Pak Board Stiff

In the last 23 years, since the resumption of bilateral cricket between 1977-78 and 2001-02, Indo-Pak cricketing ties have remained dependent on a flare-up here or a thaw there. But regardless of the relationship between the two governments, and whether cricket was being played or not between the countries, the cricket boards of both Pakistan and India have been close allies in the International Cricket Council (ICC). When the chips were down, or when a stand was to be taken, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) could count on each other.

The most recent manifestations were Jagmohan Dalmiya going out on a limb using his authority as then ICC chairman to throw the ban on Shoaib Akhtar out of the window and Pakistan first standing firmly behind the BCCI on the Mike Denness affair, following it up with mediation between Dalmiya, Speed and Gray through Ehsan Mani, the next ICC chairman.

But it seems the era of unstinted support is now over, as, perhaps with some prompting from the government, there has ostensibly been a re-evaluation of the policy. This means that the PCB will, from now on, look at every issue separately, and then decide whether to support the BCCI or take an independent position, based on its own interests and not just close ranks on regional lines in the ICC. This was quite evident in the latest stand-off between Dalmiya and the ICC regarding the constitution of the committee to review Denness' action, as PCB neither took a public stand nor made any behind-the-scenes efforts to defuse the situation.

Perhaps the PCB's change of heart can be attributed to the fact that India is continuing to refuse to play Pakistan not just in Pakistan but anywhere. Another grouse, divulged one highly-placed PCB official on condition of anonymity, is Dalmiya's reluctance to use his considerable influence over the West Indies to tour Pakistan, and the home series, now due to commence later in the month, had to be whittled down to two Tests and moved to Sharjah. Dalmiya had promised, informed the PCB official, that he would make the WICB reconsider its position.

In fact, the list of Pakistani complaints is rather long. "On the one hand is this spirit of camaraderie, and the rhetoric of natural sub-continental alliance, and on the other there is this dichotomy that India does not want to visit Pakistan. Turfs were torn up in Mumbai (1991) and Delhi (1998-99) by extremists; bowing to frenzy at home, after losing to Pakistan for the umpteenth time in Sharjah, the Indian board refused to visit the desert emirate—apparently, under no government pressure—between 1991 to 1994. In a similar fit, in 2001-02, India's sports minister Uma Bharati first denied permission to the Indian team to travel to Pakistan for an ICC-scheduled tour but also clamped a unilateral ban on participation in events in non-regular offshore venues," says the PCB official.

"In this backdrop, the question for the PCB would be whether to proceed on the trodden path and cast its lot with India on all issues, and expect a quid pro quo, or use discretion on an issue-to-issue basis and even then maintaining a balance and not going the whole hog with them," says the official. He was non-committal on whether this was mere loud thinking or if a decision has been taken.

For their part, the Pakistanis are really disappointed. The Indian government, they believe, is playing into the hands of extremists. The same lot which had disrupted cricket for the better part of the 1990s by digging the Wankhede Stadium turf in 1991 to block a trip by the Pakistan team. Similar tactics were used when the series was about to be revived in 1998-1999, this time round the pitch at Ferozeshah Kotla in Delhi.The tour, however, took place, with Pakistan winning two Tests, and Anil Kumble making history in the third one.

That tour remains unreciprocated, and that has hurt the PCB's pocket-book by $15 million. But more importantly it has wounded its pride too. And the frustration runs so deep that the most cordial relations between the two boards are now being threatened.

It goes without saying that in these turbulent times, a relationship of trust and friendship between the BCCI and PCB is of crucial importance—not just for the two boards, but also for the future of cricket in the region. Another crucial point is that a wedge between the BCCI and PCB would mean disunity in the sub-continental vote bloc in the ICC, which in these times may considerably damage the aspirations of both the boards in critical areas.