We were concerned as young players were joining the ICL: Lalit Modi

Lalit Modi tells DNA that the BCCI was not sure if it would be able to launch the IPL in the first place. Excerpts:

What exactly were BCCI’s fears over ICL?
That ICL will take all the players globally and as they are owned by a broadcaster, they will make all boards redundant in the future. Next, their objective was TRPs. Lastly, if a broadcasting company started to broadcast matches without the sports bodies controlling the rights or getting rights fees, then it would make all sports bodies redundant.

Many youngsters had signed up with the ICL. Was the BCCI worried?
Yes, this was a serious concern. They were deserting their state teams. Further, the ICL had proposed to hold matches at the same time as BCCI international and domestic fixtures and as such that would have had a major impact on domestic cricket.

You talked of international boards being pressurised. Was there any resistance and why did they play into BCCI’s hands?
There was resistance from ECB due to anti-competition laws in the UK. There was also resistance from PCB, Bangladesh and NZ
as a large number of their players had joined the ICL and if it was to be branded as unauthorised cricket then, they would lose the services of these cricketers.

The players themselves had, for the first time, an opportunity to earn more than they could by playing for their country and as such could not be denied the opportunity. The ICC, as governing body of the game, was approached by the ICL for approval, which normally should not be denied.

Was the BCCI united about the actions against the ICL or were there any reservations among the members?
As you know, only a few are involved in the decision-making process in the BCCI. And once they have decided, the rest go along and rubber-stamp it. There was actually little or no discussion.

How would you justify your role in the whole thing?
I was given the task of launching the IPL. My key job was to get the players. Given the cheque book potential of the ICL, we would have had a bidding war for the players. It would have made the cost of launching the IPL expensive. As an administrator, one needs to see what’s best for the organisation. My job was to find ways and means to overcome obstacles for the launch of the IPL apart from ensuring its success. Keep in mind when I did conceive it, everyone including the BCCI’s own members, thought it would not work. Rest is history.

Was there a fear that the IPL would lose its sheen if the ICL was allowed to flourish?
IPL was still on the drawing board stage at that time. So the question was not whether we would lose our sheen. The question was whether we would have been able to launch it in the first place.

On hindsight, do you think it would have been better if the ICL and IPL co-existed?
Chances of two leagues succeeding in one country are remote. But we will never know.