The best-paid teams in all sports

A year ago, I wrote about the results of the Global Sports Salaries Survey, a survey conducted by sportingintelligence.com that revealed the world's best paid teams... in all sports. On its way, the survey also went on the reveal the league's with the highest average salary.

A few weeks ago, the results for the 2011 Global Sports Salaries Survey were revealed - and the results are interesting indeed. Some of the top football, basketball, and even cricket teams in the world are represented from league's like Primera Liga (football), NBA (basketball), and IPL (cricket).

Baseball team New York Yankees of the MLB were the world's best paid team last year, but Spanish footballing duo of Barcelona and Real Madrid have since overtaken them for the top spot.

The richest NBA team is the Los Angeles Lakers, who are fourth in the overall list behind Barca, Madrid, and the Yankees - no surprises there, since the Lakers are not only the most popular team worldwide but also two-time champions. What is surprising, though, are the next three basketball teams on the list - Magic (5), Nuggets (9), and Jazz (11) - I would've expected someone else to be ranked higher. The Celtics come in at 15th on the all teams list.

And about our Indian cricket leagues? Well, they seemed to have fallen far behind. Last year, the Royal Challengers Bangalore of the IPL were 12th on the list. This year, they are still the richest IPL team, but have fallen to 26th.

So here is the top 12 for 2011 - a detailed list of the top 200 is available on ESPN-The Magazine website:

1. Barcelona (La Liga)
2. Real Madrid (La Liga)
3. New York Yankees (MLB)
4. Los Angeles Lakers (NBA)
5. Orlando Magic (NBA)
6. Chelsea (EPL)
7. Inter Milan (Serie A)
8. Boston Red Sox (MLB)
9. Denver Nuggets (NBA)
10. Manchester City (EPL)
11. Utah Jazz (NBA)
12. Bayern Munich (Bundesliga)

Any more surprises? Barcelona, the leaders, pay an average annual salary per of $7,910,737 per player. Manchester United, one of the most famous teams in football (real football, soccer football), rank 16th. Liverpool are 20th. The two best NBA teams, in terms of record this season, are 42nd (Bulls) and 43rd (Spurs).

The NBA, who crowd the majority of the top half of the top 200, leads as the league with the highest average salary in the world, which is about an average of $4.79 million per year or $92,199 per week, sportingintelligence.com said.

SportingIntelligence also did a survey of global attendances, to mark the best attended outdoor and indoor leagues in the world. Amongst outdoor sports, the top five are the NFL (American Football - USA), Bundesliga (Football - Germany), AFL (Aussie Rules Football - Australia), EPL (Football - England), and MLB (Baseball - USA). India's IPL comes in at 10th. The NBA continues to be the best attended indoor sports league in the world.

The lesson from all this? Sport pays. And basketball is one of the richest. The IPL has shown that it has the lucrative backing to eke a space for itself amongst the top leagues, even though cricket isn't a worldwide sport like football or basketball is. India is just that crazy a market, and it's another sign that maybe, if basketball is marketed the right way, it could have a positive future in India.

FIBA 33: A boon or a curse for hoops?

When the first ever Youth Olympic Games (YOG) took place in Singapore earlier this year, there was no sign of a proper basketball tournament. I use "proper basketball" deliberately, because the tournament showcased the large scale debut of FIBA's latest brainchild, the FIBA 33.

Maybe I used correct the "latest brainchild" statement - after all, every ball player alive (no really, EVERY ball player alive) has played a less formalised version of FIBA 33. If you don't know, FIBA 33 is half-court basketball, played 3-on-3, first one to 33 in regulation time wins. Regulation time is just 10 minutes (with five minute halves), and if no team reaches 33, the one leading when time expires wins. Each team has three players plus one substitute. There is just a 10 second shot-clock, and like the international unspoken rules of basketball half-court play, if the defensive team gains possession of the ball, they have to first pass it outside the three-point arc before starting their offense.

It sounds suspiciously like every pick-up game ever played, except with referees and timers - plus I'm not sure if FIBA would be too hot on the Shirts vs. Skins idea.

Anyways, due to the fast-paced and exciting nature of the game, it was a roaring success at the YOG, capturing the largest (and loudest) crowds. Even India had a four-member squad present at the games - they failed to win any of their group games, but beat a couple of teams in the 17-20 classification to end at 18th spot.

The success prompted FIBA to discuss the format at the FIBA World Conference in Istanbul during the World Championships. Now, FIBA are hoping to take the 3-on-3 format to a bigger stage.

“We are all very excited about FIBA33, and in view of its popularity after just one day, it isn’t too far fetched to imagine it one day making it into the Olympics in its own right,” said FIBA Secretary-General Patrick Baumann.

Baumann has even said: "The US will always be able to have 12 players of the same quality which India would not be able to have. But India can have three, four or five players who can play three-on-three and they will be at the same level as the US"

FIBA president Bob Elphinston has added: "We want to use FIBA 33 to encourage more young girls and boys to play the game, to get started in basketball. We also want to create FIBA 33 as a separate discipline, not dissimilar to what we see at the Olympic Games with volleyball, in that we have beach volleyball and we have volleyball."

Is there anyone else here who thinks this new concept sounds a bit too familiar? Let's see, what is that one sport in India that involves a lot of players and goes on for five days? There is a one-day version of that sport, too, but it goes on for hours and hours. People love this sport in our country but the organisers and some fans (but mainly, the advertisers) felt the show was too long and too slow to be enjoy / capitalised on fully. So they introduced a much shorter version of the game, inspired by the version played on the grass-root level, and gave it a nifty name with a two-digit number and soon, this version became so big and popular that those who fell in love with the original version of the sport said that the new version was killing it.

I'm talking of course of cricket - After the Test format and ODI format was deemed 'too slow' for some fans, in came Twenty-20 cricket, with just 20 over games to satisfy all our cricketing needs in under three hours. T-20 has become a phenomenon since, and its league in India, the IPL, has become almost as lucrative as football's EPL and basketball's NBA.

But T-20 critics are aplenty - many have complained that it has killed the soul of the game, or that it encourages pinch-hitting cricket without the classic technical skills, that it has become more of a spectacle than a sport.

Whatever side you take on this argument, it is clear that T-20 is here to stay. Now, FIBA 33 is a similar story in many ways. Of course, basketball's long format is about the same length as cricket's short one, but the intention in both cases is to serve the needs of the our collectively shortening attention spans (I'd be surprised if many readers have actually attentively made it this far down in this article!). Just like T-20, FIBA goes back to the grass-roots of the game, thus perhaps encouraging more participation.

But this is where we feel that FIBA needs to be careful. The 3-on-3 format encourages the one thing that many basketball purists detest - the 'I' not in 'Team'. Shanmugam Sridhar, the coach of India's 3-on-3 team that played in Singapore, said: "The 3-on-3 format made for very quick games. It especially helped in showcasing the talents of individual players."

Just like cricket purists have complained that T-20 has "dumbed-down" the game, FIBA 33 critics too may claim that the new format might be a too simplistic version to feature on the big stage.

On the positive note though, T-20 has been good for other formats of cricket in one way - by changing the player's attitude towards greater aggression, and of course, serving as a good platform for youngsters to prove their mettle for the "more respected" versions of the games.

FIBA 33 scores big in the fact that it will be able to involve more countries, since they will be required to field lesser players. India's involvement in the tournament in Singapore proved just that. Also, quicker games would mean greater participation. And both T-20 and FIBA 33 have been great crowd-pullers, so why not just give the people what they want?

Which side of the fence do you sit on with this issue? And while you mull over it, here is a video of the Indian three-on-three team at the Youth Olympics in their 27-11 win over South Africa.

Indian Basketball: The Corporate Takeover

Share|

In the last few months, first there was Mahindra teaming up with the NBA to promote the Mahindra-NBA Challenge. Then there was Reliance who teamed up with US-based sports marketing company IMG Worldwide to develop sports facilities and leagues in India. Now, with the appointment of United Phosphorus Limited (UPL) CEO Jaidev Shroff as the president of the Maharashtra State Basketball Association (MSBA), it seems that another large corporation has joined the race to profit through sports, and specifically, basketball.

The MSBA unanimously elected Shroff as president recently. Shroff has been supporting several sporting events in different fields for the past 15 years. This will be a crucial time for Shroff to take over the MSBA helm as basketball is growing at an unprecendent rate in Maharashtra and in Mumbai (which was crowned as India's Basketball City on this site).

Shroff has a corporate background, and the UPL has been supporting two annual basketball tournaments in Mumbai - the Ramu Memorial Tournament and the Savio Cup.

From SportzPower.com:

Commenting on this situation, MSBA Secretary M Venkatesh, said, “Maharashtra has been a strong hub for basketball. With the National Basketball Association (NBA) lending its might in promoting the game, the MSBA is eager to utilise this opportunity to further strengthen the game. The Association will focus on the grass root level, increase the participation of athletes as well as train talented players to increase the overall standard of the game in Maharashtra.”
Laying down his vision, Shroff said, “The responsibility is huge, but I'm sure I will get the complete support from all office bearers to promote basketball.”

Shroff stated that the involvement of corporate houses in the decision-making process of sports administration is good news for Indian sports and would take it to a new horizon. "The UPL Group has always supported the sports in India by offering scholarships to deserving students and we will continue to do so in the future."

One of the future (perhaps exciting) plans for the UPL with the MSBA is to introduce the 'Hoop-A-Loop League' - not really sure what it is, but it will be played in the weekends in Mumbai.

Led by the commercially super-succesful IPL, India seems to have truly woken up to the business of sport. I'll quote Abhaya Srivastava from his recent article on this growing phenomenon: "For many the success of the IPL was a symbol of the new India -- an emerging economic powerhouse, pumped up with self-confidence and aspiring to assert itself in the global arena." Srivastava goes on to say that allegations of corruption, money laundering and tax evasion in the IPL have tarnished the sports/business relationship a little bit, but I don't believe that it is enough to stop this expanding snowball. The IPL will survive the scandal and continue successfully, and from the looks of it, other corporations will continue to see green in sports, too.

Has the time truly arrived for India to take sports seriously? When I say 'seriously', I mean in the only way that really matters for a sport's promotion, through money. Mahindra, Reliance, UPL... these are all big companies with big money to potentially invest in basketball. Forget about our socialist beginnings, India is now an uber-capitalist country where to really make it you have to make it by yourself. No government is going to be there to hold your hand through it. I have been a staunch believer that success stories in India have really come despite the government, and this belief holds in the case of basketball, too.

There is of course the ugly, annoying negative side. We have all seen it happen with the IPL. Advertisements during ball breaks, commercial breaks interrupting crucial replays, a six being called a DLF-Maximum and (well respected) commentators being obliged to mention the MRF-blimp every chance they get. It's tragic to see when celebrities are celebrated more than cricketers. Capitalism in sport is a double-edged sword, because if corporates decide to sell-out basketball the same way they did with T-20 cricket it would popularise the game to a wider audience but simultaneously take the focus and soul away from the game itself.

There needs to be a sensitive balance between commercialisation and maintaining the soul of the game, and the next few years could be very telling in the growth of basketball in India.

Do you agree with Shroff? Is the involvement of corporate houses in the decision making of sports, and in our particular case, basketball, a good move for Indian sports?

Share|

A tale of three leagues

Share|

It's a tale of three leagues, in three countries, of three sports.
1. National Basketball Association (NBA) - Basketball, USA
2. English Premier League (EPL) - Football, England
3. Indian Premier Leauge (IPL) - Cricket, India

India has a total of ONE succesful professional sports league: the IPL. ONE. Like it or hate it, but that's the truth. Hell, even many cricket purists hate it, disregarding the Twenty-20's format as 'real' cricket.

Whatever - we aren't here to argue about what cricket should be. We're here to talk about what the IPL wants to be. The IPL wants to be the NBA, and it has wanted to be the NBA for quite some time. It is no secret that the league format, the franchises, the cheerleaders, the dugout (or "bench"), the player profiles, the "strategic" time-outs, the advertising frenzy, the television broadcasts, etc in the IPL have borrowed heavily from the NBA and even the EPL. Sorry football fans, but in many ways financially, the IPL has actually overtaken the EPL. According to the inaugural Annual Review of Global Sports Salaries (ARGSS) (later published on sportingintelligence.com), IPL became the second highest paid league in the world this year, overtaking the EPL. You know what's it second to? The NBA.

Even NBA Commissioner/Tsar/Maharaja David Stern become a fan of the IPL last November. In an interview with DNA-Mumbai, Stern said, "We are closely watching as to how the IPL has been a game-changer in sport. It has adopted a number of Western sporting practices like the franchise system, player bidding, the home-and-away games, double-headers and the like."

Now, IPL may take yet another page out of the NBA book. After adding two new franchises to the existing eight in the IPL, the BCCI is looking to change its format to finish the tournament in the same seven-week period as the previous three IPL editions. Until IPL-3, each team played each other team twice, home and away, to play a total of 14 matches each, which meant that a grand total of 60 matches were played. If the same format is continued for 10 teams, 94 games would have to be played. The BCCI don't want that because they have a time constraint.

One of their options is to do with the NBA does: Divide the teams into two groups (NBA-read: Conferences) of five. Like the NBA, the teams in the same conference play each other three or four times, whereas teams in opposing conferences play each other twice, once home, and once away. Each team plays 82 games in the regular season. In the IPL, the proposition is that each team plays other teams in its groups twice (home and away) and the teams in the group once.

Good idea, but it does create problems. Home advantage is something that teams obviously rely on, so on what basis will the home games be played in the inter-group games?

The other idea I feel is worse, which is to have the same round-robin system in the two groups, and then the best teams move on to a 'Super Six' stage and they all play each other. With this format, there are many teams who may never get to play each other, and that completely defies the whole point of being a league.

My solution is this: screw the groups. Don't follow the NBA, follow the EPL. Have all teams play each other home AND away like the current system. Play 94 games. I can hear the groans already: there aren't enough days to fit these many games. Or the groans from TV broadcasters: we can't show more than one or two games a day because TV ratings will take a hit.

I don't see why the league can't be expanded to take a longer time. This way, it will become less of a quick tournament and more of a 'season'. Yes, international cricket clashes will cause a problem, but just like international breaks in the football season, the IPL can incorporate their season around cricket international breaks, too.

And it's fine to glamourise our leagues just as media has done it in the US, but their needs to be a limit, and that limit is crossed when the sport is overshadowed by celebrity and marketing culture. I searched for 'ipl' in Google-Images, and you know what I got? Three of the first four photos are of Katrina Kaif, Preity Zinta, and Shah Rukh Khan. The first cricketers don't show up till the eight pic. Even Vijay Mallaya scores earlier.

If we are truly looking to bring a sports league/season culture such as that in the USA, Europe, etc into India, our leagues have to be bigger, last longer, and be ABOUT THE SPORT. It is laughable that the second-richest league in the world lasts just seven weeks.

Share|

An NBA preseason game in India? Dream on...

Share|

The NBA is a very rich league, a league much richer than other sporting leagues in North America, and a huge reason for this is that the NBA is a lot more famous internationally. There are three major reasons for this:
1) Basketball is the one sport that both North Americans and the majority of the rest of the world understand and enjoy.
2) There once lived a man named Michael Jordan who was the biggest thing since basketball itself.
3) NBA commissioner David Stern is a shrewd man - and ever since he took the role of commissioner in 1984, the one thing that the NBA has done best is spread the game to other parts of the world while at the same time feature more and more international players in their own league.
Let's focus on point number 3: there are countless examples of the NBA's efforts to promote itself to a far greater international audience than just those in North America. Outside the US and Canada, NBA games are regularly broadcasted live in at least 31 more countries around the world. The recent All-Star game was broadcasted in 215 countries in 41 languages! The NBA has set up a dedicated 'Global' page to showcase its efforts around the world, and it has global websites in Brazil, France, India, Taiwan, Canada, Germany, China, Japan, Spain, Italy, Hong Kong, and the UK. There were 83 international players from 36 different countries on NBA rosters to start the 2009-10 NBA season.
And then its the NBA's outreach and grassroots events in other countries that continue to make them the ubiquitous name in basketball. The Basketball Without Borders (BWB) programme has served as "has served as a summer camp for young people designed to promote friendship, goodwill and education through sport." BWB have been to India, too, and as you may know, the NBA has teamed up with Mahindra to start a recreational league in three Indian cities this summer. Programmes such as BWB have also encouraged current and former NBA players to visit other countries, including India.
So where do we go from here? In most countries, usually the NBA's next step has been the most interesting one - organizing preaseason games featuring NBA teams on foreign soil. The NBA has been holding games exhibition games in Europe for several years already, and recently announced that the Lakers, Knicks, and T'Wolves will be playing again in Europe this October.

Even Asia has had its share of NBA action: The NBA has played six games in Japan since the 1990s, and has held preseason games in China since 2004, after Chinese star Yao Ming joined the Houston Rockets in 2002: the first game obviously featured the Yao-powered rockets against the Sacramento Kings. In 2009, when the Nuggets met the Pacers in Taipei, it became the eight Asian city to host either an NBA regular season or preseason game, along with Tokyo, Yokohama, and Saitama in Japan; Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou in China; and Macau.
You know where this train of thought of heading... an NBA game in India? FUGGEDABOUDIT! What is the one thing in common amongst all the other countries that we lack back home in India? We have the money if someone chooses to spend it (for proof, see IPL). Our extra large population ensures that even a small percentage of NBA fans make up for enough to provide enough audience for any game. And the IPL has proven that we have the technological, energy and security infrastructure to host large sporting events.

No, what we really lack back here are good, ol-fashioned arenas! Not the kind of sharp-shooting, gun-toting Arenas that plays for the former Washington Bullets; no, I mean actual, international quality indoor basketball courts, made of good quality, polished hardwood (or similar surface), with fiberglass boards, and the capability to hold a large-capacity audience. Yes, there are some new courts around the country now which come close, but we're talking NBA-quality here, people! Yes, the NBA has brought in everyone from AC Green to Dikembe Mutombo opened several courts in India over the past few years, but we're far, far hehind.
Hell, even the Indian national team has to practice on shoddy surfaces most of the time. One of the biggest complains is that the best players in India play most of their basketball on concrete courts with rubber balls, and so when they move on to play on a hardwood court with a leather basketball they are constantly struggling to adjust. Even the men's national team members that have been training with JD Walsh, Craig Esherick, and Dr. Bob Baker in Bangalore have had to work in embarassing facilities.
I'm sorry, but there's no way that David Stern is going to allow his preciously talented millionaire NBA stars to break a sweat in any of our Indian courts.
Who knows, maybe the Reliance-IMG alliance to develop sports facilities in India will change things in the future. The extremely distant future. Otherwise, no, no chance in hell.
Go ahead, David Stern, NBA, Reliance... prove me wrong.

Share|

Living the Game: The need for a grassroots basketball movement in India

In large pockets of America, basketball is more than a sport — it is a part of everyday life. A basketball court is a social center, basketball shoes are essential fashion accessories, and hip-hop music/culture remains eternally intertwined with the game. In such cultures, “playing ball” is more than being in a professional league, a college tournament, or as part of a fitness regime — “playing ball” starts from the grassroots, it’s a recreational activity, just something to do, something embedded deeply in the lifestyle.

The English, and other Europeans, and South Americans have football — the soccer kind of football — it is for them a recreation, a get-together with friends, the perfect pastime.

In India, our favorite pastime is cricket. Every thin lane, or gullie in India is a cricket pitch, every wooden stick a bat, every round object a ball. It is deeply embedded in modern Indian culture — the majority of Indian societies see children having impromptu cricket matches in their neighborhood, by the ghats of the Ganga, every barren field is a stadium, cricket references and metaphors have become part of everyday speak in the country, and get-togethers in roadside tea-shops only discuss cricket scores.

The result of our addiction with cricket is that it has become the biggest thing in India since Butter Chicken. Cricket apparel rules in athletic stores across the country, the majority of sport news in India is about cricket, and every Indian from every strata of society unites under the banner of cricket. That is why India is now one of the strongest cricket teams in the world, Indian players the world’s best, and the Indian Premier League (IPL) of cricket the world’s richest.

So when the NBA decided to tap the 1.2 billion strong Indian market to popularize basketball, they knew they were up against some tough competition. After launching an NBA-India website, their most recent development has been a deal with rich industrial conglomerate Mahindra Group to launch a recreational league in three Indian cities: Mumbai, Bangalore, and Ludhiana. The league will tip off in a month’s time and will last for seven weeks.

Eventually the Basketball Federation of India (BFI) plans to launch school and college leagues with the NBA’s guidance to promote the sport amongst the youth. When I spoke to BFI president Harish Sharma, he said the idea is to use the school, college, and city recreational league as a launch-pad to eventually develop a professional basketball league in India in three years time.

Yes, these efforts are going to increase urban interest for basketball in India, but will it really influence more people to love basketball the same way they love cricket? Everyone interested in the development of basketball in India (BFI, NBA, and those working for the game on a local level) admit their eventual goal is to make it the second favorite sport in the country, but even for that to happen, the game has to be more culturally ingrained into our lifestyles.

I believe what is really needed is a grassroots movement, a movement to make basketball more than a game but a culture. Why does the NBA, for example, sell so easily in a country like the Philippines? NBA players have created waves in the Philippines for years, including the famous Gilbert Arenas trip a few years ago. The answer: So influenced by Americanism, basketball is part of everyday lifestyle in the Philippines, bringing with it its swagger, the hip-hop culture, and NBA fanaticism.

For India, one such movement to popularize basketball into rural and grassroots lifestyle is the Sumpoorna Basketball School. Sumpoorna is the name of a basketball camp — or like its founder Subhash Mahajan likes to call “a grassroots basketball revolution” — that has been slowly growing in small, rural town of Tumkur in Southern India over the past five years. Driven by a lifelong love of basketball, Mahajan has set up this basketball camp mostly for small town and village youth, which has grown over the years to have taught basketball basics to up to 6,000 youngsters around the rural area, and launched the Sumpoorna Basketball Tournament where dozens of small school and recreational teams compete against each other.

Mahajan, who is from Kapurthala in Punjab, spent nearly three decades as a basketball coach before setting up the Sumpoorna School in 2005. He chose Tumkur, which is a village near the much-larger and richer city of Bangalore, in Karnataka.

“In India, sports and money are not compatible,” Mahajan said, “Unless of course, that sport is cricket. Selling the game of basketball amongst city kids in posh schools might change the commercial culture, but the love of the sport has to come from the grassroots level — it seems that I’m fighting this battle alone.”

“In India, kids below Grade 9 can still be engaged in basketball and taught the basics — unfortunately, after that, they have to turn toward their ‘real life’, their studies, their other career, and basketball fades away.”

Mahajan’s camp is a unique concept for India — it is a summer camp of basketball skills in a rural area. He has spent his own money into a large basketball campus, where he already has three courts and is now investing for 13 more. Kids who join the camp for around five days, where they stay in residence and play ball, all day.

As the awareness and interest for the game has spread, Mahajan has been able to organize large tournaments, and is looking to get larger. “We want to tie up with more schools, especially from the bigger cities, so that they can learn basics. I want them to live the game and not just play it.” A major step that Mahajan is looking to take with Sumpoorna is to invite senior basketball players in India to oversee and promote the Sumpoorna tournaments.

Another unique feature of the Sumpoorna tournaments has been that the games are played without refs. Indian sport has an unfortunate reputation of being shrouded in corruption and bias — and the referees have regularly been the ones footing the blame for unfair calls and pre-meditated results. The injustice was highlighted a little more than a month ago, when the referees and officials were accused of helping the home team at a major national university tournament. At Sumpoorna, the players are expected to resolve the calls amongst themselves, and more often than not, the system works.

“The players from the age 9 onwards are taught to self referee and agree on consensual play,” he said, “It is basketball at its best — the way we played it here forty years ago.”

Mahajan is from an old-school brand of hoop lovers who played the game because they were addicted to the game, and even after his prime, he could never leave the game behind. With Sumpoorna, he has been able to provide a platform through which youngsters can become hoop addicts from an early age, and as they grow, basketball becomes part of their cultural upbringing.

If these efforts are complemented by the popularization of the game in urban India, we could be heading toward a future where basketball could become a more common pastime, and as the number of players grows, the quality of basketball will eventually improve, too.

*First published on SLAMONline.com on March 25, 2010.

Reliance and IMG to develop sports facilities and league in India

Closely following on the news that the Mahindra Group will be partnering the NBA to launch a recreational basketball league in three Indian cities, here's another corporate venture in expanding sports not named "cricket" in India: Reliance Industries, led by India's wealthiest Mukesh Ambani is partnering with US-based sports marketing company IMG Worldwide in a joint venture to build sports facilities in India.

IMG-Reliance will also develop professional basketball and football leagues in India, nurture young talent at the academies, and train coaches in these sports as well.

From the Business Standard:

The new company, IMG Reliance, would set up sports facilities across the country to train athletes, thus developing the sports market. The model would be similar to the one followed in mature sports and entertainment markets such as the US. The companies plan to create and operate major sports and entertainment assets.
Mukesh Ambani, chairman and managing director, Reliance Industries, said: "Development of sports and the sporting culture is a social imperative for India in the 21st century. World-class infrastructure, frugal engineering, technology and scientific coaching are an integral part of development of today's sporting talent globally."

Plans are underway to create an agency to offer 360-degree sports management to celebrities from the world of sports, Bollywood and fashion. IMG would transfer its existing business and assets in the country to the joint venture. These include the Aircel Chennai Open, the Association of Tennis Professionals World Tour event and Lakmé Fashion Week.
However, the ongoing Indian Premier League would stay with IMG and the company's international business and executive team is to manage it.
Ted Forstmann, chairman and CEO of IMG, said: "The performance of Indian athletes on the national and international stage will improve dramatically with the correct development strategies. As a consequence, the commercial performance of sport and entertainment in India will be enhanced."

To quote an article from the The Wall Street Journal, IMG owner Ted Forstmann said that "the venture's ambitions are to create something akin to England's Premier League, for which IMG produces and distributes television programming... People might laugh at that now, but let's see where we are in five years"

The real potential profits from the venture will come from the development of professional sports leagues. The IMG-Reliance venture will look to strike arrangements with India's soccer and basketball federations to help them build these leagues.

Wow. I don't mean neccessarily good wow or bad wow... Just.. Wow...

It's all really happening now isn't it? When the richest Indian company and one of the most succesful sports management companies from the USA get involved in helping to build facilities and a basketball league in India, you know it's more than just empty words.


I've always believed that India's sporting success has always come despite the government. Despite the public sector. So, while the BFI plans and contemplates and slowly trudges towards starting a pro basketball league in the country, here come Ambani and Forstmann with a lot more money and a lot more vampire fangs to suck into the growing Indian athletic juices. Their proposed basketball and football leagues will not be too different in terms of the commercial standpoint from Lalit Modi's IPL T-20 Cricket league. Purists may completely disregard what the IPL and T-20 have done to the game, but there is no denying that now being a professional cricketer is an exciting and possible option for a lot more Indians than before.

This could turn out well for basketball in India. Better facilities, better training, more money, more talent, better teams, more fans, more merchandise... More basketball.

On the other side, it could all go bonkers... If the soul of the game itself is disregarded. Money may be able to buy a lot of things, but it'll be interesting to see how they manage to buy fans for the game in India. It's not impossible, for basketball and football are very easily likable sports, and are already two of the fastest growing sports in the country. I just hope that, like T-20 threatened to butcher what purists called "real cricket", this league doesn't butcher the game of basketball itself.

The Cricket Delusion: How Indian basketball can learn from the recent field hockey debacle

Let me start with my thesis: Sport in India is a joke.

I write this article as I watch my favourite ever sportsmen devastate the Bangladesh bowling attack with another spectacular performance. He has just completed his 45th Test century (half a dozen more than his nearest competitor), and would go on to make a breathtaking 143 runs.



It’s been 20 years since Sachin Tendulkar first gripped India’s emotions as a talented 16-year-old, and up to this day, he remains in the eye of the Indian public the one untouchable, uniting figure in the country. Globally, he’s ranked as one of the greatest to ever play the game. I don’t exaggerate when I say that there has been no more unanimously loved Indian since that Gandhi character.

Sport can’t be a problem in India when an athlete is the nation’s more powerful icon, can it? Sport can’t be a problem when the Indian Premier League (IPL), a competition of cricket’s newest format, the Twenty-20, is Asia’s first billion dollar sporting league , and one of the richest sporting leagues around the world? Of the top-10 most earning cricketers in the world, spots 1-4 and 6 are occupied by Indians. Number one is the captain of our national cricket team, MS Dhoni, and although his 2009 earnings of approximately 10 million USD are Lilliputian compared to the amount of money that superstar athletes make in other sports worldwide, these cricketers aren’t exactly fighting to feed their kids.

How can sport be a problem when India is ranked the number 1 Test Cricket team in the world? How can sport be a problem when our cricketers are as famous as our much-revered film stars? How can I call sport a joke in India, when millions keep their eyes glued to their TV sets, the housewives offering prayers to our pick of a hundred thousand gods for another victory, the fathers ditching work and the sons ditching school to sit home and watch another India international cricket match?

The problem, obviously, is the fact that all the glorious stories and figures in India belong to cricket, and if we do strike lucky and succeed in another sport, the successes are either quickly forgotten, or the newspapers find it tough to squeeze in the news amongst the barrage of daily cricket stories that the Indian audiences are overdosed with.

There are, of course, a few exceptions. Field Hockey, officially our ‘national sport’ has been headline material twice over the past few years. The first time was in August 2007, when Bollywood came to temporarily save the day (and earn a lot of money) as the blockbuster film Chak De India on the story of India’s women’s hockey team made the sport the flavour of the month.

The second time was a few weeks ago, when the members of the Indian hockey team boycotted a national camp in Pune, demanding their unpaid dues. The news wouldn’t have made as much noise as it did but for the fact that India is set to host the Hockey world cup in a month. There was suddenly the ridiculous danger of the home team fielding a B-squad for the greatest stage of their so-called national sport.



The stand-off between the players and the hockey federation stretched for several days, with everyone from state ministers and movie stars (After Chak De India, superstar actor Shahrukh Khan became the self-appointed ad-hoc spokesperson for Indian hockey) pitching in their opinion.There were debates on national TV, front page articles in the newspapers, and more editorials written about the sport nationwide than those accumulated in the last ten years. The Hockey Federation seemed to have the sponsor money with them, so when news broadcasters asked the federation’s bigwigs in a live telecast about where the money went, they got bumbling, anxious responses. The audiences were glued: we smelled corruption and couldn’t look away.

Cricket must have watched jealously for a week. Well, finally, a resolution was reached: the players got their money, and India began another cricket series. The media’s attention shifted away and order was restored in the universe.

Most of the sport fans in India didn’t even know that the hockey world cup was imminent, and what more, that it was being hosted by India. The general public only became interested when hockey went wrong, and we suddenly had the federation to throw our verbal rotten apples at, and Shahrukh and the media had us showering our sympathy on our poor professionals who never get what they deserve, and the facilities are appalling, and the money is bad, and now, it is the women’s hockey team turn to start asking for their money and so on and so forth.

The problem is that, with all the attention and finances thrown around by the broadcasters, promoters, media, and government authorities to make cricket the most lucrative business in India, there is little left room left to share with other sports in the country. It is perhaps no surprise then, that India, a country of a billion and a half people, has won a staggering ONE (1) individual gold in the history of the Olympic Games, and that too went to the shooter Abhinav Bindra at Beijing 2008, who was rich enough to self-finance his training, equipment, and success, free from the meddling hands of the government. The Olympics, obviously, don’t feature cricket, or India would have be raking in the medals and the positive vibes.

Team sports in India, such as football, basketball, and hockey, are forever stifled by age-old bureaucratic traditions, where a young talent finds it near improbable to climb up the ranks without politicking with the authorities on the side. Football has managed to thrive a little more than the others because of the century old tradition in the country and the marginally successful I-League. Even they have complaints: International superstars like Cristiano Ronaldo and Leo Messi are far better known than the members of our own national team.

The hockey debacle has once again exposed India’s monomaniacal obsession with cricket. A cricket international would never be treated the way the hockey internationals were. The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is obviously the country’s richest sporting body. Compared to it, other sports, and particularly basketball, is still miles behind. Basketball even lacks the ‘national sport’ sentiment that hockey is often credited (or burdened) with or the historical significance of football.

Ayaz Memon, one of India’s most respected sport’s journalist and a columnist for NBA.com/India, writes in his article ‘The Changing Face of Sports’ that, “…NBA can be of help to India: not necessarily because of the sport it represents, but more because of the way it has gone about conducting its business. I used the last word of the previous sentence deliberately, because in India, sport has hardly been seen as business, more as pastime: the government provides some grant, officials hang on to office for power rather than passion for the sport, and players fight heavy odds to eke out a living or at least some glory.”

The NBA business model relies a lot on individual marketing of players to deepen their fan base. Would a basketball star in India ever be marketed this way? Would another sport’s star ever be held in the kind of reverence that is showered on cricketers like Tendulkar or Dhoni? The Basketball Federation of India (BFI) has been pondering bringing in a NBA-inspired league system to basketball here, and although it would generate a little more excitement and hope for the sport, it would only be a modest first step.

Compared to a few of the other sports, Basketball has a relatively cleaner reputation in terms of corruption or embezzlement in India, but I believe that the trend of seniority-based preferential treatment and unfair team selections would have to be cleaned out from the sport’s culture. When I spoke to India’s former women’s national captain Divya Singh, she said, “I don’t like cricket very much, but I admire the way that it is managed. It’s possible for basketball to grow in India. There is a court in most of the schools in India, and kids play the game regularly at a young age. Their talent needs to be channelized in the right way.”



The other good news is that, as time has passed, the attention level of your average viewer is diminishing by the day. Half a century ago, cricket started off as a five-day marathon, and in the 70s morphed into a day-long game. Now, the most recent form of the game (the Twenty-20) only lasts around three hours and has taken cricket hysteria to new heights. If projected as a shorter, faster, and more athletically appealing sport, basketball has the perfect opening to carve out a space for itself in the public's consciousness.

In recent years, Leander Paes, Sania Mirza, Viswanathan Anand, Bhaichung Bhutia, Saina Nehwal, Abhinav Bindra, Vijay Singh, and others have had relative successes in their respective sports, gaining a little bit of fame and commercial value. We are still a long way away before the successes of non-cricket athletes are taken by the majority of Indians seriously. The mainstream media’s regular interest in hockey’s darkest day shouldn’t be just some one-off fling with other sports in India. Like hockey, sports like basketball should be put under the scrutinizing media spotlight, making the structure behind the system accountable as well as help in promoting the game.

*First published on SLAMOnline.com on January 28, 2010.