The IPL mess

How Kochi finally claimed Modi

The Kochi Tuskers Kerala played in just one IPL. But their short stint was controversial and was a catalyst to Lalit Modi's dramatic exit from the BCCI

Amol Karhadkar

September 7, 2013

Comments: 5 | Text size: A | A

Shashi Tharoor, a minister in the Indian government, chats with Lalit Modi, Delhi Daredevils v Kolkata Knight Riders, IPL, Feroz Shah Kotla, March 29, 2010
The controversy over the Kochi Tuskers Kerala franchise was catalyst to Lalit Modi's exit from the BCCI and Shashi Tharoor's resignation as a minister in the federal government © Indian Premier League
Enlarge

Kochi Tuskers Kerala's controversial stint in the Indian Premier League lasted barely a year. But during their one-season appearance in the IPL, the owners of the franchise indirectly ended up playing catalyst to the dramatic exit of Lalit Modi. It was a saga that involved allegations of threats and intimidation, a curious case of a reprimand that wasn't, and led to the downfall of the former IPL chairman and the resignation of a federal minister.

In its inquiry report, the BCCI's special disciplinary committee, which was appointed to probe charges against Modi, details the alleged irregularities that he committed from the time the IPL's governing council approved the draft of the Invitiation to Tender (ITT) in December 2009 - for adding two more teams to the league - to Modi's eventual suspension in April 2010. The case of Kochi's entry into the IPL constitutes three of the eleven charges pressed against Modi - rigging bids, arm-twisting franchises and bringing the BCCI into disrepute through his comments on Twitter.

The most intriguing events in the five-month period took place over a span of six days, beginning on April 11, 2010. On that day, hours after signing the franchise agreement with the owners of the Kochi franchise, Modi revealed the franchise's shareholding patterns on Twitter. Among the shareholders, 4.75% of the sweat equity was owned by Sunanda Pushkar - identified by the Kochi franchise as a "businesswoman who had interests in the Gulf" - who was, at the time a partner of the then junior federal minister Shashi Tharoor. The two subsequently married, but the controversy forced Tharoor to resign his post in the government, following allegations of holding a hidden stake in a franchise based in his home state.

While explaining Modi's defence in the 134-page report, the three-member disciplinary committee observes: "He (Modi) stated that he had informed the President (then BCCI president Shashank Manohar) of there being sweat equity in Kochi franchise. On the instructions of the President, the Agreement was signed. Mr Modi enquired from the representatives about the identity of the person to whom the said equity was received. Mr Modi was informed that the owner of the said equity was a lady called Ms Sunanda Pushkar. When pressed for further details of her identity, Mr Modi received evasive replies one of which was that she was a businesswoman with interests in Gulf. At that Mr Modi's concern at the lack of clear identity of the sweat equity holder were heightened. When Mr Modi insisted on getting a clear answer, he received a call from Mr Tharoor telling him not to enquire into the identity of the sweat equity holder. However, as instructed by the President the Agreement with the Kochi franchise was signed on 11.4.2010. Later, on 11.4.2010 itself, Mr Modi tweeted the ownership details of the Kochi franchise on social media."

Hours after the tweet, Vivek Venugopal, one of the members of the Kochi consortium, filed a written complaint to Manohar against Modi, requesting him to: "immediately 1) instruct Mr Modi to retract the statements made in the media as well on Twitter, 2) reveal/ disclose similar information for all participating teams on his Twitter account, 3) apologise for the communications given in the media."

Matters came to a head on April 16. The Kochi franchise alleged to the BCCI that, at a meeting at the Four Seasons hotel in Mumbai (a meeting Modi has denied), Modi had threatened the representatives of Kochi franchise to "give up the franchise failing which: a) he would remove the players' spending cap which would send the players' cost spiraling; b) intentionally delay the construction of the Kochi stadium by taking in PIL and environmental litigation; c) identify stadiums in remote and infeasible locations like Guwahati and Bhiwani till the Kochi stadium was ready; and d) introduce a player retention policy that would allow the existing franchise to retain up to six existing players thus reducing the options of hiring top players."

Based on the facts that were established, the committee concluded: "In view of the aforesaid, we hold that despite being the successful bidder, the act of Mr Modi in arm twisting the Kochi franchise to leave the franchise was an act likely to be detrimental of the interest of the BCCI and endangered the harmony and affected the reputation of the BCCI."

However, the report suggests that the seeds of the controversy were sown in the preceding months. On December 17, 2009, the governing council approved the draft ITT documents for inducting two additional teams; however, the final ITT had two clauses inserted by Modi. These "onerous conditions", as the report called them, were: the bidder should have a net worth of US$1bn and must provide a bank guarantee of Rs 460 crores [$100 million].

Modi contended that he added the clauses to "protect BCCI's interest". But the board contended he was "rigging bids" in order to suit the Videocon Group and Adani Group, both of whom had made their intentions to bid for new teams for a group. The two new clauses ruled out most of the other prospective bidders, and some of them, including the Sahara Group and the Jagran Group, complained to Manohar, an eminent lawyer who advises the BCCI's legal arm along with Arun Jaitley, immediately after the ITT was floated on February 22.

 
 
The report suggests that the seeds of the controversy were sown in the preceding months. On December 17, 2009, the governing council approved the draft ITT documents for inducting two additional teams; however, the final ITT had two clauses inserted by Modi. These "onerous conditions", as the report called them, were: the bidder should have a net worth of US$1bn and must provide a bank guarantee of Rs 460 crores [$100 million].
 

As a result, instead of the bid documents being submitted and opened - as announced earlier - on March 7, the BCCI issued fresh tenders, quashing the earlier process. In fact, according to the minutes of the governing council meeting on March 7, "The president further explained that he had further received complaints from GC members in regard to these conditions and Sahara, who are the sponsors of the Indian Cricket team and pay the BCCI Rs 500 crore per annum, have deliberately been kept out of the tendering process due to some of the above conditions and they have written to him saying if they were good enough to pay 500 crores to BCCI how can they not be worth to pay 150 crores a year (US$30 million) even if they were to have bid US$300 million. Similarly, other companies like Jagran group have also expressed the same concern that it is a deliberate attempt to keep most companies out."

In his defence, Modi said he had cleared these conditions with Manohar on the phone and only after that did he put out the tender. Manohar, according to minutes of the BCCI, conceded Modi had sought his approval in general but he [Manohar] had not read the document. "On the reading of the document and receiving the complaints, he is of the firm view that the said ITT should be cancelled under clause 11.4 of the ITT."

There's an aside here: at that March 7 meeting, according to its minutes, Manohar reprimanded Modi "for incorporating such onerous and unreasonable conditions in the ITT." However, Sunil Gavaskar, a member of the governing council, later requested that the word "reprimand" should not be recorded as Modi had already accepted his censure in public. The word was deleted but the charge against Modi, of adding two clauses without permission, stuck. He used the deletion of "reprimand" in his defence, as vindication of his action, but the committee preferred to see it as "an act of courtesy at the behest of a colleague."

As a result, while finding Modi guilty of rigging bids, the committee concluded: "The object of such unreasonable conditions was to exclude healthy competition and favour two bidders which is evident from the fact that only two bids were received pursuant to the ITT."

It was clear that Kochi entered the IPL on the back of a controversy and a relationship with Modi gone wrong. The former IPL chairman, on the other hand, staunchly defended his actions. "The fact that Kochi franchisee defaulted in paying even the bank guarantee to the BCCI and was terminated and even Sahara has said no to further participation in IPL shows that only cash-rich entities could have had the stomach to sustain the initial losses and could have continued in long run. The termination/ pulling out of these two franchises has taken a toll on the brand value of IPL," Modi said

Amol Karhadkar is a correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Amol Karhadkar

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by jimbond on (September 8, 2013, 2:14 GMT)

This showed that Modi was smart in building power based relationships but was naive in dealing with others. The. links with BJP leaders like Vasundhara Raje and Jaitley and Narendra Modi, was useful in making him powerful, but he was foolish to make enemies out of Tharoor and Pawar (who were if nothing else- ministers of the govt of India). He may have won round one (making Tharoor resign), but Tharoor won the next few rounds. He is married to his love, is back as a Minister and Modi is banished out of the country. Modi's experience is a useful case in use of power.

Posted by scarab666 on (September 8, 2013, 0:22 GMT)

Cricket followers outside of India couldn't care less about the IPL anymore, its lost its appeal. ODI's lost their appeal mainly thru oversaturation and T20 is going down the same path. Whats killing the game of T20 is..............money,paying players ridiculous amounts of cash for say 6 weeks play for players who just don't warrant such money being paid to them. Take Dan Christian's $900k for what ???

Posted by Cricketfan11111 on (September 7, 2013, 9:38 GMT)

No more new teams. 8 established teams from IPL-1 are just fine. Both new teams KTK and PWI couldn't fit in. BCCI should concentrate purely on cricket and money will naturally follow. Modi is a businessman. Not a cricketer. That is why he is out of cricket administration now.

Posted by   on (September 7, 2013, 9:14 GMT)

IPL Governing council should reinstate Kochi Tuskers Kerala for being thrown out without a fault from the franchisee. With IPL a tremendous success for the game of cricket, the governing council should consider the below points from IPL VII to promote the game of cricket.

1. Maximise the number of teams to 12. 2. Mandatory inclusion of players from countries like, Zimbabwe, Ireland, canada, Afganistan, Kenya, Netherlands. 3. 4 to 6 games to be played daily in multiple venues. 4. Matches to be telecast in multiple channels. 5. Restrict overseas players to 4, but mandatory one player from ICC Associate country.

The above would not only popularize the game, but also increase revenues to the BCCI and demonstrates to the cricketing world, that the surplus from the IPL is re invested back to the game. Though the number of matches would increase, by playing 6 games a day, the duration of the tournament would be cut short.

Posted by   on (September 7, 2013, 8:14 GMT)

y terminate is the final option...????? IPL 1-3 were the highlight of its existence... after that.. nobody liked the idea of 2 more teams, more matches and especially... a fresh AUCTION....... all this did was to give financial benefits to BCCI... but was gone??? BCCI ignored it..... The Legacy was gone...... Our favourite players going to other teams... caused a lack of interest.. and downfall of IPL.. and now that teams have become a part of IPL family.... YOU DECIDE TO TERMINATE THEM???? that's the last thing this tournament wanted..... We all loved DECCAN CHARGERS, (nt Sunrisers of course).. we all liked Pune and some pplz loved Kochi... but it doesn't mean u throw them out.. If this were the thing.. terminate CSK and RR as welll... y to include them...???? They also. failed outside cricket..... now.. they are 8 teams.. - 7 original and 1 Hyderabad Duplicate.... 8 original cities... so.. plz.. let it be that way,. dnt ruin it again.. by adding 1-2 more teams... that's a humble req.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Amol KarhadkarClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days