Equal Match Fees, Unequal Contracts: India's Women Cricketers and Pay Equity

Timeline

1. Jul 5, 2022New Zealand Cricket announces a deal giving women and men the same match fees.
2. Oct 27, 2022The BCCI announces equal match fees for its centrally contracted women and men.
3. Jan 25, 2023Five WPL franchises are sold for INR 4,669.99 crore.
4. Feb 2023Smriti Mandhana is the top buy at the first WPL auction at INR 3.4 crore.
5. Sep 2025The ICC announces record prize money of $13.88 million for the Women's World Cup.
6. Nov 2, 2025India beat South Africa by 52 runs to win their first Women's World Cup.
7. Nov 3, 2025The BCCI announces an INR 51 crore reward for the team.
8. Nov 15, 2025Harmanpreet Kaur says contract values will change after the win.
9. Feb 9, 2026Women's central contracts for 2025-26 are announced, reportedly with unchanged grade values.

The ethical issues

• Whether equal pay should mean equal pay for each match or equal total earnings.
• Whether market revenue is a fair basis for pay gaps.
• How a governing body should invest in an underfunded part of its sport.
• Whether women must 'prove' themselves to earn equal treatment.
• The role of franchise leagues in closing or widening gaps.

Stakeholders

Stakeholder	Interests & obligations
India's women cricketers	Fair pay, security and recognition.
India's men cricketers	Pay that reflects their revenue and workload.
The BCCI	Growing the game, managing revenue and its reputation.
WPL franchise owners and broadcasters	Return on investment in women's cricket.
Domestic women players	Pathways and pay below the national team.
Girls and families	Whether cricket is a viable career for women.

The case

On October 27, 2022, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the richest body in the sport, announced that its women would be paid the same match fees as its men for international games. It was hailed as historic. Yet the headline hid a gap: the annual contracts that provide most of a player’s guaranteed income stayed far apart. Three years later India’s women won the World Cup, and the question returned. What does equal pay mean in a sport where the women’s game earns much less than the men’s, and who decides when the gap is fair?

Background

Before the change, India’s women earned a flat INR 1 lakh for an ODI or T20I and INR 2.5 lakh for a Test.^[1] A few months earlier, New Zealand Cricket had announced a five-year deal, from August 1, 2022, under which its women’s national team and domestic players received the same match fees as men. It was the first time New Zealand’s men’s and women’s professional players were covered in one agreement. Men were still expected to earn more because they played more matches and formats.^[2] White Ferns captain Sophie Devine called it “a massive step forward.”^[2] Similar debates played out in other sports; see the Matildas’ collective agreement and the USWNT equal pay lawsuit.

The rules and governance

The BCCI pays its international players two ways: match fees for each appearance and annual retainers through graded central contracts. Its policy, approved by its Apex Council, applied to match fees only.^[1] Women’s retainers stayed at INR 50 lakh for Grade A, 30 lakh for Grade B and 10 lakh for Grade C. Men’s grades were INR 7 crore for A+, then 5 crore, 3 crore and 1 crore.^[1] In other words, the top women’s contract was worth about one-fourteenth of the top men’s. Men also play many more international matches, so equal fees per match still meant very different totals.

The announcement

Under the new policy, women earned INR 15 lakh for a Test, 6 lakh for an ODI and 3 lakh for a T20I, the same as men. Jay Shah, then BCCI secretary, called the move “the first step towards tackling discrimination” and a “commitment to our women cricketers.”^[1] Former captain Mithali Raj wrote: “This is a historic decision for women’s cricket in India! The pay equity policy along with the WIPL next year, we are ushering into a new era for women’s cricket in India.”^[1]

The market arrives

In January 2023 the BCCI sold five teams in the new Women’s Premier League (WPL) for a combined INR 4,669.99 crore, about $573 million. It had already sold the league’s media rights to Viacom18 for INR 951 crore over five years.^[3] Shah said the bids had broken the records of the men’s IPL in 2008 and that “people are very keen to invest in women.”^[3] At the first player auction, Smriti Mandhana was bought by Royal Challengers Bangalore for INR 3.4 crore, the highest price.^[4] The league gave top women a large new source of income outside their central contracts.

The global game moved as well. For the 2025 Women’s World Cup, hosted mainly in India, the ICC raised prize money to $13.88 million, more than the $10 million at the 2023 men’s World Cup. ICC chairman Jay Shah said: “Our message is simple, women cricketers must know they will be treated on par with men if they choose this sport professionally.”^[5]

Winning the World Cup

On November 2, 2025, India beat South Africa by 52 runs in Navi Mumbai to win their first Women’s World Cup.^[6] The BCCI announced a cash reward of INR 51 crore for players, support staff and selectors, on top of the ICC’s $4.48 million winners’ prize. BCCI president Mithun Manhas said the win “vindicates the investment and faith the BCCI placed in building a world-class women’s programme.”^[7]

Days later, captain Harmanpreet Kaur said contract values would now change. She said the gap had been “driven by market forces,” with most revenue from men’s cricket. “Now we can talk about equal payment and equal recognition,” she said. “If we want to change, we have to come to that point that we win the same number of trophies for the country. Then people will automatically start giving us the same value as men get.” She credited Shah, saying, “He gave us everything we needed, be it pay parity or any support.”^[8]

Aftermath

On February 9, 2026, the BCCI announced its women’s central contracts for 2025-26. It did not publish the grade values, but ESPNcricinfo reported there had been no change to the structure of INR 50 lakh, 30 lakh and 10 lakh.^[9] This case does not report any later change to retainers.

The core dilemma

The BCCI gave its women equal pay for each match, a real and visible step. But the annual contracts, and the number of matches men play, left a large gap in total earnings. The board and the players themselves often explain that gap by the revenue each game generates. Yet revenue also reflects decades of investment choices. Is pay equity satisfied by equal fees for equal work on the day, or does fairness require closing the gap in total pay and investment?

Competing values

• Equal treatment vs. market value: same pay for the same work against pay that reflects revenue.
• Recognition vs. desert: rewarding women now against waiting until they “prove” themselves.
• Board stewardship vs. investment: careful use of revenue against building the women’s game.
• Symbolism vs. substance: a headline policy against the larger structure of pay.

Strongest arguments

For the BCCI’s approach. Equal match fees were a concrete, visible change that raised women’s pay severalfold for each game. The board invested heavily in the WPL, which brought franchise and media money and new income for players, and it rewarded the World Cup win generously. Retainers can reasonably reflect workload and revenue, and players, including the captain, have said they accept that logic.

For full pay equity. Revenue gaps are partly the product of past underinvestment: fewer matches, less coverage and lower promotion. A governing body that controls the whole sport’s revenue can choose to invest in its women’s game, as New Zealand did through a combined agreement. Asking women to win trophies before being paid more puts the burden on them to overcome conditions they did not create.

For a staged approach. One could support equal match fees as a first step, as Shah described them, while setting clear targets for retainers, matches and domestic pay over time, measured and reported publicly.

Applying the frameworks

Justice and fairness

Distributive justice asks what principle should govern pay: equal shares, contribution, need or market value. The match fee policy applies equality to each game; the retainers follow contribution and market value. Behind a veil of ignorance, not knowing whether one would be born a male or female cricketer, a person might accept some differences tied to workload but reject gaps that stem from unequal opportunity. The glass ceiling concept helps explain why market value alone may not be a neutral measure.

Rights

A rights lens treats equal pay for equal work as a claim owed to workers, not a favor. It would ask whether the BCCI’s two-part system respects that claim, and whether women players have a real voice in setting pay, as New Zealand’s players’ union did. It also asks whether the right should depend on winning trophies.

Utilitarian

A utilitarian would weigh the effects of pay decisions on the whole game: whether higher pay draws more girls into cricket, raises standards and grows revenue, against the costs to the board’s finances and other priorities. The World Cup win and the WPL’s success suggest that investment in women’s cricket can pay off, which may strengthen the case for further increases.

Walk it through: the Simple Decision Model

1. Spot the issue. You are a BCCI official reviewing women’s pay after the 2025 World Cup win. Stakeholders include women and men players, domestic players, state associations, franchise owners, broadcasters, fans and girls considering the sport. The codes in play are the board’s contract policies and national equal pay principles.
2. Gather facts. Compare total earnings, not just match fees, for men and women, including match volume and WPL income. Look at revenue from women’s cricket and how it has grown. Watch for status-quo bias: the current gap can seem natural simply because it has existed for a long time.
3. Test options. Keep retainers as they are; raise them significantly; tie them to a share of women’s revenue; or negotiate a combined agreement covering pay, matches and conditions. Run each through fairness, rights and consequences.
4. Check codes and law. Review the board’s rules, any applicable employment law and international examples such as New Zealand’s agreement.
5. Decide and document. Explain the principle behind the decision, whether equality, revenue share or contribution, and the timeline for change. Consult players directly.
6. Communicate and follow up. Publish contract values, which were not released in 2026, and report on progress in match volume, domestic pay and women’s revenue each year.

What’s settled and what’s contested

Settled

• Since October 2022, BCCI women and men have received the same international match fees.
• The top women’s retainer was INR 50 lakh against INR 7 crore for the top men’s grade, and the women’s structure was reported unchanged for 2025-26.
• India’s women won the 2025 World Cup, and the BCCI awarded INR 51 crore.

Contested

• Whether match fee parity amounts to pay equity.
• Whether revenue differences justify the gap in retainers.
• When and how much women’s contracts should rise.

Why this case matters

This case shows how “equal pay” can mean different things. A policy can be equal in one measure and unequal in another. As women’s sport grows in value, governing bodies everywhere face the same choice: wait for markets to close gaps they helped create, or invest ahead of the market and set out clearly what fairness requires.

Key terms

Distributive justice

Fairness in how scarce opportunities, resources, benefits and burdens are shared.

Glass ceiling

Invisible, systemic barriers in hiring and promotion that keep women and minorities out of leadership roles.

Commercialization

The process of turning sport into a product and a business enterprise, with profit pressures that can compete with principle.

Stakeholders

Everyone with something at stake in a decision: athletes, coaches, parents, officials, fans, employees, sponsors, media, communities and regulators, including the less visible ones.

Veil of ignorance

Rawls’s test for fair rules: design the policy as if you did not know which position you would end up in.

Multiple points of view

Analyzing a dilemma from each stakeholder’s position in turn (athlete, parent, coach, administrator, official, bystander) before reaching your own reasoned view.

Definitions from the Ethics Cases glossary.

Discussion questions

1. Is equal pay for each match enough, or should total earnings be equal?
2. Harmanpreet Kaur said women needed to win trophies before they could talk about equal pay. Do you agree?
3. Should a governing body use revenue from the men's game to raise women's pay? Why or why not?
4. How should the WPL's success affect the BCCI's contract decisions?
5. What would a fair pay structure look like behind a veil of ignorance?

Sources

1. India women cricketers to earn same match fee as male counterparts, BCCI secretary Jay Shah confirms — ESPNcricinfo
2. New Zealand Cricket strikes pay equity deal so women and men earn same match fees — The Guardian
3. Owners of Mumbai Indians, Delhi Capitals, RCB win bids to own Women's Premier League teams — ESPNcricinfo
4. WPL auction - RCB pick up Smriti Mandhana, Harmanpreet goes to Mumbai — ESPNcricinfo
5. Massive four-fold increase in prize money announced for ICC Women's Cricket World Cup 2025 — ICC
6. India beat South Africa for historic World Cup win — BBC Sport
7. BCCI to give India women INR 51 crore cash prize for World Cup win — ESPNcricinfo
8. Harmanpreet Kaur hopes for hike in value of women's contracts post WC triumph — Sportstar (PTI)
9. BCCI annual contracts: Rodrigues elevated to Grade A; Patil, Vastrakar miss out — ESPNcricinfo