There are always many means, but everything is towards one end. Does T20 seek making the game better overall or just its finances?
India won the World Cup in 1983 which commercialized the One-Day game. India next won in 2007, commercializing T20. There is nothing wrong in commercialization of the game, but to what end. India has not won either World Cup hence and came close to achieving it only once, in 2003. So does this mean that commercialization has not led to a development in skills?
The pace of commercialization of T20 far outstrips any cricketing revolution. Loyalties have gone for a toss, and the identity of the cricketer transcends borders. Cricket is going the football way, or is it? All domestic football leagues are profit minded, but at the same time seek to contribute to the National Squad. The strongest domestic leagues, viz; EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, and Seria A have all seen their National Teams as World Champions. On the contrary, IPL, considered as the strongest domestic T20 league has been accused for the downfall of India in the T20 World Cup.
So what should be the priorities of a IPL team? In its current structure, it cannot be anything but profit. This is partly due to the system put in place by the BCCI and partly because of who the franchise owners are. The few basic things required of a succesful league, or for the game’s betterment have been compromised.
First is the concept of the team. Instead of building franchises around the strongest domestic teams, the franchise system has brought together players haphazardly. This “just for now” bonding was exposed in the initial T20 when teams with less glamourous players walked over the IPL teams. Now just as the IPL teams start looking like teams (The ongoing CLT20 is a case in point), we are staring at another auction in November.
Second is infrastructure. In this case the BCCI is to blame. The franchise fee is so high that no one would think of investing in infrastructure. Instead BCCI could have asked each franchise to develop its own infrastructure, which would only have meant better and newer stadiums. This would not only be to the advantage of players, but also come as a much-needed relief for Indian fans who have been tolerant enough to watch matches in inhuman conditions in some of the stadiums of cricket’s richest countries.
Third is cricketing logic. There is a saying in Hindi “Dikhave pe mat jao, apna akal lagao“. Kevin Pietersen was bought for an enormous sum and made the captain of Royal Challengers Bangalore. He almost crashed their campaign before even the halfway stage before being rescued by Anil Kumble. No IPL franchise would have wanted an old Test match leg spinner without the X-Factor to be in their ranks. But cricketing skill? There are some things money can’t buy!
So T20 seeks what end? Football is highly commercialized. But there is a system in place and as the pockets become heavier, the game also gets better. T20 faces that dilemma. It can contribute to the betterment of the game across formats. Test Matches are more result oriented as players score faster. 400 plus targets are not unachievable in ODIs. Bowlers have evolved with the slow bouncer. But what do they all play for? It is the system which has to respond, respond well and respond quick.
