Bored Members - Guests | Media | White Bored | Interview | Bored Anthem - Songs | Boredwaani | Cartoons | Facebook | Twitter | Login

Auction and Other Issues

by Mahek

Last week I had written a post about why some players may not make good administrators. The post focused on three core issues related to the upcoming auction in the Indian Premier League. Aditya from forwardshortleg cleared up one of the points. Shane Warne has shared his views on the two other issues I had raised.

According to him, no franchise should be allowed to retain its players at the start of the auction. Once a player has garnered a winning bid from one of the franchises, his old franchise has the option to buy him at a premium of $50,000. For example, if Bangalore put in the winning bid for Sachin Tendulkar at $1.5 million, Mumbai then have the option of buying him at $1.55 million. Of course, Mumbai can also waive their option of buying Tendulkar and let Bangalore keep him.

I quite like this idea. It gives all the franchises the chance to bid for the best players. At the same time, the high bids garnered by the players would make it difficult for franchises to retain more than a handful of players as there are salary cap constraints to look after. More importantly, this also addresses the issue of franchises paying players through alternate means in order to keep their payroll in check.

However, Warne has also talked about franchises retaining their captains by directly negotiating a contract with them. I understand where he's coming from but it might lead to franchises cutting corners by paying their captains outside their IPL contracts. Also, how are the two new teams going to choose their captains when most of the players are already with one of the eight teams?

There are other interesting options Warne has suggested and some of them are worth pondering over. Let's hope the league does what is required to have as transparent and equitable distribution of players as possible.


Soulberry said...

The premium is a good idea. First-option theme...

straight point said...

going by the same logic... here is another example why warne will not be a good administrator...

there is nothing in his suggestion that favors franchisee... he has talked with single minded purpose to benefit players (hence self) only...

Mahek said...


All the franchises get a chance to buy every player while they also have the option of retaining some of their current players. How does this not take into account the interests of the franchises?

You seem to have missed the point of this post. It's not about whether Warne would make a good administrator or not (Notice I have mentioned a point of his which I am opposed to?). It's about solutions to the issues that will crop up when the league sits down to decide how to distribute players.

straight point said...

just like sachin suggestion can be held against him and a sweeping judgment can be passed based on his single suggestion that he won't make a good administrator... i believe this is another case of passing that sweeping judgement...

the suggestion aim is based on self-interest only... as if franchise are nothing but money milking machine and the three years he has invested time, money emotions count for nothing...

so apart from coughing big money for the (highest) bid he also have to cough the 'top-up'... brilliant!!!

no rocket science who's interest this suggestion of warne aims at...

Mahek said...

If Warne's ideas are implemented he wouldn't even make the auction as the Royals might want to sign him as their captain.

I don't get why players shouldn't be paid what they're worth. If a franchise is so desperate to retain someone they should pay him what he's worth. The salaries are anyway low compared to the league's total revenue and the rules have been loaded in favour of the owners as the Ravindra Jadeja episode has shown.

And let's not get into how the franchises have invested so much in the players. They get these players for two months a year. It's not like they have built academies and nurtured them from an early age. Also, they don't pay for the players' treatment once the IPL is over. Sehwag has injured his shoulder two years in a row and GMR haven't paid for his treatment. Ditto for players like Flintoff and Hayden.

Aditya said...

Warne's idea of a premium system will create more people skipping first class cricket ( like nannes, Hodge) and tempt players from few countries like NZ,SL to pressurize their board even more. Basically Warne is trying to milk more money! He just got something around $400k in the first auction, so he wants more! Many players were robbed because of the 3 year same salary logic: Amit Mishra, Pragyan Ojha's salaries never crossed $50k because of the same reason. He wants more money, As simple as that!

And deciding the Captain is a bad idea as again the salary would be fixed before hand, which would lead to many deals under the table!

All players released and put in an auction would be the ideal solution! N Srinivasan was the only franchise owner who opposed it and given his chances of becoming the BCCI president player retention will happen!

IMO players get payed very well for the IPL, after all they play 14/16 T20 matches and that too for 2 months a year. All of these are more than what their national boards pay them annually.US $ 7 million cap is good enough. Why would GMR pay for his injuries when he goes about playing for BCCI 10 months a year? With Sehwag earning something around US$ 1 million for 2 months work, I am sure he can afford his medical bills. It's not like in football where they play for the Club for 10 months a year .

Coming to the $50k extra fee, that should be only for players who have represented India and other players who have played International Cricket rather than all players in the auction! Would the Deccan Chargers want to pay $200K instead of $150k for the services of a certain VenuGopal Rao or Would the Delhi Daredevils want to pay $200k instead of $150k for the services of a Mithun Manhas?

Mahek said...

Paid very well? The league makes close to $200 million every year through just TV money. Player salaries at $ 70 million are just 35% of it. Look at other leagues and you'll see pretty much all the best ones pay the players close to 50% of total revenues (Total, not just TV). So NO, the players are NOT paid as well as they should be. It just seems they are because they've never been paid this much.

The reason Mishra and Ojha weren't paid more was because NONE of the players were paid more unless they want back into the auction. It's not Warne's fault. And under the new system the market will determine the value of these players. It's not like they'll be stuck with sub-100,000 salaries.

If a player gets injured playing for a franchise it should be the franchise that has to pay for his treatment. Why should his board foot the bill when it's not getting any money for allowing him to play in the IPL? The salary they get from their franchise is for their cricket, not for their injuries. For that there is, or should be, insurance.

I don't think Srinivasan was the only owner opposed to releasing players. I think all the current owners are keen on retaining some of their players.

There doesn't have to be a constraint on who the premium applies to. A franchise can very well choose not to pay the extra $50,000 for Venuslowpal or Manhas, or if it's their current franchise they can just bid for the player. That way they don't have to pay the premium.

Aditya said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aditya said...

ou are comparing with Other leagues aka Football, see in football they play for their club almost throughout the year!Even if you see in terms of revenues as well, the prize money in cricket has never been good, look at the ICC events where prize money is so low, even the cricket boards don't pay the players 5% of the money generated through TV right and other revenues, lets not compare with other spots shall we? In cricket they are being paid very well!

I just took Ojha and Mishra as examples for the 3 year same salary rule's losers, we need a robust and fool proof system inn which player salary will change every season!

I think the IMG and the player retention issues started the Cold war between Modi and Srinivasan!

Th BCCI gets maximum money from the IPL, its share is bigger than what any franchise gets,and till recently I think central pool sponsor money was not given to the teams and most importantly, franchise fee,which makes up most of the money goes to the BCCI and no one else! Hence they can afford to spend more on players! ( over US$ 60 million per year combining the 8 existing franchises)

US $ 50k premium should not be on all players, some limit on whom it has to be there should be specified! In some cases it will be equal to the salary! Time will tell what will happen on this point!

Mahek said...

Shouldn't the salaries be based on revenues? If a company is making more money it should pay its employees more, isn't it? The cricket boards have to pay a much larger number of cricketers and also invest in a number of other things, something franchises don't have to. So why is it that these franchises pay more money to the BCCI than they do to the players? It still doesn't explain why national boards have to pay for treatment of players injured while playing for their IPL teams.

The premium amount can be $50,000 or less. The amount is not as important as the concept. They could just as well do a salary range for which the premium should be fixed.

0-$249,999: $10,000
$250,000-$499,999: $20,000
$500,000-$749,999: $30,000
$750,000-$999,999: $40,000
$1,000,000+: $50,000

This way no franchise can complain about not having the option to retain their players. Heck they can retain 10 or 15 if they want as long as they stay within the salary cap. Atleast this will prevent them from paying players outside of their IPL contract, and even allow them to sign the players as brand ambassadors as there can't be any arguments about players not being paid by their market value.