BCCI Equal Pay Policy Marks Progress but Faces Economic Reality

In October 2022, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) made a historic announcement: equal match fees for men and women representing India in international cricket. While the move was lauded for promoting gender equality, it also sparked debate across cricketing circles. Does equal pay reflect fairness in effort, or does it ignore stark differences in revenue, popularity, and viewership?

What the Equal Pay Policy Entails

Under the BCCI’s revised payment structure:

• Test match fee: ₹15 lakh
• ODI match fee: ₹6 lakh
• T20I match fee: ₹3 lakh

This is now applicable regardless of gender, meaning Smriti Mandhana and Virat Kohli receive the same amount per match, assuming both are selected and play.

A Progressive Step Toward Equality

The advocates justify that women deserved equal match fees long ago. Women cricketers also have to face training routines, diet, travel and emotional stress as much as their male counterparts. The demands of skill performance in the field are also similar to that of gender.

Consider these examples:

• Harmanpreet Kaur’s 171 (off 115 balls) against Australia* in the 2017 Women’s World Cup semifinal remains one of the greatest knocks in Indian cricket history—across genders.
• Jemimah Rodrigues, Deepti Sharma, and Renuka Singh have consistently emerged as high-impact players on the world stage.

Yet, for years, the match fees were drastically lower for women—until the 2022 policy shift.

But Is It Financially Justified?

The economics of cricket, however, paint a different picture.

Viewership & Fanbase Disparity:

• The India vs Pakistan Men’s World Cup match in 2023 attracted 3.5 crore concurrent viewers.
• By contrast, even WPL (Women’s Premier League) averages significantly lower TV ratings, although the 2023 season did cross 50 million unique viewers—a promising sign.

Sponsorship and Advertising

Women’s cricket remains a growing market, with WPL helping shift perception but still far from parity in terms of commercial draw.

In FY 2023, BCCI’s revenue exceeded ₹5,000 crore, the majority of which stemmed from men’s cricket (IPL, bilateral series, and ICC tournaments).

Symbolism vs Sustainability

The equal pay move is as much about symbolism as it is about policy. It sends a message: women’s cricket is no longer an afterthought. This decision lays the groundwork for:

• Grassroots encouragement for girls to take up cricket professionally.
• Corporate investment in female cricketers and leagues like the WPL.
• A shift in cultural perception—from novelty to legitimacy.

Yet, critics argue that equal match fees may not yet be economically sustainable without structural reform. Should match fees be proportional to viewership revenue until parity is reached? Or is this exactly the kind of leap of faith that drives change?

What Cricketers Are Saying

• Smriti Mandhana (2022): “This is a big move not just for us, but for the future generation of women cricketers. It shows that our board believes in our value.”
• Sunil Gavaskar (2023): “Equal pay is a great goal, but for long-term sustainability, women’s cricket must also focus on improving marketing, fan engagement, and quality of competition.”

Conclusion: Equal Pay, Unequal World

Match fee equalization is certainly a forward-looking decision-but that does not happen in a bubble. Even the sport of women remains behind in terms of the number of spectators, products, and even culture. Equal match fees are not retroactive to decades of inequity, but they are a key steppingstone into a brighter future.

And while fairness shouldn’t always be dictated by market forces, sustainable growth will depend on whether the women’s game can now convert policy wins into commercial strength.