When Jindal Steel’s subsidiary, Jindal Shadeed Iron & Steel (JSS), became the title sponsor of the Oman Professional League earlier this year, the move triggered an online debate about priorities & Indian Football.
How could one of India’s biggest conglomerates invest in football abroad while the Indian Super League (ISL) the nation’s top-tier competition entered its 2024–25 season without a title sponsor for the first time since its inception? At first glance, the optics appeared damning. But a closer examination reveals a more complex commercial paradox: Jindal’s investment in Oman was not about sport at all, while the ISL’s struggles stem not from sporting inadequacy but from deep structural and governance flaws that have eroded sponsor confidence.
Strategic Utility, Not Sporting Sentiment
The Oman deal is rooted in industrial strategy, not consumer marketing. Jindal Shadeed, one of the Gulf region’s largest private steel producers, operates massive integrated facilities that are central to Oman Vision 2040 the Sultanate’s national plan for economic diversification.
By sponsoring the Omani top-tier league, now renamed the “Jindal League,” the company fulfills its In-Country Value (ICV) compliance obligations a national requirement mandating corporations to reinvest in local communities and skill development. The sponsorship is, in effect, a geopolitical and corporate relations tool that ensures operational stability and goodwill with Omani authorities.
The deal’s structure further reinforces this function: it includes funding for youth academies and a new grassroots competition, the “Jindal Juniors League.” This aligns with Oman’s socio-economic development goals, demonstrating tangible local contribution. In business terms, it’s a strategic insurance policy. The investment estimated at around $2–5 million safeguards Jindal’s industrial assets worth billions. Compared to the operational risks of losing regulatory support or license stability, the cost of sports sponsorship is negligible and commercially justified.
ISL’s Sponsorship Vacuum: A Governance and Market Failure
The ISL, by contrast, operates in a completely different ecosystem. Its lack of a title sponsor is not an indicator of poor footballing quality Indian clubs have improved, viewership has expanded, and social engagement is thriving but rather a symptom of systemic dysfunction and commercial mismanagement.
The ISL’s previous title partner, Hero MotoCorp, ended its decade-long association after 2023, leaving a vacuum at the central revenue level. Despite strong club-level partnerships such as FC Goa’s deal with Red Bull and Tata Steel’s continued support for Jamshedpur FC no brand has stepped in to fill the league’s central rights.
Three key factors explain this hesitation:
1. Market Distortion: The Overwhelming Gravity of Cricket
India’s sports economy remains overwhelmingly skewed toward cricket. In 2024, cricket commanded nearly 85% of total sports sponsorship spending, leaving little corporate capital for other disciplines.
The Indian Premier League (IPL)’s astronomical title deals — once reaching ₹440 crore per year — have set an impossible benchmark. For a B2C brand seeking guaranteed national reach, IPL remains the first choice. The ISL, despite its respectable TV and digital audience, cannot compete for the same marketing budgets.
2. An Unstable League Structure
The ISL’s business model, initially modeled on U.S. franchise leagues, imposed annual participation fees of around ₹12 crore per team. While this helped finance the league’s early years, it created an unsustainable cost base. Most clubs have operated at a loss for years, with some shutting down (FC Pune City) or relocating (Delhi Dynamos to Odisha FC).
This financial fragility undermines sponsor confidence why would a brand tie its identity to a property whose clubs regularly face economic uncertainty?
3. Governance Chaos and the AIFF–FSDL Dispute
The ongoing power struggle between the All India Football Federation (AIFF) and Football Sports Development Limited (FSDL) over the Master Rights Agreement (MRA) has further deepened uncertainty.
The agreement, due to expire in December 2025, has become a flashpoint for mistrust. The tender process to renew these rights has faced repeated delays, prompting clubs to accuse the AIFF of a “breach of trust.” Until this dispute is resolved, no corporate sponsor will commit hundreds of crores to a property with unclear governance and revenue-sharing structures.
Structural Instability and Relegation Risk
The introduction of promotion and relegation starting in the 2025–26 season — a move necessary for sporting merit has paradoxically added commercial risk.
Sponsors typically seek stability and predictable exposure. The risk that a major team like Mohun Bagan Super Giant or Mumbai City FC could be relegated undermines long-term marketing value. Without financial guarantees (like parachute payments for demoted clubs), sponsors view this uncertainty as a major deterrent.
A Tale of Two Economies: B2B Stability vs. B2C Risk
Comparing Jindal’s Omani sponsorship with the ISL’s vacuum reveals the core of the paradox.
- Jindal’s deal is a B2B geopolitical expenditure, meant to strengthen industrial relations, not consumer engagement.
- ISL sponsorship, however, is a B2C marketing decision, dependent on brand visibility, governance reliability, and audience conversion all currently in flux.
In Oman, a few million dollars buy stability for multi-billion-dollar operations. In India, a similar investment into the ISL comes with governance disputes, market uncertainty, and cricket’s overwhelming dominance.
The Path Forward for Indian Football
The ISL’s commercial stagnation is a structural failure, not a sporting one. The league’s audience is growing, its clubs are securing individual sponsors, and India’s footballing quality continues to improve.
To restore sponsor confidence, three immediate steps are critical:
- Resolve the AIFF–FSDL dispute and finalize the Master Rights Agreement publicly.
- Introduce financial safety nets for relegated clubs to stabilize investment risk.
- Reprice and repackage sponsorship assets, offering flexible, digital-first deals to attract new-age and non-traditional partners.
The absence of a title sponsor in the ISL is not a referendum on Indian football’s quality but a reflection of administrative instability and market distortion. Meanwhile, Jindal Steel’s investment in Oman is a geopolitical move disguised as sports marketing. The two realities one corporate, one sporting operate on different planes. Yet together, they underline a sobering truth: India’s football economy doesn’t lack passion or potential, it lacks trust.
Until governance aligns with professionalism, the ISL will remain a powerful product trapped in a fragile system admired for its reach, yet starved of investment.
