|
| Wicket games |
| Suveen K Sinha / New Delhi Jan 24, 2010, 00:58 IST |
|
A concoction of politics and sport leaves a bitter aftertaste.
Three years ago, Damien Martyn disappeared abruptly after playing two Test matches in the Ashes series in Australia. For some time, few knew his whereabouts. He has not played international cricket since then. In his career, he has played five Twenty20 matches and had a brief flirtation with Subhash Chandra’s Indian Cricket League. At the Indian Premier League auctions a few days ago, he was snapped up by Rajasthan Royals. Captained and coached by Martyn’s former brother in baggy green, Shane Warne, RR paid $100,000 for Martyn, after making space for him by buying out Mohammed Kaif’s contract for $675,000.
No one bid for Shahid Afridi, who won the semi-final and final of the last T20 World Cup for Pakistan; he was an absolutely steal at the base price of $250,000. If someone wants to believe that matters other than politics tipped the scales in favour of Martyn over Afridi, he should be charged with substance abuse. These same franchisees had come together to pay the top price of more than $1.5 million each for Flintoff and Pietersen knowing that the two would be available for about half the tournament.
Nothing but politics could have ensured that not one bid came for the 11 Pakistani players at the auction, many of whom were part of the team that won the T20 World Cup. Sohail Tanvir was also there, the bowler with the odd action, who helped RR clinch the title in the first season of IPL.
The Pakistanis were not included in the second season of IPL, which took place when the embers of 26/11 were still hot. This time they were put up for auction, after being given no-objection certificates by the Pakistan Cricket Board and clearances from various ministries in the Pakistan government.
Things would have been better if BCCI, in conjunction with the franchisees, had acknowledged the politics of sports (any argument that the two did not mix was blown to pieces in the ambush on Togo’s soccer contingent). They could have approached the Indian government to seek a clear stand on the participation of Pakistani players. Failing that, there was no need to make the Pakistanis part of the auction.
According to reports, at least one franchisee had to evince interest in a player for him to be a part of the auction. A simple “sorry, guys, but we fear trouble” would have been less discourteous. The Indian government, on its part, would have done well to decide whether it was going to make nationality a factor that could undermine the Pakistanis’ right to earn a livelihood. If that answer was yes, it should not have been shy of stating it, like it did for IPL II, and like it did in denying IPL II security because it was becoming a distraction at the time of Parliament elections.
The way the things were done makes your columnist wonder if it is the same IPL and the same Lalit Modi, who seems to brook no obstacles to the path of making money, that moved IPL II to South Africa.
Suveen K Sinha is resident editor, Business Standard, New Delhi
suveen.sinha@bsmail.in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Read Business news in |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content Guide
