The impasse between the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and the Sahara India group continues, with the former refusing to waive rules for the latter.
Last week, Sahara had abruptly announced it was withdrawing as official sponsor of the Indian cricket team and also from the Indian Premier League (IPL) tournament. The two sides met in Mumbai yesterday, but could not resolve the issues. These were again discussed at the Board's working committee meeting in Chennai on Monday.
According to sources, the working committee seems to have rejected Sahara’s two primary demands, of being allowed to play five foreign players for the next IPL edition and returning the bank guarantee.
According to Sahara, none of the earlier eight teams deposited any bank guarantee against franchise fee, while it was asked to do so despite a cordial relationship with the BCCI over a decade.
| STANDOFF CONTINUES |
| Sahara’s demand: |
| * Reduction in franchisee fees |
| * Yuvraj Singh’s price of $1.8 million to be returned to Sahara |
| * Wants to play with five foreign players this season, instead of four |
| * Wants return of bank guarantee as other eight team owners, which entered in 2008, haven’t deposited the guarantee |
| * Wants to call on board a strategic partner |
| What BCCI says |
| * Cannot make exceptions in the rules for one team |
| * Rejected the demand for five foreign players |
| * Refused to return bank guarantee |
| * Not objected to stake sale or new partners |
| * Agreed to replace Yuvraj Singh with another player |
“These demands were unfair and unacceptable, as board members felt it would not go down well with the remaining eight franchises (of IPL),” said a BCCI official, who attended the three-hour meeting.
However the board had no objection on a replacement for Yuvraj Singh (undergoing medical) treatment and allowing Sahara a strategic partner or to offload stake in their franchise.
More From This Section
BCCI president and India Cements vice-chairman, N Srinivasan, told reporters in Chennai, “These issues will be addressed within the framework of BCCI rules and it is not possible to create an exception. We have responded to Sahara on these and we have to wait and see what their reactions will be. We hope their response will be favourable”.
However, Sahara says BCCI has breached an agreement by which the board had committed to a joint statement on February 13/14. According to an official statement it issued, “Subrata Roy (Sahara’s chief) requested the BCCI president and his team that there is no point in quoting the rule book and debating it word by word. After all, they were BCCI’s own rules and not some constitutional rules of the Government of India.”
The other Sahara demand was to have an open auction of players in 2013 to ensure a level field for all teams. “If all teams are balanced, the tournament and all the matches will be very competitive; else, the tournament will lose its charm. This is the precise reason why Sahara had insisted on an open auction last year, after the induction of two new teams,” the Sahara statement said.
Sahara has also asked for a 27 per cent reduction in franchisee fees, as the number of matches had reduced to 76 from the 94 mentioned in the IPL contract.
In the same statement, Sahara said if issues related to the IPL were solved, then “We could also discuss the sponsorship of the Indian cricket team.”
Srinivasan said they had “adequate sponsors” and the BCCI was not losing any money.