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

A blueprint for the IPL

Corporate partnership rather than ownership might have delivered a much healthier IPL

Rahul Bhattacharya

April 26, 2010

Comments: 21 | Text size: A | A

Nita Ambani takes part in the IPL auction, Mumbai, January 19, 2010
Corporate participation in cricket is well and good but it needs to be in the nature of a partnership rather than just buying and selling © Getty Images
Enlarge
Related Links
Gideon Haigh : Why so surprised?
Features : A timeline of the IPL mess
In Focus: The IPL Mess
Series/Tournaments: Indian Premier League
Teams: India

Watching the sleaze drip off the Indian Premier League, I was reminded of a man I'd encountered in my early days in cricket journalism. He was a suave, laidback Englishman, had dabbled in the global sports-rights industry for some years as a middleman and found he hadn't the stomach for it. "The dirtiest business in the world," he called it.

I write this piece a week before publication. Things are moving fast. Some hours ago the semi-finals were moved out of Bangalore after more bombs were discovered around the stadium. Shashi Tharoor's fate as minister had just been sealed over his lady friend's sweat equity. Meanwhile, reports of Lalit Modi's conduct, too formidable a list to summarise, mounted and mounted. By the time the piece appears, I do not know if he will have taken a terrible fall, emerged heroically triumphant, or merely survived with wounds. What I do know is that cricket has been grabbed at so hard that it can barely be discerned any more. To get a taste of how this game is played, have a look at Shantanu Guha Ray's report in Tehelka. I cannot vouch for every fact, of course, but it is a pretty vivid illustration of "the dirtiest business in the world".

As the raids and reports and rumours escalated, I briefly indulged in the thrilling fantasy that the whole league might go up in flames in a spectacular blaze of corruption.

Who would be the loser? Not the Indian team. England's examples in both football and cricket have shown, as have India's own Twenty20 performances in the past year, that a league only exists for the sake of the league. The effect on the national team, many argue, is deleterious if anything. Nor, in the long run, would young Indian cricketers lose, because the Twenty20 fixation that the IPL encourages, and the "IPL Nights" culture that it advances, will not make them superior cricketers. The spectator, perhaps - but not if he can be given something entertaining in place.

A relatively minor point in the Tehelka report caught my eye. It had to do with Jagmohan Dalmiya's efforts at rallying state cricket associations against Modi for a larger share of the IPL pie. This was interesting not only because of the BCCI's realpolitik. It is much more relevant than that.

"The IPL is, logically, the brainchild of a party animal, for it is the most ingenious private party organised in the history of independent India," MJ Akbar wrote recently. For this private party the state provides stadiums, security and tax waivers. Cricket associations (the Indian state associations that Dalmiya is trying to galvanise, as well as others from around the world) groom and supply the cricketers. The Indian business and glamour-world elite then comes in and buys and sells.

In IPL bubbleland this may be lovely and exciting but on the ground there are problems with the structure. It leaves the sport more susceptible to the kind of indiscriminate commercialism that has appalled many genuine cricket lovers. It allows more dubious wheeler dealers a stake in the easily manipulable property that goes by the name of cricketainment. And it provides no incentive for these stakeholders to plough anything back into the sport.

 
 
At present team owners are super-selectors in a fantasy game, buying and selling and managing their playthings under rules set by Modi. In the alternative proposal, they would be compelled to help create the strongest possible cricket system in the states, without which their team would not be able qualify for the IPL
 

There might have been a more meaningful way for Indian cricket to use corporate imagination and energy. Tenders could have been floated for partnerships with state cricket associations, rather than for owning teams. This would have avoided creating the parallel team structure that now exists. More importantly, it would have avoided the murky ownership issues that the league is now being investigated for.

As partners, the companies/consortiums could be mandated to invest in grassroots cricket, take the sport into disadvantaged communities, support first-class cricket, and help build spectator infrastructure. They could also be enlisted to try and tackle the most nefarious problem blighting domestic cricket: nepotism, especially in player selection. This could be done by establishing ombudsman panels comprising a nominee of the partner, one of the association, and a third independent member, each "of outstanding repute", to whom any matter of impropriety may be referred.

The prize for the partners would have been a shot at a three-week-long Indian Premier League. This would feature eight teams, qualified through the domestic tournament, with each team allowed to contract three foreign players in the XI. From the IPL they would draw the invaluable brand exposure and a share of revenue, as they do now.

The job of the partners would not then be so superficial and self-aggrandising as that of the owners now. At present they are super-selectors in a fantasy game, buying and selling and managing their playthings under rules set by Modi. In the alternative proposal, they would be compelled to help create the strongest possible cricket system in the states, without which their team would not be able qualify for the IPL. It would be a far more equitable arrangement too, as Ramachandra Guha argued the other day, because a city or state would be rewarded for its cricketing merit rather the money power of someone who has bought a franchise there.

Any system is as corrupt as the people who run it, but the benefit of this enterprise could be profound. It would lead not just to better teams - the results of last year's Champions League were instructive in this regard - but to a better culture. It could help make India a healthier and sportier nation, and I think, though this is debatable, create an environment a little less vulnerable to grabbers.

But I run on. This is not the IPL we have or will have; the IPL we have is in the papers every day.

Writer's note, 30 April Because of the bewildering charges of communism/Nehruvianism, I thought it would be useful to clarify that the state associations referred to in the article (the Mumbai Cricket Association etc) are not governmental. They are members of the BCCI, and like the BCCI, are private bodies. My view is that it is worth trying to strengthen this structure - responsible for virtually all organised cricket in India - rather than create a layer of private teams that (unlike clubs in football) simply buy and package products for a temporary period, and have no incentive to help cricket. I share with readers their skepticism both of the politicised cricket associations as well as of corporate intent - and so the conclusion that this will not happen in India.

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 dwighty on (April 29, 2010, 0:43 GMT)

Rahul - I do always enjoy reading your articles. This one however (or rather your idea) while interesting sounds a bit naive. The nearest analogy I could think of was Nehru's "Mixed Economy" model - and look where that got India! Commerce (while derided) has a role to play - whether we like it or not. D

Posted by Spinoza on (April 27, 2010, 20:45 GMT)

I second Wander's view that corruption is a concept perfected by the West. What were Clive, McCaulay, Warren Hastings, Dalhousies, Walter Raleigh, Francis Drake - even Queen Victoria all about? Corrupt exploitation and looting of weaker people. Unable to stand up to them our people joined them and learned their art and have now perfected the art.

Posted by wanderer1 on (April 27, 2010, 13:07 GMT)

@Browndog1968, If the sub-continent has been the heart of corruption for centuries and from the late 1700's to 1945 it was predominantly controlled by Britain, what does that make Britain exactly? Maybe you should take a look at the sheer corruption of the western world before berating others. The level and scale of corruption, especially in the financial world in the west is unpalatable, though they've done well to brush it all under the carpet. And guess what, now that it's coming to the surface, it's taking the whole world down with it. Surprised, not at all, since the west is the heart of all the worlds corruption.

Posted by TheOnlyEmperor on (April 27, 2010, 7:29 GMT)

"In the alternative proposal, they would be compelled to help create the strongest possible cricket system in the states, without which their team would not be able qualify for the IPL."... Haha. This is brilliant an idea as Nehruvian socialism in today's world. Here's more brilliance!... "As partners, the companies/consortiums could be mandated to invest in grassroots cricket, take the sport into disadvantaged communities, support first-class cricket, and help build spectator infrastructure" God! Let's keep the commies, the socialists and all those who think money grows on trees - out of cricket! Getting in political ideologies into cricket is a sure fire model to kill cricket. All sorts of ignorant political commentators and politicians would then play the field and cricket would take a back seat. If the sheer absurdity is still not understood, then let the Bengalis implement this proposal in West Bengal and keep the Rest of India out of it!

Posted by Browndog1968 on (April 27, 2010, 7:05 GMT)

Why are we so surprised to find out that the IPL is a corrupt regime? The Sub Continent has been the heart of corruption for centuries, it's just how things get done there. Grease the right palms and presto you win! I just hope the serious cricket world jumps on this soon enough to wrest control back from the BCCI

Posted by tgevans on (April 27, 2010, 6:32 GMT)

This IPL season had a lot of memorable entertainment, but the phrase that'll stick is "sweat equity". Is that what it's called these days? And spare a thought for the "impresarios" who facilitate it.

The IPL as a business is fine provided there's plenty of transparency and we agree that this isn't a not-for-profit activity. BCCI should retain the teams but re-bid the ownership if it wants to restore integrity.

Posted by Hiteshdevilliers on (April 27, 2010, 3:31 GMT)

This "blueprint" you propose Rahul, is a good idea, but implementation of such an idea wouldn't be easy. There is only one motive in this system and that is: profit. As feasible as your plan above sounds, it would require patience and painstaking effort to find suitable talent, good enough to represent the teams, for which millions are being spent on. Think of it like this, Sahara group paid $300+ million for an IPL team. Under current system, it would take many years before the new teams could even break even. In the system you are proposing, it would take much longer to break even, let alone be profitable. What incentive then do these investors have to partner with state associations and extract raw spending time and effort, when they could just go and show off their wealth on the market and buy off a player? I agree that the IPL should do more in strengthening grass roots cricket, as too much talent that goes unnoticed and if some of the money were to be invested it would beneficial

Posted by   on (April 26, 2010, 20:16 GMT)

Calling ICL as illegal Cricket league Accusing them for destroying cricket structure!! Now look How one Man hurts Cricket Image!!!

Posted by time_out on (April 26, 2010, 18:37 GMT)

"invest in grassroots cricket" "take the sport into disadvantaged communities" "support first-class cricket" "build spectator infrastructure" "tackle the problem of nepotism" (ROTFL) ... I'm sure big business is just salivating at the prospect of being given the opportunity to invest time, money and effort to address everyone's issues. It's a little too early to write to Santa.

==> This could be done by establishing ombudsman panels comprising a nominee of the partner, one of the association, and a third independent member, each "of outstanding repute", to whom any matter of impropriety may be referred.

...are you sure you didn't plagiarize this from some Monty Python sketch??!!

Posted by IPL_is_Fixed on (April 26, 2010, 15:55 GMT)

IPL has taken betting to highest level. IPL is not a Cricketing event

it is a worst commerical event. Team India and BCCI is completely

focussed on IPL. Because of IPL, Team India is losing skill,

inspiration, motivation and fitness to play Test Cricket. These

curators, coaches and BCCI officials are working for IPL growth rather

than Cricket growth. Until IPL is thrashed, Team India is not going to

perform well in other tournaments. IPL is completely meaningless and

obsolete Tournament. Test, ODI & T20 Cricket is great to watch between

Countries unlike IPL Teams which look like clubs. Test Cricket is

ultimate to watch on sportive pitches. But IPL is making these pitches

Lifeless.

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

    What is Rohit Sharma's role?

Should India have practised slip catching in the nets? Who will play at the G?

    'I'd like to have faced the West Indies quicks'

Northamptonshire's David Willey picks his ideal partner for a jungle expedition, and talks about his famous dad

    Benn shows up in body and spirit

Tony Cozier: The spinner has brought in a sense of discipline into his bowling and behaviour on the field since his Test comeback

    The return of Bob Simpson

Rewind: When the 41-year-old former captain came out of retirement to lead Australia against India

Bowling to blame for India's poor overseas record

Kartikeya Date: The inability to build pressure by denying runs, even on helpful pitches, is India's biggest problem

News | Features Last 7 days

What ails Rohit and Watson?

Both batsmen seemingly have buckets of talent at their disposal and the backing of their captains, but soft dismissals relentlessly follow both around the Test arena

The perfect Test

After the tragedy of Phillip Hughes' death, this match showed that cricket and life will continue to go on. This time Test cricket dug in and got through to tea.

Hazlewood completes quartet of promise

Josh Hazlewood has been on Australian cricket's radar since he was a teenager. The player that made a Test debut at the Gabba was a much-improved version of the tearaway from 2010

Australia in good hands under proactive Smith

The new stand-in captain has the makings of a long-term leader, given his ability to stay ahead of the game

Karn struggles to stay afloat

The failed gamble of handing Karn Sharma a Test debut despite him having a moderate first-class record means India have to rethink who their spinner will be

News | Features Last 7 days