A Phoney War

Every sport needs a villain - someone to add colour and column inches to the back pages and for the supporters to get all vexed about. For English cricket journos and supporters our villain is not any individual (now that Ponting has retired) but a whole organisation that exudes corruption, personal vendettas, protectionism, unfettered commercialism, pettiness, and downright vindictiveness - yes the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has been called all of those things. With its four board members, five vice-presidents, twenty-seven state associations in five zones, a further twenty-eight working parties, and more importantly 1 billion cricket fans, the BCCI generates a lot of cash  and a lot to get vexed about - and we do. Let's just look at few weeks in the world of the BCCI.

Joe Root - an English player but an Indian shot?

Last week the BCCI was fined approx $10m (about 6% of its annual revenue) by the Competition Commission of India for 'misusing its dominant position and indulging in anti-competitive practices'. This decision relates to the BCCI's support of the IPL and its effective banning of the IPL's still-born predecessor, the ICL. Naturally the BCCI does not accept this finding and is going to appeal. The previous week the BCCI gifted the media a headline grabbing ruling by banning a group of thirty English county players from a planned trip to India to further their cricketing education by playing on spin-friendly wickets at the Global Cricket School in Pune. The media smelt the acrid whiff of revenge for the 2-1 series defeat of India by England and reported accordingly - the ban was imposed, the press surmised, because Joe Root, who played so well in his test debut in Nagpur, was the beneficiary of a similar programme a year or so earlier. So you can add the sickly scent of protectionism to the unsavoury odour emanating from the BCCI.

But if you take a deep sniff you will also discern the subtle but all pervading musty aroma of the ECB in the mix. The ECB caused a row with the BCCI by playing Stephen Finn in an English Performance Programme match in Mumbai in late November to prove his fitness for the Eden test. Root also played in this game. First in appears that the BCCI did not sanction this EPP tour, and second the BCCI understood that it would not involve players from the Test squad. Following BCCI's letter of complaint the ECB has had to apologise (I seem to have missed this apology in the British press) lamely pointing out it wasn't a proper match.

In case you have been asleep for the last fifty years let me remind you that the ECB and BCCI have 'history' that is likely to run longer than the hundred years war. The power struggles in the ICC (International Cricket Council) make the Borges saga seem like a family tiff. The ICC is of course almost completely controlled by the BCCI who are hell bent in seeking retribution for years of real and imagined disrespect and arrogance shown by England (and Australia) towards India and the subcontinent in general. And the focus of all this retribution? - the IPL, that over-indulged love child of the BCCI and Indian commerce. In the eyes of the ECB the IPL represents all that is wrong with the cricketing world and the ECB's judgement is completely clouded by the red mist it produces at the mere mention of the competition. Whether it is restriction of trade, Stanford or KP, the ECB has shown it is incapable of rational thought and deed when it comes to how to deal with the IPL. But the ECB now realises that the IPL has grown into a commercial monster that is funding the dominance of the BCCI. The brand of the IPL, after only five years, was valued at approximately $3bn. If you think that is naan in the sky then consider that in 2010 Sony agreed to pay the BCCI $1.6bn over a ten year period for the IPL television rights.



Would Morgan be playing for England if
Ireland was playing in the IPL?

Which leads us nicely to the real reason for the BCCI banning the County players trip to India. Last year the BCCI had tried to get some IPL 'exhibition' matches played in Ireland and Scotland and offered to underwrite the costs. However the ECB has paid for the rights to all international matches in these countries and effectively banned IPL players from playing there. Buried deep in the Indian press is a quote from a BCCI representative that shows the true reason for the BCCI decision to ban the County players: "Discussions are still on but it has to be a two-way process. We can't see how we can allow the counties to send their players to practice here when the ECB refuses to allow the IPL players to play even in Ireland. They must explain why they did it." How are the two issues linked? The background to this is the ECB's own (as yet unexplained) plan for an international T20 competition to compete with the IPL. But the ECB appears to be thwarted in it plans as its natural allies in the ICC, Australia and South Africa have both done deals with the ICC (and therefore the BCCI) to allow IPL players to appear in their new 'domestic' T20 competitions thus giving them an international appeal.

So the ECB faces some worrying questions - is there room for another international T20 competition? How can the ECB keep its centrally contracted players from benefiting by playing in the IPL? Which of course are questions that go to the heart of the issue - money. The BCCI has lots and the ECB is trying to get more and both see T20 as the only potential source of new income. They are both fishing in the same pond but the BCCI is using dynamite whilst the ECB is using an old rod. Unfair? - of course it is. But when has any war ever been fair?