Saikia Just Put Every IPL Franchise on Notice

For weeks, the BCCI's response to Rajasthan Royals' growing discipline problem has followed a familiar script: fine the individual, issue a statement, move on. Riyan Parag was docked 25% of his match fee for vaping on camera. Team manager Ravinder Bhinder was fined ₹1 lakh for using his phone near the dugout. One demerit point here, a stern press release there. Business as usual.

That script just got ripped up. Speaking on the sidelines of India's Women's T20 World Cup squad announcement on Saturday, BCCI secretary Devajit Saikia made it clear that the board is no longer satisfied with slapping wrists. The new target? The franchises themselves.

This isn't an incremental policy tweak. It's a philosophical shift in how the IPL handles misconduct — from treating incidents as isolated individual failures to holding the organisations responsible for the culture that produces them. And make no mistake: Saikia's comments, though diplomatically worded, are aimed squarely at Rajasthan Royals.

The context writes itself. Rajasthan Royals have featured in IPL 2026's misconduct news more than any other franchise — and it's not close. Two incidents in a matter of days, both captured on broadcast cameras, both generating the kind of headlines the league's commercial partners would rather not see.

First, team manager Ravinder Singh Bhinder was spotted using his phone near the dugout during the Punjab Kings match — a clear breach of IPL regulations designed to prevent in-game communication advantages. He was fined ₹1 lakh. Then, days later, captain Riyan Parag was filmed vaping inside the dressing room during the same PBKS match. The optics were particularly damaging: e-cigarettes are banned in India under the Prohibition of Electronic Cigarettes Act, 2019, making it not just a code of conduct issue but a legal one.

Sangakkara called it "not a positive reflection." Ashwin said it "cannot be brushed under the carpet." Mothers Against Vaping demanded a criminal probe. And the BCCI? They fined Parag 25% of his match fee — roughly ₹1.87 lakh from a ₹7.5 crore contract — and said they were "exploring options."

Now, those options are materialising. And they go beyond anything RR might have expected.

Saikia's language was deliberately vague — "exploring options," "take a call" — but the direction is unmistakable. The BCCI is looking at the IPL's terms, conditions, and protocols to find mechanisms for punishing franchises collectively, not just the individuals who break rules.

What does that look like in practice? The IPL's governing council has a range of tools available, from financial penalties imposed on the franchise entity to restrictions on auction spending, suspension of team officials, or even docking of points in extreme cases. The precedent exists: the IPL has previously suspended entire franchises (Rajasthan Royals themselves were banned for two years in 2015-16 over the betting scandal).

Nobody is suggesting it'll go that far this time. But Saikia's public signalling is calibrated. He wants franchises to understand that a culture of indiscipline — where a manager uses his phone and a captain vapes in the same match week — reflects systemic failure, not individual poor judgment. And systemic failure demands systemic consequences.

While the BCCI was crafting its response, Riyan Parag was busy playing the innings of his IPL career — 90 off 50 balls against Delhi Capitals on May 1. His team still lost by seven wickets, thanks to KL Rahul's stunning 75 off 40 that powered DC to a record 226-run chase. But the knock silenced the on-field critics, even as the off-field ones multiplied.

And Parag's post-match response was pure Parag: defiant, unbothered, and completely unwilling to engage with the narrative the rest of the world was having about him.

There's a fascinating dissonance playing out here. On one side, the BCCI is publicly signalling the most significant governance escalation in years — threatening to hold franchises accountable for their players' conduct. On the other, the player at the centre of the storm is saying he doesn't need to answer anyone, scoring 90 off 50, and treating the entire controversy as background noise.

Both positions are, in their own way, correct. The BCCI is right that a 25% match-fee fine on an individual doesn't move the needle for a franchise worth over a billion dollars. Parag is right that his job is to score runs and win games. The problem is that these two truths exist in parallel, and neither one addresses the other.

Saikia's "decorum" comments suggest the BCCI has figured this out. Fining Parag ₹1.87 lakh didn't change his behaviour — he's already said he doesn't think he needs to answer critics. But threatening RR with franchise-level consequences? That changes the incentive structure entirely. Suddenly, it's not about one player's personal choices. It's about the franchise's operational licence, its reputation with sponsors, and its standing with the league.

Whether the BCCI follows through is the next question. Saikia said "we will be taking some action" — not "we might." But the IPL's code of conduct doesn't have defined sanctions for vaping, the legal framework around e-cigarettes is enforced by state police rather than cricket boards, and no franchise has ever been penalised for a player's personal habits.

If Saikia turns these words into action, it sets a precedent that will reshape how every IPL franchise manages player conduct. If he doesn't, it joins a long list of BCCI promises that stayed in the "exploring" phase forever. Either way, Rajasthan Royals — banned once before, and now accumulating infractions at a rate nobody else is matching — are about to find out which version of the BCCI they're dealing with.