Does the IPL even deserve Harsha Bhogle (or Gavaskar)?

Harsha Bhogle is being missed.

That’s what tweeting followers and the man himself would have us believe.

It’s true, I guess.

While Bhogle is always entertaining, always suave, always smooth and always different from former players turned microphone wielders, the IPL  is not where he has the best impact.

It’s bizarre but while he’s missed, he’s not. There are just too many things to distract television viewers.

The BCCI, in all its wisdom, dropped Bhogle and the other wise man of Indian cricket, Sunny Gavaskar from its list of approved commentators.

While there’s been an uproar about Bhogle’s sacking , there’s been nothing said about Gavaskar’s exit. Probably because the great man was earning more—much more—than any of the other commentators and it could be explained away as a cost-cutting measure.

Bhogle’s absence, however, has the conspiracy theorists out in full force.

Amitabh Bachchan photographed by Studio Harcourt Paris Français : Amitabh Bachchan photographié par Studio Harcourt Paris Harcourt Paris (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Bhogle got on the wrong side of Amitabh Bachchan whose tweet questioning the nationalistic credentials of Indian commentators was enthusiastically endorsed by Mahendra Singh Dhoni.

And Bhogle’s comments during India games have ired the Indian dressing room.

It’s strange, really.

These speculations would have been more believable had N Srinivasan still been heading the BCCI. Dhoni was purportedly his blue-eyed boy.

But those days are past or aren’t they?

And why is it that the BCCI still decides who should commentate on India games?

Can their ‘employees’ really provide unbiased views about their paymasters? That’s hardly credible much as Ravi Shastri and his ilk might protest otherwise.

Ravi Shastri, former Indian cricketer. 4 Test series vs Australia at Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It would be best if broadcasters were to select and pay cricket experts themselves.

Why have cricket boards have any say in the matter?

Viewers, too, shouldn’t have to second-guess the experts.