CLT20, not quite
When the third and fourth best teams in one domestic tournament are granted direct entry and actual champions from elsewhere are forced to jostle for two meagre spots qualification fist-fights, why call it the 'Champions' League T20 in the first place?
Where Trinidad & Tobago are still not considered 'champion' material good enough for direct entry despite having been one of the Champions League T20's few success stories. Not to forget among the most successful T20 teams in the world and home to eight of the present World T20 champions.
But it's probably too idealistic to expect any different when a tournament's ownership rests in the hands of an exclusive bunch of countries-50 per cent with the BCCI. In fact so uneven is its playing field, that the Champions League T20 (CLT20) ends up tripping on its own feet.
The concept of the CLT20 itself is not a bad one. The amalgamation of the T20 champions from around the world fighting it out for the prize of being crowned the best. The CLT20's bane though has been the skewed concentration of power.
And the time might well be nigh for the International Cricket Council (ICC) to take over the reins and turn it into a nonpartisan world championship, especially with the franchise format having replaced regional T20 tournaments in most parts of the world already.
The ICC's involvement will not only depreciate the bullying power of the present stakeholders of the CLT20, it will also ensure that the English counties-who are unlikely to return to the CLT20 having opted out from the 2013 event for now-are retained.
With a window for the CLT20 already present in their future tours programme, the time may have come for the ICC to throw their weight around and take ownership so that the tournament actually merits the Champions League title.