The Hindu : Sport / Cricket : Need for legislation questioned

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Jul 15, 2005

Sport

Sport - Cricket

Need for legislation questioned

Special Correspondent

The National sports federations went unrepresented at the seminar

NEW DELHI: The need to have a legislation for sports broadcasting was questioned in a discussion organised by the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII) here on Thursday.

The Managing Director of ESPN-Star Sports, R.C. Venkateish, argued that a possibly one-sided legislation would have a knockdown effect and affect the growth of sports in the country.

"If exclusivity is not there, there is no level playing field'', said Venkateish.

The Director General of Doordarshan, Navin Kumar, argued that the cable channels reached only 61 million homes in a total of 108 million television homes, and thus it was in national interest that private broadcasters shared their rights for important sports events with Doordarshan.

"It is possible to work out a commercial model that will benefit all. Acquiring rights at a commercial value and then sharing it is unfair. But, if you do it in advance, it is a fair thing to do'', said Navin Kumar.

In fact, Navin Kumar argued that exclusivity should not be allowed as it was excluding people from watching for commercial interests.

The COO of Zee Sports, Gary Lovejoy with 28 years of experience in the broadcast business around the world, said that United Kingdom had formed a legislation in 1956 even before there was more than one channel.

However, he said that it would be unfair to suddenly draw a list of events of national importance and force the sharing of rights.

Venkateish argued that the investments made by private channels like ESPN-Star Sports in conducting the national hockey league would come down if there was a legislation discouraging exclusive rights.

Mutually profitable

Navin Kumar emphasised that Doordarshan was not cut out to get broadcasting rights for everything and go about selling it to interested parties, and that it would always go to the one that has acquired the rights and try to share it on a mutually profitable basis.

"Having more viewership is good for the game and that can be exploited commercially also. For example, during the Asia Cup cricket tournament we had a tie up with ESPN-Star Sports and we offered to market it better than the figure quoted by them'', said Navin Kumar.

The Doordarshan Director General said that it was a problem with some of the channels as they were not even willing to talk about sharing, and that there was a need to have a legislation in the larger interest.

Test cricketer Arun Lal said that it was because of the television rights that a State player was getting Rs.35,000 per match as compared to Rs.3,000 a few years back, and if the rights were devalued, following legislation, the player would suffer.

"The jobs are drying up. Even today cricket is not a career. The talent continues to evade the game. If you have a choice, you leave sports. If the argument that it would be a win-win situation, then there is nothing like it.

"But, I don't see that a real possibility. If it is of such importance, why don't the host broadcaster buy the rights, why share'', Arun Lal asked.

Viewership coming down

Navin Kumar conceded that the viewership of Doordarshan was coming down, but hastened to add that as far sports viewership was concerned, Doordarshan had the highest.

"The argument that the revenue will come down is not correct. We are not getting into the bidding at times, because the hike is artificial. I can try and acquire rights from BCCI, but I can't do it with the West Indies or other countries who sell rights for five years etc. I want rights only for India's matches'', said Navin Kumar.

Venkateish observed that it was unfair to say that the hike was artificial. He pointed out that the market forces decided the value.

"It is a symbol of growing economy and advertisement industry. The rates have gone from Rs.10,000 for 30 seconds to three lakh rupees for 30 seconds. Please pay the value and take it'', said Venkateish.

Talking about the quality of production, Lovejoy said that he was not seeing 20 cameras for a Ranji Trophy match or Doordarshan cover women's cricket.

"We are the only channel covering women's cricket'', countered Navin Kumar.

Adding to the point, Navin Kumar said that Doordarshan lost Rs. 20 crore in telecasting the Athens Olympics after having invested Rs.28 crore.

"We went to all the channels, but nobody came to share Olympics with us. Who has the interest? As far as World Cup junior hockey is concerned, it is not possible for us to get everything. We do show even indigenous games'', said Navin Kumar.

Affordable price

It may be pointed out that Olympics coverage is provided to Doordarshan through the Asian Broadcasting Union at an affordable price.

The latest tussle is centred around cricket telecast rights, with Prasar Bharti moving for legislation following the controversy over rights during the Indian team's tour of Pakistan last year.

The session moderator Paranjoy Guha Thakurta said that it was impossible to come to a conclusion as the Group of Ministers (GoM) formed to look into the matter following a recent cabinet decision, had not met to decide about the need to have legislation.

The National sports federations went unrepresented at the seminar as the President of the All India Football Federation (AIFF) Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi, who was scheduled to attend, failed to make it.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Sport