Before delving into the latest changes in IPL rules, an important question arises: When is the next mega auction expected to take place? The Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy (SMAT) T20 tournament, a key event for IPL franchise scouts, is scheduled from November 3 to December 15.
Logically, holding the auction right after the SMAT final would make sense. However, franchises have only been vaguely advised to “keep the end of November free,” meaning the auction could occur during the early stages of the SMAT. This uncertainty is partly due to leadership changes at the BCCI and ICC after December 1, with the Indian board appointing a new secretary and the ICC getting a new chairman. Although Arun Dhumal, head of the IPL governing council, is expected to be at the forefront of the mega auction, the idea of a grand live TV event from an overseas location may face resistance.
Franchises would prefer a bit more flexibility around the SMAT schedule, but so far, they’ve had to adjust. Despite attending several BCCI meetings to seek clarity and offer suggestions, they often end up dealing with new regulations that try to cater to everyone, sometimes resulting in outcomes that seem less than ideal.
Before this sounds like mere complaining, it’s important to recognize the positive aspect of the two-year ban on overseas players who enter the mega auction and then withdraw at the last minute, only to reappear in the next mini auction for a larger payout. Those managing substantial funds are unlikely to fall for the same trick repeatedly, nor are IPL fans.
It’s clear that the revised ‘uncapped’ player retention rule could be more accurately referred to as the MS Dhoni Clause. However, offering ₹4 crore is rather insulting for a legendary captain who has led CSK to five IPL titles and has been a two-time World Cup winner with India. While the rationale behind this figure may relate to MSD’s popularity and marketability, ₹4 crore seems quite minimal. For those who devise such regulations, it may also seem excessively high for a player with no international experience. This situation arises from attempting to apply redefined terms for ‘uncapped’ players across a broad spectrum.
On October 1, CSK CEO Kasi Viswanathan reassured that they might not utilize the uncapped player retention card for MS Dhoni, as discussions with him are still pending.
The new regulations are intended to serve multiple objectives. Removing the retention cap on overseas players could be dubbed the IPL’s Sunriser Clause. Additionally, the retention fees of ₹18 crore for players ranked No. 1 and No. 4 could be called the (Hardik-Rohit) Bhai-bhai Clause, aimed at alleviating the concerns of Mumbai Indians management after a tumultuous 2024.
There’s also the Patriot Clause, which stipulates that an overseas player cannot earn more than the highest retention fee of ₹18 crore. Although the rule states “or lower,” it’s worth noting that in November 2023, players like Mitchell Starc and Pat Cummins fetched bids exceeding this limit, making “lower” a non-option.
This raises questions about the true nature of the IPL: Is it a top-tier global sports league or a government department enforcing price controls? The BCCI’s price control measures have also ensured that franchises retain a considerable amount of their salary cap for overseas players, while the actual amount received by the player remains capped at ₹18 crore, with the surplus directed to the BCCI.
This salary cap for overseas players sends a discouraging message to Indian cricketers, suggesting they will never command higher salaries than their overseas counterparts. If there’s another rationale behind this, I’m open to hearing it. Additionally, there are unfinalized ideas regarding the Right to Match (RTM) card that have surfaced, adding to the confusion.
The scenario unfolds as follows: after an intense bidding war for player X, Team A leads with a ₹5 crore bid, prompting the player’s original franchise to consider using their RTM card. Under the original rules, they had the option to do so. However, the twist now allows the highest bidder to increase their bid after the RTM indication, meaning if the original franchise wants to retain player X, they must offer a higher price. This change effectively transforms the RTM from a protective tool into a strategic element of the bidding process, potentially leading to conservative bidding from teams wishing to gauge whether the original franchise will activate the RTM. The real value of player X could be obscured, as teams may only discover the true worth once the RTM is declared, defeating the original purpose of the auction.
What franchises truly desire is the opportunity to conduct trials in an organized and fair manner without disputes with domestic teams and coaches.
What they do not want is the monotony of annual auctions. Player continuity is crucial for strengthening teams and fan bases. Franchises have requested fewer auctions, but BCCI’s penchant for auction-related events and arbitrary rule changes suggests it prioritizes media partners over franchises and players. After all, auctions generate news, buzz, and television airtime.
Rohit Sharma previously stated that the Impact Rule could hinder player development during a podcast with Adam Gilchrist and Michael Vaughan before leading India to a T20 World Cup victory. Despite his concerns, the rule is set to remain in place until 2027, leading to speculation about increased player participation in the future.
Finally, regarding the new ₹7.5 lakh match fee for Indian, overseas, and impact players, a key takeaway is the need for robust domestic contracts.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Stay ahead of the latest cricket industry trends by subscribing to our free cricexec “daily briefing” newsletter.
Name of Author: Cricexec Staff
