Up to 462 million Indians tuned in to the 2019 IPL on TV
A year ago, the ICC released the figures for what it presumably called “one of the most watched sporting events in the world.” With a cumulative audience of 1.6 billion and 706 million unique viewers, the 2019 World Cup generated impressive numbers. And yet, despite reaching new heights, could you justify its status as the world’s largest cricket tournament?
For more than three decades since its inception, the stature of the ODI World Cup as the ultimate spectacle of the game was beyond question. It had the largest television audience, generated the most revenue, and had the cultural relevance of being the only competition that cricket fans around the world expected to see every four years. But over the past decade his aura has faded. It is no longer the competition that most cricket watchers look forward to.
After all, of the 706 million people who watched at least part of the 2019 World Cup, 509 million were in India. And yet 462 million Indians tuned in to the 2019 IPL on television, and another 300 million did so through Hotstar’s digital platform. While the India-Pakistan clash at the World Cup drew more than 320 million viewers in one go, the follow-up to many of the tournament’s other matches was small. In contrast, the IPL has a more consistent audience in a competition of similar duration.
There are also other ways to measure the strength of a tournament. Over the past six months, the Covid crisis has essentially tested the world’s individuals, businesses, institutions, nations, and even cricket tournaments for resistance. The ICC T20 WC, despite being a relatively simple, short and compact tournament, did not pass the endurance test. However, the IPL, benefiting from the fact that the BCCI enjoys a level of autonomy from the Indian government that other ICC members do not have, has succeeded in overcoming the challenges of relocating to a hyper-restrictive environment. As the locks squeezed life out of the 2020 cricket calendar, it is the one competition that never seemed to waver, even after its initial postponement.
“The IPL is unique in terms of its size and the amount of money it generates from a reasonably small cricket window. It has changed the whole landscape,” says Tom Moffat, executive director of the Federation of International Cricket Players Associations. . “It has been the engine and catalyst for the alternative national league market to evolve and grow.”
In May, former IPL COO Sundar Raman explained the financial power behind the IPL while advocating postponing the T20 WC and filling its window with the IPL. In a paper addressing the Covid-inspired cricket crisis, he wrote: “IPL remains the largest event to the global cricket economy. Contributing around 1/3 of global cricket revenue annually, the importance of IPL for the global cricket economy cannot be overemphasized. If IPL were to be considered a separate cricket body and IPL revenues were removed from the revenues of the Indian cricket board, IPL would emerge as the largest revenue generator. for world cricket, even higher than ICC and ACC revenues combined. “
On its way to the top of the cricket pyramid, the IPL has changed cricket faster than ever. A whole sport has changed. South African players agent Francois Brink puts it this way: “In rugby, international matches are still the latest and club and provincial rugby is still played. In soccer, club play is the most important thing, and coaches see international soccer as a necessary evil.
“Cricket used to be more like rugby, but in the last 10 or 12 years, because of the T20 tournaments, it has become more of a hybrid between rugby and soccer. Most importantly, lucrative leagues, like the IPL, or internationals. Cricket? Cricket is somewhere in the middle. I think it’s trying to find its feet. “
While Brink may see the game in a balanced state right now, it’s clear in which direction he’s changing. If we accept that the IPL has become the largest tournament in the world and that it will continue to direct the direction of the game, where does it lead us?
“What it could do to cricket has already started and could exacerbate it,” says Andrew Breetzke, who heads the South African Cricket Players Association. “It is quite clear that the status of players who have national contracts with their own countries as their main source of income and, as such, their main commitment to cricket is changing. The IPL has given them another option.”
“That concept started with the players from the West Indies, who realized that and became international free agents. It gradually moved to county cricket, where the guys didn’t want contracts. Alex Hales was one of the first. who said he didn’t want one because he didn’t need one. Last season, for the first time in our history, we had that situation (in South Africa). That’s what created the IPL. It’s the core of the influence that the IPL has had. in international cricket, from the player’s perspective. “
As lockdowns squeezed life out of the 2020 cricket schedule, IPL is the only competition that never seemed to hesitate
Faced with a changing landscape, other membership boards have had to react. England, which is at the second tier of the cricket power list with Australia, has done so in two main ways: introducing The Hundred and changing their programming to allow their players to participate in the IPL. Both measures are designed to keep the players happy, which is a tacit admission that in the world that is creating the IPL, the players have more influence than the boards.
These trends have been emerging for some time and were prominently featured in the T20 Revolution series that ran in this space during the 2019 IPL. But the world has changed dramatically since that tournament, and the speed of change has increased even further. In the wake of Covid-19, which has made the cost of bilateral cricket prohibitive for many members and has also reduced the global economy they depend on.
It is into this void that the IPL is entering, and it is a void that will likely only become more hollow over time. That could loosen some of the parameters that have inhibited IPL growth in the past. The concept of having two IPL seasons per year has been around since the tournament’s initial success, but has been held back by the international calendar and BCCI’s international broadcasting rights. Since Star owns the rights to both the IPL and the local Indian season, it has not been possible to expand the former without devaluing the latter.
But with IPL becoming a more valuable property than India’s internationals, the incentive to play more IPL is growing for both BCCI and its streaming partner. And as the realm of money shrinks and less international cricket is played elsewhere, could it also be easier for the IPL to claim a second window on the schedule, or more realistically increase the scope of its current season? ?
“I think that’s the ever-present threat,” admits Moffat. “He has that window that could potentially work his way through to be a significant part of the year. Whether positive or negative, time will tell. He clearly has the commercial power and support to be able to do that. It’s a question of whether that’s the right thing to do. for the game, from an Indian perspective and from a global perspective. “
There was a hint of mischief in the writing of Raman’s article when he spoke of the importance of the IPL to the “global cricket economy”, because while the tournament has clearly benefited players at the highest echelon of the game elsewhere of the world, there is minimal profit to the cricket structures they come from. This was summarized by Cricket West Indies CEO Johnny Grave in a document he submitted to the ICC two years ago.
“While not organized by the ICC, the IPL has acquired the status of a global event. Similar to what happens during ICC Events, the full members have scheduled little or no international cricket during the IPL. , allowing the world’s best cricketers to play in India and cricket fans around the world with just the IPL to view, “Grave wrote. “However, unlike ICC Events, the net surplus from the IPL is not distributed among those members who have agreed not to schedule tours during this period. Instead, except for launch fees, all proceeds are retained by BCCI.” .
Grave went on to suggest that the BCCI should make a payment to members who agreed not to play international cricket during the IPL, and while one can imagine the idea being laughed at in the halls of BCCI headquarters at the time, it is a coin. of change they have. Even a small reward would be enough to incentivize smaller nations to downsize their international schedule, or play it in smaller blocks like in international soccer, given that most of their matches lose money anyway.
But would the BCCI need to do that? As the IPL and other T20 tournaments empower players and international cricket is sidelined, in part due to its own inability to create a relevant and attractive offering, what happens in the ICC boardroom will be less important. . The BCCI may not need to “buy” the votes of other members to dominate the areas of the game that really matter.
All of which makes this IPL a pivotal moment in cricket history. For the first time, the tournament takes place outside of the Indian Christmas season. Will you get the same attention? And what will appetite levels look like when two IPLs are held in the space of six months, as will be the case now?
The answers to these questions are likely to inform any decision to expand a tournament that, thus far, has served the BCCI so well that they have not seen the need to modify the formula. And even if they don’t care much about cricket itself, the rest of the world will be watching with interest, waiting to see how the sport’s biggest tournament will shape their future.
.
