Considering the hype and hysteria that accompanied the launch of the Indian Premier League in 2008, it was only fitting that the final was a nerve-shredding thriller. Chasing the Chennai Super Kings’ 164, the Rajasthan Royals knocked off the runs with the very last ball of their twenty overs. The players, the fans, even the Royal’s mascot, a lion called Moochu Singh, were wild with excitement.
Moochu Singh, our ninety-third object, was just one of the novelties introduced to the world’s most lucrative cricket competition. From the moment the forty-four-day tournament was launched by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) in early 2008 it grabbed headlines with the big names involved and the huge money on offer. Of the eight franchises, the Rajasthan Royals were the cheapest with a player budget of US$67 million, unable to compete with the likes of Chennai, who, in February’s player auction, bid $1.5 million for the services of M.S. Dhoni, or Hyderabad, who got Australian all-rounder Andrew Symonds for a mere $1.35 million. The players, it was reported, were being paid more than £500,000 for six weeks’ work.
Symonds was just one the stars on show when the first of fifty-nine matches began on 18 April with Bangalore facing Kolkata in Bangalore. Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath and Adam Gilchrist were involved, so too a trio of South Africans in all-rounder Jacques Kallis, fast bowler Shaun Pollock and national team captain Graeme Smith. The best players from West Indies, New Zealand and Pakistan were also represented; in fact the only nation not involved was England, because the tournament clashed with its domestic season and its top players were contracted to the ECB. Only Dimitri Mascarenhas, an England player but not on a central contract, took advantage of the riches on offer, leaving his teammates to mutter about the inequity of it all. ‘It’s silly to think that you’re losing up to a million [dollars] over six weeks,’ Kevin Pietersen told The Times. ‘It’s definitely something that the hierarchy needs to fit into our fixtures.’
The ECB promised to look into the matter and sent a delegation to India to study the tournament, muttering vaguely about setting up a rival competition more in line with the English season. Later they would ensure the loyalty of their stars by offering them each substantial win bonuses reported to be as much as £2 million.
In India, meanwhile, no one gave a hoot what the English thought. They were too busy picking a franchise as the tournament got under way. With so much hype the IPL had a lot to live up to, but it fulfilled every expectation. ‘The IPL has had everything,’ said Kanishkaa Balachandran in an article reviewing the tournament for ESPN Cricinfo. ‘Shiny uniforms and big money, controversy and comedy, dancing girls and dancing down the track. And, lest we forget, lots and lots of big hitting.’
When it all ended with the Royals’ victory over Chennai on 1 June opinion was divided about what it meant for the future of the game, as it had been thirty years earlier when Kerry Packer came to town with his World Series Circuit. ‘Twenty20 has become the central financial pillar of cricket,’ wrote the Sunday Times. ‘In infancy, it was a diversion and an entertainment; in maturity, it is the bread-winner. The sport has never been so wealthy as it is right now… everything to do with Twenty20 is measured in millions. Every stakeholder – from cricketers to counties to countries – is reassessing their priorities and business plans. The game may be cash-rich, but many of its well-wishers are confidence-poor. They fear the unknown final destination of this vast gravy train.’
Cricket writer Rob Steen struck a more optimistic note, asking: ‘How can anyone who cares about the game’s future not be delighted that the upshot, properly handled, might be millions of additional apostles and disciples?’ He added, however, that he foresaw difficulties ahead. ‘Turning on, or even up to, a match to see Glenn McGrath re-cross swords with Sachin Tendulkar will be all well and good, but who, beyond India, will care whether they play for Mohali or Mumbai – let alone who wins? Even in India, persuading the public to care about a team’s fortunes, that barest of necessities for a spectator sport, may prove an insuperable hurdle.’
And that’s proving to be the case. Despite the fact that in November 2012 Pepsi bought the IPL sponsorship rights for five years for approximately $71.77 million (almost double the original title sponsorship deal of 2008), television audiences are on the wane. Ratings figures for the first sixteen games of 2012 were down 8.75 per cent on the same stage the previous season, with the cumulative figure decreasing from 127.40 million to 122.44 million. As brand analyst Santosh Desai told Cricinfo, sentiment is key to audience viewing habits and sentiment can rapidly change. ‘When the tide turns, then it can turn dramatically,’ he warned.
In Steen’s opinion the best option for the IPL, and cricket in general, would be for the ICC to join forces with the IPL and ‘rebrand it as the World Cricket League’ with sides from every major cricket-playing city in the world. ‘Who knows, it might even excise the word “burnout” from the players’ dictionary.’