On Indian cricket

As Gainline.us readers are always interested to consider American rugby in light of sister sports, here’s an article regarding another game staging its World Cup this season: cricket.

More specifically, the Wharton School’s business review examines economic imbalances in India. Though it is ostensibly the most lucrative market in world cricket – the Asian giant has commanded $1 billion in commercial rights money – 70 percent of world revenues, according to Forbes – many players make their living from endorsements, not actually playing the game.

Incentives are therefore skewed, and it’s not hard to draw a straight line to such problems as the betting which has dogged cricket.

(Free registration is required. Disclosure: I sit on the advisory board of Knowledge@Wharton, the nonprofit publication’s formal title.)

A few snapshots:

"Under the existing system, 26% of BCCI's [Board of Control for Cricket in India] gross revenues were earmarked for player payments. The Men in Blue -- the Indian team -- got 13%, domestic cricketers got 10.6%, with the remaining 2.4% going to junior cricketers."

"India Team players also ignore the domestic leagues -- the Ranji Trophy, the Irani Trophy, the Deodhar Trophy and the Duleep Trophy -- though the BCCI requires them to take part. The only time they show up is when the BCCI declares that their performance in a particular match will be used for selection purposes. The net result is that domestic cricket in India is largely unloved and unnoticed. With no sponsors and very little money, cricketers can't treat this as a fulltime occupation."

Some businessmen are looking into established a professionalized domestic competition. That may be one way forward; but could it lead to the imbroglio now engulfing English and French clubs and their respective unions?

Comments

[Nor Cal Rugger]

A little off topic, but one wonders how this would have been handled by the American media had it been a star of equal magnitude in one of the USA's professional sports;

http://www.rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/articles/2007/04/12/1175971248841.html

[Flynn]

"That may be one way forward; but could it lead to the imbroglio now engulfing English and French clubs and their respective unions?"

Probably, but only because the BCCI is as incompetent as the RFU and FFR (how you can turn a billion people mad about cricket into a team as crappy as India;s is beyond me). There is something extraordinarily arrogant about providing very little finance for the club game, yet establishing control over it. It would be like if USA Basketball got a cut of the NBA's profits in exchange for nothing. The unions don't even do much of the organizing for the Heineken Cup. International rugby is great and all that, but club rugby is the day to day source of rugby for people and should have primacy over the international game. A top-down approach is not healthy for the game; only Argentina and Italy have had any success with this and that's because they export players to other club leagues. Scotland have been an utter failure trying to impose it.