Moving the Indian Premier League overseas in 2017 is not a great idea. I don’t know whether BCCI secretary Anurag Thakur expressed this thought out of pique or dismay, as a threat or as despairing defensiveness. Perhaps it was a combination of all of this, but still doesn’t make sense because it can only dilute, not enhance brand IPL.
There is obviously a context to Thakur’s statement given last week. After some of the IPL matches were shifted out of Maharashtra following the Bombay High Court order hearing a PIL to address the drought issue in the state, the BCCI ran into another roadblock.
Matches allocated to Jaipur were contested by another PIL, this time filed in the Rajasthan High Court. With 11 states in the country identified as drought-affected, this severely restricts the BCCI’s options. Also, there is no saying how many PILs may be in waiting to stymie the Board and the League.
It is only specious logic that forces a co-relation between drought and cricket, specifically the IPL. The failure of governments (state and/or Centre) in addressing the problem cannot become the onus of sports bodies. That this burden seems to have fallen singularly on the BCCI is also unfair and explains perhaps why Thakur made the statement he did.
Yet, at this point in time it appears an impetuous and ill-timed position to suggest that IPL 2017 could go overseas. True, two past experiences of playing the League abroad (South Africa in 2009 and partly in the UAE in 2014) were hugely successful. But that cannot obviate the original purpose and flavour of the IPL.
While the tournament features international players, the IPL is essentially part of India’s domestic cricket structure. Taking it overseas every now and then would weaken this structure even in the medium term, even though there might be gains in the short term.
Essentially, an Indian Premier League played overseas seems a contradiction. For a city-based tournament, it would also create a crisis of identity. Imagine the English Premier League football tournament not being played in England! It seems completely out of sync.
The home of the IPL is India and this is where it should stay. The solution to the BCCI’s problem is not in flight, but to stay and fight, especially the demons within. This must begin with improving its image and credentials that have taken a serious knocking, especially in the past few years.
There is little doubt that the BCCI — and by extension the IPL — has become a soft and or easy target for critics to hammer away. Even in the drought controversy, that no objections have been raised against any other sport — which may need as much if not more water to conduct matches — is instructive.
This is because the cricket establishment is seen as self-serving, and the IPL promoting a 'casino’ type culture. These are extreme views, of course, but who can deny that there has been a grisly underbelly which those controlling the court either tried to obfuscate or tackle at snail’s pace.
Till, of course, the Supreme Court appointed Justice Mudgal and Justice Lodha panels came down like a ton of bricks on the BCCI. Several details that emerged during the investigations conducted by the two SC appointed panels were unsavoury, testing the faith of the public in the administrators and causing the Lodha panel to suggest sweeping reforms.
Some of these reforms are contentious no doubt, but this is something that the BCCI has wrought on itself. It must emerge from the crisis by willing to relook at itself. The appointment of a CEO (the first ever) is a step in the right direction.
But this can’t just be a titular position forced on it by the Lodha panel without the wherewithal to implement reform. What is clear is that BCCI has change, adapt, be more efficient and certainly become more transparent. If that happens, the question of moving the IPL anywhere else would never arise.
