Sports

Short Of Good Length Just Ain’t Cricket

The SC may force new rules down BCCI’s throat. Indian cricket might yet be run with accountability.

Advertisement

Short Of Good Length Just Ain’t Cricket
info_icon
  • The Supreme Court might soon pass an order, forcing the BCCI and its affiliates to drastically change their ways of functioning
  • The BCCI has challenged the Lodha Committee recommendations at the SC, but has mostly faced the court’s wrath
  • Other than disqualifying officials, the Lodha report plans to do away with voting rights for multiple bodies in a state

***

In what can be a tectonic shift in cricket administration, if the Sup­reme Court has its way, the Board of Control for Cricket in India will change forever. The Board and its affiliates, who have ruled the game with an iron fist for decades, are now bracing for the inevitable—dilution of much of their power and control. Changes are imminent in the governance structure of the Board and its 37 affiliated bodies, with a slew of restrictions and stipulations being suggested by the SC-appointed three-member Lodha Committee in its game-changing report. As the hearings over objections raised by the BCCI and its associations on the Lodha Committee report enter the home stretch in the Supreme Court, the reality of impending reforms is dawning on cricket administrators.

Advertisement

Administrators’ mood can be gauged from the way they are bracing up for the final blow. Many say they would quit, if req­uired, to comply with the SC order, which might come as early as next month. A mood of grim resignation is unsurprising, since the bench headed by the Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur has mercilessly criticised the Board and its retinue of top lawyers during the hearing. The BCCI has objected to many recommendations of the Lodha Committee, appointed in the aftermath of the 2013 IPL betting-fixing scandal and two Mukul Mudgal probe reports. But the court is unsparing. “Are you refusing to ref­orm?”; “You are practically corrupting the person for votes”; “Funds are disbursed as if you are a mutual beneficial society”, are only some of its gimlet-eyed observations.

Advertisement

So, it seems the world’s wealthiest cricket body will be forced to make basic structural changes. It could well begin with the Punjab Cricket Association (PCA), one of the better-run BCCI affiliates. If some recommendations—like no bureaucrat or politician can run cricket associations or that administrators can’t be over 70—are implemented, most PCA office-bearers will have to go.

The PCA has traditionally been run by government officers, bureaucrats or IPS officers. Current chairman I.S. Bindra, PCA pre­­sident from 1978 to 2014, has been the face of the so-called ‘IAS lobby’ that has ruled it for decades. Deva Pampapathi Reddy, a bureaucrat in the Punjab government, succeeded Bindra as president last year. Reddy knows what to do if the court bars government servants in cricket administration. “I would quit gracefully if that is needed. But, let me make it clear, I’m not speaking on behalf of other government servants in the PCA. I’m in cricket administration because of my passion for the game,” 57-year-old Reddy told Outlook.

Reddy, a 1985 batch IAS officer, says the general mood in the PCA is ‘very good’, des­pite the impending storm. “We’ll do what is needed to be done...whatever the court decides. There’s no occasion to be nervous,” he says, putting up a brave face. Apart from a likely bar on government servants, the Lodha Committee has also recommended that those who have held any post in other sports bodies or have been BCCI office-bearers for over nine years, must also go. So, apart from Reddy, PCA secretary-general M.P. Pandove (over 70, and more than nine years as PCA office-bearer) and treasurer Viswajeet Khanna (bureaucrat) will also have to resign. “We will go by whatever the SC decides,” says Pandove. “If the Lodha Committee suggestions are imp­lemented, 80 per cent of BCCI-affiliated associations will be headless. But time provides solutions for everything,” he adds.

Advertisement

One biggie facing the heat is ‘young Turk’ BCCI secretary and Himachal association president Anurag Thakur. He is also executive member of Indian Olympic Ass­ociation, president of Himachal Rifle Ass­ociation, general secr­etary of HP Olympic Association and HP Hockey. Mumbai president Sharad Pawar, Tamil Nadu chief N. Srinivasan, Sau­rashtra secretary Niranjan Shah, Kanataka chief Ashok Anand, and Orissa secretary Ash­i­rbad Behera will all have to resign as they are eit­her over 70 or have been office-bearers for over nine years or hold posts on other federations.

info_icon

Maharashtra Cricket Asso­ci­a­tion presid­ent and former BCCI treasurer Ajay Shirke, a successful businessman, says he isn’t des­p­e­rate. “Cricket administration is not our personal thing. Nahi hai toh nahi hai. We’ll only be affected if our voting right goes,” he says. Shirke, considered close to Sharad Pawar, is backing Mumbai for the voting rights from Maharashtra, if the ‘one state-one full member-one vote’ recomm­e­ndation is implemented. “Mumbai is senior to Maharashtra and it is also a permanent Test centre. Which one to recognise among the four associations in Maharashtra is for the BCCI to decide,” he says.

Advertisement

Mumbai is a founder-member of the BCCI and has been in existence since December 1929, while Maharashtra became a BCCI member in 1934. The other two members in Maharashtra are the Cricket Club of India (1933) and Vidarbha (1934). Both CCI and Vidarbha have filed intervention applications. In Gujarat, Saurashtra and Baroda are the other bodies. The Supreme Court has suggested that both Gujarat and Maharashtra rotate full membership within the states, with each one having a two-year tenure, but the proposal is being resisted. “After the court passes an order, we will talk to the BCCI,” says Rajesh Patel, secretary, Gujarat Cricket Association, which is headed by BJP president Amit Shah.

Advertisement

Baroda joint secretary Snehal Parikh, batting for retention of his organisation for historical reasons, says all multiple associations in states should continue for the good of Indian cricket. “A good batsman can win a match single-handedly but to win a tournament you need a team. The same thing applies with BCCI and its associations,” says the former first-class cricketer. There some other bodies, like Delhi and Kerala, that too have raised objections to the Lodha Committee recommendations. But they have chosen not to go to court and instead apprised the BCCI of their views. “Since BCCI is properly defending the case, we feel it’s not necessary for Kerala to file an application,” says Kerala Cricket Association president T.C. Mathew.

Having heard the counsel of BCCI and its affiliates, the Supreme Court bench has indicated it wants to conclude proceedings quickly. It could be before May 16, when the court goes on summer break. In any case, it might not be later than July 22, when Justice Kalifulla—part of the two-judge bench deciding the issue—ret­ires. Whenever the order comes, it has the welcome potential to end the horrible arbitrariness with which cricket—and hopefully other sports too—is administered by the power-hungry jealously guarding their fiefdoms.

By Qaiser Mohammad Ali in Chandigarh

Tags

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement