What is next for Indian football? | Explained

The story so far:

On September 1, the Supreme Court of India paved the way for the commencement of the country’s top-flight football — the Indian Super League (ISL). Scheduled to begin this month, the premier competition has been in limbo ever since the Football Sports Development Limited (FSDL), organisers of ISL, announced on July 11 that the 2025-26 season will be ‘put on hold’. But in a short order — with a detailed judgment to follow — the SC accepted a tentative roadmap presented jointly by the FSDL and the All India Football Federation (AIFF) which will see the season start with the Super Cup in late October, followed by the ISL in December, subject to the consent of the Asian Football Confederation (AFC).

Why was the ISL put on hold?

In 2010, the AlFF signed a 15-year Master Rights Agreement (MRA) with the FSDL — a joint venture between Reliance Industries and Star Sports — to run the ISL, which eventually kicked off in 2014. The FSDL is AIFF’s commercial partner and pays Indian football’s custodian an annual sum of ₹50 crore for the right to broadcast, commercialise and manage Indian football, including the national team. But this agreement runs only till December 8, 2025, and though negotiations to finalise new terms went on for months, they remained inconclusive. A deal that will expire midway through the season was deemed undesirable and the organisers decided to suspend operations until there was clarity about the future.

The situation was made more complicated when the SC, back in April, asked both parties not to take any final decision until it pronounces the judgment in a case regarding the formulation of a new constitution for the AIFF. This case arose out of a judgment passed by the Delhi High Court in 2017 which deemed that the election of AIFF office-bearers was in violation of the National Sports Code. The SC stayed the HC order and called for a new constitution to be drafted. The SC’s recent prohibition on any decisive parleys between AIFF and FSDL was essentially to avoid a scenario where the eventual verdict calls for fresh elections and the whole MRA has to be renegotiated by the new AIFF committee.

On August 22, however, after being apprised of the difficulties faced by the stakeholders in the football ecosystem, the SC asked AIFF and FSDL to come up with a “workable arrangement for the smooth functioning of the league(s)”. The SC, through last week’s order, while making no mention of fresh elections, prima facie accepted the joint roadmap and stated that the “collaborative effort is a significant step in the evolution of Indian football”.

What have AIFF and FSDL proposed?

Apart from the provisional dates for starting the season, it has been agreed to “conduct an open, competitive and transparent tender for selection of a commercial partner to conduct the ISL in line with global best practices”. This effectively means that there is a chance that the FSDL may cease to be the commercial partner if any other entity outbids it. Additionally, FSDL agreed to “waive its contractual Right of First Negotiation and Right to Match under the Master Rights Agreement dated 08 December 2010” and to issue a No Objection Certificate for the execution of this tender. This process is to wind up before October 15 and a bid evaluation committee has been formed for the same. FSDL also told the SC that the July-September quarterly rights fee of ₹12.5 crore has been cleared and that it was open to advancing the payment of the final tranche of ₹12.5 crore for the October-December 2025 quarter.

What does the short to medium-term future hold?

Once the tender is floated and a commercial partner finalised, broadcast deals have to be struck and revenue-sharing agreements with clubs drawn. These remain important for clubs to work out their budgets for the season.

While such negotiations progress on one side, authorities will have to deal with the stern ultimatum that the world governing body FIFA and AFC have issued to the AIFF to adopt and ratify its new constitution by October 30. It is to be noted that in August 2022, when the SC appointed a Committee of Administrators (CoA) to temporarily assume charge of AIFF and finalise the new constitution, FIFA suspended the AIFF citing “undue interference by a third party”.

A repeat of this episode is unlikely, for the AIFF is now governed by an elected committee, and the SC’s detailed judgment ratifying the constitution — as finalised by Justice (Retd.) L. Nageswara Rao after taking into account the comments and suggestions of various stakeholders on the draft version prepared by the CoA — is expected shortly.

The constitution has to be in line with the National Sports Governance Act, 2025, which was passed during the recent monsoon session of Parliament. But the Act, despite receiving Presidential assent, is yet to notified. The SC had initially kept its judgment pending to ensure that the constitution was in sync with the Sports Governance Act. But in the last hearing, it indicated that it will not wait for the law to be notified after being informed by the Centre’s counsel that it could take as many as six months.