tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21636894.post7963908007378219376..comments2024-03-18T23:33:45.536-07:00Comments on A CRICKETING VIEW: "Corporate Governance", BCCI, IPL and HaighKartikeya Datehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03512491310629949028noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21636894.post-82177437092944274062010-06-01T17:13:37.762-07:002010-06-01T17:13:37.762-07:00Do you mean entire cricket teams being formed in o...Do you mean entire cricket teams being formed in order to make money? I'd be surprised if this has never happened before IPL/ICL/Packer, but that isn't my point. The Packer teams were shortlived at least partly because the establishment began to play along. The influence may not have been as extreme as in the IPL, but in either case it needs to be scrutinised. (Apart from that, surely you are not saying the time-outs count as tampering with the format - the serious changes clearly came before the business model that you and Haigh are both focussing on here.)<br /><br />My understanding of the ideas discussed as "corporate governance" is that they are aimed at corporate bodies and their incorporated structure, not necessarily the commercial/profit angle. I agree that it would be a mistake to look at things in a money-making framework - I just don't think that is the issue here. <br /><br />Yes, we can ask whether governing bodies should authorise commercial leagues/teams. If anything, Haigh's third proposal seems to agree with you. But whichever approach is taken, it is certainly worth questioning how its implementation is governed, and also worth at least look at the relative advantages and disadvantages of the purely confederate structure that is more or less entrenched at different levels.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04663760985851423746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21636894.post-54468526765676106602010-06-01T03:44:42.759-07:002010-06-01T03:44:42.759-07:00Before the IPL, name one instance of entire cricke...Before the IPL, name one instance of entire cricket teams being formed, with the blessing of the ICC. The Packer teams are an example - but this was shortlived. Besides, even Packer did not tamper with the format of cricket. I don't think the view that the IPL is somehow just another in a natural and ongoing shift of cricket into the entertainment business is sustainable.<br /><br />Cricket has always been governed by corporate bodies - non-profit cooperative confederate bodies, not commercial businesses.Kartikeya Datehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03512491310629949028noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21636894.post-22456608373669635012010-05-31T23:51:01.483-07:002010-05-31T23:51:01.483-07:00I'm afraid I still don't understand what y...I'm afraid I still don't understand what you're getting at. Even accepting the notion that sports governance may not completely fall within the remit of "corporate governance", cricket is governed by corporate bodies. Is the governance of those bodies themselves not important?<br /><br />Was there really not any impact on cricket from those who were using it for business purposes before the IPL? Is it really not possible/likely that people supposedly engaged in govening a sport are making decisions that benefit their business interests when the two are intertwined? There is a clear difference between sport and business, if a national body makes a lot more money than it spends on its supposed raison d'etre, is it really engaged in sport, in business, or something else?<br /><br />I don't get the impression that Haigh is trying to answer all the questions. His preferred outcomes are not entirely clear, but in at least one case he is suggesting that the sort of questions you ask about IPL and franchises weren't answered by the right people, and that improving the structure would change that. That doesn't sound too different to what you are saying.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04663760985851423746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21636894.post-30479512145950834512010-05-31T22:23:15.904-07:002010-05-31T22:23:15.904-07:00The problem with corporate governance - is precise...The problem with corporate governance - is precisely that it cannot replace "cricket governance", but is pretending to in Haigh's formulation. The two are not the same and I refrained from using that phrase in the post, precisely because I wanted to remove the argument from the technical level at which Haigh wants to make it.<br /><br />The difference between Sport and Business is not murky at all.<br /><br />If we are to be concerned with cricket governance, then core questions about existence of the IPL and franchises are inevitable. Further, the questions that we will be compelled to ask won't have obvious answers like the ones Haigh presents.<br /><br />The recommendations in Haigh's column reads like a memo drafted by a public relations professional, not a cricket journalist.Kartikeya Datehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03512491310629949028noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21636894.post-77644048581087765522010-05-31T21:46:04.191-07:002010-05-31T21:46:04.191-07:00Kartikeya, I really don't see what you're ...Kartikeya, I really don't see what you're getting at here. "Corporate governance" has a lot to do with covering your rear-end, but it's not restricted to making money.<br /><br />I don't know where you get the impression that Haigh appears to think that the IPL has simply been a good thing for cricket. I also don't know why you think that a faithful quote from the Telegraph article serves to make the same point as the author did, let alone suggest that the IPL was ever about "citizenship".<br /><br />The history of interaction between cricket as sport and cricket as business is much murkier than a bright line at the advent of the IPL, as you hint at with your reference to the invention of T20. However we view it, it is indeed a significant distinction. The buzzwords are not important, but something like corporate governance is surely an acceptable framework through which to look at this interaction (including conflicts of interest). <br /><br />Whether enough money is being spent on cricket is one question, in which the percentages are irrelevant. But a world full of real problems only answers the questions over the other 92% (if the figures have any relationship with reality) if we know that it is being spent on those problems. Otherwise, perhaps there isn't actually any truth in distinguishing between cricket as a sport and cricket as a business when it comes to our national governing bodies.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04663760985851423746noreply@blogger.com