Cricket and corporate culture – shall the twain meet?
By Swapan Mitra
Purists may call it whatever they like, but the Indian Premier League (IPL) has undoubtedly proved to be a huge success. We have witnessed some spectacular cricket, remaining thoroughly absorbed in the thrill and excitement provided by the first-ever competition of this kind. Electric fielding, innovative stroke-making, skillful bowling – the tournament has dished out everything for millions of viewers spread across the world. And most importantly, not for once was there any indication of the kind that cricket was going to lose its true identity. Wild slogging rarely dominated the proceedings; the subtle nuances of batting and bowling were very much in evidence throughout the competition. There were sixes and fours galore, but a major chunk of them came from authentic cricket shots. The shortened variety of the game only necessitated a different approach, even where success proved difficult to achieve in the absence of a strong foundation.
In any case, why should we worry if the demands of the limited-over games lead to the ‘invention’ of some unorthodox but productive shots that are beautiful as well? Hitting a six over third man was just unimaginable a few years ago, but it no longer is. Virender Sehwag, who often plays the shot, already has two triple hundreds in Test cricket under his belt. Remember Douglas Marillier, the little known Zimbabwean player who invented the technique of scooping a delivery from on or outside the off stump over the fine leg region? The shot is used by a number of established batsmen these days. So purists should not lose their sleep over the future of cricket. Cricket can only be a gainer if all the positives of 20/20 cricket are absorbed into the longer version of the game.
This will certainly make Test cricket look more interesting and competitive.
So if we dispel our fears about the possible ‘character assassination’ of the game and ignore the so-called entertainment part of the IPL, i.e., the cheergirls and some song-and-dance programs, the only issue that really merits discussion is the relation between cricket and corporate culture. There seems to be an inherent contradiction between the two – one a game of “glorious uncertainty,” and the other driven by a motive that demands certainty of profit, leaving no room for luck or uncertainty. Apprehensions of a clash of cultures were always there, but the issue came to the fore only when Bangalore Royal Challengers owner Vijay Mallya, shaken by his team’s abysmal performance, fired his CEO Charu Sharma and even made some unkind remarks against team captain and icon Rahul Dravid, who is already an established legend in Indian cricket.
As the incident caused quite a flutter, Mallya said he wanted Dravid to do the best for the team and to produce good results. “I don't think Rahul Dravid enjoys being at the bottom of the league tables, and certainly I don't.” He regretted his decision of not being more assertive during the player auctions. Mallya said he was prevented by Dravid and Sharma from buying some cricketers he wanted. “When Dravid was not present at the second auction, I wanted to get some players but Sharma was tentative about them. I mean I bought Misbah-ul-Haq because I was determined to do it. There were other players I was discouraged about," the business tycoon said.
Mallya’s frustration at his team’s performance is understandable. Except for the win-win situation in Calcutta soccer where he owns both the top teams, Mohun Bagan and East Bengal, his forays into sporting arenas are yet to pay dividends. His newly acquired Force India still has a long way to go before it can set the F1 tracks on fire. The brand and image conscious businessman though erred in hastily overreacting to the situation.
Of all games, cricket is the one with a glorious, mind the adjective glorious, uncertainty. Even a star-studded team is sometimes found humiliated in the hands of a much inferior opposition. In cricket, it takes only one delivery for a batsman to get out, and it might come at any moment no matter how great a player he is or how much time he has spent at the crease. We also often forget that a species called bowler is needed to make the game possible. Like batsmen hitting centuries, they too have the right to bowl some unplayable deliveries to dismiss even the best of batsmen. A wrong umpiring decision or a brilliant piece of fielding can also turn a match on its head. These are the factors that make cricket so fascinating, and no amount of corporate culture can force it into a realm of predictable certainty.
But even if we feel some sympathy for Mallya, the way his company executives tried to interfere in cricketing decisions was just ridiculous. There were reports that these honchos joined team meetings and even advised the coach and players on how to play the game. Imagine an official called Tom, Dick or Harry advising Dravid on how to set the field, or what to do after winning the toss! Rajasthan Royals skipper Shane Warne had reportedly threatened to quit if there was any interference by the owners in cricketing matters. (Did it have anything to do with his team finally winning the tournament?) Mukesh Ambani and Shah Rukh Khan, the owners of Mumbai Indians and Kolkata Knight Riders respectively, apparently did not meddle in their teams’ cricketing decisions.
But it would perhaps be a mistake to make Mallya the villain of the piece. There is no guarantee that the other owners, benign till now, won’t do the same thing in the coming days. Because, it is not a matter of one individual only – a whole system investing millions of dollars is involved here. Some sensitive players have already expressed their reservations over being ‘auctioned’ like just another inanimate object. But they have to bear with it; they can’t have the best of both worlds. The owners, who have spent millions on their teams, will certainly demand their pound of flesh.
But what the owners should remember is that the name of the game is cricket in which official circulars mean nothing. They must devise some methods to factor in the inherent uncertainty of the game before fixing their targets. They should understand that a late inswinger can suddenly shatter all their plans discussed in the last board meeting.
What is the greatest ill effect of the capitalist system? Well pundits may differ but all will advocate that this very system changes each and every aspect into a notion of profit. This will be clearer ...
NAT26National/EntertainmentAge of Bollywood BombastBy Chitra Padmanabhan"Mumbai kisi ke baap ka nahin hai," growled the city's joint commissioner of police K.L. Prasad recently. He was briefing ...
SPO1Sports/Education/SportsWhy India fails to win Olympic medals CommentBy Ashis RoyAt the Olympics, India had been known as hockey champions, though the last hockey gold was a devalued one, coming in ...
London, Nov.22 ANI: England's cricketers will have to make a hard choice between retaining their central contracts or signing up for next season's Indian Premier League IPL, said Hugh Morris, the ...
By Swapan Mitra
Purists may call it whatever they like, but the Indian Premier League (IPL) has undoubtedly proved to be a huge success. We have witnessed some spectacular cricket, remaining ...
