, 8:07 GMT

    well they should have kept it simple as it is very unlikely for multiple teams to end up on the same run rate...