Lalit Modi: "What we have been able to do is, we used to have cricketing fans, and now we have got glamour and Bollywood fans" © AFP Enlarge

Harsha Bhogle: Lalit, you know that you have created this huge entity in world cricket that has split the world of cricket wide open.

It's polarised everybody. Some people think that it is the greatest thing that has ever happened to the game. Some would think that you are this big, bad ogre who is out to destroy everything that cricket stood for. One of the things that people are worried about is that this new generation is going to watch just Twenty20.

When we spoke to Rahul Dravid, a couple of weeks ago, he said that it's okay for people who are 20-21, but what about kids who are 11 or 12 or 13 now - will they grow up thinking that 20-overs cricket is the only cricket that matters?

Lalit Modi: I don't think that is true, because you see the younger generation was anyway mostly moving away from the game of cricket. We have brought them back into the game of cricket. They were diverting their attention to football and other sports. Here we are not only able to retain them but also add more. So I think the pie is only going to increase.

If you look at the size of the audiences we have for Twenty20 or ODIs or even Test matches, we will see - only the time can tell this - that the share of voice for each one of the format is going to grow.

HB: Sanjay, you have been a lover of Test cricket as well, and Test cricket has produced some fantastic series of late. But is Test cricket in trouble or are people just reacting too much to this IPL, which is this big bad boy on the stage taking every one on?

Sanjay Manjrekar: Well, at this stage I don't think anyone is sure where cricket is heading. Whether Twenty20 is going to be the only cricket after 50 years. Will Test cricket survive? What about 50-overs cricket, the third brand of cricket? So nobody knows where this is going.

The fact is that the IPL, at the moment, is the most popular cricket product we have. And it's something we've got to respect. It has also shown Test cricket and 50-overs cricket what they are lacking.

I think it's important to have more and more people getting interested in sport, more and more countries getting interested in the sport. For the last 10-15 years, we haven't seen too many countries seriously getting into cricket. So that tells you a bit about 50-overs cricket and Test match cricket. Maybe Twenty20 and IPL can start doing that.

HB: Lalit, of all the things that you need to take care of, is security the biggest concern? Given the part of the world we live in, given that we are always next door to turmoil?

LM: It is a big concern without doubt, and we have to take it seriously. Security is increasingly becoming an issue all over the world, not only in India. We must be conscious of the fact that security is something that we need to deal with, not only for the players but for the fans. We need to make sure that the people watching, or playing the game are in a secure environment.

HB: Are you satisfied with where it is at the moment, because the players' associations around the world don't particularly enjoy all that has happened. They think you should be taking to them as representatives of the players.

LM: You know, we do that. Not every country has a players' association. So as a policy we decided that we are going to talk to the boards, and all the boards have their players' association. It is important for us to be able to communicate in the same language to all the players. So we give the communication to the boards and then they pass it on. We are not telling the board to not to pass it on to their players' associations or the players.

SM: Let me make one point. India, I think, is more vulnerable to security threats than some of the other countries, and so that's where I think IPL has a problem. It's a highly visible, very popular, product, and if anyone wants to make a point - say a politician or any other element that wants attention, getting it through the IPL is the best way. So that is one of the threats that IPL will always have, because it is such a valuable commodity.

HB: I am sure Lalit is aware that sometimes when you become too big, you attract all kinds of people. But Lalit, there is one set of people who are very happy with you, because you tend to evoke strong opinions. These are the people in the US, who crave cricket and this YouTube deal is going to be fantastic for them.

LM: I think the YouTube deal is going to be good for everybody around the world who can't watch live cricket in countries where there is no broadcast, and that was the prime focus for that. We wanted to make the signal available to every country in the world, and to every person in the world. Many people, even your friends in the different parts of the world, would have asked where it is showing. You will see IPL being broadcast in the main Test-playing nations, but in the majority of the countries around the world one would never be able to see the live match. So the YouTube deal actually takes us further to that level. The US, without doubt, is a growing market. It's a big market and we definitely want to tap that market.

HB: Are you going to go there with the IPL sometime?

LM: I don't think we will go with the IPL, but we will take IPL teams and play sort of tournaments or exhibition games to start with. Play within the gaps in the calendar in the year and try and build a fan base.

HB: I am going to address this first to Lalit and then to you, Sanjay. One of the reasons why people look at IPL as this threatening monster is this marriage of commerce and sport. Because traditionally we have always looked at our sport as a very genteel thing, with commerce always kept beyond the boundary line. Now commerce seems to intrude, in their view, upon cricket, and we saw that in the commentary, we saw that in the packages, we saw that everywhere. Is that the way ahead Lalit, for the game?

LM: See, without the commerce no sport is going to survive. You look at soccer, you look at rugby, you look at tennis. Commerce has always been there. Cricket was the poor cousin. And if you need to grow the game and build modern infrastructure, you need commerce. We are always being compared for the modern infrastructure with the NFL or the MLB or the EPL. Or even, as a matter of fact, cricket stadiums around the world, and it's all to do with commerce at the end of the day. So, commerce is always going to play an important role in the development of the sport.

HB: I am glad you mentioned that, because our stadiums have not always provided the best experience. Sanjay, now take off your cricket player hat and put on your broadcaster/media hat …

SM: [Laughs] That hat has been on for a long time now, really. I am more a media person today than a cricketer.

HB: So this marriage, intrusion is probably a strong word, but this intermingling of commerce and cricket, as visibly as this... what do you think?

SM: It's a fact of the changing world. India has changed in the 19 years, since we liberalised. It's something that we've got to accept.

We don't want Test cricket to just survive. I want Test cricket to thrive and become commercially viable as well. At the moment IPL and Twenty20 cricket are commercially viable, and I don't think it should be looked down upon as something that's bad. The challenge, especially in India, is to not go overboard. I like the commerce angle, I like the financial side of the things, but to get obsessed with making a lot of money at the cost of how the game is coming to the television audiences or the viewers…

LM: Test cricket is, actually, the highest-paying entity for the board. Test cricket is actually our bread and butter, which people don't understand. We are never going to compromise on Test cricket. In fact, our viewership is high for Test cricket. When I talked about doing something for Test cricket, it's for other countries where Test cricket is going down. In India, our ratings are going up. We are tracking that year by year, it's going much better for us, and in fact we get paid highest for Test cricket.

SM: I am a little surprised with that information. I always thought that 50-overs cricket and Twenty20 cricket got more eyeballs than Test cricket.

LM: Yes, Twenty20 cricket is getting more eyeballs than Test cricket. But cumulatively, if you take five days and you compare that to a single game (of ODI or Twenty20)... yes, on a five-day basis you have more eyeballs without doubt. If you look at the comparison over the last few years, it has actually grown in the last year and a half.

HB: This whole business of glamour, Lalit. Bringing in the Shahrukhs, the Preity Zintas, Kareena Kapoors and now Saif Ali Khans... do you think it's creating an impression around the world that the glamour component is starting to take over the cricketing component? Forgot to mention Shilpa Shetty from Rajasthan Royals...

LM: You see, out here it is a totally different issue. What we have been able to do is, we used to have cricketing fans and now we have got glamour and Bollywood fans. What we have been able to do is expand the fans for cricketing purposes by trying to get those other fans inside. That's how the pie increased for us. If you look at it, it was positioned straight, at prime time on television, addressing the whole house, and the housewife and the kids.

We are a male-dominated game, and if you look at the statistics in the past - it was 96 to 97% male dominated. And if you look at the statistics now, you will see a lot more children and women involved in the game. It's only because of this factor that you have been able to get them into the game, and they love the game now, and they become addicts of the game.

SM: Yes. All you have to do is be alongside a cricket stadium before an IPL game and look at the queues. And you will generally find a lot of young boys, girls, teenagers… queuing up to watch the game.

The glamour element - that is the thing I worry about. With any Indian television product, we have a tendency to go a little overboard. We are a land of excesses. In the first couple of years, I think when the IPL came onto the scene, there were few sceptics including me, and then suddenly we saw this concept touch the heart of the people. The Shahrukh Khan element helped, Preity Zinta helped, and now you are seeing more and more film stars coming in, obviously because they get the platform to, almost, advertise themselves.

If there is a situation, five or six years later, that every team has one Bollywood ambassador, that, for me, is slight going over the top. Not as a cricketer but even as a television viewer.

HB: I guess that will be a challenge, but the moment the game starts it all becomes cricket. Having said that, I have always been this slightly old-fashioned cricket lover, but to me, if you ask me what were my 10 biggest moments of IPL 1, one of them, I don't know in what position, will be Shahrukh, just off the boundary area at Kolkata singing "Korbo Lorbo Jeetbo Re". and the entire Eden Gardens singing with him. You don't get that often.

SM: Or on the railing in Bangalore [during the first IPL game in the first year], almost falling over. That really helped introduce the IPL to people who are not into cricket that much.

HB: Lalit, you think you can really compete with the EPL? It's an old product; a more global game.

LM: Yes, that is our target but we have a long way to go to get there. They have a long tradition, and they have built fans consistently over time. There are a few billion people around the world who understand the game of cricket, and I think we have a very good chance to take it to that level.

HB: Everyone always asks you the difficult question, and for some reason you tend to attract an attack on yourself most times. But here is something that you said that I enjoyed. During the EPL, for whatever happens, you know which teams are going to finish in top four. This year a Manchester City might threaten, but eventually you know which team in going to finish in the top four. Whereas in the IPL you've got the salary cap - that is clearly the American influence on you telling, isn't it?

LM: It's a combination of the two. One of the fundamentals that we built the league on is that there needs to be unpredictability. That was one of the key things in our vision document at that time. How do we build on that? How do we make sure that there is unpredictability? At the end of the day you are going to have strong owners and you might not have strong owners. You may have fans on one side, you may not have fans on the other side. How do we ensure that there is unpredictability? That's why we put in systems in place - an auction system, a cap system to ensure that. And fortunately for us the foreign players coming in and out of the tournament also creates the unpredictability. A long as there is unpredictability, you've got fans who are going to be interested to watch more and more. It will be evenly panned out. That has happened for us, and that helps the ratings, viewership, and also helps build fans for all teams alike. So you don't have an Aston Villa and Manchester United on one side.

SM: Let's not forget that Twenty20 in itself is a very unpredictable cricket format.

LM: That's right, absolutely.

HB: Pakistan won the World Twenty20, and from what happened in Pakistan two months before that, who would have tipped them to become the champions? But that's how the game is.

HB: Lalit, there is one thing that worries people. As the games get closer, inherently, the old fear of match-fixing is always around, isn't there? And some people think that Twenty20 is almost made for it because you can camouflage attempts like that rather easily. Is that something that bothers the governing council - that unlike Test cricket or one-day cricket, this seems almost easier to manage?

LM: Every sport has to worry about that, and if you don't then we are fooling ourselves. Match-fixing, betting… is an area of big worry, and that's why an anti-corruption unit is in place, and they have very stringent controls. We need to be very focused on that, and work with the authorities to stem it.

HB: Lalit, is the six-week window going to be a limitation to the IPL? Really, you've been told that six weeks is all you have in the calendar and do what you want in the six weeks?

LM: We are going to have the current limitation (in the IPL's duration), and we are happy to live with that.

HB: There are some people who think… if you want to take it forward like the EPL, make it a longer tournament with more games?

LM: Then (if we make it a longer tournament) you are going to start to hurt the other forms of the game. We chose the window specifically to be off-season in India, April-May are typically off season in India. Traditionally they have been off-seasons, and that the reason we choose it, and I don't think we are going to be able to change that.

SM: But I hope that changes. Lalit, I know, at this stage, it is difficult to get it changed. I would like to see these kind of tournaments - IPL, Champions League, maybe England if they start their own league - get more time. And the international cricket has been excessive in the last 10-15 years, we have certainly gone overboard with the number if matches. The India-Sri Lanka one-day series, nobody knows the result of that series. People know who won the Champions League, they know who won the IPL. So perhaps, maybe not in the next 3-4 years, international cricket gets toned down a little bit. You have the world events, but the IPLs, the Champions Leagues, and the Twenty20 leagues of the respective countries get a longer period for their tournaments.

HB: Lalit, in a sense IPL is your baby. You are the poster boy of the IPL. People are coming in, the investors are coming in based on the track record that the IPL has set up over the last two years. But there is a general feeling that the IPL starts and ends with Lalit Modi, and it's not going down too well with a lot of other people. So what happens if tomorrow Lalit Modi is not with the IPL, is that something that you wake up in the middle of the night thinking about?

LM: I do, I think about it all the time, that's why we are trying to put in a professional organisation. We are only two years old, we have some very, very good people in there, and whether I'm there or not, they have learnt very well and I'm sure they will be able to take it on.

HB: But you would want to be, won't you? It's your child after all …

LM: Of course, you want it to survive past anybody. That's how you leave a legacy. That's why you build an organisation that is not person based but is able to survive on it's own, go forward on it's own. And I think we are getting there very soon.

HB: This whole thing about the new franchises… $225 million, I know you are going to turn around and say we thought $50 million was a great deal when it happened. But with $225, do you see financial viability coming in? Because the other risk is, that the clubs might go the way of the EPL clubs - perennially in debt, and waiting for someone to keep bailing then out; and then you get into dodgy ownership and things like that.

LM: We wouldn't want that (clubs getting into a debt trap). When we did the 50m numbers, we projected certain revenue going forward, 80% of the revenue (we earn) goes back to the franchises. When we did our numbers, it was on a business plan. Our business plan is already four times of what we had planned then. So automatically there would be a value that would go up.

HB: So do you sit back and say, I wish I had made it $115 in the first year?

LM: No, no, the idea is that everybody should survive and make money on it, then only can somebody grow, because of the confidence. Whatever we have done, we have no regrets.

SM: And I think the first year there was risk, right? Lalit, nobody expected IPL to be as big as it was. First time Indian viewers were tested with a domestic championship. We know how we look at domestic cricket in India, and this was very much a domestic championship with a few foreign players thrown in. Different concept, and it was a risk at that time.

LM: It's always a risk. It was a very big risk, and we took a big punt.

HB: There will be 94 games next year …. you are worried about there being too much over just six-seven weeks?

LM: Yes, a little bit on the travel side. It's only over seven weeks, instead of six. Actually it's over 51 days instead of 46 days….

HB: You've always had these numbers on tip of your fingers don't you?

LM: Because we have done the numbers, we have done the planning, we have done the modelling, we have done the schedule… we just have to announce it.

HB: We are all waiting to see what happens - 94 games, 10 franchises… I have a slightly personal question for you. We are now three-four days away from the next IPL, but the talk that is going around is bout the franschises, it's about commerce, it's about rights, it's about players' association... not hearing enough about the cricket in IPL yet, Lalit?

LM: You will hear about cricket, when the cricket begins. That's the only form that can demonstrate it. We have had best cricketing moments…

HB: Okay, so tell me which is the best team, Lalit? We can't let you go without getting your point of view.

LM: It's very difficult. Harsha, you are a cricketer. I don't know cricket as well as you do ….

SM: Lalit, that's the first time Harsha has been called a cricketer on a cricket show

HB: Good on you Lalit…

LM: I mean he is an expert by now…

HB: Don't change that, Lalit. The only people who knew about my cricket-playing days were the guys I played university cricket with in Hyderabad.

I think Lalit, to be honest the cricket will take care of itself. I am not as worried about the cricket. There is only one thing that I am praying for the IPL, which is that on the last day of the IPL we've had tension free, interruption free, terrorist free IPL …

LM: We all hope that, and looking forward to that.

HB: Lalit, thank you for joining us, and hopefully we will get a great IPL.

LM: Thank you.