The IPL experiment, irrespective of whether it succeeds or fails, has deep implications for debates about post-colonialism and globalisation. England, the original home of cricket, stayed away from last year’s edition and its early reluctance to embrace the League was at least as much to with reluctance to embrace the new era of Indian control over cricket as with genuine problems over scheduling. The colour of money has changed all of that this year, with Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Peitersen’s record contracts and the ECB’s prompt yes to the chance of playing host. Despite the prospect of short-term economic losses with an overseas edition, the experiment holds the promise of globalising the League like never before and drawing in new audiences, outside the subcontinental diaspora. It is a great branding opportunity, one that could have significant long-term benefits for the IPL in terms of its fan-base.  

The “god’s air” of Lord Harris’s cricket certainly has an Indian twang now —with all of the grand drama of Indian politics, the backstage skullduggery and the grandstanding. For now, India’s cricket bosses would do well to remember that there is a national election unfolding — whatever they might think, it matters — and that when the time comes, they may be better off showcasing another great Indian trait: that of the willow and the ball.  

The writer is a social historian and a fellow at La Trobe University, Melbourne.