Indian Premiere League
Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly, Yuvraj Singh and Gautam Gambhir are among the big names released by their IPL franchises, along with Brendon McCullum, Chris Gayle and Andrew Symonds, while Virat Kohli is the surprise retention for his team for the next three seasons. Wednesday was the deadline for the franchises to name the players they would retain from their current squads and while there is no common thread running through the choices of players retained and released, the key factors seem to be form, brand appeal and age.
Kolkata Knight Riders, Deccan Chargers and Kings XI Punjab have decided not to retain any of their players, while all the other IPL franchises have held back at least one current player. Chennai Super Kings and Mumbai Indians, the 2010 finalists, have retained the maximum of four players each, in the process parting with half of the $9 million salary cap available to teams.
According to the auction rules for IPL 4, teams can retain up to four players, only three of whom can be Indians. The retained players - who must have been part of the franchise's registered squads for the 2010 season - will be valued at $1.8 million for the first player, $1.3 million for the second, $900,000 for the third and $500,000 for the fourth.
Mumbai, as expected, held on to Sachin Tendulkar, the highest run-scorer of the 2010 season, offspinner Harbhajan Singh, West Indies allrounder Kieron Pollard and Sri Lanka seamer Lasith Malinga. Chennai took the Indian trio of MS Dhoni, Suresh Raina and M Vijay out of the auction, in addition to South African allrounder Albie Morkel, their regular opening bowler. Delhi Daredevils retained only Virender Sehwag, meaning Gambhir - their captain for the last two seasons - is in the auction pool.
The retained players |
The most interesting choice came from Royal Challengers Bangalore whose sole retention is Virat Kohli, currently on an impressive run in ODIs. There is no place for Dravid, their icon player, nor for Anil Kumble, their captain and the head of the state association. Kolkata's decision to drop Sourav Ganguly, the biggest cricketing name to emerge from the city and the face of the franchise's on-field persona, is a bold step.
Punjab's decision to release all their players was expected following their dismal 2010 season, which means Kumar Sangakkara, Mahela Jayawardene and Yuvraj Singh will go under the hammer.
Siddhartha Mallya, owner of the Bangalore franchise, said the decision to retain just one player was backed by financial logic. "You must realise that with retention, a big chunk of your budget gets taken away," Mallya told ESPNcricinfo. " Mumbai and Chennai have kept four players, which means that half their budget is gone. It finally comes down to how much money one was going to lose. We have a big balance sheet but we have lost $1.8 million for keeping one player. We still have about $7-odd million left but if we had retained four then we would have had to buy virtually an entire squad with the remaining half."
Age is not a universal disqualification. It didn't count in Tendulkar's case, nor in that of Shane Warne, Rajasthan's coach and captain, who was retained by Rajasthan Royals, along with Shane Watson, a day ahead of the deadline. One franchise official explained the difference: "Warne is a global brand so that only helps to promote the franchise."
If Rajasthan opted for Warne because they have always viewed the IPL as a global brand, Mumbai went with Tendulkar and Harbhajan for their popularity. Pollard and Malinga may have made the cut on account of being impact players, who have backed up their strong Twenty20 credentials with consistent performance.
Sehwag's match-winning abilities, coupled with his rapid emergence as a brand, clearly had a say in Delhi's decision to retain him. MS Dhoni and Suresh Raina must have been shoo-ins for Chennai following their compelling IPL and international form. Vijay's performances, coupled with his potential to attract a strong local fan-base, must have tilted the scales in his favour, while Morkel's proven all-round skills were always going to be an asset. If there is a stranger in this crowd, it could be Kohli. Despite his owners trumpeting his recent performances, Kohli is still work in progress. But he is young, ambitious and has the youth appeal - all qualities of the UB Group's target audience.
relief for Kings XI Punjab
The Bombay High Court has granted Kings XI Punjab an interim stay on its expulsion from the IPL but said the franchise will have to satisfy certain conditions, including retaining its shareholding pattern, fulfilling pending player payments and paying the BCCI guarantee money in case the final judgement goes against them. The court also rejected Punjab's request to defer the date for submission of the list of players they would like to retain for the fourth edition of the league, the deadline for which expires today. Punjab have until midnight to finalise their list.
After listening to both parties over the last two days, Judge SJ Vajifdar said that "prima facie" Punjab had a strong case against the explusion and the "interim injunction" was only just. But his verdict carried many riders, the most important being that the franchise cannot change its shareholding pattern and the control should rest in the hands of the four main owners: Ness Wadia, Preity Zinta, Mohit Burman and Karan Paul. The court said that these four needed to hold not less than 51% of the shares in KPH Dream Cricket Pvt. Ltd - the rights-holding company of the franchise - until the final judgement. Punjab's owners refrained from commenting on the issue before they received the court order in hand tomorrow.
In the interim, Punjab will have to submit various guarantees to the court and the BCCI. The first is clearing the pending payments to its players over the last two years, an amount running upto Rs.35 crore ($7.77 million). And now, since the franchise is free to re-enter the IPL arena, the court has asked it to commit an amount of $18 million for the next two years (at the rate of $9 million per year) as guarantee money for player payments in case the franchise participates in the league.
"When they [Punjab] sign up players, their contracts are for two years," CA Sundaram, BCCI's lawyer in the case explained. "And in case they lose the arbitration the players' contract must be honoured. Hence the bank guarantee for of $18 millionn which is two years' contract money for players."
The other important condition the court asked Punjab to fulfill was to pay the BCCI $3.5 million per year for a period of two years, as security towards any damage incurred by the board in case the final verdict went against Punjab later on.
"For the time being they have been permitted to participate but on very stringent conditions where they have to furnish various assurances and papers," Sundaram said. "Importantly all these are only pending the final decision in the arbitration proceedings as an ad interim measure."
When asked whether BCCI had considered challenging the verdict in a higher court, Sundaram said the decision would be made when the order is in hand.
Wednesday's news will be seen as another blow to the IPL, whose 2011 tournament has been put increasingly at risk by a succession of court cases. While the Rajasthan and Punjab franchises were embroiled in courtroom battles, a third (Kochi) barely made it over the line. As a result of the controversies, the player auction for the season has been delayed by several months.
In October the BCCI had terminated Punjab, holding the franchise guilty for violating the franchise agreement on three counts, the biggest offence being that the ownership had changed twice in the first three years of the league, something that went unreported to the Indian board.
The franchise moved court last month seeking redressal for the cancellation of its IPL contract. Its petition contended that the termination was a "deliberate and calculated" move to ensure a new and more lucrative re-bidding process. Both parties then decided to opt for the arbitration process, but that too got embroiled in controversy when the arbitrator, Justice BN Srikrishna, recused himself after admitting to the BCCI that he had been legal counsel for the Wadia Group, part owners of Punjab, for many years.
At that point the issue seemed to be snowballing into another protracted battle, just like the one Rajasthan Royals had got involved in with the BCCI. But Punjab rushed to the High Court for help and have now found new crutches to lean on before building their case in front of the arbitrator.
The confusion over the eventual number of teams that will be involved next season affects every component of the world's most lucrative domestic league: its teams/ franchises, its players and its very structure.
