India showed great character, says Kohli after series win against England

New Delhi, Jul 21: With the T20 World Cup's postponement clearing the decks for a full-fledged IPL, the glitzy event's Governing Council will meet in a week or 10 days' time to plan its next course of action, eyeing UAE as the host this year.

An IPL between September and early November has been made possible by the ICC's decision on Monday to postpone the T20 World Cup in Australia, scheduled for October-November, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

"The IPL GC will meet within a week or 10 days and all decisions (including final schedule) will be taken there. As of now, the plan is to have a full fledged IPL comprising 60 games and most likely in the UAE," Patel told PTI.

Asked about the main challenges in conducting the event in current scenario, Patel added: "Just the operational side of it. Whether you do it here or outside, it doesn't matter (with no crowds)."

The franchisees had already been working on their plans for the IPL even before the ICC announcement.

With majority of the Indian players not having access to grounds amid the pandemic, teams will need at least three to four weeks to get them match ready.

Foreign players will fly in directly to the UAE from their respective countries.

"Our players will need at least three to four weeks of training, if not more. We will finalise all our plans once the BCCI announces the dates. It looks like the IPL will be in the UAE and we are ready for that," a team owner told PTI.

Since India tour Australia for a four-Test series right after the IPL, training of the Test players is also an important issue.

Test specialists like Cheteshwar Pujara and Hanuma Vihari, who are not part of the IPL, are likely to train for the eagerly-awaited series in a bio-secure environment at the newly-renovated Motera Stadium in Ahmedabad during the time of the IPL.

A few fringe players are expected to join them at Motera along with the Indian team's support staff, which is free during the IPL.

Work from home has become the norm amid the pandemic, therefore, there is a possibility that IPL commentary will happen from the comfort of the living room, a safer and cost effective-option considering the likes of Sunil Gavaskar, who is 71, are involved.

The viewership is expected to be a record one with people craving for live cricket, something KXIP co-owner Ness Wadia has said.

However, it remains to be seen how much the broadcasters and teams are able to attract from the sponsors in the current financial climate.

More moot points and questions ahead of the IPL GC meeting:

1) More double headers expected (original schedule had only five double headers).

2) BCCI will need to provide a Standard Operating Procedure to IPL teams even though they will have their own SOPs in place.

3) Will the BCCI compensate teams for not being able to generate gate money this year?

4) Will there be virtual commentary from Star Sports? It was seen in the recent 3TC event in South Africa with the likes of Aakash Chopra, Deep Dasgupta and Irfan Pathan commentating from home.

New Delhi, Mar 13: The remaining ODI series between India and South Africa has been called-off amidst the rising concerns over the coronavirus pandemic.

"The second and third ODI between India and South Africa in Lucknow and Kolkata respectively are called off," the BCCI source told media persons.

The first match of the series was abandoned due to rain and wet outfield without a toss at Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association (HPCA) stadium on Thursday.

The second and third ODI was scheduled to be played at Lucknow and Kolkata on March 15 and 18 respectively. Earlier on Thursday, the BCCI has decided to play the remaining two ODIs behind closed doors.

"After holding discussions with the MYAS and MOHFW, the BCCI on Thursday announced that the remaining two One-day Internationals (ODIs) of the three-match series of South Africa tour of India, 2020, will be played without any public gathering, including spectators," the BCCI had said in a statement.

The Union Health and Family Welfare Ministry has advised all the federations to avoid large gatherings.

World Health Organisation (WHO) on Wednesday had declared the coronavirus outbreak a 'pandemic' and expressed deep concerns.

The coronavirus disease was first detected in Wuhan in China's Hubei province, in late December, and has since spread worldwide.

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.