Just how far is the Board of Control for Cricket in India willing to go to divert the chickens coming home to roost? After decades of eschewing transparency and accountability, it is now on the verge of paying the price for it. But sometimes when the pendulum begins to swing the other way, the momentum tends to carry it farther as it describes a larger arc.
The BCCI is experiencing this now. The matter has gone beyond cricket administration and has begun to affect personalities. Now with the Supreme Court hinting at a jail term for its President Anurag Thakur for perjury, the board has got itself into another fine mess.
Or perhaps it is the Supreme Court’s way of telling the BCCI that it holds all the aces, and can not only revolutionise the way cricket is administered in the country, it can also trip up the leading officials too individually.
The saga is being extended as much by the BCCI intransigence as by the Supreme Court’s reluctance to put its foot down. A long rope is a handy thing, but uncertainty cannot be good for the game. It is doubtful if the BCCI has a Plan B in place if faced with the worst case scenario on January 2 or 3 next year. The Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur retires on January 4, and this could be his final pronouncement from the high chair. On the other hand, if he decides to leave it to his successor, there could be more uncertainty.
The Supreme Court and the BCCI have different objectives, a fact that is sometimes lost sight of. It is the latter’s business to run cricket while the former comes into the picture, as it has now, only if laws are breached or money mishandled. It is the BCCI’s duty to ensure that the game is not affected, and that its own stubbornness does not inspire a similar response from the court.
State associations have complained of lack of funds to conduct tournaments. Such problems are as much a result of the BCCI abdicating its responsibilities by ignoring the Supreme Court as they are of the court’s following a clear set of priorities.
Hence the overarching importance of Plan B. Both the BCCI and the Supreme Court need to have one in place. The domestic season is in full swing, and over the next few weeks Bangladesh and Australia too will be visiting for internationals. To imagine that only those state associations which have fallen in line with the Supreme Court’s ruling will be eligible to host matches means that once England leaves, five Test matches and six other internationals can be played only in Tripura, Vidarbha or Rajasthan. This needs to be thought through.
Then there is the matter of the IPL and the television rights for the next ten years. That will be in excess of a billion dollars. Men with experience and vision must be in place.
If the BCCI need to get their act together, then the panel that the Supreme Court approves ought to be able to hit the ground running too.
The logistics of putting panels in place in the state associations need to be worked out. Cricket administration, like nature, abhors a vacuum, and the mission should be to have as smooth a transition as possible. It might be unfair to characterise the standoff between the Supreme Court and the BCCI as a “battle”, but increasingly ego has played a part, personalities have been asserted and efforts have been made to garner public sympathy.
The story is told of two women claiming motherhood of a child before the court of King Solomon. Cut the baby in half, said the wise king, and give one half to each claimant. At this, one of the women gave up her claim, and Solomon understood she must be the real mother after all.
It is a fable the BCCI will do well to mull over. If its interest is cricket, then it will ensure that the changes are carried out and the transition completed with the least damage to the game.
There is the danger of political club-swinging, of an urge to teach the other side a lesson, of forgetting the original vision (the cleansing of the game) and that must be avoided. If moving out after the age of 70 is the best way to serve the game, then it is a path that must be taken.
For so long has the BCCI been a law unto itself that it might be difficult to convince its members that some of their actions are not above board. It is the culture the administrators have grown up in, revelled in. Whatever the Supreme Court’s decision next month, there will be much churning. It is in everybody’s interests, however, to ensure that the fallout does not affect the game of cricket or turn away its passionate fans.
