The IPL auction 2011 January 27, 2011

Mumbai unhappy with change in auction norms

26

Mumbai Indians have sought an explanation from the IPL regarding a last-minute change in the auction procedure, which they feel compromised the "level-playing field" for all franchises.

In a two-page letter (a copy of which is available with ESPNcricinfo), Mumbai referred specifically to the clause in the 'Player Auction Briefing' dated December 17, 2010, which stated that the auction of player sets would occur in random order. But on the eve of the auction (held on January 8 and 9), two hours before the final auction briefing, the franchises were sent an email containing an amendment which stated that the random order would be replaced by pre-decided 'order of the auction list'.

The clause was in paragraph 18 of the original Player Auction Briefing, which read: "Players in the auction would be divided into 'sets'. The initial sets would comprise marquee players. Subsequent sets would each comprise players with the same specialism (batsmen, bowlers, allrounders, wicketkeepers). The order of these subsequent sets would be determined by random draw that will take place in the auction room."

According to Nikhil Meswani of Indiawin Sports Private Ltd (parent company of Mumbai), who signed the letter, there was a sudden and unexplained change made to the above clause the day before the auction. "The final sentence of paragraph 18 is to be deleted. The sets will be presented to the auction in the order of the auction list." Meswani noted that this was a "fundamental change" to the auction process.

"The primary purpose of deciding the order of the auction (whether of subsequent sets or the players within the sets) through random draw in the auction room in presence of the bidders is to ensure transparency and a level playing field to all the franchisees so that all the franchisees are not only privy to the process but are treated in the same manner and no particular team receives preferred treatment," Meswani said.

According to him any such change warranted strong and justifiable reasons, which he felt were not there or explained. To clarify the matter, Mumbai have asked the IPL governing council for ten bits of information including documents.

Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • sr_buddha on January 30, 2011, 9:14 GMT

    WOW Mr.Inidan Rulez, What an logic man?

    First read your comment below before criticizing others,

    "Now this wily fox (CSK) dont bid for B1,B2 as they know that there is another batsman B3 who is going to come up sometime later in the day.They save their money and then get B3 for a cheap price as the other members have either exhausted the money on B1,B2 or have filled their desired quota..."

    Haaaa...SO only CSK knows that the badri, murali, balaji, bolligner are still to be auctioned??!! As per your logic the other teams thought B1 and B2 are better players than B3(ex:badri) so they bidded for them and got them, enjoy madi..that's it..FULL STOP... Now what's all this new song for... To be frank, expect bolligner, murali and aswin, other CSK retained players are not in the wish list of any other team... Now they feel only jealous on CSK as they retained most of its team which the other teams failed by their miscalculations...

  • dummy4fb on January 30, 2011, 6:23 GMT

    anyway a franchise owner should not be any official of BCCI. the CSK got the advantage by this because they were able almost able to retain their team

  • harshacc on January 30, 2011, 5:55 GMT

    @Indian_Rules. This logic works both ways.If other teams do not get the players of their choice they will bid even harder to get B3 in case they missed out on B1 , B2.Everyone knows B1,B2 and B3 are up for Auction.Everyone knows you need 7 Indian players and at least 3-4 of those Indian players have to be reasonably good/recognized players That CSK wanted to retain the whole team was a known fact.In fact RCB gave up bidding on Ashwin and got back in it just to hike the rate.Kochi went for the Badri and jacked his auction rate The auction was cheap and denigrating but it was fair

  • Vatto on January 29, 2011, 20:01 GMT

    see the post auction interview given to espn (in cricinfo) by Nita Ambani. There was not an iota of doubt or upset... She was as happy as ever and no points did come out. So this is all an agenda driven by none other than mr.taint lalit modi who is angry that things go well here...

  • Indian_Rules on January 29, 2011, 17:31 GMT

    for all those who are saying that the auctions were fair.. let me tell u something which might ring some bells in your ears..suppose a team wanted a batsman.they had 3 options B1,B2,B3.B1 comes up for auction.The teams bid for him and buy him so as not to lose out on a batsman as they are not very sure they will get B2/B# as others might outbid them.Now this wily fox (CSK) dont bid for B1,B2 as they know that there is another batsman B3 who is going to come up sometime later in the day.They save their money and then get B3 for a cheap price as the other members have either exhausted the money on B1,B2 or have filled their desired quota... If after this explanation also we have some foolish fans who simply blindly wanna support CSK and say that the auctions were fair.. Well i dont have any words of wisdom for them... stay in darkness and keep supporting those cement guys and Mr Tamil Nadu

  • Samgen on January 29, 2011, 17:23 GMT

    You just have to look at the other sports administrators in the country to know how honestly they run their organizations and don't take undue advantage of their positions. I don't expect people running IPL to have any different standards. We all know how our policians become very successful businessmen and their businesses do extreemly well once they are in power. Because they are in a position to make 'smart' decisions..they do. enough said.

  • Vatto on January 29, 2011, 10:52 GMT

    @all against csk or srini: guys... dont talk something that makes no point. The mumbai indians got whom they wanted. A good day before the auction, it was announced how the players would be put up for sale... So if you had found somethin fishy, which im sure there isnt any, you could have escalated before the auction. Mumbai has almost the same eleven, or even stronger having rohit sharma and symonds and the uncapped players, and there is no point for any doubts arising here... The complain is as thou srinivasan had hid some players from the auction and when everyones purse has gone empty, presented them to CSK... Total rubbish... MI and RCB are havin some agenda/mistrust against srinivasan and this shouldnt be a way of expressin it... If at all there is a debate, that shud be against the marqee players... How du define them??? Someones gotto tell me if Irfan in any way is better than Steyn???

  • Mumbaikar11 on January 29, 2011, 9:19 GMT

    Mumbai (and all other franchisee) have rights to ask justification about last minute change made to auction procedure. Its about 'system', it has to be transparent. No doubt CSK is good team, but there is huge scope for doubt in this case about the owner (not players). N Srinivasan is Franchise and at the same time governing council member, definitely his staff would have got to know about rules change much more earlier and got time to prepare accordingly. If they had changed the rules month before no one would have objected.. but it could be the case of unfair use of power.. and has to be challenged. If IPL governing council is right in their position. they shouldn't have problem in explaining and justifying the change

  • harshacc on January 29, 2011, 7:29 GMT

    if you want to buy a player you wait till that player comes up and you keep some cash for him.like most of the teams that did for capped indian bowlers.Its not very hard to do.Look i dont like N.Srinivasan being on the GC when he is the owner of a team.It is a conflict of interest but i fail to see how the auction was unfair.It was mebbe unfair to RR and KXIP coz they could not retain players but thats a different matter altogether.Same way for uncapped Indian players.It leaves a lot of unofficial dealings.It shud be kept clean,But i fail to see how the order of players getting auctioned was important

  • VISHNU1990 on January 29, 2011, 6:44 GMT

    guys.....kool_indian seems NOT TO BE AGAINST CSk but against Mr.N.SRINIVASAN who s currently influencing both BCCI n IPL....he s the one who made modi to exit...but he too belongs to the same genre as modi....it may be modi or srinivasan,politics s not be influencing the game ..thats my point.... and CSK is not the whole best team in the ipl....othrs r ther too..

  • No featured comments at the moment.