Emphasising the Role of Education and Infrastructure Development in Cricket: A Plea for Reversing the “Priority Shift”

The media (read The Hindu
(http://www.hindu.com/2009/08/04/stories/2009080453401600.htm), the Deccan Herald (http://www.deccanherald.com/content/17732/twenty20-no-way-groom-talent.html) and the Times of India) have all widely reported the anguish expressed by former Indian cricketer Javagal Srinath on what he terms as a “priority shift” in the working of the Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA). In particular, Srinath has cited the differing attitudes towards the long pending proposal to establish a Karnataka Cricket Academy via-a-vis the KSCA’s keenness to launch the Karnataka Premier League. The following quotes have been attributed to Srinath “There seems to be a priority shift in the working of the KSCA. The basic premise of an association is to improve the game and contribute to the development of the players but the apathy shown towards the Karnataka Cricket Academy shows that a shift has taken place.” “T20 is a great format that reaches new audiences but, at the grassroots level, it is not on. You must orient the kids towards the longer version and then introduce the T20. Don’t make these kids professional T20 players at the age of 17. Money at this stage is difficult to handle. Don’t people realise this?”

The above observations call for some serious introspection, not just within the KSCA but from the entire cricketing fraternity. At a larger macro level, Srinath’s views should be seen not merely as a criticism of the KSCA but of the manner in which all cricketing bodies are viewing the game of cricket per se in a rapidly changing environment.

Cricket administrators across the world appear to be unsure on where to place T20 cricket within the existing cricketing hierarchy, which also comprises of the other three forms of cricket i.e. Test Cricket One Day Internationals (ODIs) and domestic first class cricket. Administrators are not sure as to whether they would like to embrace T20 at the cost of Test matches, as that would mean alienating the traditional cricketing audiences and acting contrary to the views held by former cricketers. Yet, it is hard for administrators to turn their backs to the money-spinning potential of T20 Leagues, and hence they are here to stay. Consequently, there appears to be a glut of cricket in the international cricket calendar. There will come a time when the cricketing calendar will have to cave in to either (a) the demands for adequate rest by Players; or (b) sheer spectator and sponsor fatigue. In such a scenario, it is a widely held view that ODIs are likely to be the worst affected as a consequence of the T20 boom, as they can offer neither the fast-paced excitement of T20 games nor the strategic warfare or compelling drama provided by Test Matches.

T20 cricket has also created a fresh set of problems for administrators, some of which have been highlighted by Srinath in his statement above. I would like to dwell upon a few of those issues in greater detail here, and suggest a few solutions to those issues.

(1) Lure of “Easy Money” for Players: Structurally, T20 cricket leagues across the world have developed on the lines of a private franchise ownership model, wherein governing bodies have established a city-based T20 cricket league, and have invited corporates to own and operate franchise teams for different cities. Since, T20 cricket is not played round the year (but is still only seasonal in nature), most franchises operate an administrative setup only for the duration of the season. Therefore, a franchisee’s operating budget also factors in revenue anticipated to be earned and expenditure anticipated to be incurred only during the season, which would typically range from 30-60 days. For players, what this entails is that they would be paid only for services rendered by them during the season. In a high profile league such as the IPL, the salaries earned even by domestic players (i.e. those who have not played international cricket) during a season would compare favourably to those earned by various other professionals such as lawyers, accountants and bankers over the duration of a year! Admittedly, the salaries offered currently in the KPL are nowhere near what is offered in the IPL. However, with the bidding for the eight KPL franchises fetching a substantial sum of $7.3 million, it will not be long before the KPL Franchisees demand a corresponding return on their investment. In an effort to maximize their returns (which can only be done by ensuring that the quality of cricket is of the highest standards), it is inevitable that the KPL Franchisees will raise player salaries significantly to attract more and more players to the KPL. Consequently, the argument that Srinath is advancing is that young players may see the KPL (or for that matter any other T20 League) as a way of earning “easy money” to sustain their livelihoods rather than going through the grind of domestic first-class cricket through the year.

There are innumerable cases of sportspersons going astray due to their inability to handle money and fame (One of my earlier posts on the case of former English Cricketer Chris Lewis highlighted this issue). By providing access to money at a young age, T20 cricket structurally has the potential to exacerbate this issue. This is a perfectly valid concern, and this concern can be addressed only by ensuring that Players are put through a rigorous and continuous education programme, modeled somewhat on the following lines:

(i) Players in the U-16 age group ought to mandatorily complete their high school education, by following the appropriate curriculum (i.e. whether it is ICSE, CBSE, SSLC etc.).

(ii) Players in the U-19 age group ought to mandatorily complete their pre-university education, by following the appropriate curriculum (i.e. whether it is ISC, PUC etc.).

(iii) All Players of whatever age group should mandatorily undergo an intensive programme, encapsulating at a minimal level, topics such as player management; sports psychology; sports medicine; sports law; personality development; and media/public relations management.

One hopes that with exposure to such education, players will attain a certain level of maturity, which will enable them to make informed choices at every stage in their career. The fact that sportspersons have a relatively shorter career span has been repeatedly mentioned by most present and former sportspersons. Not every sportsperson can attain a level of success, fame and respect that their services would be utilised by cricket administrators on completion of their cricketing careers. Hence, education can play a key role in enabling a Player to have a secure future (whether in cricket or elsewhere) once his/her playing career ends. The question that arises is who should be facilitating this education programme? To me, the governing body in question (i.e. in Karnataka, it is the KSCA whereas in Punjab, it is the Punjab Cricket Association) is the guardian of the players, and hence it is their responsibility to facilitate this education programme for all players registered with them.

This is exactly where Srinath’s other concern lies i.e. that the KSCA has not created institutional mechanisms to assist in the development of players. Srinath specifically cites the case of the proposed Karnataka Cricket Academy, which has been placed on the backburner for the last three years. He believes that the failure to establish a proper training ground has hindered the development of cricketers within Karnataka. Srinath is also of the view that this infrastructural issue ought to have been addressed by the KSCA, prior to the establishment of the KPL. By establishing the KPL before providing the requisite infrastructural and educational support to players within Karnataka, the KSCA appears to have placed the cart before the horse!

(2) Administrators’ Focus on Short Term Profitability: In their effort to maximize short-term returns (by exploiting the revenue generation potential of T20 cricket leagues), most administrators have overlooked the critical aspect of infrastructure development.

There is no doubt that an investment in a cricket academy is a long-term investment, and the returns on such investment would not be visible in the short-term. However, such an investment is just as essential, if not more, than an investment required to set up a T20 League. While education can shape the personality and character of cricketers, a cricket academy can hone the cricketing talents of cricketers in the right direction. The provision of world class facilities, including but not limited to (i) training kits, bats, gloves, pads, protective equipment; (ii) cricket pitches of different kinds; (iii) facilitation of play under floodlights; (iv) modern gymnasium and fitness facilities, etc. all go a long way in developing the Player and preparing him/her for the pressures and grind of all forms of cricket, whether Tests, ODIs or T20s. One need not look any further than the successful experiments of the Australian Cricket Academy and the National Cricket Academy, to find proof of the concept. It would be unrealistic for cricket administrators to expect that a high standard of cricket would be on display in leagues such as the KPL, in the absence of a proper infrastructure setup.

With Cricket being such a popular sport in India, it should not be difficult for administrators to attract high levels of sponsorship investments in cricket academy projects, provided these academies are administered by experienced former cricketers, who are committed to developing the game of cricket. Provided they are highly motivated, it should also not be too difficult for administrators to simultaneously champion three different projects i.e. (a) the establishment of cricketing leagues/properties to generate revenues for the sustenance of the game of cricket; (b) the development of a comprehensive player education programme to ensure a secure future for their prized assets, the Players; and (c) the development of cricket academies so as to ensure that that the bar is raised higher and higher for cricketers in terms of their cricketing performance! All this calls for is a reversal/rethinking of the “Priority Shift” by cricket administrators, that is geared towards refocusing their energies on more mundane (non-glamorous!) and basic issues such as education and infrastructure! Whether administrators will be able to look beyond short-term revenue and political goals and concentrate on developing a strong grassroots structure for cricket is another matter! Perhaps the media can also play a crucial role by highlighting the developmental work performed by academies rather than focusing only on more “glamorous” issues presented by T20 Leagues!

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

Of “No-Tweet” Clauses and “Whereabouts Requirements”- Constitutional Challenges confronting Sport

Australian opener Philip Hughes stirred up a controversy on the eve of the third Ashes Test at Edgbaston, when a tweet attributed to him was posted on to Twitter, disclosing the fact that he had been dropped from Australia’s team for the match! Subsequently, Hughes’ manager, Neil D’Costa revealed that it was he who had posted the message on Twitter on behalf of Hughes, and admitted that he had made a mistake in terms of the timing of the Tweet, as the message found its way to Twitter well before the official announcement of the Australian team for the Test match! (See http://www.cricinfo.com/engvaus2009/content/current/story/417068.html).

What is the fuss all about? Well, for starters, a Twitter message regarding the composition of a team for a test match can provide the opposition team with an opportunity to revise their strategies before the commencement of a match. Then again, such a message could also take us back to the dark days of match-fixing, when bookies allegedly fished for information on what a team would do if it won the toss, or what the pitch conditions were, which information was then utilised to place bets on matches or on specific parts of matches.

The question that would need to be considered by players, boards, agents, families of players etc. is to what extent can players share seemingly harmless information with the public? How do we distinguish a case of a genuine misunderstanding, from an intentional disclosure of information. Who bears the consequences of such improper conduct?

In this case, Hughes must have been disappointed at missing out on a Test match, and must have felt a need to express his disappointment! Being a 20 year old rookie cricketer, he probably did not realise the consequences of using the new media to convey his feelings. I do hope that governing bodies will be mature enough to treat players as responsible individuals, and issue mere directives to Players to exercise reasonable discretion while communicating match-related information with either their confidantes or the general public. As much as lawyers love to have more clauses to insert in a contract, it is certainly not desirable for the sporting community to have a new genre of player contracts cropping up in the aftermath of this incident, which explicity forbid the use of new media by Players! I am positive that the ICC and Boards do not want a situation where a “No-Tweet” or a “No-Blogging” or a “No-Facebook use” clause is challenged by Players on grounds that it impinges on their right to freedom of speech and expresssion!

On the other hand, the ICC and BCCI are currently grappling with the implementation of the new anti-doping code formulated by World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). This code requires players in the testing pool to inform the governing body (i.e. ICC, for the sport of cricket) through an online form about their whereabouts in advance, when not. WADA’s “whereabouts requirements” require an athlete to give his whereabouts during a one-hour time slot, any time between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m. each day of the year. The information can be updated every three months. Such “whereabouts requirements” have been heavily disputed across various sports, including athletics and tennis, on the grounds that such disclosure requirements infringe on an athlete’s right to privacy. However, WADA has justified the “whereabouts requirements” on the grounds that they allow doping controls to be conducted without notice to athletes, and hence are one of the most powerful means of deterrence and detection of doping, which is essential for the protection of the integrity of sport. The issue has gained importance, after BCCI failed to meet the original deadline of July 01, 2009 for compliance with the WADA Code, as Indian cricketers raised concerns regarding their privacy and security being compromised. In his column in Mid-Day (http://www.mid-day.com/news/2009/jul/310709-World-Anti-Doping-Agency-ICC-Lance-Armstrong-Roger-Federer-Cricketers-Doping.htm), Clayton Murzello has argued as follows: “If the likes of Federer and Nadal are doing it, why do the Indian stars have a problem is a question that will be thrown at the Indian cricket board. Unfortunately, we live in a world where rules have to be followed.” I, for one, don’t subscribe to this view. Regardless of the stature of sportspersons involved, if someone has an issue with their constitutional rights being infringed, then they do have a right to protest and ask for legally valid rules and regulations to be framed by governing bodies.

Interestingly, the two issues raised above present administrators and sportspersons with diametrically opposite constitutional law challenges (i.e. one regarding a player’s right to freedom of speech and expression, and the other regarding a player’s right to privacy). It would be fascinating to see how courts and administrative bodies across the world respond to these new challenges presented by sport!

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

The Gauteng Cricket Board-Cricket South Africa Dispute and its Implications for Stadium Management Practices

Cricinfo has reported that the Gauteng Cricket Board (GCB), which manages the Wanderers Stadium in Johannesburg has accused the IPL of violating various norms, during the hosting of the IPL matches, and in particular the semi-finals and final on May 24, including attempts to forcibly take over all stadium operations, such as ticketing and parking systems (http://www.cricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/415913.html). Unfortunately, rather than examining whether these allegations have any substance, the Cricket South Africa board’s members’ forum has refused to allot any international matches to the Wanderers until the GCB apologises for its allegations and submits its match hosting conditions and, as a result, Wanderers has been stripped of a Test, an ODI and a Twenty20 game it was due to host during England’s tour later this year.

The same article by Cricinfo also refers to IPL Commissioner Lalit Modi’s denial of these allegations by stating the GCB’s allegations are “completely baseless”, and by his reference to the “clean stadium agreement” that the IPL had signed with CSA, which he claims, gave the IPL complete control of the venue, including ticketing and parking.

I will reserve my comments on the relative merits of the positions adopted by the GCB, CSA and IPL as I don’t have access to the aforementioned “clean stadium agreement”. However, this dispute does highlight once again, the need to have clear stadium usage/hiring policies as the cricketing world moves into an era where professional T20 cricket leagues, international cricket and first-class domestic cricket all co-exist round the year.

Typically, a “Clean Stadium” refers to a Stadium that is free from commercial or promotional messages, advertising, displays or facilities of any kind except for those installed, erected or otherwise authorised by the Host Stadium/Host Governing Body for a predefined time period before and after a particular match/tournament so that the commercial rights would be available to the Host Stadium/Host Governing Body for exploitation, without any hindrance from any pre-existing sponsor/advertising rights holder. The Stadium itself is defined to include surrounding areas under the control of the Host Governing Body, used for the Matches, including without limitation parking facilities, VIP and hospitality areas, concourses, concession areas, fencing and entrances.

Globally, the practice is for the Event’s Governing Body to specify dimensions, quantity, standards and other technical specifications pertaining to various areas within a stadium, and such specifications can include those pertaining to the number of parking spaces that are to be provided, the facilities that are to be provided to the media, the camera positions, tv and radio commentary positions, medical facilities, toilets, hospitality areas, scoreboards, emergency lighting systems, public announcement systems, and special provisions for persons with physical disabilities.

In India, not much attention has been paid to the above issues till date, and it is very common for a Host Governing Body to issue just a simple letter (more as a matter of formality than as a legally binding obligation) to record the terms and conditions of usage of the Stadium. While this does appear convenient for the Stadium Owner and for the Lessee, the potential liability that a Stadium Owner and a Stadium Operator can be exposed to in the event of a calamity can be unlimited. Furthermore, the scope for disputes similar to the GCB-CSA-IPL disputes are significantly enhanced in a such situations, as there is no legally binding document, which can pin responsibility for certain actions on one or the other party i.e. the Stadium Owner/Governing Body or the Stadium Operator/Franchisee.

Apart from improving the entire “spectator experience” in a Stadium, it is also high time that Governing Bodies, Franchises and Sponsors work responsibly towards ensuring the highest spectator safety standards across venues in India.

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

Batting for the J&K Cricket Bat Manufacturing Industry: A Call for BCCI Intervention

Recently, while doing some research on the state of the cricket goods manufacturing industry in India, I came across an interesting article titled “Cricket bat industry dying a slow death”, written by Vijay Sazawal. In this article, Sazawal has dwelt in great detail on the reasons for the declining fortunes of the cricket bat manufacturing industry in Jammu and Kashmir. Some of the main reasons highlighted by Sazawal are (i) smuggling of Kashmir willow and its abundant use in plywood units; (ii) shortage of willow (due to its smuggling), leading to increased prices, and consequent unaffordability of the willow for bat manufacturing units; and (iv) reduced cultivation of the willow by Kashmiri people on their lands as willows take almost 20 years to grow; and (v) failure of legislative measures introduced by the Jammu and Kashmir Government to curb export or smuggling of the Kashmir willow.

It is sad to note that while the Jammu Sports Goods Manufacturers Association and the Cricket Bat Manufacturers Association have been lobbying for governmental intervention to ensure the continued survival of the cricket bat manufacturing units, the custodian of the game in India, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and its affiliated state association, the Jammu and Kashmir Cricket Association (JKCA) have failed to take any visible measures to preserve the cricket bat manufacturing industry. Hereinafter, I have outlined a few propositions which could be considered by the BCCI, to contribute its might to ensure that an essential cog in the larger cricket industry in India becomes commercially feasible, while also ensuring the continued employment of a sizeable populace within the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

(1) Institution of a BCCI Fund: BCCI should, after consultation with the various stakeholders (including the Jammu and Kashmir Cricket Association, the Jammu Sports Goods Manufacturers Association and the Cricket Bat Manufacturers Association) institute a fund, which can provide a short-term financial assistance to a number of cricket bat manufacturing industries. Any cricket bat manufacturer should be placed in a position where he can apply to the JKCA, for funding, after satisfying certain pre-conditions, including (a) that such manufacturer has been carrying on the business of cricket bat manufacturing for a certain period of time; (b) that such manufacturer has demonstrated certain quality and commitment towards manufacturing bats of good quality; and (c) that a certain percentage of such manufacturer’s revenues can be shared with the Jammu and Kashmir Cricket Association.

(2) Run a Promotion Campaign “Save the Kashmir Willow”: BCCI should procure the services of leading Indian Cricketers to run a campaign “Save the Kashmir Willow”, targeted at the Jammu and Kashmir region. As a part of their responsibility towards giving back to the game, there can be no better opportunity for cricketers than to be part of a campaign that is geared towards protecting their essential “tools of trade”.

(3) Promote Usage of Kashmir Willow Bats: While the choice of a bat should ultimately be left to a batsman (depending on his comfort), the BCCI and its affiliated bodies can encourage the wholesale procurement of cricket bats for all domestic tournaments, starting from school level cricket to first class cricket. By creating awareness through an effectively run promotion campaign, BCCI also has an opportunity to increase sales of Kashmir willow cricket bats, and if this can be a consequence of the funding by JKCA (with appropriate linkages to a revenue share mechanism), this will only add to BCCI’s profitability.

(4) Promote Innovation: The BCCI should place a high premium on, and provide more funds to those bat manufacturers who are able to design innovative cricket bats, which can cater to the requirements of the modern game, as the demand for innovative and powerful cricket equipment such as bats is only likely to increase, in light of the proliferation of a host of domestic and global T20 cricket tournaments. For instance, recently in the United Kingdom, a new cricket bat called the Mongoose has been launched as a response to the attacking nature of T20 cricket (http://www.mongoosecricket.com/who-are-mongoose). It is sad that in a cricket crazy country such as India, and despite having the world’s richest cricketing body, we have not seen the same levels of investment and innovation in the industries that support the game of cricket. By fostering an environment of innovation, BCCI will not only ensure the continued commercial viability of the cricket bat industry in Jammu and Kashmir, but can also seize another opportunity to ensure that the cricket goods industry in India becomes not just competitive but dominant, globally.

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

Effective Management of Endorsement Relationships: Lessons from the KSDL-Dhoni Dispute

The Karnataka High Court has appointed former High Court Judge R. Gururajan as the arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the Indian Cricket Team captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni and Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Ltd. (KSDL), which manufactures the Mysore Sandal soap (http://www.hindu.com/2009/06/24/stories/2009062454931000.htm). The dispute arose when KSDL claimed that Dhoni had breached an endorsement agreement that he executed with KSDL in January 2006, by not performing the promotional obligations for which he had contracted with KSDL. The contract was subsequently terminated by KSDL in December 2007, a month before it was to officially expire.

From media reports, it appears that Dhoni has defended his non-performance of the contract by stating that he was not given enough time by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) (http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/dhoni-ksdl-spar-on/315662/). A common provision in most endorsement agreements executed by cricketers is an acknowledgment by both the Player and the Sponsor that the Player is bound by the rules and regulations of the ICC, BCCI, IPL Governing Council, the IPL Team and the State Association. Accordingly, the performance by a Player, of his obligations under an Endorsement Agreement is made subject to any of his obligations, specified under the rules and regulations of the aforementioned bodies or any agreements he may enter with any of these bodies from time to time.

If the endorsement agreement between Dhoni and KSDL contained a clause similar to the one mentioned above, and if Dhoni’s counsel is relying on such a clause to defend his non-performance, the onus will be on Dhoni to establish that either (a) he was prohibited by the aforementioned governing bodies from specifically performing his endorsement agreement with KSDL; or (b) that his Playing commitments during the period between January 2006 to December 2007 were such that there was no time for him to perform any of his endorsement obligations. The above arguments, while being reasonable grounds for Dhoni’s defence, would be particularly difficult for Dhoni to make, if he has performed other endorsement obligations during the same period.

While the final outcome of this dispute is still some time away (!!), considering that the arbitrator to the dispute has been appointed a good two years after the contract was terminated, the dispute throws up several lessons for Players, Player Agents and Sponsors on how to manage endorsement relationships effectively.

From the perspective of Players and Player Agents, they need to take a careful look at a Player’s playing calendar before committing their time to sponsors, so as to avoid outcomes such as the above. In addition, even if there are sufficient breaks for a Player in his Playing Calendar, an agent may also need to consider a Player’s obligations towards his family, his training schedule, and his employment obligations (if a Player is employed by either a Government organization or a bank) before committing a Player’s time. There has to be a larger industry realization that a breach of contract (apart from creating legal hassles for the Player), also impacts the credibility of the Player and the agency that manages the Player.

Another important point to note here is that the Player-Agent relationship traditionally has been structured on the basis of a “Minimum Guarantee” commitment i.e. that the Agent has to commit to a Player that he/it will necessarily obtain endorsement/sponsorship/media/licensing & merchandising contracts worth a minimum amount in a year if the Agent is to represent a Player for that duration. If the Agent is not able to provide a Minimum Guarantee, then the Player has a right to terminate his relationship with such Agent and obtain the services of another agent. The “Minimum Guarantee” commitment places the Agent under a tremendous strain to ensure that the Player obtains as many commercial relationships as possible. Consequently, this also places the same amount of strain on a Player to commit to as many commercial relationships as possible, thereby increasing the chances of conflicts/breaches in a Player’s playing commitments as also his sponsor commitments. A good agent plays a critical role in shaping the public persona of a Player. Therefore, it is critical that there be a certain amount of stability in a relationship between a Player and an Agent. For this to goal to be achieved, a Player-Agent relationship ought to transcend, if not do away with, a “Minimum Guarantee” obligation. This in turn, will be a function of the maturity of the Player Representation Industry in India over a period of time.

From a Sponsor’s perspective, it is essential that a Sponsor undertake a basic due diligence on the Player’s ability to perform an endorsement contract (by examining his past track record, if any) and by asking for a confirmation from the Player and his Agent that none of his other endorsement commitments during the same period will prevent him from performing his obligations towards such Sponsor. Furthermore, a Sponsor should also determine whether a Player is so over-exposed in the media that it may not serve the best interests of a brand for such Player to act as its Brand Ambassador.

A basic level of due diligence from all concerned parties to an endorsement relationship, as described above, can go a long way in structuring a win-win relationship.

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

Cricket Australia-Australian Cricketers Association Heads of Agreement-A Preliminary Analysis

As per a press release issued by Cricket Australia (CA) on June 09, 2009 on its website (http://www.cricket.com.au/default.aspx?s=news-display&id=16327) CA and the Australian Cricketers’ Association (ACA) have reached a Heads of Agreement on a new two-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) agreeing to terms for Australia’s elite male cricketers for the 2009-2011 period. According to the same CA press release, the full MOU is currently being documented and will be published once available.

While I am looking forward to reviewing the full MoU once it has been published, there are various interesting themes running through the Heads of Agreement, which (if appropriately reflected in the MoU) can offer some interesting lessons to other cricket playing nations, including India. I have attempted a preliminary analysis of a few of these themes hereinafter.

(1) Realistic Acknowledgment of the Global Financial Crisis: The CA and ACA have made a realistic acknowledgement of the impact of the current global financial crisis, by restricting the term of the MoU to 2 years, as against the traditional system of a 4-year MoU. Accordingly, there appears to be an in-built flexibility, which will enable the parties to re-negotiate the terms of the player contracts should there be a significant improvement in the economic environment.

(2) Introduction of Player Marketing Contracts: The CA press release specifies that Marketing Contracts have been introduced for Cricket Australia contracted players for the following reasons:
(a) To better match remuneration with the marketing value and activities of each individual player;
(b) To provide greater flexibility to players as to type of appearances performed; and
(c) To further motivate players to perform appearances and therefore add value to CA and State sponsors.

The CA press release further specifies that Marketing Contract monies will be paid to players at the end of each financial year on a three metric formula basis:
(a) Marketing value of each player (independently determined);
(b) Type of attribute use and appearances performed by each player; and
(c) Number of each type of attribute use and appearance performed by each player.

While I am not aware of how such Marketing Contracts would work in the Australian context, purely on a first principle basis, this appears to be a rational model, which seeks to balance visibility expectations of team sponsors with the endorsement obligations imposed upon a player. First and foremost, there appears to be a clear recognition that if a Player makes an appearance or his attributes are used by a Team Sponsor, a Player will be paid for such appearance or attributes use. The amount that a Player is actually paid is dependent on the three metric formula described above. The number of player appearances will be from 15-30 in 2009-10 and 18-30 in 2010-11. Therefore, a player who makes 15 appearances stands to earn less than a player who makes 30 appearances.

In my post on May 25, 2009, I had examined the post-IPL endorsement landscape in India and had attempted to decode perceived conflicts between a Player’s Individual and Team Sponsors. Theoretically, the “Marketing Contract” model, as described above, offers yet another potential solution to the perennial quandary faced by Indian cricketers while dealing with conflicting endorsement obligations between their personal sponsors and Team Sponsors. For example, the Player Retainer Agreement signed by the players with BCCI, as also the IPL Player Contract signed by the Players with their respective IPL Franchisees can incorporate clauses similar to the three metric formula described above. The “Marketing Contract” model does allow a Team Sponsor to exploit a Player’s attributes but requires such Sponsor to pay a Player for such use. Therefore, while BCCI or a Franchisee of an IPL Team is entitled to offer the services of their Players to their respective Sponsors, it would be required to ensure that a Sponsor adheres to certain rules and regulations before exploiting a Player’s attributes, including paying the Player for such exploitation. If structured appropriately, this model can balance the interests of all concerned parties i.e. BCCI, BCCI’s Sponsors, the Player, the IPL Franchisee Team and the Franchisee Team’s Sponsors.

To elaborate, perhaps Players can suggest that the number of appearances required to be made by them for Team Sponsors be limited to a particular number, with a minimum threshold being specified by the BCCI/Franchisee. So long as the Players comply with the minimum threshold imposed by BCCI/Franchisee, a Player should be given the freedom to opt not to endorse/make any appearances for a Team Sponsor if such Player is of the view that (i) such Sponsor (or its Products) are likely to diminish the marketing value of the Player; or (ii) such Sponsor (or its Products) will directly conflict with any of the Player’s personal sponsors. Furthermore, the BCCI and the IPL ought to impose a payment obligation on Team Sponsors, where such Team Sponsors seek to utilize the Players for appearances or utilize the Player’s attributes in any manner. The actual payment to a Player can be worked out based on the marketing value of each player (determined by an independent third party agency). Such provisions can prevent unintended conflict situations, such as those currently faced by various Players whose personal sponsors are in conflict with various IPL Team Sponsors.

Hypothetically, if Player X is requested by a Team Sponsor A of Deccan Chargers to endorse its products/services or provide his attributes to a promotional campaign run by Team Sponsor A or make any other appearance for Team Sponsor A, Player X can
(i) refuse to participate in such endorsement/attribute usage/appearance so long as the Player can commit to comply with the minimum threshold imposed on him by Deccan Chargers; or
(ii) refuse to participate in such endorsement/attribute usage/appearance on the ground that such endorsement/attribute usage/appearance will be in conflict with his other personal endorsement obligations, provided that the Player still complies with the minimum threshold imposed on him by Deccan Chargers; or
(iii) refuse to participate in such endorsement/attribute usage/appearance on the ground that such endorsement/attribute usage/appearance will diminish his marketing value, provided that the Player still complies with the minimum threshold imposed on him by Deccan Chargers; or
(iv) ask to be paid by Team Sponsor A for such endorsement/attribute usage/appearance.

(3) Family, Career and Welfare Benefits: In a clear recognition of the grueling travelling commitments undertaken by Players, the CA and ACA have committed to provide some significant support mechanisms for families of the contracted players, so as to enable them to be with the Players, during cricket tours. The new MOU seeks to provide inter alia for payment of airfares for children (previously it was only partners); and upgrade of class of airfare for player partners/guests from Economy to Premium Economy. In addition, the CA and ACA have made significant investments in a Career and Welfare Program for Players over the last four years (The funding was $700,000 for each year of the 2005-09 MOU). In the new MOU, funding for the program will increase to $1,080,000 in 2009-10 and $1,340,000 in 2010-11). As per the press release, the new Career and Welfare Program will provide for an increased scope of service for female and underage players; increased funding for the full-time employment of State Player Development Managers; and increased funding for player education and training grants. Cricket Australia definitely needs to be commended for instituting these welfare measures for the benefit of Players and their families.

To summarise, on a preliminary analysis of the Heads of Agreement between CA and ACA, these two bodies seem to be shaping the game of cricket in Australia in a structured manner, and their governance mechanisms appear to be robust enough to cater to the needs of various stakeholders in the game of cricket in Australia. CA and ACA appears to be setting the right benchmarks in the administration of cricket, and other cricketing bodies would do well to take a leaf out of their books.

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

Lessons from the Cricinfo Growth Curve-Understanding the Challenges before Cricket Websites

As somebody who religiously tracks any cricket-related information online, I have, for long felt that there always has been a clear blue water between Cricinfo and other websites which provide 24/7 cricket coverage. The quality of cricket coverage, cricket literature and analysis and the sheer depth of its database have made Cricinfo peerless. In a recent column on Outlook Business (http://www.outlookbusiness.com/inner.aspx?articleid=2770&subcatgid=1199&editionid=76&catgid=60), the authors have highlighted some interesting statistics that provide some insights in understanding what makes Cricinfo tick. For starters, it has a user base of 11.5 million. Cricinfo claims that each of its 11.5 million users spends about 50 minutes a month on the website and each session is about 10 minutes long. Its nearest cricket website competitors are way behind on the same parameters. As the Outlook Business column points out, Cricinfo holds its own even when compared with general websites, being ranked ahead of even the ubiquitous Indian Railway portal in terms of number of views.

It would be interesting to understand the underlying cricket market factors, as also the website-specific factors, which have contributed to the phenomenal Cricinfo story. First, lets look at the market factors. There are various nuances of the game of cricket which make it so attractive for a web-based platform. Even its shortest format lasts for atleast 3 hours, and with breaks of various kinds thrown in for good measure, a cricket fan can always follow the game even if he is pre-occupied with other work, by tracking the scores on a cricket website! So, unless office policies on usage of the Internet are very strict, a good cricket website has the potential to attract a sizeable chunk of busy office-goers to follow the game on a desktop!

Secondly, the game of cricket is not continuous. There is a time gap between each delivery as the ball has to be relayed back to the bowler at the end of every delivery. It is these gaps which allow the viewers to hear the expert feedback of cricket commentators on various aspects of the game, be it fielding, batting, bowling, umpiring or just an interruption in the game due to a dog coming on to the field!! A conventional cricket website (i.e. one which cannot or does not offer video streaming) can therefore assume the role that radio commentators would once perform, when they would allow the readers to imagine how a stroke was played or a ball was bowled! This adds to the excitement of the reader! Thirdly, the game lends itself to an enormous amount of statistics, which makes it a statistical delight. A well designed website would allow a cricket buff to explore this treasure trove and get him/her hooked! In that sense, the database of Cricinfo does stand out for its sheer global reach.

Furthermore, the views of expert cricketers/cricket commentators can be harnessed through various means including interviews, columns, podcasts, blogs and other interactive frameworks designed on a website. Finally, it is possible for a website (if it has the relationships to back it up) to offer fantasy cricket games, memorabilia, souvenirs and merchandise in a faster and perhaps more economical manner, making it an attractive wholesome package for cricket lovers.

Each of these underlying cricket market factors has shaped the Cricinfo growth story. However, before its competitors or potential entrants into the cricket website market contemplate replicating a Cricinfo-like model, they would do well to also understand the website-specific factors that have contributed to Cricinfo achieving this critical mass. Cricinfo has thrived on bringing in viewers to track live scores on its website, and has subsequently got them hooked with exclusive premium content. Today, Cricinfo followers swear by its ability to deliver high quality ball-by ball commentary, features, interviews and interactive discussions on a wide variety of topics, spanning every cricket-playing country, in a most user-friendly manner. Even as this post was being finalized, Cricinfo unveiled its revamped website, which to me, looks set to raise the bar even higher for its competitors.

This leads me to ponder whether there is any space for new entrants in the cricket website marketplace? I do anticipate that the barriers to entry are significantly high in an already crowded cricket website marketplace (which is primarily targeted at eyeballs in India). Some of the challenges that will confront any potential entrant into the cricket website market are outlined below:

(1) Premium on Content: It is often said that everybody has a view on the game of cricket. The biggest challenge for cricket websites will be to deliver content which has a high premium attached to it. In the context of a cricket website, this would mean their ability to assimilate large amounts of information pertaining to cricket matches, players, teams, venues, etc. Even more critical is the ability of a website to analyse the information and provide the readers with interesting articles/columns, which can get the readers hooked, and allow it to stand out from the rest of the crowd.

(2) Competition for Advertisements: The cricket website industry is getting more and more crowded (what with conventional players from the newspaper and the television industry also setting up separate cricket-related websites or separate pages within their websites, as also mobile platforms). As would be obvious in any crowded marketplace, the competition for advertising revenues will only be stiffer. In such an environment, readers would be drawn to a website primarily on the basis of its content.

(3) Viewer Fatigue: In a sense, with cricket being played almost 365 days a year, sustaining the quality of the underlying cricket product itself will be a challenge. Consequently, sustaining viewer interest in the game itself will be an even bigger challenge for industries which are ancillary to the primary product. I fear that with a glut of T20 matches, viewer fatigue is likely to set in sooner or later, and this could have an impact on underlying business of reporting cricket.

(4) Purchasing Power: While a lot of cricket websites do generate significant viewership figures, it is interesting to note that most services offered are free services and not based on a “pay per view” model. While creation of premium content could be one factor in ensuring a migration from a “free” to “pay per view” model, websites also need to ensure that their offerings are priced in a manner that is commensurate with the purchasing power of the Indian consumer marketplace.

(5) Building Social Media and Digital Media Relationships: The growing influence of various forms of social media have not been lost on Cricinfo and the sooner its competitors or a potential new entrant realize the power of social media networks in harnessing fan communities, the easier it will be for them to attract greater eyeballs. In addition, it is extremely important to have an underlying technology platform which enables content delivery across different media platforms in a user-friendly way. This is easier said than done. In Cricinfo’s case, these were made possible by its acquisition by ESPN, which allowed it to leverage ESPN’s expertise in the fields of broadcasting, sports marketing and digital media. For a potential new entrant, it would require significant capital investments, which is a challenge in today’s environment.

(6) Clarity in the Legal Environment: The live ball-by-ball commentary application has been built around a live telecast of a cricket match by a television channel. A couple of years back, the Justice M Chockalingam of the Madras High Court initially restrained mobile operators from disseminating cricket scores and updates by SMS for the ODI cricket series between India and Pakistan, on a civil suit filed by Chennai-based Marksman Marketing Services Private Limited, which was the exclusive global SMS rights-holder for the cricket services. Within three days of this order being passed, Justice R. Bhanumathi vacated the interim injunction granted by Justice Chockalingam but asked mobile service companies and content providers to maintain accounts of revenues from the messages so that the plaintiff company could be compensated later if it succeeded in the main suit. The judge passed her order at the end of a hearing that saw lawyers for Marksman Marketing Services Pvt. Ltd, arguing against those representing several cellular companies and content providers on the question of whether there could be any copyright over scores that are telecast live. I have not been able to locate any subsequent decision of the Chennai High Court on this suit, and am not aware if a final judgment on the same has yet been delivered. This issue, will have significant implications for all websites and content providers, and hence there is an urgent need for clarity in the legal environment in India.

My own personal viewpoint on this matter is as follows: As long as the textual representation of a game can contain significant elements of originality (i.e. the language contained in the ball by ball commentary, the analysis that is made, the discussions that are held etc.), the author of such textual representation (i.e. a website) can claim the information to be “fair use” for the purposes of relaying news, and can also claim a copyright on its textual representation. This is primarily because the scores of a game are said to be in the public domain as soon as the telecast is made, and therefore it is not practically feasible to prevent the subsequent relay of information by a website/mobile service provider to its subscribers. This view has also been adopted in various other jurisdictions, including the USA, where similar issues had arisen in the context of a mobile service provider paging the scores of a NBA game.

The continued growth of this exciting cricket-ancillary market will depend on how well both existing and new players are able confront the above mentioned challenges.

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

Analyzing the Post-IPL endorsement landscape: De-coding the perceived conflicts between a Player’s Individual and Team Sponsors

Cricinfo.com has carried a column titled “Endorsements get a shake-up” (http://content.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/405833.html), which seeks to highlight the conflicts between individual sponsors of Players and team sponsors in cricket, particularly in the context of the IPL. The crux of the column, as suggested by its authors, is that the IPL appears to have altered the economics within the multi-million dollar player-endorsement industry, where individual player deals are now gradually losing ground to team endorsements.

To me, the entire issue of conflicts between player endorsement contracts and team sponsorship contracts is a case of “old wine in new bottle”. Such perceived conflicts have existed in the cricketing landscape, have been managed and can be managed in the near future as well. For example, this issue had also cropped up in the pre-IPL landscape in the context of the players’ personal sponsors being in conflict with BCCI’s and ICC’s sponsors for marquee events such as the Champions Trophy in 2002 and the Cricket World Cup 2003. Subsequently, the solution that had been agreed upon by Players and the governing bodies was that (i) players would endorse products of official sponsors of the ICC or the BCCI only in association with atleast two other players in any advertisement; and (ii) such promotions would be used only for a specified time period during and around the ICC/BCCI event in question. With the introduction of the IPL, it is just that the layers of conflict have increased i.e. the Players and their Agents now need to ensure that their new individual endorsement agreements are structured in a manner that there is no conflict with their obligations to (i) the ICC; (ii) the BCCI; and (iii) the Franchisee to which the Player is contracted to play for during the IPL, whereas prior to the conceptualization of the IPL, the third layer simply did not exist.

Rationalizing the Endorsement landscape in the context of the Franchise Model

When the IPL was conceptualized, it was clearly the objective of BCCI to (a) ensure the widest possible coverage and audience for the IPL; and (b) maximize revenue generation of the IPL. Towards this end, the BCCI invited bids from various corporates, and the eight highest bidders were granted the rights to operate eight city-based teams respectively. The BCCI has entered into a Franchise Agreement with each of the eight successful bidders, which outlines the rights and obligations of BCCI and the Franchisee on a host of issues, including the manner in which various revenues earned on account of the IPL are to be shared/distributed between BCCI and the Franchisees. While income earned from sale of media rights and from licensing and merchandising are shared between the BCCI and the Franchisees, income earned from certain other rights such as (i) the naming rights in respect of the Franchise and/or Team; (ii) the shirt sponsorship rights in respect of the Team; and (iii) official suppliership rights in respect of the Team are exclusively retained by a Franchisee. Furthermore, Franchisees are also entitled to retain gate receipts earned from stadium audiences for their “home” matches.

From the above, it is evident that for a Franchisee to earn a profit on its initial investment i.e. the Franchise Fee paid by it (For example, Reliance Industries Limited paid $111.9 million as a Franchise Fee to win the Mumbai franchise), a Franchisee needs to exploit its lawful revenue stream opportunities to the maximum extent possible. The basic commercial assumption that a Franchisee makes while acquiring the rights to a Team is that it can drive higher sales of its products/services (by reaching out to its target audience through the Team). It is in this context that Franchisees negotiate various sponsorship deals, riding on the brand recognition of its primary assets i.e. Players.

Yes, this does lead to situations of potential/actual conflict. The Cricinfo column points out some interesting situations of potential/actual conflict, which make for interesting analyses:
(a) a scenario where leading players are forced to endorse certain brands for their franchises in categories they have steadfastly refused to promote in an individual capacity;
(b) a scenario where some leading players are required to endorse “under-value” brands, which don’t match their stature; and
(c) the potential domino effect on a player’s individual value in the event of a failure of a franchise to attract sponsors.

Situation (a) ought to be addressed between the Franchise, the Sponsors and the Players, where certain Players can be given a limited right to opt-out of certain category endorsements (provided that they furnish adequate reasons for their refusal to do such endorsements). For example, if it is against the religious principles of an individual player to consume alcohol, and he is not willing to sport the logo of an alcohol brand on his shirt or helmet on those grounds, he should not be compelled to do so by either the sponsor or the franchise.

Situations (b) and (c) are where a Player and a Franchisee have to play ball with each other. A Player has to remember that in a team sport, the Franchisee has a significant role to play in shaping a Player’s career with such Franchisee’s IPL Team, as also in the development of his stature outside the field. Equally, a player’s or a team’s failure to perform on the field could have an adverse intangible effect on the brand value of a franchise (Examples being that of Kolkata Knight Riders in 2009 and Royal Challengers Bangalore in 2008). Hence, I do not think Players should be allowed to discriminate brands on the basis of their perceived values or on the basis of their impact on a player’s stature, as that would undermine the very economic basis of the Franchise Model, as described above.

I do not believe that the IPL landscape poses any different a challenge to the Players, in terms of their endorsements, than what the Players were already accustomed to. In my view, so long as the concerned Parties i.e. the Player, his Individual Sponsor and the Team Sponsor are all clear about (i) the scope and extent of a player’s obligations under the respective sponsorship/endorsement contracts; (ii) the rights conferred on the respective sponsors under their respective sponsorship/endorsement contracts; and (iii) the duration for which these rights subsist; any perceived or actual conflicts in the endorsement obligations of a Player can be addressed. What this essentially calls for is a due diligence exercise to be conducted by a Player, the Sponsors (both Individual and Team) and the Governing Bodies in their respective capacities, bearing in mind their respective commercial and legal interests.

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

The Implications of Chris Lewis’s Conviction- A Case for Designing Robust Player Management Systems in Cricket

On May 20, 2009, former England cricketer, Chris Lewis was sentenced to 13 years in prison by Croydon Crown Court after being found guilty of smuggling cocaine into the country on a flight from St Lucia. He was arrested at Gatwick Airport in December, along with a friend, Chad Kirnon, when customs officials found five cans of fruit juice in his luggage in which cocaine had been dissolved.

Predictably, there have been various reactions (some of sadness (http://content.cricinfo.com/england/content/story/405230.html) and some which refer to a promising talent that was rarely fulfilled (http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/may/20/chris-lewis-profile)) to the above news. Most observers have pointed out that that this case serves as yet another example to modern-day players on how not to cope with life without the adulation and fan following, post-retirement from the game. While I agree with the sentiments expressed above, I do believe that cricket’s institutional mechanisms also hold have to shoulder responsibility to a certain degree in shaping a player’s career, and ensuring that cases akin to Chris Lewis’s case are avoided to the extent possible.

Cricket, like most other sports, has transformed itself from an amateur sport to a professional discipline in the last 15-20 years. Needless to say, with (i) the mushrooming of various T20 leagues across the globe; (ii) players being paid relatively higher sums of monies by their governing bodies; and (iii) celebrity endorsements being increasingly viewed as an integral part of brand marketing strategies adopted by corporates, the economic wellbeing of modern day cricketers is more or less assured. However, there have been innumerable cases of cricketers going astray due to their inability to handle their fame, image and finances appropriately. While the Player in question ought to be ultimately responsible for managing his career, image and brand in accordance with publicly acceptable standards of propriety, the governing bodies (i.e. the Cricket Boards, the Franchise Teams which the Player represents and the Provincial/State Cricket Associations) ought to shoulder some responsibility in shaping the career path of a cricketer.

As things stand, it would be interesting to know from various governing bodies, the initiatives that they have taken to ensure that appropriate player management systems have been devised. While most countries now have cricket academies, which seek to serve as training grounds for cricketers to hone their cricket-playing skills and sharpen their physical fitness, I am not so sure that the same amount of emphasis has been laid on developing a player’s soft skills. A few interesting questions that arise in this context (and perhaps could be the subject-matter of a professionally conducted survey) are outlined below:

(1) How may governing bodies offer non-cricketing education as part of their curriculum? To elaborate, how may governing bodies offer courses on basic education, etiquette and behavioral training, legal education, financial management, sports psychology and post-cricket professional opportunities?

(2) How may governing bodies invest in hiring professional experts of the highest calibre to render courses/modules on the above disciplines?

(3) How many governing bodies assist players in locating appropriate professional support (be it financial, legal, psychological or managerial)?

(4) Do governing bodies adopt processes through which only those professionals who are accredited (by complying with rigorous professional standards) can provide necessary support to players?

While I do not expect any survey to show too many governing bodies in a positive light, an honest appraisal of the absence of/shortcomings in institutional mechanisms and subsequent redressals by governing bodies, by putting in place, robust player management systems, will only help sustain the growth of the game of cricket, governing bodies and players alike.

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.

It’s just not Cricket! – Why audiences may dislike “DLF Maximums” and “Citi Moments of Success”

As IPL-II draws towards its final stages, I have been noticing a growing feeling of resentment in both the Indian and South African media with the IPL and its Sponsors, particularly with the intrusive nature of sponsorship communications adopted by the main sponsors of the league i.e. DLF and Citi. Sample the following criticism by a columnist Stuart Hess in his column in the Star (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=6&click_id=17&art_id=vn20090507055930749C348994):
“Sponsors might be happy to be thanked as often as they are by the IPL’s team of spokesmen – they can hardly be called commentators anymore, so much have they sold themselves to the corporations – but there comes a time when it wouldn’t be a bad idea to employ a little subtlety.
However, subtlety and the IPL are about as compatible as oil and water – the two just don’t mix – so we’ll have to put up with spokesmen screaming about a six that’s no longer a six, but a maximum sponsored by an Indian property company whose finances have taken a hit during the credit crunch, and a catch that’s a success backed by a bank that needed bail-out money from the Obama administration.”

Elsewhere, there has been severe criticism of the concept of having a “strategic time-out” after 10 overs of each innings on the grounds that it was introduced purely to provide the television broadcaster to sell more advertising spots and that it is a direct intrusion into a game of cricket, disliked by players and spectators alike.

In addition, there has been an added criticism of the excessive media coverage of the creators of the property (i.e. officials of the BCCI and the owners of the IPL teams). Sample the following criticism by Kunal Pradhan in his column in the Indian Express (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/premier-propaganda/453135/0):
“The stars of the IPL, they’d have us believe, are the strutting team owners and the IPL’s “owner” himself, Lalit Modi. Certainly, Modi (or, as Rajasthan Royals star Shilpa Shetty recently called him, “the brainchild behind the IPL”) is signing autographs like he’s the main attraction. Well-trained cameras follow him adoringly across the stadium, as he waves magisterially to the people his minions have summoned to gawk at the wonders of his IPL. You would be forgiven for thinking that you were watching one of Kim Jong-Il’s giant propaganda games from North Korea; since we aren’t allowed to see the relatively thin crowds, the resemblance is even more marked. And, in all this, the cricketers that actually prop up the system are forgotten — it doesn’t give a damn for them.”

Some of the above criticism maybe excessively harsh as the IPL is just in its second season and still has a long way to go before it can be considered as a mature sports property. Along the way, the creators of the property and the sponsors associated with the property will also need to transition into mature sports brands whose messages to their respective target markets are tailored in an appropriate manner, so as to enhance rather than dilute their respective brand values. Research has indicated that brands that reach out to their audiences through a meaningful gesture or by including their target audiences to become a part of the event, achieve greater returns on their sponsorship investment.

The IPL and its Sponsors will soon realize that effective brand communications are those that convey meaningful messages to an audience’s event experience. Those communications that divert the attention of the audience from the experience that they are trying to have, or intrude, onto an audience’s event experience are less likely to be viewed as being effective and more likely to be viewed as being merely a necessary evil. For cricketing audiences, a shot that clears the boundary is a six and will remain a six. A wicket obtained by a bowler is just that- a wicket! By trying to term a six as a “DLF Maximum”, or a wicket as a “Citi Moment of Success”, it appears that DLF and Citi have devised sponsorship communications which seek to alter time-tested fundamentals of the game of cricket, or which have the effect of intruding onto an audience’s event experience.

I do believe that if the audiences don’t like a product, the same would be reflected in lower television rating points and lower in-stadia audiences for the event. Furthermore, there would inevitably be a dilution in the brand value of organizations associated with the product. This, in turn, will force the hand of both the IPL and its Sponsors in various ways. Consequently, the participants in the IPL matrix i.e. the IPL, the broadcaster, and its Sponsors may re-negotiate their agreements with each other, so as to specify stricter quality control mechanisms on all aspects of the production of the event, including the manner in which brand communications are tailored. Perhaps, IPL-III may witness the beginning of more mature brand communications from the participants in the IPL matrix, whether by choice or by compulsion.

About the Author:

Amrut Joshi leads the sports practice at MMB Legal in Bangalore and can be contacted at amrut@mmblegal.in. The views expressed in this post are his personal views.