Written by Aarav Gupta
A. Introduction: The recent conclusion of the IPL Auction in Jeddah has proved one thing for sure, the cricket environment is changing dramatically as local competitions like the Indian Premier League (IPL), SA20, and ILT20 take centre stage on the cricket calendar. The SA T20 League in January, The PSL in February – March, the IPL in April and May, the SLPL in June – July, The Caribbean League in August – September, The Big Bash (Australia) in December, This explosive growth of T20 cricket leagues has though created a convoluted network of legal and contractual issues, completely changing the professional cricket scene. This blog examines the changing nature of contracts, their effects on managing players' workloads, and the increasing tension between franchise and international cricket responsibilities.
The transition of cricket from the five-day Test format to the thrilling T20 leagues has caused a cultural and commercial shift. With huge investments and previously unheard-of viewership, T20 leagues have become profitable businesses. The IPL, which is worth over $12 billion, is a prime example of this format's financial success.[1] T20 competitions provide players with lucrative salaries, sponsorship opportunities, and international recognition. But this expansion has a price, especially when it comes to the laws that regulate the sport. Once simple agreements with national boards, player contracts have transitioned into arrangements that need some careful negotiations and legal protections.
B. Contractual Structure and Franchise Influence:
Players sign contracts with franchises that outline their remuneration, performance obligations, endorsements, and other duties. Some important clauses are about:
Remuneration Clauses: Based on base pay, match fees, and performance bonuses.
Injury and Insurance Clauses: Protecting players and franchises in case of injuries sustained during the league.
Termination and Exclusivity Clauses: Preventing players from participating in rival leagues or endorsing conflicting brands.
Franchises, now primarily controlled by some selective groups have a lot of control on player schedules and branding, particularly in the IPL, which sometimes causes conflict with the national boards that have historically overseen players' activities. The owners of the Delhi Capitals (DC) and Mumbai Indians (MI) have each purchased franchises in brand-new T20 leagues in the US, South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates.[2] At least one club from eight of the 10 IPL teams plays in another league overseas. The Marquee Players who were mostly reliant on central contracts from national boards, guaranteeing their first priority commitment to international cricket, are now not so dependent on them. To play in leagues, players are, nonetheless, increasingly negotiating "No Objection Certificates" (NOCs). Boards like the BCCI closely regulate player involvement, making the NOC procedure a complicated process, denying them in most cases.[3] To maintain the IPL's market exclusivity, for example, the BCCI forbids Indian players from participating in overseas competitions. However, the glaring pay gap sometimes makes foreign players prefer league contracts over national responsibilities.
The relentless T20 schedule, which regularly clashes with international matches, also leads to legal issues. If players violate their national responsibilities to honour franchise contracts, they run the danger of infractions and fines, which complicates their duty. However, doing so also runs the danger of negatively impacting their relationship with the franchise owners, which would reduce their ability to earn money from these leagues. This high amount of workload also raises questions about player fatigue and performance, which has led to debates over whether contracts should include workload limitations. Ben Stokes, the Test captain for England, ended up retiring from the One Day format citing the tremendous physical and mental toll that playing Test cricket and several T20 tournaments has on players.[4] These problems are reflective of how urgently teams and boards must include strong player welfare clauses in their contracts, such as required rest times and workload limits.
For players from associate cricketing nations, where the glaring cheque gap between franchise leagues and national teams sometimes pushes them to make tough decisions, franchise cricket has become an economic lifeline. For players from countries like Afghanistan or the West Indies as well an IPL contract can easily exceed a year's worth of revenue from international cricket. Boards like Cricket West Indies are finding it difficult to retain elite talent as a result of many players prioritising franchise obligations above national responsibilities due to financial constraints.[5] Because of this, there is a legal ambiguity around the enforceability of central contracts. Furthermore, bilateral series are regularly cancelled or rescheduled as a result of scheduling conflicts between the ICC's Future Tours Programme (FTP) and T20 leagues. The legal connection between the ICC, national boards, and franchise leagues has become unclear as a result, which has led to concerns over governance and the future of cricket's scheduling system.
The ICC must take a more assertive regulatory role to balance franchise cricket and international obligations. Introducing a standardized contract template for T20 leagues could address crucial issues such as NOCs, workload management, and financial parity, thereby reducing conflicts. Contractual frameworks also need to evolve, incorporating flexible NOC policies that balance player autonomy with board priorities, mental health provisions like mandatory rest periods and counselling, and revenue-sharing models to ensure equitable benefits for players and boards from league earnings.
C. Transition of Cricket Towards a Club-Based Model and the Role of the ICC:
Cricket seems to be gradually moving towards a club model modelled after football, with players spending most of the year with teams and clubs and saving national responsibilities for major competitions like the Cricket World Cups (50-over and T20 formats) and sporadic Test series. If fully implemented, this approach is economically feasible since it leverages fan interaction, boosts broadcasting income, and provides steady job prospects for a wider range of cricket players, including domestic and periphery players who would otherwise find it difficult to get notoriety.
From the standpoint of the player, such a system offers chances beyond national selection and guarantees financial security and professional development. It allows boards and leagues to diversify their revenue streams by facilitating the wider commercialisation of talent. However, by reducing national teams to sporadic prominence in international competitions, this trend runs the danger of weakening the national status traditionally attached to cricket.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) and national boards need to take aggressive measures to buck this trend and preserve cricket's special fusion of pride in the country and international entertainment. As the authority that oversees the sport, the ICC is required to implement rules that strike a balance between the needs of franchise cricket and the integrity of international matches. For instance, it may establish a structured global cricket schedule that incorporates franchise leagues without jeopardising international obligations or imposing required player participation agreements for important bilateral series.
To remain relevant, cricket boards must also rethink bilateral series. One strategy is to incorporate the thrill and creativity of T20 competitions into conventional games. Reviving trilateral or quadrilateral series might provide fans with high-stakes rivalry outside of World Cups and rekindle memories. Such events might become more appealing with longer, well-publicized bilateral series with rivalries, themed stories, and interactive fan engagement initiatives. Fan interest may also be maintained by implementing innovations like dynamic broadcasting elements, mid-game fan exchanges, or fantasy cricket partnerships.
The ICC and cricket boards must also strive to solidify bilateral series as a display of talent and national pride to maintain regulatory and financial control. The integrity of the sport may be maintained by utilising digital channels to generate excitement for these games, guaranteeing competitive equality through organised team rankings, and investigating innovative formats. Without such steps, cricket runs the risk of losing its historical relevance as a game of national pride and fervour and becoming only a source of amusement controlled by commercial franchises.
D. Conclusion
Cricket faces both an opportunity and a challenge as a result of the growth of T20 competitions. Although they have brought about a revolution in the sport, they have also shown weaknesses in its legal and governance structures. Finding a balance between the established international cricket culture, player welfare, and franchises' financial interests is the difficult part.
The ICC has sent a strong warning to the promoters of many leagues still expanding in this area.[6] According to the document, recent experiences have shown that there are several ways that the integrity of the game can be compromised, including, but not limited to, the entry of dishonest individuals who are determined to engage in corruption and/or doping into the sport. Domestic events in the form of T20 Leagues—the premier Twenty20 league sanctioned by and played under the National Cricket Federation—seem more vulnerable to such an attack than other game formats.
*The Author is a legal Scholar from National Law University, Delhi, India
(The Image used here is for representative purposes only)
References:
[1] Times of India, 'IPL Brand Value Reaches Whopping $12 Billion; Here Are the Top 10 Most Valuable IPL Brands 2024' (Times of India, 2024) https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/ipl-brand-value-reaches-whopping-12-billion-here-are-the-top-10-most-valuable-ipl-brands-2024/articleshow/115964117.cms accessed 10 December 2024.
[2] ESPN Cricinfo, 'Owners of Mumbai Indians, CSK, Delhi Capitals to Own Teams in MLC' (ESPN Cricinfo, 2023) https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/owners-of-mumbai-indians-csk-delhi-capitals-to-own-teams-in-mlc-1363831 accessed 10 December 2024.
[3] Times of India, 'BCCI Opposed to Seeking Approval from ICC for Domestic Events' (Times of India, 2019) https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/news/bcci-opposed-to-seeking-approval-from-icc-for-domestic-events/articleshow/70626113.cms accessed 10 December 2024.
[4] ESPN Cricinfo, 'Ben Stokes to Retire from ODI Cricket After Chester-le-Street Farewell' (ESPN Cricinfo, 2022) https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/eng-vs-sa-1st-odi-ben-stokes-to-retire-from-odi-cricket-after-chester-le-street-farewell-1325304 accessed 10 December 2024
[5] NDTV Sports, 'West Indies May Cease to Exist If Players Prioritise T20 Leagues: Report' (NDTV Sports, 2023) https://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/west-indies-may-cease-to-exist-if-players-prioritise-t20-leagues-report-3708434 accessed 10 December 2024.
[6] Times of India, 'National Cricket League Raises Concerns Over Regulations and Standards: Report' (Times of India, 2024) https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/news/national-cricket-league-raises-concerns-over-regulations-and-standards-report/articleshow/114138545.cms accessed 10 December 2024.
Comments