By Desh Gaurav Sekhri

There are increasing rumors of impending closures of two I-league clubs- Pune FC and Bharat FC, and of there being at least another four clubs seriously considering immediate or deferred closure.

Once again Indian football just cannot seem to find a formula to grow and improve. The I-league in its top division has eleven teams, and barring a few, all are running into serious operating losses. Some have attributed this to the introduction of the Indian Super League (ISL) and suggested that a merger of the two leagues is imminent.

But, the ISL with its abbreviated sixty one match schedule is not enough for the development and improvement in Indian football, simply because the accepted model across the world for a football league is a season spanning at least five-six months and 91 to 120 matches. An extended season is the only way to ensure that the sport is monetised, popularised, and above all, team loyalties are created across the entire country.

Football in India definitely needs tweaking and an overhaul, but the widely rumored plan for the ISL and the I-league to merge and form one cohesive domestic football league is not the solution. The I-league has been a product of the team-owners’ passion for football, and an outlet for stirring the loyalties of die-hard football enthusiasts for their respective teams.

The ISL on the other hand is a commercially driven entity, promoted and supported by the experience and monetary clout of its promoters. It has focussed on a more international flavour, and in its short window, excites the fan-bases who are as likely to flock to the stadiums to see their favorite international stars of the past as to become die-hard city-team loyalists.

A merger of both leagues would not work, because teams in each are established with different ideals. The I-league teams are bankrolled by their promoters, and are rarely profitable. Most would be valued at significantly less than a comparable ISL team, due to the latters’ entry price, a cap on the number of franchises in the league, and the guaranteed sponsorship money that the ISL teams receive.

In terms of costs, the ISL teams have cost their franchises significantly more than I-league teams cost theirs, but the sponsorship-driven business model makes ISL a more viable property.

It is the exclusivity and barrier to entry which has attracted the ISL franchises, and in a limited window in which the ISL operates, a merger with the I-league will add another six-seven teams to an already packed calendar, diluting the revenue share, and introducing a league culture that greatly contrasts with the ISL set-up and may not be able to adapt in time to turn things around.

A merger will clutter things, and solve the purpose for neither the ISL nor the I-league. Instead, both leagues and especially the All India Football Federation (AIFF) need to be creative in finding ways to optimise both leagues. A three match series between the champions of the ISL and the champions of the I-league each year should be considered.

This will reconcile the two leagues in the eyes of the public, and will also showcase both to a wider audience.

Next, the AIFF should sponsor an ‘allstar’ team of the best domestic players in the I-league and field them as a distinct team in the ISL. It will be great exposure for the Indian players, and will also harmonise the ISL and I-league.

It will require tweaking of contracts and schedules, but the results will be worthwhile. Similarly, the ISL should also create an ‘all-star’ team from its player roster, and field them for at least one game each against each I-league club. As both have a common title sponsor, reconciling sponsors shouldn’t be an issue for joint initiatives.

The ISL as the sole flagship league in India would be a folly, and one which could be attributed to the false optimism that the Indian Premier League has given to Indian sports. The IPL is only able to succeed because it is backed by a complete domestic season to develop cricketers, and the successful Indian national team has a huge following by itself.

Football, if it loses the I-league won’t have the former, and given its current state, the national team is very far from the latter. Unless the ISL becomes an extended league along the lines of the Premier League or La Liga, a merger of the two will not only be a failure commercially, it will also set Indian football back another decade or so.

Therefore, both need to be supported and with some innovative tweaks a wider spectator base for both could eventually lead to profitability of both, and the positive development of football in India.

(The writer is a sports lawyer)