IPL Franchise Global Expansion vs Indian Players’ Overseas League Ban
IPL franchise owners continue expanding their global footprint, owning teams in ILT20 (MI Emirates, Dubai Capitals), SA20 (MI Cape Town, Joburg Super Kings), and CPL (Trinbago Knight Riders), with plans to invest in The Hundred. However, the BCCI maintains its strict policy barring active Indian male cricketers from participating in overseas leagues, despite franchises’ international growth.
IPL chairman Arun Dhumal affirmed no discussions are underway to allow Indian men’s players in foreign leagues, emphasizing the need to preserve the IPL’s “premium” status. While franchises train Indian players like Vignesh Puthur (MI Cape Town nets), they cannot field them due to BCCI restrictions. In contrast, Indian women (e.g., Harmanpreet Kaur) freely participate in WBBL and The Hundred.
Dhumal hinted at a potential IPL expansion to 94 matches (home-and-away format) by 2028, aligning with ICC’s shifting focus toward franchise cricket’s commercial dominance. Franchise leagues now threaten bilateral cricket’s relevance, with IPL owners driving a year-round T20 calendar akin to football’s club-dominated model.
Domestic players face financial constraints, as BCCI’s ban limits earnings to IPL and state leagues. With Major League Cricket (MLC) offering higher salaries, non-contracted players may explore legal routes or early retirement to join overseas leagues. The BCCI risks backlash if courts rule against its restrictive policies, potentially reshaping India’s cricketing ecosystem.
While Dhumal acknowledged the need to “create maximum value for stakeholders,” the BCCI must address the growing disconnect between franchise globalization and player mobility. With IPL owners investing globally, pressure mounts to revise policies or risk alienating domestic talent seeking international exposure.