The Sri Lankan cricket board's plan to revamp the domestic championship structure has received a cautious thumbs-up from competing clubs and local commentators.

More radical plans, however, to redistribute star players to outstation and developing clubs has met with resistance. Leading clubs are understandably concerned about losing their best players to opponents.

The Sri Lankan board is expected to formally announce the changes later this week. They will include a new-look three-stage structure, which includes a `Super League' followed by a knockout finale, and, possibly, a limited re-distribution of players.

Some, though, argue that the proposed `Super League' format is too complicated and does not fully address the problems faced by domestic cricket.

Prominent cricket commentator and the vice president of leading club Nondescripts Cricket Club, Ranjit Fernando, said: "The number of the teams participating should be less than what it is now."

Shammi Silva, the cricket convener of Colombo Cricket Club, agrees: "The English system of reducing the number of clubs looks a good one. It appears to have helped there and here in Sri Lanka just eight clubs would have been the ideal. But if we can't do that let's accommodate about 12 clubs."

Ragama Cricket President, Roshan Abeysinghe, though, pinpointing the problem faced by administrators, believes that a two-division championship would have been politically unacceptable to the majority of the Premier League clubs.

"The structure here in Sri Lanka is very different from the state-based system in Australia and county-based system in England," he said. "The clubs here are stakeholders in the BCCSL and the board would have run into trouble if they had tried to spilt the Premier League."

According to Abeysinghe a two-division structure would have adversely the rural clubs: "Most of the clubs that would have been relegated would have been from the outstations. No one wants to play for a second division side so their top players would have probably migrated to Colombo."

"Anyway, the proposed structure is segmented and is effectively a two-division competition in everything but name," he added. "The best cricket will be played in the top segment."

The proposed re-distribution of top Sri Lankan players to the lesser-known clubs has been tentatively supported in principle by the clubs. It's full acceptance and implementation, though, in the limited time period available, would be difficult.

Mahinda Alangoda, cricket committee member, said: "SSC will be losing the most with the present system, but we are ready for it as this is for a national cause."

Former Sri Lankan vice captain and the current coach of Colts Cricket Club, Roy Dias feels that the player re-distribution would be a positive move.

"It's good to hear that some of the Sri Lankan stars may be available for rural clubs," he said. "This would increase the standard of cricket."

He warned, however, that: "One has to keep an eye in the amount of matches these stars are going to play. It would be futile if they play just two or three matches."

Roshan Mahanama, A team coach and Secretary of the Sri Lankan Players Association, reveals that the players have yet to formally discuss the proposals, but will do so shortly. He worries that the players may not show the same level of commitment if forced into new clubs.

"They have to make the Premier League more competitive and it will be difficult to do overnight," he said. "My fear is that the players will not play many games for their clubs because of international cricket and may not show the same level of commitment that they did for their old club. If this happens the whole purpose of the changes will be lost."

Ranjan Paranavithana, the former coach of the Sebestianites Cricket Club and a leading journalist, is also skeptical about the commitment of the players: "I don't think it'll work. With a busy international schedule ahead, the star players will only turn up for a few matches and not at all for the practices. Tell me the use of that."

There are also fears that the developmental efforts of the top clubs, who have nurtured and supported their players for a number of years, often from school cricket, would be wasted.

Jayanatha Kudahetty, Chairman of the SSC Cricket House Committee, has such concerns: "It is in the national interest and it fundamentally a good idea, but it must be implemented in a manner that is fair. Clubs invest considerable resources in their cricketers and it would be unfair to arbitrarily pull out players that have come up through the ranks."

He believes the clubs should no throw out the proposals, but must get together and thrash out a workable solution: "There is no reason why the clubs can't swap players according to their needs. This would give welcome opportunities to some of the players."

The board's approach so far has been statist in approach. There is no doubt that a centralised player transfer system would be complicated and could lead to frequent disputes. Fernando recommends a healthy dose of the free market.

"The ideal would have been a format like in soccer," he says. "The clubs should have the freedom to buy the players whom they want."

So, it seems, the consensus is for change, which in itself is encouraging. Attempts to force the clubs into a centralised player transfer system look doomed. Nevertheless, a voluntary system, based on board compensation to both club and player, would be much more readily accepted and represents a satisfactory compromise.

© CricInfo