BCCI clearly to blame

There is something seriously wrong with the Indian cricket board if its relationships with key stakeholders like sponsors, TV rights holders and others are in such a wretched state that so many are distressed enough to wish to leave the game they have supported. Sahara India’s decision to give up its long-standing sponsorship of Team India (worth `540 crores in its latest renewal) as well as to renounce its IPL team, Pune Warriors, which at `1,700 crores is the highest paying franchise, is the latest blow to the BCCI.
When you strip emotions from the Yuvraj Singh health situation, what clearly emerges is the BCCI’s inflexible attitude and refusal to waive a pedantic sticking to the rulebook when it comes to some stakeholders. Curiously, the rules are bent at will for others like a team backed by a powerful corporate entity which was once allowed to field five foreign players in the Champions League as one of their Indian cricketers was supposedly sick.
Considering BCCI’s problems that began with a Zee TV contract for TV rights and continued through Kochi Tuskers, who were stripped of their IPL franchise, down to Neo Sports annulling their rights contract worth several million dollars, it is apparent that doing business with the BCCI is fraught with risk and uncertainty.
With little transparency in its working, the BCCI is known to behave with utter disregard for the ethics that should govern any relationship in sport. At this rate, its financial well-being — the very fount of its autonomy — faces serious threat. And it’s not hard to see who’s to blame.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
R

Editorial

The just-concluded summit meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) in Chicago leaves gaping questions about the viability and direction of the world’s largest military alliance.

If we rework Shankar’s cartoon with, say, Mahatma Gandhi riding a bullock cart of democracy in his dwija dress and Jawaharlal Nehru standing in his sanatan pundit’s dress, a thread across his body, an