CRICKET AUSTRALIA chief executive, Todd Greenberg, has attempted to ease growing concerns that private investment in the Big Bash League could eventually place too much influence in the hands of Indian investors and Indian Premier League franchise owners.
Speaking to SEN Radio, Greenberg dismissed suggestions that Indian investors would take control of Australian cricket. “We’re not looking to sell the game to India,” Greenberg said. He argued that fears surrounding Indian influence were exaggerated and noted that India is already central to the global cricket economy. Greenberg added that the decision regarding future investors would ultimately remain with the state associations managing each franchise.
The comments come after Cricket Australia’s ambitious privatisation proposal for the BBL stalled following resistance from several state cricket associations. Cricket NSW formally rejected the proposal, while Queensland Cricket deferred its decision, preventing CA from securing the consensus needed to move ahead with the plan
Cricket Australia had hoped to unlock as much as AUD 650 million (approximately USD 427 million) through the sale of minority stakes in BBL franchises. The objective was to strengthen the financial position of Australian cricket, increase player salaries, modernise franchise operations, and help the BBL remain competitive against rapidly expanding T20 leagues globally. The move mirrors trends already seen in Indian Premier League, SA20, ILT20, and The Hundred, where private ownership and franchise investments have transformed commercial valuations and player earnings.
According to CA, the intention is not wholesale privatisation but the introduction of strategic capital partners capable of improving franchise value, infrastructure, and commercial growth. The hesitation among Australian state bodies stems partly from the expanding footprint of IPL franchise owners across world cricket. Owners connected to IPL teams now hold stakes in South Africa’s SA20, UAE’s ILT20, Caribbean Premier League franchises, and teams participating in England’s Hundred competition.
Critics fear a similar model in Australia could reduce local governance control, prioritise franchise interests over domestic cricket structures, and tie Australian cricket more closely to the IPL calendar and ecosystem. Some state associations are also concerned about preserving long-term control over iconic cricket assets such as the Sydney Cricket Ground and the Gabba.
