( My columns on Cricket titled Jhakaas only on www.SanjayJha.com from here on. The stop-gap site is currently under back-end reconstruction . After a brief hiatus, time to tell you some home-truths ).
Now that the initial hullabaloo over Gautam Gambhir’s financial windfall has subsided, the whereabouts unknown character Daniel Trevor Christian has been actually identified after his dollar signs were made public, and after witnessing some acerbic exchanges between otherwise apparently civil franchise owners, we need to take a quick reality-check on some ticklish aspects of IPL 4 auctions that have either commanded vuvuzela-kind attention or been cursorily overlooked.
1. First, that expected sentimental outburst over Sourav Ganguly’s exclusion, deemed by some over-stretched minds as a nocturnal “ conspiracy”. Come on, folks, aren’t we “exaggerating an hyperbole” here? I am not going to waste precious time on eulogizing Sourav’s greatness, that is an unquestionable reality and yours truly has been one of his most vociferous supporters . So why then was the Prince so uncharitably dumped by all, including his own home brethren? The answer is simple; firstly, IPL is a business model that requires constant reinvention; it is also bloody brutal. Ask Charu Sharma, Mohammed Kaif and Rahul Dravid. Secondly, KKR seems to have gone for a total overhaul, and you cannot blame them given their abysmal track-record. They are fully entitled to their own management theories and eureka experiences.Thirdly, Ganguly has a formidable persona, a cricketer who has not just been high-impact, but also egregiously controversial and frequently Anti-establishment. I think the franchise owners perhaps felt that “ managing Ganguly” itself would consume approximately half of their time investment. Fourthly, the ridiculous “ player – price benchmarking”. But that’s the next point
2. How come everyone missed out on the most grotesque positioning of players on their celebrated “ base price”? Frankly, take two obvious examples based on current availability, recent international playing experience, age, etc; you have Brian Lara ( 41 and long-retired) , Sourav Ganguly ( 38 and retired ) in the USD 400,000 bracket, while Gautam Gambhir and Robin Uthappa are in the USD 200,000 catgeory? Doesn’t that appear atrocious? Even Zaheer Khan, Kumar Sangakarra, Michael Hussey are in a lower base. There are other glaring mismatches between players-price in the various categories, and that is why it resulted in price distortions. It is as simple as that; its business, as Michael Corleone, would say, its nothing personal.
3. It was the task of the IPL Governing Council to have done some basic player research ( they have a surfeit of resources) , and then using some degree of prudent wisdom slotted players based on their perceived attractiveness. The purpose of an auction is to ensure that every bracketed player gets his best price. The most flagrant fallacy was to give the player the right to choose his price band— that is preposterous. Naturally, egos came tumbling in, and Ganguly enhanced his base price from USD 200,000 to the higher USD 400,000 bracket. But as it happened in several cases, if Ganguly’s bidding had commenced at USD 200K you never know how high the price war could have escalated from that lower level.
4. Wasn’t IPL supposed to be about creating these local fan clubs and raging city-centric community affiliations? Well frankly, all that has come to a sorry naught. While the KKR team maybe justified in doing a drastic purge, they are left with not a single player with whom there is any nostalgic attachment, a shred of memory or some native bonding. The same applies to almost all teams, other than CSK and Mumbai Indians. A three-year investment in building a local franchise has frankly been a complete wash-out. I therefore see the frantic rush for these uncapped players from predetermined catchment areas being the only “connect” that owners can create to the local fans.
5. The “player retention “ clause is , of course, pregnant with imperfections. Take Mumbai Indians, for example. They have decided to retain Sachin Tendulkar, Harbhajan Singh, Kieron Pollard and Lasith Malinga. Now as per their graded pay-outs, Sachin gets USD 1.8 mln, Bhajji ( USD 1.3 mln) , Pollard ( USD 900,000) and Malinga ( USD 400 K). Rest assured, given the exponential boom in player valuations, they will want more. Logically, they deserve it too. What would have been their market price based on free market forces of demand and supply? Now Mr Vijay Mallya tells us that franchise owners are not bound by the USD 9 million cap if they negotiate private cash deals; isn’t that an unfair business practise as it aggregates higher than those of other franchise owners?
So what ought to be the solution? There are two options: firstly, the arrangement can provide a minimum guarantee ( MG) to the retained player. Secondly, the Franchise owner can alternatively offer matching compensation of the highest traded player in the auction to the corresponding retained player. For instance, Tendulkar, Dhoni and Sehwag should get what is Gambhir’s final price. The same formula will apply to the remaining retained players in proportion to the highest paid player in their team.
On the flip side, please also remember that the retention clause is a comfort clause where the Franchise owner guarantees that MG amount irrespective of auction status. For instance, if the highest traded player Gambhir was sold for just USD 1.5 mln, Sachin etc would still earn USD 1.8 mln. Ideally, the option of choosing either of the two options should be given to the players. That would be transparent and would work flawlessly for the benefit of all stakeholders. Also, it is absolutely imperative that the commercial earnings of ALL players MUST be in the PUBLIC DOMAIN.
6. IPL can only succeed in the long-run if there is great local passion for franchise players other than thronging stadiums for a three-hour summer picnic outing. To ensure that at least after this IPL 4 auction there are no further complete team overhauls ( like KKR, Kings XI Punjab, Deccan Chargers etc ) , the “ trading window” of players must be made open with immediate effect and kept open on an ongoing basis other than during the tournament . For buy and sell deals, there are no seasons . Thus, teams that want to still reconstitute their teams can make an open offer to another franchise on a negotiated deal which should be announced publicly. This will make sure that a core team remains consistent and long-standing and increase local spectator and city-participation.
7. Like the failed fan club ob-jective, IPL has been a complete disaster from the big “ globalization” spiel. It has an unfair and skewed representation, with countries like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Pakistan ( for obvious reasons ), West Indies and England finding minimal representation. You can forget the minnow nations altogether. Bottomline, as I had written earlier, the only way that IPL can become a global brand is when all international boards have a financial stake/ cost in proportion to their player representation, there are no limitations on foreign players, no salary caps on players and IPL is part of ICC’s FTP ( Future Tours Program) which guarantees “ availability”, the latter being the principal reason why foreign players saw an unreasonably low price. Currently, IPL is a case of I want to have the cake and eat it too.
8. Tell me , has our ODI team or our Test team, in particular, really changed dramatically over the years? Thus, is it fair to really put fixed salaries for uncapped players, when for many the IPL could actually be the much-needed commercial bonanza for a professional career who may never see a blue cap? Manish Pandey, A Rayudu, Dhaval Kulkarni, Swapnil Asnodkar all deserve a better deal than that USD 60 K being currently offered as a fixed salary. Let the franchise owner take the risk of a higher payment to them.
9. Lastly, we are finally seeing what was initially feared by some of us perennial cynics, the rise of the new “ IPL T 20 player”. The ideal example is players like Robin Uthappa, Irfan Pathan, Rohit Sharma, Saurabh Tiwary and Ravinder Jadeja. It does not matter whether they represent India officially in the future or not , they have carved a distinct niche for themselves in IPL which makes them a commercially viable proposition. In a sense, if that makes some of them our “ summer superstars” only, we should be ready to understand its long-term repercussions. The abject rout of New Zealand against Pakistan in the just concluded Test match might just be the early warning bells.
IPL, ladies and gentlemen, only talks in “money-syllables”.
sudha
January 13, 2011
The valuations and the process seems senseless. Just because a Saurabh Tiwary has played 3 ODIs , he is in the auction and worth crores. A Rayadu or Manish Pandey who are his equals are bound by the salaries for uncapped players. How come uncapped foreign players were allowed into the auction but not Indian players?
Its grossly unfair and this is going to create deep fissures among the domestic players because of BCCIs arbitrary rules.
All the players who have played in the IPL previously should have been in the auction.