Is India a one-sport country?

Recently, news came out that Mumbai may have another major cricket stadium. The metropolis already has four big venues – Wankhede, Brabourne, Bandra-Kurla Complex and DY Patil (five, if one includes Bombay Gymkhana, which hosted the first Test match played in this country) – but since none of them has a spectator capacity close to Ahmedabad’s Narendra Modi Stadium, the city was seen to be losing out on big finals. So, in the opinion of those who matter, bigger equals better, and the financial capital of the country, with the most successful domestic first-class team in Indian cricket history, needs another big stadium.

This is the situation in a huge city where top-class facilities to host major events in other sports have been almost negligible in recent times. If this is the case with Mumbai, one wonders about the sporting infrastructure in most of the other cities.

Stadium Surplus

Close on the heels of this development comes news that a major broadcast network has bought the rights to Indian cricket action from ‘May 28 till Diwali’. The package, comprising 10 major India series and marquee continental events, must not have come cheap. But the bidders must have considered it worth it and were confident of generating returns.

In contrast, consider that football’s world governing body, FIFA, has still not been able to sell the broadcast rights with the World Cup starting in less than two months. This, despite the rights to the 2026 and 2030 editions being bundled together to make the proposition more attractive. The minimum amount asked for was reduced from $100 million to $35 million, but there have been no takers till now.

On the other hand, the IPL doesn’t seem to have any such problem, and the only issue confronting the BCCI is that the recent consolidation in the broadcast industry has left very few entities with the capability or interest to bid for these rights, which may bring down the valuation in the near future.

Time zones are said to be a problem as far as the 2026 FIFA World Cup – co-hosted by the United States, Mexico and Canada – is concerned. Most of the matches will be played late at night or early morning (India time), but don’t people get up early to watch Test matches in Australia and New Zealand, or stay awake beyond their usual bedtime to watch cricket from the Caribbean?

Time is a factor

If time zones are an impediment, it would be the same two years from now when Los Angeles will host the Olympics. If the lack of Indian participation is a hindrance, it also doesn’t make much conventional sense. Only 48 nations will be represented at this World Cup – it used to be 32 before the upcoming edition. Does this mean the rest of the world doesn’t have any interest in arguably the greatest sporting extravaganza on the planet?

For a country whose medal haul at the Olympics doesn’t exceed a handful, the interest in the quadrennial extravaganza is often secondary to that in any cricket series involving India going on simultaneously.

To be sure, one can’t blame broadcasting companies and their executives for falling over each other to get the rights for the IPL and big ICC events while giving the cold shoulder to other sports. They are primarily interested in eyeballs, returns and advertisement revenue. It’s no surprise that around 90 per cent of the overall advertisement budget goes to cricket, with the other sports left to fight over crumbs. The suits know that it’s only cricket that sells in the mass market.

It leads one to conclude that, regardless of whatever anyone may claim, India remains a one-sport country as far as mass following is concerned, with everything other than cricket forced to live on the margins of popular consciousness, waiting for a big event like the FIFA World Cup or Olympics to get their 15 minutes of fame and attention.

Ad Revenue

But as recent events have suggested, even those rare events may not always be able to rise above the cold logic of the market. Even an Olympic medallist is not guaranteed recall value a few months after the Games, while a new star is born after a few big hits or wickets in any IPL game.

Those non-cricket athletes who become known do so only when they have excelled on the world stage.

All’s not lost

India may still get to watch the FIFA World Cup after all. Public broadcaster Prasar Bharti may step in, matches may be streamed for free, or the private broadcasters may reach an agreement with FIFA.

It’s not that India doesn’t have a football following, even though the fortunes of the national team and the top domestic league have been scraping the barrel. Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi are icons, as was evident when the latter came to India last December. But with both of them now active outside Europe, the viewership numbers of top European leagues in India have stagnated. The broadcasters may not find the World Cup attractive enough to bid for the rights.

At the end of the day, they don’t believe that a sufficient number of viewers would care enough for the World Cup to stay up at night so that advertisers get their money’s worth. That they only get the half-time break to show commercials, as against an ad break after every over – also the more recent phenomenon of strategy breaks – may also be a factor, though there are ways to get around that limitation.

The broadcast rights business involves huge sums of money, and it’s only right that the executives don’t spend it on a whim. These decisions are taken after a lot of deliberation, and plenty of data analysis is involved. It’s not enough to just broadcast the matches. They have to produce pre-match, post-match and half-time shows. One needs to get some marquee former players as experts.

There are a lot of former cricketers waiting for such assignments, but with the World Cup taking place once in four years – the European Championships are the only other comparable event – getting players with a recall value in India isn’t that simple or cheap.

It all boils down to value for money and whether the broadcasters think the viewers and advertisers care enough to loosen their purse strings. The answer, so far at least, lies in the way they are dragging their feet in this matter.