as stated the following issues are quite interesting
if you have a spare few minutes you can access Tony Greig's show on cricinfo and also Sanjay Manjrekar to hear about the changes in Indian cricket in the wake of their elimanation from the World Cup in the first round.
The idea of a limit being imposed on playes endorsements is a restraint of trade (As per tony G's comments). I wonder if the Indian cricketers will finally see the value in a players' union. Time will tell
PK
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think there is a difference if a player is centrally contracted as then endorsements become part of his binding contract - or he negotiates a clause to get out of this and is either allowed it or not- the same can be true of media representaytion etc that the BCCI are trying to regulate. Either the players are free agents, or they are contracted, or they have a defined scope of freedom under contract between central responsibilities and persoanl responsibilities. The issue between sponsor activity and playing activity should be contrcatual as there can be conflicts of interest. persoanlly i think the BCCI is powerful enough to get a set of effective sponsorshiop deals that can apply to centrally contracted cricketers and thus control this. Endorsements of prodyts and services outside this can be contractually controlled (ie no ambush endorsements can be contractually stipulated)The real issue for me is performance - if sponsorship and endorsement activity is seen to be affecting performance then you have to control it - it was interssting that performance related pay was also introduced - players ot performing successfully should not be able to gain ensorsement power QED- tbedulkar has been living on past performance for a while and may not be worth more than a pay per play contract despote hos god like status commercially in India - actually a round of central contracting might be easiest way out as then you van cull the team and prepare for the future- and the players whjo are not contracted can endorse whatever they can...I was interested in greig's commnets on the balance between local and international calendars of competition - it seems more a nd more logical that local competiton is a test bed for international competition and therefore should be focused on developing talent rather than senior talent - this thins out the ranks of mediocre performers earning a living from going through the motions and encourages competition among younger talent.I'd like to see more of it in the Uk where over say five years we turn the county cricket game, one day domestic and 20-20 into a predominnatly young player vent with gradual reduction of over 25 year old players ie a sharper pyramid of talent whihc produces a squad of 30 -40 top class international players
absolutely the right way forward for English cricket - I wonder if the alternative domestic competition setting up in India by the guy in charge of Zee TV will do - I think it may hinder as you are taking something that may already be a bit weak and diluting it further. I think a lot of the issues are being raised to take away soem of the player's power in the marketplace. Indian cricketers were always powerful financially due to the amazing endorsement deals they could sign. These good circumstances negated the need for a players union. I know tim may would be very interested to strengthen the FICA body (as not all countries have participating unions) if he could get an Indian representative on board.
To test the limit on endorsements it would take a gutsy board. Droppoing a player from the team (or event cancelling a contract) as they have too many deals may turn the fans against the board. Also if you limit the number of endorsements there may be a need to seek finances from alternative means (rationally they should be paid enough - but so was Cronje) which could be risky for the sport.
Interesting nonetheless, I read today that Tennis in europe with regards to ATP tournament status is kicking off - could be a summer of dicontent;)
I doubt if endorsements limitation (suitably financed)would impact the corruption element/ You are of course right that the issue is player power and by extension fan power but fans crave success and may turn againts highly paid players who do not perform. The BCCI is between a rck and hard place 9as are RFU and countless other psorts administrations)- but my view is that the game survives even if there are upsets and tantrums and in the end the product will earn whats its worth in the market - it may take another generation of economically savvy marketing and media people to challenge player power though as all the value is moving inexorably their way
while I agree with you I think the way that these organisations handle the disputes is the interesting thing, I dont feel that any of these sports are in jeopardy. I guess I am a bit of a management voyeur when it comes to disputes. Althoguh I dont wish organisations and sports to go through issues such as these I do find it more fascinating. PLus I want the blog to be a bit more engaging so I feel I may have to take the devil's advocate role to see what responses will be like :)
I agree with the idea of watching the train wreck and musingover the apparent folly of individuals when they come together as a Board :-)
Its the odd melange of cultural assumptions, hidden agendas, need to be seen to be doing something (the action paradox - any action is better than none otherwise people think you are incompetent when most likely any hurried action leads to sub optimal results)and genuine concern for the sport/business. However there will always be clashes between those who administer and those who produce as the latter strive to extract value from a short lived performance period where the talent is unique (relatively unique anyway as yopu can always find someone else to play although not so well or at best differently) to the individual. Professional sport economics have to take into account the market value of talent and it would need extraordianry coherence among employers to limit wages and extra-mural endorsement money, and as you say, may even be illegal unless some form of binding contract is entere into. The US seem to have a lot of this covered through the monopoly/monopsony structuring of sport leagues where breaaway leagues are nonsensical because there is no way to outflank the core leagues. Almost every other sport and national adminstration has breakaway threats excepot where the administration has taken over control of the top players AND the top level of competition is international rather than domestic or regional. Its not so much the psorts are in jeopardy but thast the behaviour of those involved in managing them is sub optimal - but then that is true of all areas of management- hence the fun watching it
Post a Comment