Rahul Bhattacharya
Author of Pundits from Pakistan: On Tour with India, 2003-04
Mint Lounge

Aggravated by advertising

Watching the IPL is like encountering one of those post-modern narratives that seeks to satirise consumerism

Rahul Bhattacharya

March 29, 2010

Comments: 151 | Text size: A | A

Amit Mishra bagged two crucial wickets to restrict Royal Challengers Bangalore in their chase, Royal Challengers Bangalore v Delhi Daredevils, IPL, Bangalore, March 25, 2010
...And there are plenty more logos on the back © Indian Premier League
Enlarge
Related Links
Tanya's Take : Greedy or good?
News : IPL player auction purse hiked to $7 million
Gideon Haigh : Really, Warnie?
Series/Tournaments: Indian Premier League
Teams: India

Tweeting after watching the Indian telecast of the IPL for the first time, cricket's most lovable commentator, David Lloyd, fell foul of Indian fans. He thought it a fantastic tournament, but the coverage "nonsense", "unwatchable", "just ads and daft interviews". Two years ago I would have agreed with Lloyd. By now I've resigned myself to the understanding that there is no separation of the "tournament" and "coverage".

Watching the IPL is like encountering one of those post-modern narratives that seeks to satirise consumerism. Surely, one thinks, this must be a critique of the contemporary world and Lalit Modi not its marketing whiz but its artistic seer.

The player outfits look like a collage of flyers. Excluding the team crest, they wear two logos on the front, two on the "non-leading arm", two on the "leading arm", and a big one at the back. The trousers sport a logo on each leg. The helmets and caps have one at the rear and another on the side. The umpires are similarly draped, though they haven't such a variety.

The beautiful baize of the field is defaced by anywhere between five and eight giant logos, one or two on the straights, and the remaining square. Inside the advertising boundary boards, the boundary triangles carry branding. So do the sightscreens; so do the stumps. The fibreglass of the dugouts is tattooed in logos. There is a blimp in the sky. A giant screen constantly fizzes with advertisements. The banners in the crowd can be sponsored ("Cheer your Citi").

Watching on the telly one sometimes loses a horizontal quarter to ads, sometimes a vertical quarter, sometimes both together. Along the bottom, there are text promos the whole while.

As many viewers have noted with horror, this season features ads between not just overs but between deliveries, cunningly zooming in and out of the giant screen sometimes. Besides, there are two "strategic time-outs". These provide 10 minutes of pure, cricket-free ads. These have been sold to Maxx Mobile: perhaps the first instance, as somebody said, of a sponsored ad-break.

Meanwhile the commentators shout. The shouting is to add excitement, and to build up a necessary momentum for the commercial bombardment. To the existing DLF Maximum and Citi Moment of Success has been added the Karbonn Kamaal Catch. No amount of repetition inures one to this surreal appropriation. At any rate, the Maximum, you sense, has been named with a far-sighted elasticity: it is only a matter of time, sixes flowing like water, that an eight or a 10 is introduced.

The celebrities who watch from the stands have been usually bussed in or have paid heftily to wear the jersey and wave the flag. Some have no interest in cricket. When Jack Nicholson watches the Lakers he does it because he loves basketball. He buys his tickets. And celebrities are present at the IPL after-match parties. Tickets are sold for the parties: they cost more than the match tickets.

 
 
A minority will grumble but India can accept the IPL the way it is because it is not a playing society. Its relationship with sport is not of participant but consumer. It holds nothing sacred. The IPL knows that it competes not against sport but general entertainment
 

The other day I stared at the screen in disbelief on seeing the "meet a cheerleader" promo (an SMS contest, I think: Rs 3 an SMS, as well as a chatline, Rs 10 a call), leaving no doubt as to what the IPL thinks of them. They are not, as in American varsities, a homegrown support and performance troupe whose athletic prowess matches those of the players, but dancing girls who add a bit of titillation and colour (preferably white, as two sacked black cheerleaders found out in season one).

To switch sports while the IPL beams is to find a sanctuary in the middle of a mall. In the Champions League, the footballers move about in logoed but elegant jerseys on a field of unblemished grass, unbranded goalposts and boundaries. Same in the ATP Masters: the tennis players are beholden only to their apparel sponsor, whose branding is subtle, and the court is clean. Neither sport has stooped to restructuring itself to add more commercial breaks. Their commentators are not pushing products; they are empowered to critique.

You think that all of this is important in sport - the idea of an aesthetically pleasing area, of a reliable structure, removing one temporarily from the haggles of the daily world. You think, briefly, that the IPL does not need to go so far down the road that it has. They could just as easily shave off a couple of hundred million dollars from their billion dollars-plus television rights sale, and build in clauses to safeguard the viewing experience. But this is to misunderstand the IPL.

The highest possible figure is important because in India money is exciting and a truth. It is the parameter to judge a profession, a work of art, a life. To be able to say "billion dollars" matters. It empowers and it attracts power. And as symbolism the IPL deals and public auctions are scarcely different from Mayawati's garland of rupees that middle-class Indians find so repulsive.

A minority will grumble but India can accept the IPL the way it is because it is not a playing society. Its relationship with sport is not of participant but consumer. It holds nothing sacred. The IPL knows that it competes not against sport but general entertainment. "Saas-bahu se better hai," [It's better than family-drama soaps] a viewer remarks. And to compete with saas-bahu one must make concessions. Do not give them a moment to linger; cut to Deepika Padukone, a cheerleader's thigh, a 30-second dugout interview.

I appreciate that the IPL did not invent advertising in cricket, merely took a leap further towards the logical end. That we are still not at the end is the truly frightening thought.

Rahul Bhattacharya is the author of the cricket tour book Pundits from Pakistan. He writes a monthly column for Mint Lounge

RSS Feeds: Rahul Bhattacharya

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by vicky4113 on (April 1, 2010, 18:52 GMT)

love the article...cricinfo should consider a like/dislike system for all articles like how youtube has recently done..cheers.

Posted by The_Czar_of_Bizarre on (April 1, 2010, 18:26 GMT)

A superb article. I really agree with each and every point. An ad between two deliveries does not make any sense and is highly annoying. Just because businessmen have invested a lot that doesn't mean you should over do the non sense so that they reach break-even in first year itself. Though I love IPL, I totally agree to the writer's views and apprehensions about future. Also the best part is where the writer describes the role of "money" in India in judging profession. Last year i had taken a oath that I will NEVER buy the products that are shown in ads between the balls. Lets control what is in our hands because I am sure these businessmen and Mr. Modi won't understand it.

Posted by   on (April 1, 2010, 6:15 GMT)

No one can escape the tyranny of commercials. Even I've encountered instances of some glitzy ads hindering me from reading the cricinfo article. Cricinfinfo should do something like wikipedia. Moreover IPL is budding and they need to neutralize thier hefty expenses.

Posted by inswing on (March 31, 2010, 20:21 GMT)

The ads are not a matter of taste or choice. The are a matter of necessity. The owners have spent otherworldly sums to money for the franchise licenses, and then for buying players and support staff. All this money has to be recuperated somehow. If they don't jam in ads in every nook and cranny, the owners would go under very quickly, because the revenue from ticket sales is a very tiny fraction of the cost. The ads are the only reason why they are able to pay the players so much, and pay BCCI so much.

Posted by   on (March 31, 2010, 13:17 GMT)

Popular entertainment in India has always been cheap and shallow in quality- movies, tv shows or even News or now IPL....the emphasis is always been to make it shallow unintelligent entertainment to appeal to mass socially uneducated audience.

Also, while owners of IPL may be filthy rich, large sections of India are still utterly poor, so not many India emphasize on service. Television, like any other mass product in India, is about quantity and not quality.So, no surprise, millions will still watch IPL despite obscene amount of ads

Posted by   on (March 31, 2010, 6:20 GMT)

An absolutely superb piece Rahul. Keep it up mate...at least top writing of this kind puts the crap of the IPL into perspective...

Posted by   on (March 31, 2010, 5:41 GMT)

I thought slowly the commentators are learning their lesson when I heard our Mr Sunil 'Sunny' Gavaskar telling 'What a magnificent SIX!' in the match between MI and KXIP (Played on 30th March). Good going Sir, and please KEEP IT UP!

Posted by _NEUTRAL_Fan_ on (March 30, 2010, 22:04 GMT)

@dhaval1984. Do you really have the right to advise the writers of what they should and shouldn't write about? IPL is a big thing and a revolution in cricket. Cricket is for every1, including the writers and it is their job to write about major cricket events. Despite it being sold as a domestic tourney, there is a massive contribution from international representatives. The IPL is a good thing but there are many flaws and turn-offs which if addressed could make a good thing better! If all the writers said I don't like this about it and so I'm not going to write about it, some flaws may never get ironed out and may even be ignored. Even test cricket which is over 100 yrs old has flaws and is still trying to improve. So in response to your "TO ALL THE BELOVED WRITERS ONLY ONE ADVICE....IF YOU DONT LIKE IPL DONT WRITE ABOUT IT..." well dude if you don't like what they write...DON'T COMMENT!

Posted by Arvian on (March 30, 2010, 18:24 GMT)

I posted the following comment yesterday and it's still not live...think the author doesn't accept the truth.... :) hope it'll be live this time........

These days if you want to know how successful a program or person is, just look at the amount of criticism the program or person is getting. The more criticism it brings the more popular it is. This is exactly what IPL is going through right now. Now tell me what you think of IPL. If you really want to change things then stop watching IPL. If nobody watches IPL saying too much of advertisements then I am sure there won't be any more time outs. But the point is how many dare to do it? Can at least the people who are shouting dare to do it? I don't think so, because they don't want to stop thinking and writing about IPL. You know the reason behind it….So let's cut the crap and admit it that IPL rocks………..

Posted by dhaval1984 on (March 30, 2010, 17:18 GMT)

@rahul

Ranji trophy, and all the other domestic tournaments come with very few ads, no logos on cloths on NEO cricket...Go watch it and dont complain...

It seems to me than every article on Cricinfo has to say something bad abt IPL...Though all writers has atleast written one article on IPL..

CRICINFO it self is selling itself by writing about IPL to make money..

TO ALL THE BELOVED WRITERS ONLY ONE ADVICE....IF YOU DONT LIKE IPL DONT WRITE ABOUT IT...

Comments have now been closed for this article

FeedbackTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Rahul BhattacharyaClose
Rahul Bhattacharya Author of Pundits from Pakistan: On Tour with India, 2003-04

Chanderpaul, the coach's nightmare

Modern Masters: He developed a rhythm that worked for him and gave him better balance at the crease

    'I spent 95% of my career bowling the same ball'

Angus Fraser talks about his workmanlike bowling, playing second fiddle, his stop-start career, and England in the '90s

    'A coach earns respect by working as hard as the players'

Sanjay Bangar talks about his quick transition from player to coach, his philosophy and the reasons behind Kings XI Punjab's turnaround

    'Swann could bowl length blindfolded'

Erapalli Prasanna on a thoroughbred professional whose basics were extraordinarily strong

The mathematician who loved cricket

Haider Riaz Khan: GH Hardy, a regular at Cambridge, ranked mathematicians and physicists on the 'Bradman class'

News | Features Last 7 days

Champions League T20 still battling for meaning

The thrills are rather low-octane, the skills are a bit lightweight, and the tournament overly India-centric

From Constantine to Chanderpaul

As West Indies play their 500th Test, here's an interactive journey through their Test history

'My kind of bowling style is gone now'

Former New Zealand seamer Gavin Larsen talks about wobbly seam-up bowling, the 1992 World Cup, and his role in the next tournament

Busy keepers, and Waqar's bowleds

Also, high scores and low averages, most ducks in international cricket, and the 12-year-old Test player

Soaring in the 1980s, slumping in the 2000s

In their pomp, West Indies had a 53-13 win-loss record; in their last 99, it is 16-53. That, in a nutshell, shows how steep the decline has been

News | Features Last 7 days