The Round Table

'The IPL has to be globally governed'

March 4, 2008

"The IPL should fit in with the rest of the cricket and not disrupt it. The governing body has to be seen as governing and you can't have one member state just going off at a complete tangent, because it disrupts everything else. It may be early days and we may find out where the IPL fits into the global scheme of things. But the IPL will isolate the vulnerable countries." Sanjay Manjrekar, Ian Chappell and David Lloyd analyse the impact of the IPL on world cricket

 Read Comments (13)

Comments Top ^

Comments have now been closed for this article IPL is a concept which germinated out of BCCI's idea and it is stupid to suggest that it should be globally managed. Only reason somebody would suggest is simple envy or they cannot stomatch the the fact that Indian cricket is financially so powerful.IPL can bring a lot of good to indian cricket and its economy as this goes a long way in keeping the money generated out of indian cricket within india. If properly planned IPL could generate a vibrant economy around its league and franchise and bring employment to small segment of indian populace Also BCCI should not share the IPL money or any other spoils coming out of IPL with other cricket boards.The perfect analogy to this would be requesting Western countries particulary US, England and Australia to subsidize our IIT's,Medical and engg universities because most of our young men and women spend their most productive years working in those countries after their education. Let the market worked and nobody forced anyone here Posted by IndianMigrant on March 06 2008, 02:10 AM GMT The concept of cricket as designed by IPL looks good today. But my fear is that the success as anticipated by BCCI and others may be over estimated. Looking at the Ranji Tropy and other local tournaments financially, I forsee same future for IPL. The craze for cricket in India is generated because of the rivalry between the India and other country. BCCI will have to use exceptional marketing tactics to create enthusiasm among the people as seen in other professional sports in USA and other European countries. However, to help world cricket in general and to make it a global attraction, BCCI will have to consider how to partner with other countries on financial as well as on administrative basis. If above topics are not handled tactfully, the chances are IPL will be remembered as a failed concept. Lots of luck to the future of cricket. Posted by Fatkabaji on March 06 2008, 01:07 AM GMT If we are talking about IPL so much why isn't there any talk about ICL and its impact to world Cricket. IPL will at least ensure the players can finish the tournament and go back and play for their country but playing for ICL will make them not play for their country. Shane bond will not only be a loss to NZ Cricket but world cricket as well. Yes this clause has been put in by BCCI who are the ones running IPL. 40 days in an year is what IPL is asking for and if that goes well i don't see anything wrong coming out of it. IPL and BCCI is going to make good money from this tournament but the way i look at it, players making money when they can and also playing for their country isnt such a bad thing after all. Posted by cowsick316 on March 06 2008, 00:55 AM GMT Money will ultimately come from Indian spectators. Now, why should anybody who is not from India gain from Indian money? If a non-Indian player does not want to play in IPL, that is his prerogative. If a foreigner does not want to watch IPL, he can switch channels. Who runs English Premier League? Who runs English County Cricket? Answers to these questions will expose the flaw in the argument of those salivating for Indian money. Posted by Aditya_Sinha on March 05 2008, 23:00 PM GMT I think we should relax a bit here and not criticize BCCI or IPL a lot. Its a very interesting concept and it has got a great start. But unless one or two seasons are over, we cannot judge on its actual success. Once it reaches break even, once its success is proven - then I would assume some part of the success' will be channelled to the development of world cricket. Until then, it is wrong to criticize BCCI for not channeling the money to World cricket's development. Simply because we dont yet know if it will be a success. Even if its a success as a concept, it will take a couple of seasons to get the market dynamics settled down and only then should we be planning out the success channelling activities. Posted by -mahe- on March 05 2008, 21:30 PM GMT I am concerned by the effect on World cricket. It is strange that a Board that tries to promote cricket in second tier countries (Kenya, Ireland etc) now tries to kill off International cricket in countries such as NZ and West Indies. I have watched 4 games of T20 on TV and one game live. I find them about as exciting as watching grass grow. I think the concept will disappear in 3 or 4 years as did single wicket and double wicket competitions some years ago. It is interesting that Channel Nine did not obtain the TV rights in Australia for the IPL. Can Australians watch the ICL games on TV. I understand that starts on Sunday. Posted by DonR on March 05 2008, 20:59 PM GMT Domestic cricket isn't particularly well attended in Australia. I used to work just near the SCG and once I started attending domestic matches I was amazed at the quality of cricket I could watch for 5-10 bucks. I really do think that a big reason for this in Australia is the fact that none of the matches are shown on free to air TV. I understand that cricket makes a lot of money from the cable TV operators, but it does nothing for the health of the game and attendance. People simply don't know how good these matches are as they are never exposed to them. Letting cricket stay on cable TV networks, which have very low penetration levels in Australia compared to other countries is another case of cricket organizations going for short term gains at the expense of the long term health of the game. Posted by nigelkersten on March 05 2008, 16:55 PM GMT Paralysis by analysis in these comments from Lloyd and Chappell with more than a whiff of the " not invented here" syndrome. Franchise owners, players and managers have a product to sell. The fans whether in the flesh or on TV, will vote with their pocketbooks. That will decide success or failure. " Global governance" is an euphemism for saying Australia and England must be involved if matters are to be well run. What tosh! Indians are more than capable of running their affairs, and seeking advice when they need it. Safeguards will be needed and implemented. All this hand wringing, doomsday predicting analysis is unnecessary. These are not fools rushing in. Cricket can accommodate all three current forms of the game. Some being more supported than others in various parts of the world. Why is Lloyd more concerned about match fixing in the IPL/ICL than anywhere else? Not a well thought out comment. Let's begin. The people will decide! Posted by Ellis on March 05 2008, 13:50 PM GMT IPL is going to hurt world cricket. There is little doubt of that. Not only will it induce players to leave their countries and play for the IPL but what is infinitely worse is that it will take away advertising revenues from the other forms of cricket. Advertising money is NOT UNLIMITED. The market may expand at best by 20 percent in the short to near term. And if IPL needs to generate the kind of money that they have put in to make a profit they would need more than that slight gain they might get by market creation. Most of their revenues could only come from cannibilazation of the existing cricket. Now all boards (including the BCCI) would lose out if the IPL became a major success. But what the BCCI would lose would be more than made up by the gain of IPL (which is just an extention of the BCCI). However, the loss to the other cricketing boards and the ICC would be immense in terms of revenue. Individually some players might benefit but the boards of other countries would get hurt Posted by straighttalk on March 05 2008, 12:44 PM GMT I agree with the view that serious marketing has to be done, for IPL to do well. Domestic cricket in India is not extremely popular, regarding spectators. It will be a challenge, even with international superstars to generate great interest in the IPL. Dedication is needed for the league's success. Cricket is not a business. For those who play it, it is not just a game. The monetary income is incidental, to the process of "playing" cricket. No one is more concerned about the performance of the stars, than the stars themselves. I believe, playing for India, will always be paramount, as will also be playing for England, etc. It is essential, that the standard of cricket proceeds positively, in nations like Australia, Bangladesh, etc. Posted by Aditya_mookerjee on March 05 2008, 12:40 PM GMT Read all 13 Comments  Top ^