New Delhi: Justice LN Rao has recommended “flexibility” in Indian Super League’s ownership structure, “suitable” commercial payouts for each stakeholder to have “teeth in the game” for regeneration of interest for tender and timely organisation of the top-most league while pointing out that the All India Football Federation has asked for consideration of introduction of promotion-relegation in a transitional manner, subject to discussions with AFC and FIFA.
In his 28-page report submitted to the Supreme Court last week after the AIFF received no bid for ISL’s tender, Rao said concerns of bidders centred around key areas of – 1) “minimum guaranteed payment” (Rs 37.5 asking price plus additional operational costs to the tune of Rs 30-40 crore), 2) “decision-making authority” (veto power to AIFF and limited operational control), 3) “management and sub-licensing of rights”, 4) “representation on the Governing Council” (only one representative out of six).
Four entities, including AIFF’s current commercial partners Reliance-subsidiary FSDL, attended pre-bid meetings but then opted not to place a bid, mounting trouble on the AIFF that desperately needs a commercial partner to conduct its top-tier tournament, preventing the sport from grinding to a halt after multiple clubs suspended operations citing lack of clarity.
To find a way forward, Rao, who spoke to clubs, potential bidders before filing his report, recommended “flexibility around designing the ownership structure of the topmost league in a manner that rewards all stakeholders”.
“While the Intellectual property can remain with the national federation, flexibility around structuring footballing and commercial operations separately, potentially in different companies, could help make the proposition more attractive for potential bidders,” he wrote.
“It may be appropriate to revisit and reconsider the financial obligations stipulated in the RFP (Request for Proposal). Specifically, the annual guaranteed payment to the AIFF may be restructured or reasonably reduced to ensure commercial viability for prospective partners, while still safeguarding the financial interests of the AIFF.
“Further, the interested bidders have expressed that the proposed veto power for the senior AIFF representative may significantly limit their ability to make timely commercial and operational decisions. …the delineation of roles may be more suitably achieved by conferring regulatory authority on AIFF and operational and commercial control on the commercial partner… Under this model, the commercial partner would independently manage day-to-day administrative, commercial, and logistical functions, while AIFF retains an overarching supervisory role.”
A suggestion for commercial partner be permitted to independently sub-licence rights without requiring prior approval of the AIFF was also made.
AIFF bats for phased promotion-relegation
Rao also mentioned that AIFF, in its report to the bid evaluation committee that he chaired had asked for consideration of “flexibility around designing the ownership structure of the topmost league in a manner that rewards all stakeholders”.
“Flexibility could help design a suitable structure for the ISL either through the illustrative equity route or with the current structure using appropriate commercial structuring with success (basis revenues/profits) based metrices to determine commercial payouts to each stakeholder.”
The AIFF had said that in case the equity structure is considered, provisions should be placed for the “long term” also emphasising the need for bringing in promotion and relegation in phased manner.
ISL clubs were consulted for tendering process. Photo: ISL Media
“Given the relatively young vintage of the topmost league (i.e. the ISL) in the country, the clubs and the potential bidders had concerns about the implementation of relegation at the end of 2025-2026 season, despite the inclusion of parachute payments (i.e. support payments) in the tender,” AIFF wrote.
“The Honorable court may consider, in accordance with the arrangement between AIFF and AFC and potential discussions, whether an appropriate transition period (e.g. 3-5 years) can be provided to the topmost league before introducing the promotion and relegation system.”
As per its bid document, relegation was to be implemented at the end of the 2025-26 season with AIFF paying teams going down “parachute payments” depending on their duration of stay in the top-flight.
According to AFC’s 2019 roadmap prepared in consultation with AIFF and FSDL, relegation was supposed to start from 2024-25 season after implementation of promotion from 2023-24 season.
Relegation wasn’t introduced in ISL last season as per the roadmap.
Clubs’ appeal
The Supreme Court bench of Justices PS Narasimha and J Bagchi will hear the matter on Thursday after the failed ISL tender process was brought to its notice on Tuesday.
Following a meeting with AIFF on Tuesday, nine ISL clubs, including newly-promoted Inter Kashi but barring Mohun Bagan and East Bengal, have filed an appeal to the Court for amendment of three AIFF’s constitutional articles that they believe made the tender “commercially unviable” for potential bidders while allowing them part of commercial rights monetisation process.
FC Goa, Bengaluru FC, Sporting Club Delhi, Jamshedour FC, Kerala Blasters, Mohammedan SC, NorthEast United, Punjab FC and Kashi, filed a civil appeal on the “current crisis and standstill” surrounding the game of football in India.
It “… directly affects the running and functioning of football clubs (across leagues in India), including the Applicants herein, and livelihoods of their players, coaching staff, support staff, employees and everyone involved in the conduct, operation, management and running of the Applicants,” the clubs said.