The International Cricket Council (ICC) is set to discuss proposals that would bring top franchise leagues under a common rule set. The talks are expected at a meeting in Bali this weekend. One proposal, a cap on overseas players in a playing XI, could affect ILT20 and Major League Cricket (MLC) the most.
Why the ICC Is Reviewing Franchise Leagues
Franchise cricket now runs on a patchwork of league-specific regulations. Each tournament sets its own playing conditions, overseas player limits and sponsorship norms. The ICC is weighing whether a shared framework is needed.
Review Group Set Up in July
In July, the Council formed a franchise leagues review group to examine every running franchise league. The group has since submitted several proposals, which top ICC officials are now considering. The Council must decide whether to adopt any or all of them.
Key Proposals Submitted by the Review Group
According to a Cricinfo report, four proposals stand out. They cover player eligibility, oversight, sponsorship and sanction fees. The table below summarises them.
| Proposal | Area | Potential Effect |
|---|
| Cap on overseas players in an XI | Team composition | Standardised limit across leagues |
| Expanded ICC power to review and audit a sanction | Governance | Greater ICC oversight |
| Ban on betting companies or their surrogates as sponsors | Commercial | Tighter sponsorship rules |
| Fee for granting league sanction | Finance | New cost for league organisers |
The meeting is the first major platform where these ideas are likely to be debated. No final decision has been confirmed.
Overseas Player Limits: ILT20 vs MLC
The overseas player cap is the proposal with the clearest numerical impact. ILT20 currently allows up to nine overseas players in an XI, including one from an Associate Member. MLC allows up to six.
| League | Max Overseas Players in XI | Share of XI | Minimum Local/Non-Overseas Slots |
|---|
| ILT20 (UAE) | 9 | 81.8% | 2 |
| MLC (USA) | 6 | 54.5% | 5 |
What the Numbers Show
ILT20 permits overseas players to fill more than four-fifths of an XI. MLC's limit is lower, but overseas players can still make up more than half of a side. Any uniform cap would require a larger adjustment from ILT20 than from MLC.
Contrast With Leagues Promoting Local Talent
The IPL and Big Bash League (BBL) aim to grow their businesses while promoting local talent, with a limited number of foreign players in their XIs. ILT20 and MLC lean on overseas cricketers to attract fans. The review group's proposal would narrow this structural gap between league models.
Commercial Implications for Owners and Investors
A major share of league earnings comes from star attractions. The USA and the UAE lack star power in their national teams, so these leagues rely on stars from other nations. A tighter cap could reduce the number of marquee names in each lineup.
The positions of investors and owners will be important to watch. Some may argue that a cap could weaken broadcast and sponsorship appeal. Others may see it as a way to build regional talent pipelines over time.
Regional Player Development
If a cap is introduced, both leagues would need to give regional cricketers more playing time. That could raise the profile of domestic players in the USA and the UAE. The long-term effect on performance standards would depend on how quickly local talent develops.
What to Watch Next
The Bali meeting will show whether the proposals move forward as guidelines or binding rules. Key points to track are the size of any cap, how it applies to each league and whether sponsorship restrictions are adopted. The ICC is not obliged to accept all four proposals.
| Decision Point | Status |
|---|
| Review group formed | July |
| Proposals submitted | Four key proposals reported |
| ICC meeting | Bali, this weekend |
| Final decision | Pending |
Until the ICC rules, leagues will continue under their own regulations. The outcome could set the template for how franchise cricket is governed globally.